The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

An ongoing project to survey the best films of individual decades, genres, and filmmakers.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1676 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:46 pm

Yep, it toured some festivals in fall 2015 with that title and was changed sometime in early 2016 (and then remained unreleased to the public until 2017)

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1677 Post by Finch » Sat Dec 28, 2019 2:52 am

Thanks for confirming that. Perkins has a new feature out end of January through Orion, Gretel and Hansel (names are deliberately reversed in the title, according to Perkins).

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1678 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:27 am

Haha that would be really weird if the names were somehow not deliberately reversed! I haven’t seen his other feature I Am the Pretty Thing That Lives in the House either but I have yet to hear any confident praise. Still I’ll probably check out both on the strength of his debut.

User avatar
brundlefly
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 12:55 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1679 Post by brundlefly » Sat Dec 28, 2019 6:18 am

I respected Pretty Thing as a series of dispatches from Shirley Jackson's shadow, but remember it as having trouble finding confident footing. Forcing resonances.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1680 Post by Mr Sausage » Sat Dec 28, 2019 10:09 am

therewillbeblus wrote:Haha that would be really weird if the names were somehow not deliberately reversed! I haven’t seen his other feature I Am the Pretty Thing That Lives in the House either but I have yet to hear any confident praise. Still I’ll probably check out both on the strength of his debut.
It’s a slighter film, not nearly as impressive, but Perkins’ technical skills are well in evidence and it proves a moody, unsettling haunted house film. I found it worth watching.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1681 Post by colinr0380 » Sat Dec 28, 2019 12:03 pm

I'm still reeling from Oz Perkins also being an actor and playing a Guardian Angel to Gary Busey, playing a dog hater reincarnated as a pooch in Quigley!
therewillbeblus wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:46 pm
Finch wrote:
Fri Dec 27, 2019 9:39 pm
Wasn't it also known as February at the very beginning? I could have sworn the French Blu-Ray carries that title.
Yep, it toured some festivals in fall 2015 with that title and was changed sometime in early 2016 (and then remained unreleased to the public until 2017)
Also for anyone in the UK, Film4 has shown it a couple of times in the last few months under that February title, so I guess it must have been left that way internationally.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1682 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Dec 28, 2019 1:49 pm

colinr0380 wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 12:03 pm
I'm still reeling from Oz Perkins also being an actor and playing a Guardian Angel to Gary Busey, playing a dog hater reincarnated as a pooch in Quigley!.
I still think of him first as that tall awkward guy in Legally Blonde...

User avatar
Finch
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:09 pm
Location: Edinburgh, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1683 Post by Finch » Sat Dec 28, 2019 2:34 pm

Pretty Thing would have worked better as a short but the images and the mood of it have stuck with me ever since I first saw it.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1684 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Dec 29, 2019 2:57 pm

Revisits, except for the two Quatermass films.

The Revenge of Frankenstein (Fisher 1958). A much more sedate film than the previous Curse, with Cushing’s Baron a much calmer figure, making the psychopathy not quite as evident – almost an ambiguously admirable character in his individualism and confidence, just busy trying to manage his medical practice along with his innovative brain transplant research (not to mention his volunteer work in a charity hospital to boot), with finally the help of an enthusiastic assistant! At times this feels almost more like a straight drama than a horror film, with the (willing) subject of the experiment evincing more pity than anything else. The good-looking sets and photography are subdued rather than bright and colorful, and carry on that more austere tone, although we also get touches of black humor. Cushing’s performance is really top-notch here and it’s largely a captivating film.

The Quatermass Xperiment (Guest 1955).
This is obviously a sibling to all those other 1950s apocalyptic invasion sci fi horror flicks, but more specifically with that especially Communist-phobic sub-subgenre having to do with an alien life form wanting to infiltrate the human species, with lots of clear-cuts parallels with The Thing from Another World. The earlier movie benefits from its isolated Arctic setting, but on the whole I find this the more entertaining film. I thought at some point we were going to stay in a more subdued way with the mystery of this ailing astronaut, but the film really takes off once the escape happens, and there are distinctively memorable scenes, like the zoo episode. Good overall direction and even if Donlevy is a little shaky in his performance the British actors surrounding him create some well-articulated characters that along with the settings grounds it in a social reality.

