Looking for some new horror movies

[Rick L.]

Witchfinder General--1968 horror with Vincent Price

[Klonk]

I just ordered it this morning for ~$140 with free shipping. While that seems pricey, it's well under what many other sellers are asking. Ebay seller blowitoutahere still has a few left, if anyone is interested.

It arrived on my doorstep yesterday ...$140 as well. It's one hell of a package!

[Klonk]

Witchfinder General--1968 horror with Vincent Price

Nice. Shout Factory has a couple Vincent Price collections. Very nicely restored to bluray. I have Vol. 1 which has my favorite movies on it. Witchfinder General is one

https://www.shoutfactory.com/product...roduct_id=7435

[Klonk]

Watched X a couple nights ago. Pretty violent old school slasher that scratched an itch, but really nothing I haven't seen before. It's pretty much Texas Chainsaw, but with more gore n titties. Overhyped in my opinion, but I liked it.

[Scrotum Scissor]

I thought X was okay for entertainment value, but Ti West (director) hasn't truly followed up on his substantial promise in making House Of The Devil back in 2009. That film is still intensely watchable today.

As for the potpourri nature of influences in X, I believe intentional homage was significant part of frameworks. I quite dig Mia Goth (the protagonist actress), although I'm actually not to keen on seeing her swing yet another axe in Pearl.

I'm not too confident about us any time soon being exposed to landmark innovations in horror cinema from major production companies. They'll most likely continue to be pastiche or homage or combined. Classic horrors or suspense thrillers that set standards not merely for original storylines but for narrative techniques and tableaus or more (Rosemary's Baby, The Exorcist, Don't Look Now, Alien, The Thing, The Silence of the Lambs etc.) appear to be conditioned by a sense of formative reception to artistics somewhat incompatible with a consumer-restricted dynamic census. A catharcic cinema experience like The Witch (in 2015) was refreshing for its commitment to mandates of idiom, successful yet controversial let alone due to its stance against dynamics and expectancies.

Such stuff will probably lose out.

[Bartellb]

^^ Some of the movies you mention are among my favorite all time movies, horror or otherwise. The Exorcist is in my top five of all movies. But I still like going to the theater to see the new releases not really expecting too much innovation. To me Pearl wasn't just another run of the mill horror movie. One reviewer aptly said it was a character study masquerading as a horror movie.

[Scrotum Scissor]

The Exorcist is in my top five of all movies. But I still like going to the theater to see the new releases not really expecting too much innovation. To me Pearl wasn't just another run of the mill horror movie. One reviewer aptly said it was a character study masquerading as a horror movie.

The Exorcist, to me, is still a masterpiece of fullness and total transcendence at the same time - just like its subject matter of universal spirituality, depth and dimension notwithstanding. I can see it again and again, and it's certainly in my top ten. For American movies, most top picks in my book would be from the New Hollywood era of approx. 1968-82. Apocalypse Now would take a lofty slot there.

But I have to admit that Rosemary's Baby indeed dreads me even more than The Exorcist. Typically for its semblance of the macabre in not only storyline but in nesting a fourth-wall logic with its sometimes satirical lessons and evaluations of faculties so common sense that it's a play on "normality" itself. Levels of finesse in that film are almost entangling as shows of fate, one all the more unsettling when you realize that there was senselessly little to be done about directions in path taken by the characters.

Polanski was enthralled and almost obsessed with allegories on destiny, of course. His altogether eeriest film was his 1972 rendition of MacBeth (IMHO), which although obviously not a horror flick is still as dark and doomy as a tomb's inside at night, helped by that Third Ear Band soundtrack. The whole thing was apparently enforced by his search for release through self-therapy after the gruesome loss of his wife.

I absolutely love Chinatown as well, again with the play on fate, but Polanski went a bit too far in '76 when he had The Tenant veer towards straight-up psychological black-comedy horror. It's still a good watch, but I struggle with my giggly reactions to its scenes of manic anxiety. Luckily Isabelle Adjani made up for it in 1981 with her performance in Possession along with Sam Neill; one of the strongest depictions of human nemesis I saw on film.

As for Pearl, thanks for the reassurance. I should probably give it a try after all.

