A scary thing happened on the way to the Movie Forums - Horrorcrammers

Was the acting bad outside of the lesbian flirting scene? I can't remember. I mostly remember the acting in the car/SUV (?) at the end being decent. The flirting scene seemed like parody, but also working at such a high level, felt like they could just wing it, but then realized they didn't know how to pull it off naturally. So I landed in the "didn't effectively pull off a good parody in that scene" opinion of it. I really enjoy hiking through the woods, so I really enjoyed the movie. It effectively captured what it felt like to go for a nice hike in the woods.

Sting. A little girl’s pet spider grows enormous and threatens her family. Despite an R rating this is very whimsical and kid-friendly, evoking Guillermo Del Toro vibes. It made me laugh a couple times and was mildly entertaining. I wish I found it before watching Infested, I woulda done a spider double feature.

I'm a big fan of this one as well. I saw it earlier this year, but I wish I had saved it for this month. Anyone remember Too Many Cooks? It's sort of like a feature-length version of that with slasher movies replacing TV.

The New York Ripper -

This delightfully sleazy giallo capitalizes on an ideal setting for the genre: '80s New York. As movies from Basket Case to Big demonstrate, vice and indulging one's base impulses were a big deal there at the time. Fulci and company succeed by letting you indulge in the worst of it. Like the best giallos, this one always makes you wonder "they did it, but maybe not" until it has exhausted every possibility. At the same time, you not only get to see what happens in the kind of shows advertised in the fliers that once littered the streets, but also get to walk in both the participants and patrons' shoes. Besides the female performers who the killer targets, there are memorable customers like a gigolo and a classy, likely upper west side resident and wife with certain...kinks. Thankfully, Fulci makes you wonder about the appeals and consequences of being on stage or in the audience without making you feel judged Haneke-style. He also deserves credit for being just as unflinching and for letting you ask similar questions during the violent moments, which...let's just say it's not surprising the U.K. banned the movie until fairly recently. Despite the dubbing, the performances are uniformly strong. Hedley's cop and Marco's overly confident psychologist, Dr. Davis, are standouts, and I like how Fulci develops them without dialogue, such as with the doctor's love of electronic chess. The movie is also bound to appeal to New York history lovers, especially during the moments where the grit and grime in the alleys and subway trains are so strong, you can almost taste them.

Again, the dubbing is better than others I have heard, but it still adds more cheese than necessary. Also, as much as I like the Dr. Davis character, there are occasions when I wondered if he was written solely for audience members who don't pay attention. Other than that, the movie maintains my desire to see all the great giallos and my belief that the most worthwhile criticism of a place, in this case America, comes from outside of it. As one character in the movie states, "it takes more than talent to win, honey. You’ve gotta have willpower. In this country, if you’re not good at something, at anything, if you’re not the best, the smartest, or the toughest, that’s it. You’re screwed. You won’t get anywhere." It will make you wonder if the way New York was back then is a consequence of such beliefs. Oh, and pardon the confusion, but it will also make you never look at a duck the same the way again.

Wouldn't it be nice if these IPs ever dared to think outside of the box, but frankly, I'm happy they didn't use this idea on a franchise I'd be happier to just go away.


As for the movie itself, the roaming shots in Violent Nature are fantastic, as is the concept. As for the rest of the film, I didn't like it much, but I took that as being an intentional badness that I was meant to think was extremely flat by comparison. Those moments don't have to be good because it's about this better idea intruding on them.


As usual with a movie like this though, it's amazing how bad the criticisms of it are. And I'm not even talking about the 'omg he just keeps walking' complaints. I'm also talking about those who feel the movie cheated it's promise of being 'slow cinema'. That there shouldn't have been any edits during his roaming. That there should have been more of that. That it should have been five hours long to truly qualify as slow cinema. As if that was ever the actual promise the movie made to the audience. That by being influenced by more avant garde leaning films, it has to become one itself. Now I would have been completely on board that kind of thing, but to criticise the movie as cheating when it doesn't commit whole hog to really making the film an endurance test for the average filmgoers, is just kind of obnoxious.


The actually only on point criticism I've read about it in regards to expectations is why we didn't have scenes of the killer setting up the final act body dump you come to expect in your more generic slashers. That definitely seems like a missed opportunity

That was a pretty cute movie. I would think about doing a double feature with Arachnophobia.

I need to get some more horrors in this October. It’s been a rather weak effort from my side so far…

Any thoughts on Damien Leone's Psycho "homage" in his latest movie? Too much? Not enough?

You’re talking about an IP that had the vision to send Jason to Manhattan, Hell, AND space!

My main points of criticism about the film are tonal issues. For instance, we can hand wave most of the tin-eared line delivery as an intentional evocation of a cheap 80s slasher, and Johnny is a disruptive force intruding upon their banal narratives. This interpretation runs into a brick wall with the climax as the final girl offers NOTHING to the woman who monologues about the titular violent nature. It was so jarring that I thought for sure the final girl assumed she was off screen, as she sat there, looking like a robot they forgot to switch on. Meanwhile, the driver is giving a disproportionately good performance compared to everyone else, calling into question the intention behind it all.*
This combined with the unintentional comedy of Johnny’s appearance once he attains his mask (Stephen King likened it to a Minion) feel at odds with the artistically sound and impressive bits that relate either to the predatory voyeurism of Johnny or the impending doom of the final girl wandering through the woods at night.