Taste of Fear (Holt 1961). My initial impression was definitely faulty because on second viewing I thought this was a simply terrific film within its limits. I didn’t see the plot twists coming (which I didn’t remember). In some ways a new take on Clouzot’s Les Diaboliques, with really stylish visuals and good acting. Also the kind of film that can potentially motivate a discussion about when a thriller meets the criteria to become a horror film. This is really a limit case here, because the post-Psycho influence, the visuals and the gruesome implications argue its inclusion as a horror film, but basically it still boils down to a crime mystery thriller (so was Psycho, but then that film features a more abnormal/deranged, i.e. “monsterish”, protagonist, and just a lot more horror visuals and tropes). Personally I’m inclined to be a little generous and say this qualifies, but just barely.

Quatermass 2 (Guest 1957). The obvious parallel with this sequel is Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I liked this film even more than the first. Really a terrific narrative set-up helped greatly by the wonderful art direction and sets, matte paintings, and great use of locations for extra atmosphere, and anchored again in a sense of realism and of social reality. The American film develops more deeply the paranoia theme on an interpersonal level, but this has a sinking feeling of dread of its own and a sense of conspiracy on a wider, governmental level. It’s also quite suspenseful throughout. The last act’s focus on action and battle diminishes the spell a tiny bit though.

Cash on Demand (Lawrence 1961).
Please forgive this non-horror entry as I wanted to revisit it as part of my Hammer foray (I’ll be able to insert The Snorkel in the 50s list). There isn’t horror but there is genuine terror, as well as horrifying humiliation, experienced by Fordyce the bank manager. This is a stylistically simple but a really fine little film, an effective and suspenseful psychological thriller, really well scripted (taking place in real time) and executed in the direction, with consistently solid camera framings throughout and really good performances by Cushing and André Morell. The fact that it’s a Christmas Day bank job makes this a holiday piece because the transformation Fordyce goes through really is something of a Scrooge arc, and at one point there’s a touching moment of existential vulnerability when we access the heart of what the character’s psychological life is fragilely hanging on.

The Evil of Frankenstein (Francis 1964). A six-year wait for Cushing to assume the mantle of the baron again and it’s definitely a disappointment. It’s more like a sequel to the first, with the baron returning to his hometown of Karlstaad, and thawing the original creature. Strange and not completely successful script-writing decisions are made that includes a hypnotist, Zoltan, being the really bad guy and source of the mayhem. Pretty humorless too, and a bit too focused on action, with the creature taking center stage in a way he (it?) didn’t in the earlier films.

The Kiss of the Vampire (Sharp 1963). The title of this third (Dracula-less) Hammer vampire installment hints at sex but to the contrary this is quite a dignified, seriously-toned film. The story about a young honeymooning English couple in a vampire-stricken town in south Germany is pretty conventional, and the film is definitely a minor entry, but nevertheless I enjoy the very slow build-up to the action-packed ending, with the usual fetching Hammer sets and cinematography. The vampire theme morphs progressively into a more Satanic cult-focused horror that prefigures The Devil Rides Out.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1685 Post by Mr Sausage » Sun Dec 29, 2019 6:17 pm

The Evil of Frankenstein is what we'd now call a soft reboot, posing as almost a sequel of sorts to the original Universal Frankenstein film rather than any of the Hammer films. If I recall, they show flashbacks to events that never happened in Curse. And then there's the presence of the monster, which is impossible given the previous films. Hammer had just gotten permission to use the Universal stories as they saw fit, so I guess they were looking for an excuse to show a monster made-up like Karloff. They'd do a full reboot in the 70s with Horror of Frankenstein before returning to the original continuity for the final film. Odd series, but it has some of Hammer's very best movies (Frankenstein Created Woman and Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed).