[nosebone]

Any fans of Maika Monroe and It Follows (2014)?

Along with Hereditary , It Follows is one of my favorite horror films of the last ten years.

[Klonk]

Any fans of Maika Monroe and It Follows (2014)?

Along with Hereditary , It Follows is one of my favorite horror films of the last ten years.

Love 'em both

[Rael]

Halloween Ends opens this weekend. I don't exactly have high hopes. I missed out on the two most recent entries in the Halloween franchise until this weekend as I wanted to catch up. I watched both Halloween 2018 and Halloween Kills. H2018 was meh, not very good at all while Halloween Kills was fucking awful. All the atmosphere, thrills and chills were replaced by Lucio Fulci style gore and it just doesn't work, IMO. And Anthony Michael Hall leading a gang of vigilantes was just... Terrible movie, IMO.

[BravadoNJ]

it's best to look for OLD horror movies...

[battema]

Then y'all had better follow my lead, as I watched the 1925 Phantom of the Opera last night

[battema]

Love 'em both

+1 on both. I'll add Babadook to that list in terms of recent horror.

Going back a few years, The Descent was great too...gotta make sure and watch the international cut for the darker ending.

[Progatron]

Halloween Ends opens this weekend. I don't exactly have high hopes. I missed out on the two most recent entries in the Halloween franchise until this weekend as I wanted to catch up. I watched both Halloween 2018 and Halloween Kills. H2018 was meh, not very good at all while Halloween Kills was fucking awful. All the atmosphere, thrills and chills were replaced by Lucio Fulci style gore and it just doesn't work, IMO. And Anthony Michael Hall leading a gang of vigilantes was just... Terrible movie, IMO.

Agreed, Halloween Kills was truly terrible. I'll still see Halloween Ends, of course, as I never miss them, but like you I am not getting my hopes up.

I watched X last night and it was good. I like Mia Goth for both her skill and presence, as well as for more superficial reasons. It didn't become a slasher film until well into the second half which was a bit odd, but it managed to hold interest. Where are people seeing the sequel (prequel)? I don't see it on Prime or anywhere else.

EDIT: One thing I didn't like about X was the anachronistic dialogue. I'm quite sure expressions like 'Stay in your lane' and 'Don't harsh the mellow' were not in use in 1979.

[SteveSly]

+1 on both. I'll add Babadook to that list in terms of recent horror.
.

Saw "Babadook" in the theater when it came out. Good flick that was different from your normal horror stuff. It was obviously done on a very low budget, but they did a great job with what they had to work with and the acting was excellent. The ending could be interpreted different ways.

[Lou]

Saw "Babadook" in the theater when it came out. Good flick that was different from your normal horror stuff. It was obviously done on a very low budget, but they did a great job with what they had to work with and the acting was excellent. The ending could be interpreted different ways.

I wanted to see that kid die in the most horrible and painful manner. His constant screaming was too much.

[SteveSly]

I wanted to see that kid die in the most horrible and painful manner. His constant screaming was too much.

Ha, true. It got old pretty quickly.

[Klonk]

I wanted to see that kid die in the most horrible and painful manner. His constant screaming was too much.

yeah, but I'll take that kid over the annoying little fucker in Fulci's House by the Cemetery!

[aith01]

I wanted to see that kid die in the most horrible and painful manner. His constant screaming was too much.

Oh I dunno… at first he was annoying, but by the halfway point I felt really sorry for him. He played that part well I think. Might have been intentional, so you would sympathize with the mother at least initially, before she took a turn for the worse.

Great movie, imo.

[Scrotum Scissor]

I wanted to see that kid die in the most horrible and painful manner. His constant screaming was too much.

According to director Jennifer Kent, this exact premise is the very essence of message in the film. She intended it as an allegorical play on feminist tropes of woman's damnation in being sole giver of birth and thus responsible for the lives of man and all of man's doings. Which is of course a burden of considerable latitude, seeing as "man" is inherently evil, as some would have it. Believe me, these are deeply profound theories in certain parts of humaniora academia, obscure to outsiders but totally dominant once you get inside and, when paired with various traits of existentialist and pessimist thought in philosophy, a crude definition of life.

