|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Apr 24, 2019 13:48:58 GMT
www.indiewire.com/2019/04/the-lighthouse-first-look-robert-pattinson-eggers-1202127187/First look at Robert Egger's follow up to The Witch. This guy is really taking an interesting approach here. My guess is it will be narratively unconventional, but it will definitely be technically unconventional. He's shooting on outdated equipment from the 40s and 20s, and on 35mm black and white film stock, presumably, in the old academy aspect ratio. I imagine that means this will be a period set story, and I imagine it will be as spare and desolate as The Witch, if not more so. Willem Dafoe is great, and I always expect Robert Pattinson to do something really good and break out of his Twilight past that he's desperate to leave behind. I don't think he's really done so yet, but he's clearly been trying, and I'm hoping that this will be a high point for him.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Apr 24, 2019 15:04:33 GMT
Cool, he's doing a Nosferatu remake? Neat.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Apr 24, 2019 17:54:26 GMT
Cool, he's doing a Nosferatu remake? Neat. Well, every few years they talk about doing another Nosferatu remake. Doug Jones is starring in one that has been sitting on a shelf for a while, but this bigger budget version has been in 'development' seemingly forever. I'll believe that when I see it. He would seem to be a good choice for it, though I'm much more interested in seeing what he does as an original filmmaker. |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 24, 2019 18:37:09 GMT
I am not impressed with someone shooting in the style of a 1940s film if the characters do not follow a 1940s narrative sensibility.
My guess is, and I think I will be proven correct, is the story involves overly emo men dealing with neurosis, helplessness, and failure. This will dominate the story as opposed to scares.
There used to be much more range in horror films in what the protagonists could do.
Even in the period where liberalism really started to influence story-like John Carpenter's Halloween or the Fog, the technical innovations and scary bits were interesting enough to mask the message so it wasn't as obvious.
But such innovations are gone, so now they have to use these little gimmicks (we are shooting a folk tale with a dead language, or we are using a 1940s camera).
Diminishing returns, and they use ridiculous media hype and paid praise to hide the shortcomings. "The Babadook is the scariest horror film evah!"
The horror movie business used to be much more of a direct relationship between audience and filmmaker.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Apr 24, 2019 22:53:47 GMT
I am not impressed with someone shooting in the style of a 1940s film if the characters do not follow a 1940s narrative sensibility. My guess is, and I think I will be proven correct, is the story involves overly emo men dealing with neurosis, helplessness, and failure. This will dominate the story as opposed to scares. There used to be much more range in horror films in what the protagonists could do. Even in the period where liberalism really started to influence story-like John Carpenter's Halloween or the Fog, the technical innovations and scary bits were interesting enough to mask the message so it wasn't as obvious. But such innovations are gone, so now they have to use these little gimmicks (we are shooting a folk tale with a dead language, or we are using a 1940s camera). Diminishing returns, and they use ridiculous media hype and paid praise to hide the shortcomings. "The Babadook is the scariest horror film evah!" The horror movie business used to be much more of a direct relationship between audience and filmmaker. Like Lawrence Talbot? |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 24, 2019 23:42:43 GMT
Actually that is not far off the mark-except he turned into a violent monster which was a good reason to be neurotic and for the time it was a VFX novelty that spooked audiences also. The Claude Rains character was not neurotic however. Neither was the doctor dude in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein. I would bet $$$ there won't be a single character in this film who might be of the same mental stability as the Rains character or the one who sets fire to Frankie at the end of AACMF.
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 25, 2019 16:33:14 GMT
I am not impressed with someone shooting in the style of a 1940s film if the characters do not follow a 1940s narrative sensibility. My guess is, and I think I will be proven correct, is the story involves overly emo men dealing with neurosis, helplessness, and failure. This will dominate the story as opposed to scares. There used to be much more range in horror films in what the protagonists could do. Even in the period where liberalism really started to influence story-like John Carpenter's Halloween or the Fog, the technical innovations and scary bits were interesting enough to mask the message so it wasn't as obvious. But such innovations are gone, so now they have to use these little gimmicks (we are shooting a folk tale with a dead language, or we are using a 1940s camera). Diminishing returns, and they use ridiculous media hype and paid praise to hide the shortcomings. "The Babadook is the scariest horror film evah!" The horror movie business used to be much more of a direct relationship between audience and filmmaker. The Babadook made $7 million on a $4 million budget, The Witch $40 million on $4 million. Hardly diminishing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 25, 2019 17:43:02 GMT
The Babadook made $7 million on a $4 million budget, The Witch $40 million on $4 million. Hardly diminishing. They aren't tapping into the same audience that old horror did. Horror was never mainstream except for certain big budget things like the Exorcist. These films are lower budget yet aimed at a non-specialty audience. Compared to something like the first Nightmare on Elm Street--a straight horror film with no pretensions about important socio-political statements or empowerment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2019 18:13:02 GMT
Trailer says 2018 - was there a delay in releasing this - or is this just how old this trailer is?