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1686 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Dec 29, 2019 6:36 pm

Yes there is one, rather long extended "flashback" scene that redoes the section of bringing the creature back to life, and what happens to him afterwards, from Curse, but with some important changes. I didn't know it was inspired from a Universal film. Woman is one I haven't seen yet but will, and I'll revisit Destroyed which I remember enjoying. I should also mention that the assistant in Evil is quite dull.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1687 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:00 am

Anyone here a fan of Them (David Moreau and Xavier Palud, 2006)? It’s slight with minimal ambitions but I recall it being quite eerie and fittingly bleak for the exercise it’s attempting. For all the home invasion subgenre entries that stretch the plot unnecessarily for meaning, this is scarier for depriving a motive or a face to be afraid of, and piles fear from existential absurdity onto the standard psychological unpredictability. The film might not be lavish but it achieves exactly what it sets out to, and there’s some admiration in that. I haven’t seen it in a while so my memory could be heightening its strengths, but it’s definitely worth checking out if you have 75 minutes to spare.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1688 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:06 am

bottled spider wrote:
Mon Dec 16, 2019 11:46 pm
Calling it a horror movie is reaching, but check out the beautiful poster for Patrice Chéreau's La Reine Margot anyway (the spoiler tags are just for managing size):
SpoilerShow
Image
While obviously not a horror movie, it certainly contains the most blood of any non-horror film I’ve ever seen! This should also be the go-to answer for people asking for “movies like Game of Thrones

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1689 Post by colinr0380 » Thu Jan 02, 2020 6:33 am

therewillbeblus wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:00 am
Anyone here a fan of Them (David Moreau and Xavier Palud, 2006)? It’s slight with minimal ambitions but I recall it being quite eerie and fittingly bleak for the exercise it’s attempting. For all the home invasion subgenre entries that stretch the plot unnecessarily for meaning, this is scarier for depriving a motive or a face to be afraid of, and piles fear from existential absurdity onto the standard psychological unpredictability. The film might not be lavish but it achieves exactly what it sets out to, and there’s some admiration in that. I haven’t seen it in a while so my memory could be heightening its strengths, but it’s definitely worth checking out if you have 75 minutes to spare.
It has been a few years since I last saw it but I am afraid I remember not liking this one at all, strangely perhaps because the more that it succeeded at being a stalk and chase thriller (the first half of the film set in and around the isolated house is magnificently tense and atmospheric), the more that I got really upset at the somewhat smug (almost xenophobic due to its 'strangers in a strange land of Romania' setting) wider implications being raised. And the whole 'based on a true story' aspect to its initial marketing really upset me, both for being 'based on a true story' in the way that things like The Perfect Storm and Open Water are:
SpoilerShow
(i.e. everyone disappeared without trace so at some point we just have to start speculatively making up stuff. With Them this basically starts happening immediately after the first scene at the school. Even the pre-opening credits scene of earlier victims meeting an uncertain fate on the country road feels entirely speculative to such an extent that a true story moniker would be stretching things beyond breaking point)
and that it is one of the key films in that 'hoodie horror' subgenre of the late 2000s, that covers things like Eden Lake:
SpoilerShow
in that this film is apparently about a group of schoolchildren torturing and killing people for kicks, which really feels like a paranoia of the older generation for the younger one, and creating their own boogeymen to prove themselves correct in their fears. Its what made something like Attack The Block feel rather refreshing in balancing out the seeming deluge of one way negativity a little.
I think without that 'true story' aspect I might have been a bit kinder to it, but its a film that for me felt entirely wrecked in retrospect by its 'twist' resolution, and en vogue Blair Witch-style hopelessly bleak ending, rather than enriched by it. It does feel like a key film however in helping to kick off the French extreme horror trend (I seem to remember this getting a lot of praise in the UK at the time, and the directors then went on to do the Jessica Alba remake of The Eye in 2008), but I think for all their other flaws French extreme horror-wise I much prefer Haute Tension (aka Switchblade Romance) for its isolation and chase theme (despite its similarly ludicrous twist ending it builds up enough of a head of steam to relentlessly power its way through it for me, though other responses may vary. It also pre-twist plays out very similarly to the plot of that Dean Koontz book, Intensity), Frontier(s) for its use of current events to power its conflicts (a bit of a predecessor to Green Room) and Inside as the best claustrophobic 'trapped in a house with Béatrice Dalle scratching at your door and wanting to come in' film (with a small pre-A Prophet role for Tahar Rahim!). And then of course there is Martyrs, which is perhaps the very best of the 'torture porn' films, but it may just be myself and mfunk in agreement on that one!
Last edited by colinr0380 on Sat Feb 01, 2020 3:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1690 Post by therewillbeblus » Thu Jan 02, 2020 8:46 am