However, I’m not one to punish a film whose artistic ambition exceeds its grasp, especially in a genre in dire need of such artistic ambition (especially without the crutch of oh so clever and cheeky meta commentary). I greatly admire the attempt and think its pacing and structure are almost exactly what is called for. It’s just the moment to moment execution that irks me on occasion and keeps me from raving about it.

Best scene in the franchise.

I was sitting there, thinking "Geez, I wonder what this scene would be like if there was an unrated version of this".

A few seconds later, I remembered that this IS the non-rated version of the movie.

So, it's as explicit as Leone wanted to make it.

Leone turned down a major studio offering to fund the next entry but he would have to make it more mainstream and accessible. He bet on himself and that the extremity is largely what makes the franchise work and it seems to be paying off big time. Happy for him.

As for the scene, it’s impressive in that it exemplifies why the franchise works. It homages both Psycho and the first film, heightens their violence and gore, balances both the ghoul’s humor and genuine tension necessary for it to work, and manages to address accusations of the franchise’s misogyny in a way only an equal opportunity sadist like Art the Clown could.

Definitely a ballsy move

Can’t say I saw that coming.

Watched Hellboy: The Crooked Man at a friend's movie night and I am confused by the hate it has gotten. I seriously thought is was a very good creepy horror movie and jack Kesy is great as Hellboy. It's lower budget definitely shows through at times but it's more than good enough in atmosphere and characters to offset that. If you love the Hellboy comics absolutely check it out, if you are only familiar with Del Toro's movies just go in with an open mind and realize it's doing something very different.


Also saw The First Omen and I really liked the first 2/3rds of it. There are interesting characters and some nice spookiness and mystery with a really cool reveal. Unfortunately it doesn't know how to get from that reveal to its ending without some bullshit. It doesn't kill the movie but still it's a letdown compared to how strong it was up to that point.

Terrifier. Harshly lit and looking like it was shot on MiniDV tape, yet I appreciated the simplicity of the beginning: two friends stranded and stalked by a creepy but charismatic clown. Unfortunately the second half devolves into characters who have nothing to do with each other wandering around a condemned building, causing my interest to wane.

Terrifier 2. Art is back! And he may or may not be Freddy Krueger this time. There’s production value, character development, and some sort of supernatural lore tying it all together. Every scene goes on just a smidge too long creating a two hour plus runtime. The acting is all over the place: the mom was godawful but that little girl knocked it out of the park. And most of the women look the same in these movies. That Damien Leone definitely has a type.

Shadow of the Vampire: I saw this as part of a film swap I'm doing elsewhere. It took me some time to get on its wavelength, but the more the film went on and the more the obsession of Murnau and Shreck to fulfill their goals was given emphasis, the more effective I found the film. Dafoe is excellent as usual, but I was mainly taken in by how well Malkovich's obsession to create his film at the expense of his crew members was channeled through his performance and his directorial commands during shooting. With so many Dracula films which came before this one, Merhige really found a unique way to tackle the original story since this isn't strictly an adaptation (which ties into why Malkovich's character stood out more). I also loved the attention to detail with the replications of the scenes from Murnau's original film. Again, it took me some time to get into the film, but once it got its hooks in me, I was fully on board with it.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

Quicksand. People get stuck in quicksand. It starts as a real bummer as this couple is getting divorced so they’re being shitty to each other. And as it turns out, people squirming around in quicksand doesn’t make for a compelling movie.

Dead Ringers. In the most Jeremy Irons role ever made, this movie starts with unethical patient interactions and rape and goes from there. Surprisingly restrained as far as Cronenbergs go. Not really a horror, except for the medical malpractice.

Rubikon. Astronauts harboring secrets from each other aboard a space station witness a mysterious fog wipe out Earth. There’s some moral dilemmas that would have been interesting in more competent hands but this was a real slog. I blame the score which was monotone ambience through the whole movie, making everything as dull as dishwater.

Last Straw. A young woman working overnight at a diner falls prey to tough boys. Some minor far-fetched elements aside this was real solid. Whenever I thought the movie was going to do something dumb it wouldn’t do that. So that’s good. Billy from Six Feet Under plays the dad.

Villains. Bumbling thieves break into the house of a psychotic couple. Big performances and broad humor make this an easy watch. But there isn’t much to it and I probably won’t remember it in a couple months.

Cuckoo. A teen girl goes to live at a resort in the Alps full of creepy German people. This was ****ing awesome. A weird-ass mystery, a thrilling ramp up, and characters I found infuriating for not taking the hero’s side. I still have some heavy hitters from 2024 to catch up on but I can’t imagine this not standing with the best of the year.

I saw this recently as well. My reaction?



However, the more I've thought and read about it, the more I like it. I think all the other horror fans should fit it into their watchlists because I'd like to know what you think about it as well. If I had to compare it to anything to whet your appetites, it would be Dario Argento movies like Phenomena.