The whole movie appears to be available on YouTube for $3.99....
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Apr 25, 2019 18:18:02 GMT
Trailer says 2018 - was there a delay in releasing this - or is this just how old this trailer is?
The whole movie appears to be available on YouTube for $3.99....
Somehow, and call me crazy if you must, I think that may be a different movie. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 25, 2019 18:24:51 GMT
The Babadook made $7 million on a $4 million budget, The Witch $40 million on $4 million. Hardly diminishing. They aren't tapping into the same audience that old horror did. Horror was never mainstream except for certain big budget things like the Exorcist. These films are lower budget yet aimed at a non-specialty audience. Compared to something like the first Nightmare on Elm Street--a straight horror film with no pretensions about important socio-political statements or empowerment.
Well that's not entirely true. Horror has been very mainstream. It's why the Universal Horror series was so popular. It wasn't some niche audience going to see those films.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 25, 2019 18:33:30 GMT
Well that's not entirely true. Horror has been very mainstream. It's why the Universal Horror series was so popular. It wasn't some niche audience going to see those films. But not in most decades. By the 1960s Hollywood had been left behind by smaller companies. The new wave of horror was AIP, Hammer, Amicus etc. And the Carpenter films were also low budget.
There is little connection between the Witch and Frankenstein 1931 except perhaps guaranteed market access.
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 25, 2019 18:45:50 GMT
Well that's not entirely true. Horror has been very mainstream. It's why the Universal Horror series was so popular. It wasn't some niche audience going to see those films. But not in most decades. By the 1960s Hollywood had been left behind by smaller companies. The new wave of horror was AIP, Hammer, Amicus etc. And the Carpenter films were also low budget.
There is little connection between the Witch and Frankenstein 1931 except perhaps guaranteed market access.
Which is exactly why I'm not looking for decades-old narrative or characterization in modern horror. I have old horror for that. Carpenter is also mainstream. All the classic slasher movies were. It's why they received nationwide releases. And there's the Blair Witch, very mainstream; that was in the 90s, barely 20 years ago. Saw also saw (no pun intended) a rise in mainstream horror within the past decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 25, 2019 18:50:13 GMT
Which is exactly why I'm not looking for decades-old narrative or characterization in modern horror. I have old horror for that. Carpenter is also mainstream. All the classic slasher movies were. It's why they received nationwide releases. And there's the Blair Witch, very mainstream; that was in the 90s, barely 20 years ago. Saw also saw (no pun intended) a rise in mainstream horror within the past decade. The Witch is not mainstream as in public friendly. Indie horror was since it was aimed at a specific audience that appreciated it like the teen market. The Witch is not aimed at the teen market. It's aimed at people who might attend Sundance Film Festival screenings.
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 25, 2019 20:45:29 GMT
Which is exactly why I'm not looking for decades-old narrative or characterization in modern horror. I have old horror for that. Carpenter is also mainstream. All the classic slasher movies were. It's why they received nationwide releases. And there's the Blair Witch, very mainstream; that was in the 90s, barely 20 years ago. Saw also saw (no pun intended) a rise in mainstream horror within the past decade. The Witch is not mainstream as in public friendly. Indie horror was since it was aimed at a specific audience that appreciated it like the teen market. The Witch is not aimed at the teen market. It's aimed at people who might attend Sundance Film Festival screenings.
And those people appreciate horror as well. Horror is not relegated to one set tone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 25, 2019 20:55:46 GMT
And those people appreciate horror as well. Horror is not relegated to one set tone. It's not the same audience though. The horror films that go to Sundance or similar type events are not your standard narrative films which is what regular horror audiences expect.
Even the regurgitated horror franchises like the last Halloween film-which received far more advertising than H20, even they are not really aimed at the traditional horror audience. The social message trumps the horror plot.