colinr0380 wrote:
Thu Jan 02, 2020 6:33 am
therewillbeblus wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 1:00 am
Anyone here a fan of Them (David Moreau and Xavier Palud, 2006)? It’s slight with minimal ambitions but I recall it being quite eerie and fittingly bleak for the exercise it’s attempting. For all the home invasion subgenre entries that stretch the plot unnecessarily for meaning, this is scarier for depriving a motive or a face to be afraid of, and piles fear from existential absurdity onto the standard psychological unpredictability. The film might not be lavish but it achieves exactly what it sets out to, and there’s some admiration in that. I haven’t seen it in a while so my memory could be heightening its strengths, but it’s definitely worth checking out if you have 75 minutes to spare.
It has been a few years since I last saw it but I am afraid I remember not liking this one at all, strangely perhaps because the more that it succeeded at being a stalk and chase thriller (the first half of the film set in and around the isolated house is magnificently tense and atmospheric), the more that I got really upset at the somewhat smug (almost xenophobic due to its 'strangers in a strange land of Romania' setting) wider implications being raised. And the whole 'based on a true story' aspect to its initial marketing really upset me, both for being 'based on a true story' in the way that things like The Perfect Storm and Open Water are:
SpoilerShow
(i.e. everyone disappeared without trace so at some point we just have to start speculatively making up stuff. With Them this basically starts happening immediately after the first scene at the school. Even the pre-opening credits scene of earlier victims meeting an uncertain fate on the country road feels entirely speculative to such an extent that a true story moniker would be stretching things beyond breaking point)
and that it is one of the key films in that 'hoodie horror' subgenre of the late 2000s, that covers things like Eden Lake:
SpoilerShow
in that this film is apparently about a group of schoolchildren torturing and killing people for kicks, which really feels like a paranoia of the older generation for the younger one, and creating their own boogeymen to prove themselves correct in their fears. Its what made something like Attack The Block feel rather refreshing in balancing out the seeming deluge of one way negativity a little.
I think without that 'true story' aspect I might have been a bit kinder to it, but its a film that for me felt entirely wrecked in retrospect by its 'twist' resolution, and en vogue Blair Witch-style hopelessly bleak ending, rather than enriched by it.
These are fair points and great ones for discussion, and I mostly agree with your overall concerns even if those problems didn't bother me much due to my own differing interpretations of the content. The first problem you have re: based on a true story doesn't feel all that different than so many movies that brand themselves with that title, including dramatized biopics. Perhaps I've been conditioned to taking that claim with a grain of salt, but I'm much more likely to be put off by a dramatization of the 9/11 movies (maybe unfairly, I've not been able to bring myself to seeing something like United 93, dubbing it tasteless for the reasons you describe without fairly giving it a chance). With something like Them, reading about how it was "inspired" by true events rather than be based on the specifics, allowed me to take a back seat because so much great art is "inspired" by reality, horror by fears rooted in possibilities even if there are degrees between those possibilities and the abstractions we are presented with in something like a supernatural, but I'm getting off topic. If this film opens with the word "based" vs "inspired" I do think that's worth a sideways glance, but I always took it as being more harmlessly inspired into an idea by an inexplicable motiveless crime that did occur in real life and is worthy of being examined.

The second problem you point out is interesting, because I could go either way on it. The generational fear is something so relatable for all individuals who belong to generations (that belongingness itself a forced trapping of categorization that pits them against others!) and playing with the human experience of fearing the unknown, we tend to fear other people in general, especially those with differences (your xenophobic observations are quite apt). So I could take this film as not reinforcing such a perspective as truth but one that is, for better or worse, valid in so far as it paints a subjective portrait of fears innate in the social structure of multigenerational western cultures, that are more individualistic by design and thus have a significant amount of barriers that obstruct any chance at knowledge through connectivity or a reduction of fear that a collectivistic culture may establish to alleviate such tension naturally in its community systems. The fact that the murderers are
SpoilerShow
children
to me only serves in providing an expansion on the differentiation between people and the inability to grasp onto comprehension of another, thereby reinforcing the isolation inherent in western individualistic cultures.