The film is not about physical or metaphysical monster apparitions but our apparent understanding of and empathy with the increasingly manic and semi-psychotic mother's antipathy towards her son (who was bestowed on her by a man who then "allowed for himself" to be killed in an accident and thus freed himself from evil life) and the limits to where potential for fatal violence are set. The interactive "horror" of The Babadook is supposed to be what appears within yourself as sentiment while watching.

And the ending, in which the "monster" (i.e. that responsibility of woman) is shown to still endure albeit chained up, is a direct parable on how women are "chained" by restrictions in "cultural constructions" of sex and gender. You couldn't make this up; it's where it's at in the lowermost catacombs of intellectual desolation. I even went to a "lecture" (read: a sermon) here at the University of Oslo in 2018 in which The Babadook came into focus of vivid interpretation by an exhuberantly enthusiastic professor.

You can read all about this profile of the film in numeous interviews and cases of analysis, although fittingly most of them stem from after Kent had made her second work, the radically feminist The Nightingale (which is good and watchable, even if you don't align with ideologies apparent) - by which she was suddenly somehow "discovered" by folks of internally hallowed academic interest and put to test through scrutiny.

FWIW, I quite appreciated The Babadook. It's well made as a whole; nicely structured and brilliantly acted, especially by Essie Davis (mother) and the kid, Noah Wiseman. Although the latter didn't as much act as he acted out certain orders and instructions by Kent, who admittedly wanted for him to become as despicable as possible so that we would really feel for/with the poor mum.

[battema]

I wanted to see that kid die in the most horrible and painful manner. His constant screaming was too much.

One of my favorite "tricks" with this movie is how seamlessly the "sympathetic character" changes. In the first half the mother is our sympathetic POV with her "insufferable" child, and then almost seamlessly shifts our viewpoint in the second half to turn her son into the more sympathetic character, but without necessarily redeeming. It's a really nicely nuanced bit of film work IMHO.

On a more basic level, I love the look of the Babadook itself...talk about maximum results from minimal expense.

As to the new Halloween flicks...the first one was another "remix" flick that was obviously trying to rope in the nostalgia crowd (as with JJ Abraham's Star Trek, Star Wars The Force Awakens, Ghostbusters Afterlife, etc.). Given our collective lust on PE for treating all dusty old things from our past as immutably sacred and superior to all that has come since, I'm surprised the flick wasn't more well-received here

Despite that...I did enjoy that first remixed Halloween (didn't bother with the sequel, nor am I likely to rush out to see this latest one). Sometimes I do just have a craving for fast food, even if I know vastly better cuisine is nearby

[battema]

According to director Jennifer Kent, this exact premise is the very essence of message in the film. She intended it as an allegorical play on feminist tropes of woman's damnation in being sole giver of birth and thus responsible for the lives of man and all of man's doings. Which is of course a burden of considerable latitude, seeing as "man" is inherently evil, as some would have it. Believe me, these are deeply profound theories in certain parts of humaniora academia, obscure to outsiders but totally dominant once you get inside and, when paired with various traits of existentialist and pessimist thought in philosophy, a crude definition of life.

The film is not about physical or metaphysical monster apparitions but our apparent understanding of and empathy with the increasingly manic and semi-psychotic mother's antipathy towards her son (who was bestowed on her by a man who then "allowed for himself" to be killed in an accident and thus freed himself from evil life) and the limits to where potential for fatal violence are set. The interactive "horror" of The Babadook is supposed to be what appears within yourself as sentiment while watching.

And the ending, in which the "monster" (i.e. that responsibility of woman) is shown to still endure albeit chained up, is a direct parable on how women are "chained" by restrictions in "cultural constructions" of sex and gender. You couldn't make this up; it's where it's at in the lowermost catacombs of intellectual desolation. I even went to a "lecture" (read: a sermon) here at the University of Oslo in 2018 in which The Babadook came into focus of vivid interpretation by an exhuberantly enthusiastic professor.

You can read all about this profile of the film in numeous interviews and cases of analysis, although fittingly most of them stem from after Kent had made her second work, the radically feminist The Nightingale (which is good and watchable, even if you don't align with ideologies apparent) - by which she was suddenly somehow "discovered" by folks of internally hallowed academic interest and put to test through scrutiny.