Night of the Living Dead might have used the black protagonist as a novelty, but the selling point was the cannibal ghoul stuff (not to mention it was a much lower budget affair than anything we are talking about--even Paranormal Activity was a big budget film by comparison in terms of advertising and marketing). Guaranteed the Lighthouse will market itself on something other than basic plot.
|
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 25, 2019 21:32:19 GMT
And those people appreciate horror as well. Horror is not relegated to one set tone. It's not the same audience though. The horror films that go to Sundance or similar type events are not your standard narrative films which is what regular horror audiences expect.
Even the regurgitated horror franchises like the last Halloween film-which received far more advertising than H20, even they are not really aimed at the traditional horror audience. The social message trumps the horror plot.
Night of the Living Dead might have used the black protagonist as a novelty, but the selling point was the cannibal ghoul stuff (not to mention it was a much lower budget affair than anything we are talking about--even Paranormal Activity was a big budget film by comparison in terms of advertising and marketing). Guaranteed the Lighthouse will market itself on something other than basic plot. I disagree. People can enjoy both non-standard narrative films and traditional horror. There is no definite distinction. That's a disservice to horror fans, implying they can't enjoy something other than basic plots. Though "basic" is a good word used to describe most horror plots, that is not the end all of horror. Horror, like sci-fi, is not limited to any one type of plot. Variety is good. After all, Japanese horror is not the same as American horror, French horror, or German horror. There's more than one way to tell a scary story. As for Halloween, the H20 advertising was everywhere. The return of Jamie Lee Curtis was huge. And the new Halloween's advertising was centered on the horror.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Apr 25, 2019 21:59:02 GMT
As for Halloween, the H20 advertising was everywhere. The return of Jamie Lee Curtis was huge. And the new Halloween's advertising was centered on the horror. Halloween 2018: "The studio spent an estimated $75.5 million on prints and advertisements for Halloween." As for the rest of it--there's a difference between a Toho Japanese film and something like the Witch. The Toho films DID advertise based on plot and premise-just as AIP and Hammer did. Modern "horror" like the Witch does not. It sells itself on the gimmick of some kind of authentic folk tale or the themes. This film is already following the prediction since they are talking about how it was filmed, not the plot. They will pretend it is some big surprise then when it comes out people will say "we've seen it before."
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Apr 25, 2019 22:10:50 GMT
It's not the same audience though. The horror films that go to Sundance or similar type events are not your standard narrative films which is what regular horror audiences expect.
Even the regurgitated horror franchises like the last Halloween film-which received far more advertising than H20, even they are not really aimed at the traditional horror audience. The social message trumps the horror plot.
Night of the Living Dead might have used the black protagonist as a novelty, but the selling point was the cannibal ghoul stuff (not to mention it was a much lower budget affair than anything we are talking about--even Paranormal Activity was a big budget film by comparison in terms of advertising and marketing). Guaranteed the Lighthouse will market itself on something other than basic plot. I disagree. People can enjoy both non-standard narrative films and traditional horror. There is no definite distinction. That's a disservice to horror fans, implying they can't enjoy something other than basic plots. Though "basic" is a good word used to describe most horror plots, that is not the end all of horror. Horror, like sci-fi, is not limited to any one type of plot. Variety is good. After all, Japanese horror is not the same as American horror, French horror, or German horror. There's more than one way to tell a scary story. As for Halloween, the H20 advertising was everywhere. The return of Jamie Lee Curtis was huge. And the new Halloween's advertising was centered on the horror. It's been proven to be a general waste of time trying to converse or rationalize with this guy. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 25, 2019 22:13:44 GMT
As for Halloween, the H20 advertising was everywhere. The return of Jamie Lee Curtis was huge. And the new Halloween's advertising was centered on the horror. Halloween 2018: "The studio spent an estimated $75.5 million on prints and advertisements for Halloween." As for the rest of it--there's a difference between a Toho Japanese film and something like the Witch. The Toho films DID advertise based on plot and premise-just as AIP and Hammer did. Modern "horror" like the Witch does not. This film is already following the prediction since they are talking about how it was filmed, not the plot. They will pretend it is some big surprise then when it comes out people will say "we've seen it before."
Yep, they spent a lot of money. And advertised the horror. And as for the rest: The Blair Witch Project sold itself as real footage. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre sold itself as true events. Friday the 13th pt 3 sold itself on 3D, as did Jaws 3-D. Horror has been selling itself on a gimmick for decades.
So, plot?
|
|