However, I do think this is all problematic if the film has the motivations of the opposite: not merely validating the fear as a natural fear, but one of truth. This would be didactic, pejorative, and condescending, not to mention just plain cynical to fantastical territory to relay a message of hopelessness for our future. I can absolutely see that perspective, and if I had it myself I'd hate this movie to its core, but fortunately I think of it more as a film that exploits the fears of the unknown, including different generations or people of different ages (and brain structures, in different stages of development), so it works as far as uprooting the sense of safety that is our facade in individualistic societies in a coating of defense mechanisms, and false security/superiority to the possibilities of being harmed, through passive solipsism. The ending doesn't let us off the hook and the fear of the unknown, absence of motive and all, is still present for us, serving as a mirror for our own fears in meaninglessness and divorcement from other human beings as alien and unpredictable. Not in their nature (all 'x group of people' are not sociopaths) but as that possibility, the one that no matter how improbable still exists in our minds.

For the record, I like Martyrs too! Or at least the first half, I'll half to rewatch it before the end of the project but I remember feeling ambivalent about the middle and won over again by the end.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1691 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:05 am

In regards to the Hammer films, I should point out to those that might not know (or remember), that Mr. Sausage already did a pretty exhaustive rundown of the catalogue near the top of this thread, as part of the earlier list project. I have to say that, for the films I’ve seen, I find myself largely in agreement with his opinions.


The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll (Fisher 1960). (rewatch) A radically different adaptation of the story, with a Dorian Gray-ish twist, and a striking development for Hammer at this point in time, much more provocative, sexy and lurid than previous films. It plays almost like a black comedy (Mr. and Mrs. Jekyll’s marriage is possibly the place where the most horror resides!) and the spirit of Hyde seems to have hijacked the film itself (the romantic music at times perversely accompanies acts of evil). It wouldn’t have turned out as well if every aspect of the production wasn’t firing on all cylinders as it does, with excellent acting, a witty script, great pace and direction as usual by Fisher, the bright, pastel pink-violet-blue-green color palette, and particularly outstanding, wonderful costumes. To some this is a misfire in part because of the casting of Massie in the lead but to me definitely one of the top Hammers.


Captain Clegg (Scott 1962). (rewatch) Arguably on this side of the border of horror: the Gothic feel and pseudo-phantoms, bloody brutality, a few corpses. The action-heavy script is between average and good, but it’s made extremely enjoyable by the actors, sets and locations – another handsome-looking film, in a completely different way. Again an excellent performance by Cushing, perfectly cast again as another libertarian rebel. Another winner for the British studio.


The Exorcist III (theatrical cut) (Blatty 1990). (1st viewing) I’d never seen this but decided to try it because of the enticing Arrow package and the board’s comments. Definitely a captivating, mostly good thriller, that isn’t undone by the silly bits in the ending sequence (which isn’t all bad, though I was mentally prepared for a disappointment). The film is pretty scary, especially in the first 40 minutes or so. That whole build-up creates a sense of all-infiltrating supernatural dread that isn’t that far removed from the power of the original, and it effectively conveys a sense of an utterly dark world through the grisly murders (made more repellent by the choice of the victims) and the feeling of absolute menace. Blatty’s film definitely riffs on the same existential/spiritual concerns that inhabit the original. I didn’t know the action took place in Georgetown like the first, among the same locations, so the memories triggered are definitely part of the effect. But then the sober quality of the photography/edits and the score play an important role too in creating a sense of grave threat. Once we get into the Karras/Gemini Killer scenes (the aged Miller’s presence, and acting, distracts a bit, along with a few too many showy Exorcist-y devices like that repeated roar, although at the same time it makes sense that he’s there), that initial promise diminishes a bit, and the film devolves gradually into something more akin to a slasher-type film, but one that’s still effective on that level, like a good De Palma say. Good work by Scott through the whole thing too, who has to carry the film, especially given how Cobb was so terrific in the first.


Dracula: Prince of Darkness (Fisher 1966).
(1st viewing) After an 8-year wait, definitely not the disappointment that the “resurrection” of Frankenstein was in Evil of, and a good if not excellent film for me. Knives made a comment in the previous horror project that it’s structured like a slasher film, and those were my thoughts as well watching this. Like the original, it’s completely serious in tone and does take its time with the atmospheric build-up, which is enjoyable on its own. But when the violence comes it’s surprisingly brutal, and the film doesn’t bother with the Victorian society portrayal and drama of the original and focuses more on the horror and action. The introduction of a Renfield equivalent, not present in the original Horror film, felt a little like an unnecessary reference to the original source material (though helpful for the plot development), but there are some very successful moments throughout, including the effective special effects sequence that resurrects the Count, and Lee’s dynamic attack scenes.