Perhaps it's reflexive self-defense or perhaps it's the lack of sufficient coffee coursing through my veins...I believe you and I'm kind of morbidly fascinated with that read on the film...I'm also not sure I need to amplify my pessimistic view of our world with a reminder that a film I love was also implicitly reminding me that I am That Great White Devil simply for existing. If I want to remind myself that I'm condemned by nature to be a bad person, I can just go around the corner and look at my 2CD copy of The Quest from Yes.

It's sort of the weird conundrum for me: I often am drawn to horror for the escapism aspects, but many times the most powerful horror films are ones that are clearly grounded in real world challenges which end up stripping back the escapism and remind me of just how cruel the world can be.

Aaaand with that feeble attempt to sound like I know what the f**k I'm talking about, time for my next cup o' coffee!

[Progatron]

If I want to remind myself that I'm condemned by nature to be a bad person, I can just go around the corner and look at my 2CD copy of The Quest from Yes.

Now that's horror.

[Scrotum Scissor]

not sure I need to amplify my pessimistic view of our world with a reminder that a film I love was also implicitly reminding me that I am That Great White Devil simply for existing. If I want to remind myself that I'm condemned by nature to be a bad person, I can just go around the corner and look at my 2CD copy of The Quest from Yes.

Sorry for the bads. Still it serves to illustrate just how well The Babadook is made, artistically speaking, in that these faccets aren't determining of feable enjoyment of the movie on a "pedestrian" note. It's a good flick and an interesting one, and I for one don't need to agree with the subversive visions of it to merely respect, dig and let go. And believe me, if the public were to know which allegories soar throughout pics like The Witch and Hereditary, there'd be an uproar.

Nowadays, circumstantial dissection of film and other artworks seem to be not only encouraged but actually expected to address certain mores sought inherent, if not their inclusion then their absence; as in characters' views or morals - if we're to be entrusted to like those characters.

As for The Quest, I haven't heard it yet. But I'll get around to it soon so that we can discuss it thoroughly in a separate thread of fierce power.

[SteveSly]

According to director Jennifer Kent, this exact premise is the very essence of message in the film. She intended it as an allegorical play on feminist tropes of woman's damnation in being sole giver of birth and thus responsible for the lives of man and all of man's doings. Which is of course a burden of considerable latitude, seeing as "man" is inherently evil, as some would have it. Believe me, these are deeply profound theories in certain parts of humaniora academia, obscure to outsiders but totally dominant once you get inside and, when paired with various traits of existentialist and pessimist thought in philosophy, a crude definition of life.

The film is not about physical or metaphysical monster apparitions but our apparent understanding of and empathy with the increasingly manic and semi-psychotic mother's antipathy towards her son (who was bestowed on her by a man who then "allowed for himself" to be killed in an accident and thus freed himself from evil life) and the limits to where potential for fatal violence are set. The interactive "horror" of The Babadook is supposed to be what appears within yourself as sentiment while watching.

And the ending, in which the "monster" (i.e. that responsibility of woman) is shown to still endure albeit chained up, is a direct parable on how women are "chained" by restrictions in "cultural constructions" of sex and gender. You couldn't make this up; it's where it's at in the lowermost catacombs of intellectual desolation. I even went to a "lecture" (read: a sermon) here at the University of Oslo in 2018 in which The Babadook came into focus of vivid interpretation by an exhuberantly enthusiastic professor.

You can read all about this profile of the film in numeous interviews and cases of analysis, although fittingly most of them stem from after Kent had made her second work, the radically feminist The Nightingale (which is good and watchable, even if you don't align with ideologies apparent) - by which she was suddenly somehow "discovered" by folks of internally hallowed academic interest and put to test through scrutiny.

FWIW, I quite appreciated The Babadook. It's well made as a whole; nicely structured and brilliantly acted, especially by Essie Davis (mother) and the kid, Noah Wiseman. Although the latter didn't as much act as he acted out certain orders and instructions by Kent, who admittedly wanted for him to become as despicable as possible so that we would really feel for/with the poor mum.

Wow, thanks for the insight on the film. Very interesting stuff.