Paranoiac (Francis 1963). (rewatch) Unsurprisingly given the title, this has the most similarities to Psycho among the “mini-Hitchcocks”. It’s not quite at the level of Taste of Fear or as satisfying, but it’s still very good. Like the other Hammer psychological thrillers, it features more plot twists than Hitchcock films, though. This one is quite disorienting until near the end. Not only are you not sure who’s really who, and what are their agendas, you’re kept from knowing who are really the good and bad guys/gals. The film also goes into provocative quasi-incest territory. Solid acting (with wonderfully intense rage scenes by Reed), sure-handedness in the direction and delectably stylish photography compensate for small imperfections in the narrative.


The Exorcist III: Legion (Blatty 1989/2016).
(1st viewing) It isn’t really possible to compare the “versions” since the replaced material here is from such inferior, sub-standard quality. But in any case, my takeaway is that apart from the exorcism scene the 1990 release was the superior version. I don’t know if it’s because I was watching it a second time in so short a time, or if it’s because there were minute differences (the editing in of patient X dialogue scenes seems to be different, for one thing, and I didn’t like the black-and-white start, although I understand why it’s there after seeing the deleted prologue), but even the earlier parts of the film didn’t feel as frightening. I didn’t expect most of the Dourif scenes to be from an earlier shoot, but on the whole his performances here felt a lot weaker, too low-key and lacking the intensity and menace of the reshoots, and therefore clashing startlingly with the danger coming out of the other material. Also, even though I had qualms about Miller’s presence and performance in the released version, again it makes a lot less sense for him not to be here and creates unwanted confusion. So I can understand the producers not being happy with the results and wanting changes. The problem apparently is they went overboard with the exorcism. They should have either ended the film without it, in a fashion similar to here, or included one with less hysterical visual effects. In any case, I don’t think I’ll have the desire to watch this version ever again.


The Full Treatment (Guest 1960).
(rewatch) The Hitchcock parallel here is definitely Spellbound, but it’s a much more aggressive and contemporary-feeling film (it doesn’t even have the Gothic elements that Taste of Fear or Paranoiac carry), starting with the fact that the amnesiac male has developed the compulsion to kill his wife! Like those films (all the Hammer mini-Hitchcocks?), it benefits from the South of France location and scenery. If this wasn’t part of an Indicator set, I wouldn’t have revisited it, but I’m glad I did because this is another case where I’m completely revising my earlier, misguided negative judgment. It’s a little long and doesn’t have the originality of prime Hitchcock, say, but it’s still a compelling thriller that’s nicely directed, has strong visuals and obviously benefits from a swankier production than the Hammer Gothics. This really falls into the thriller rather than horror category, though.


Night of the Demon (Tourneur 1957).
(1st viewing) I liked a lot of different things here, but something about the tone especially is just right, as the film’s spirit, despite the reveal early on of the demon, remains fairly cool and “objective”. Not only Andrews’ character, but the co-lead, the believing Joanna, never gets into hysterics. Fun also to see a film this early on referencing various areas of the parapsychological/paranormal as well (mediumship, flying saucers, people remembering past lives), and to have us be both sympathetic to but not entirely with Andrews’ “skepticism” (like the contemporary variant a lot of the time, actually a commitment to physicalism). I liked how the romantic liaison was interwoven in all of this also. After reading twbb’s take on the presence of the demon and what it does to the film, I tend to agree its removal would make this a completely different experience. A little restraint with the design and the degree of its visibility might have been beneficial though.
Last edited by Rayon Vert on Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:37 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1692 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun Jan 05, 2020 2:19 am

Re: the romantic development in Night of the Demon- I like to think of this process as mirroring Andrews’ own loosening of his rigid perspective in the film. As any relationship especially one involving love requires compromise of the self to blend with another, it also involves widening one’s perspective to share another’s; but even more there is a bit of a ‘leap of faith’ involved, for love is not scientific or quantifiable, and the falling into it is in itself kind of a surrendering to the mystical. This shift in mindset correlates to the progression of letting go of the self and joining with the inexplicable as a part of the group of affected, and bridges Andrews to the rest of humanity as one of the communal and not the superior, making the growth from the relationship and paranormal experience transferable to the social collective.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1693 Post by Mr Sausage » Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:03 pm

Rayon Vert wrote:
Sun Jan 05, 2020 1:05 am
In regards to the Hammer films, I should point out to those that might not know (or remember), that Mr. Sausage already did a pretty exhaustive rundown of the catalogue near the top of this thread, as part of the earlier list project. I have to say that, for the films I’ve seen, I find myself largely in agreement with his opinions.
Here they are, if anyone's curious about my opinions from 9 years ago:

Hammer's Dracula and Frankenstein series
Hammer's Karnstein Trilogy, Mummy films, and Sci-Fi
Hammer's Mini-Hitchcocks
Hammer's non-series films

I hadn't planned on rewatching any Hammer this period, but your posts have got me all fired up about Hammer again, so I've been doing some pleasurable revisiting and plan on more in the near future.

You've no idea how happy I am you liked The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll. I've tried to drum up interest in it a number of times on here, to little success.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1694 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Jan 05, 2020 3:32 pm

If I'm counting correctly, I've got 34 more to go (!), with 21 I've never seen before. I've got other stuff lined up to mix it up a bit as well.

Yeah I don't understand the seemingly widespread conception of Two Faces as a misfire (I've always liked it). Even the extras on the Indicator blu ray (including the two scholars on the commentary) generally hold that opinion as well. The commentators get stuck on things like Massie's performance (which I thought was perfectly good, and both Lee and Addams are terrific here), the changes in his make-up in the transformations, how it's hard to believe he could seduce the belly dancer, on how overly lurid it is, including the rape (isn't that the point?). Although they point out the excellence of some aspects, like the costumes apparently designed by a non-Hammer French designer, which is why they look so different than the usual Victoriana costumes the studio used.

User avatar
barryconvex
billy..biff..scooter....tommy
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 10:08 pm
Location: NYC

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1695 Post by barryconvex » Mon Jan 06, 2020 2:52 am

therewillbeblus wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:27 am
Haha that would be really weird if the names were somehow not deliberately reversed! I haven’t seen his other feature I Am the Pretty Thing That Lives in the House either but I have yet to hear any confident praise. Still I’ll probably check out both on the strength of his debut.
I'll confidently praise this- it's great, you should watch it blu!! Really though, I don't know why everyone is so lukewarm about it. The way Perkins ramps up the dread here is the stuff of masters. He also has an uncanny understanding of how to do "creepy", something this film has plenty of. I meant to write this up when I first saw it a few months ago and it was still fresh but got sidetracked so I can really only speak in generalities now that it's faded somewhat but it's a fantastic movie. Probably will make it onto the bottom of my list.

User avatar
bottled spider
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1696 Post by bottled spider » Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:12 am

Lunacy (Švankmajer, 2005). It's telling that the film comes with a wankerly introduction from Švankmajer explaining that it's just a horror movie, disavowing artistic intent. Why ever should such an introduction be necessary? There's an implied contempt for commercial entertainment, but this doesn't succeed on that level either. It's simply unpleasant. Also, deep down inside, if we're truly honest with ourselves, nobody likes stop motion animation.
(Švankmajer does accomplish at least one very effective nightmare image: the staff of an asylum have been overthrown, locked into basement cells, and -- horrifyingly -- tarred and feathered. These feather-plastered men are more frightening than most movie monsters).

The Godmonster of Indian Flats (Fredric Hobbs, 1973). Those who like it (or purport to?) do so apparently because it's So Bad It's Good, a concept I don't relate to. I couldn't follow what was going on or stay awake for the duration, so I missed what one review described as "a full-on funeral for a dog in a church filled with old-timey prostitutes," which is what I rented it for in the first place. Oh well.

The Blob (Yeaworth, 1958). Not really So Bad It's Good. For one thing, much of it is genuinely good, like the beautiful Norman Rockwell colours. And if some of its defects are endearing, like a far too old for the part Steve McQueen, some defects are just defects, like the slow, yackety script. So the correct classification is: Good Enough To Wish It Better.

The Ghost Ship (Robson, 1943). When this premiered, water cannon were brought in to quell the rioting mobs who felt that a movie called Ghost Ship ought to have a minimum of one ghost ship in it. Like The Seventh Victim, it varies in tone and adheres to no single genre, which is interesting without being entirely satisfying. Yet also like The Seventh Victim, it is full of perfect individual scenes.

Poltergeist (Hooper, 1982). One of the best thing this movie does is find the eeriness in television static, the believable idea that this could be an interface or portal to the beyond, the idea of a child being ensorcelled by voices and pictures in it that the adults can't discern. One of the more frightening scenes involves no special effects at all: just the girl trapped inside the TV snow calling out to her mother 'where are you?'

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1697 Post by Rayon Vert » Mon Jan 06, 2020 10:55 pm

bottled spider wrote:
Mon Jan 06, 2020 3:12 am
Poltergeist (Hooper, 1982). One of the best thing this movie does is find the eeriness in television static, the believable idea that this could be an interface or portal to the beyond, the idea of a child being ensorcelled by voices and pictures in it that the adults can't discern.
Which is actually a thing that's been studied by spiritualists and parapsychologists, "electronic voice phenomenon", although I'm not personally aware that this has been done with television!*

The thing that always puzzles me in the film is the part where the medium tells the girl to "not go into the light", which is the opposite of what the light represents in near-death experiences, already well-known in 1982 if maybe not as much as now. Which makes me think of certain evangelicals who view near-death experiences as one of Satan's tricks!

*EDIT: Here's an article about EVP, or ITC ("Instrumental Transcommunication"), involving TV sets.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1698 Post by colinr0380 » Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:23 am

I assume that they are telling Carol Anne not to go into the light because that means death, and they are trying to retrieve her rather than smooth her passage. It has been a while since seeing Poltergeist II: The Other Side, but I think that actually deals with the fall out of the Freelings just snatching Carol Anne back and running off, thinking it is over and done with at that point, by actually having to lead all of these souls into the light in its climax. They are kind of a nice pairing in that way, with the first film starting small before building to a horror crescendo of effects, and the second starting with the effects still going on (because nobody has thought to stop it) until it becomes rather more spiritual again in its own climax.

(Though how all of this factors in the outlier Poltergeist III with a different family and Carol Anne constantly being told to "go into the light" there by Zelda Rubenstein's character, it is difficult to say. Maybe the psychic was through with trying to save Carol Anne by that point?)

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1699 Post by nitin » Tue Jan 07, 2020 9:01 am

Two horror titles I saw recently (I think both count despite Phantom being more than just a horror film:

The first, Donald Cammell’s White Of The Eye, is strange, confusing, at times a little amateurish feeling, and at other times overly arty, but it has a very particular mood that is hard to shake off and lingers well after the movie is over.

Some sort of strange fusion of serial killer film, complete with giallo influence in the murder scenes, and domestic relationship drama mixed with some existential ennui.

It’s most definitely not something I am forgetting anytime soon and that is really as good an endorsement as any other. Part of its beauty is just succumbing to it and letting it wash over you.

I saw it off Arrow’s blu but the Scream release is from the same spectacular 2k restoration that looks wonderful and also has a very strong and enveloping soundtrack that does wonders with the memorable score.


The second, De Palma’s Phantom Of The Paradise, is utterly mad...genius.

Completely off the charts in terms of how ludicrously undescribeable this movie is but I will give it a shot: some sort of rock opera fusion of Phantom of the Opera, Faust and the Picture Of Dorian Gray, with some of the most kinetically charged visuals and direction that you will ever see. In that last 30 minutes, the audio/visual assault on the senses is up there with Argento’s Suspiria.

I still haven’t seen all his filmography yet but this right now is my favorite De Palma and one of the all time great films!

I saw it off Arrow’s blu and IMHO it was stunning. I know there has been some debate about the colour timing of the master provided by Fox and although it looks ugly and overly dark in screenshots, I have to say, it looked brilliant on my calibrated tv. The 2.0 soundtrack is wonderous and I preferred it to the 4.0 track.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1700 Post by Rayon Vert » Tue Jan 07, 2020 11:53 am

colinr0380 wrote:
Tue Jan 07, 2020 2:23 am
I assume that they are telling Carol Anne not to go into the light because that means death, and they are trying to retrieve her rather than smooth her passage.
My memory of my feeling of that scene is that the medium's fear is that the evil presence is hiding in that light rather than merely "death", but I could be wrong (or maybe it's just not clearly spelled out). I might revisit this one.

Post Reply