|
Post by lostinlimbo on Jul 6, 2021 10:58:02 GMT
Hammer Films Double Bill The Damned had a unique premise, and unexpectedly dark story turns, but in the end I found it hard to completely jive with the film. Mainly due to the uninteresting side-story taking centre stage of an American tourist getting involved with a girl, who happens to be the sister of the leader (Oliver Reed) of a group violent delinquents. As for Horror of Frankenstein. I rather enjoyed this spiced up entry. Ralph Bates is great as the smarmy Doctor Frankenstein, and the dark humour was a nice touch.
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on Jul 6, 2021 11:16:52 GMT
Goldie Hawn is actually not bad in this and John Heard is an interesting choice for the villain. But the movie is honestly kind of boring. I agree that Goldie was surprisingly good in this, but you could tell where the plot was going far too early.
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on Jul 6, 2021 11:33:48 GMT
The Bird With The Crystal Plumage (1969) Considering that this was Dario Argento's directorial debut, it's an impressive production. Sam Dalmas (Tony Musante) is an American writer vacationing in Rome. One night walking by an art gallery he witnesses the attempted murder of a woman by a mysterious black-gloved assailant in a rain coat. The woman survives, but the villain manages to escape trapping Sam between two glass doors. Sam is questioned by the police and it turns out that there is a serial-killer on the loose targeting young women. Sam decides to do some detecting on his own which leads to him becoming the target of the killer, barely surviving several attempts on his life. This is a very loose adaptation of the Fredric Brown novel The Screaming Mimi. Aregento, who also wrote the script retaines the shocking finale reveal from the book, unfortunately a lot of the psychological background from the source material is missing making the ending rather shallow. While the opening murder attempt is beautifully staged, subsequent killings are less effective. There is also some unnecessary goofiness which almost derails the plot. This is far less gory than Argento's later work and more Hitchcockian in style. Ennio Morricone delivers another excellent score with a catchy main theme. Not a perfect giallo by any means, but an interesting one. 7/10
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Jul 6, 2021 12:36:40 GMT
Do you prefer the remake over the original film? This is one of the few times I do like the remake better. I saw the TV version when it aired on prime time TV in '98. I thought it was all real. I was like 9 though.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Spencer on Jul 6, 2021 16:48:37 GMT
Spookies (1986) A group of stranded people stop by a creepy old mansion where a warlock has diabolical plans for them. Comical horror movie gets a little bit too goofy for its own good, but does have some inspired moments of good horror. Some of the special effects are cheesy, yet other effects are unique with creative monsters. Overall a mixed bag that yields so-so results. If you watched the Vinegar Syndrome blu, the two documentaries on the disc are excellent watches regarding the making of the film and the production/distribution company which produced/released it. Actually I watched Spookies on Shudder, but if I come across the VS blu-ray I'll definitely check out the documentaries. The behind-the-scenes story sounds interesting, from what I know. Something along the lines of two or three different directors filming separate segments, then all footage was cobbled together for the full running time.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Jul 6, 2021 22:44:11 GMT
Always had a soft spot for this one, even if the twist leaves a bit to be desired. Still, I thought it was pretty well directed and holds up rather nicely. That scene with the kidneys in the bathtub always felt tacked on. Watching the bonus features on the Scream Factory blu-ray confirmed as much. 7/10
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 6, 2021 22:52:23 GMT
I like Horror of Frankenstein as a comedy. "That's your answer for everything isn't it? If you can't beat them, bed them."
THE MAD BOMBER 1973 - Rewatch. Bert I Gordon film about a father (Chuck Connors) who goes nuts after his daughter's drug overdose and seeks revenge by blowing up places.
One of his targets is a feminist meeting. Vince Edwards is a cop who, a partner tells him, he would arrest if he didn't have a badge, because he is so high-strung. Divorced, fed up, and all he wants is to nail the bomber. He has to turn to rapist Neville "My name is George Fromley" Brand. There's a weird mid-film incident where Brand kills a victim and it is totally forgotten but anyway, I found out the song that keeps playing on the soundtrack is sung by the actress portraying his daughter in frequent flashbacks.
"That guy is sick. He ought to be locked up." George Fromley on the Mad Bomber
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Jul 7, 2021 3:01:05 GMT
If you watched the Vinegar Syndrome blu, the two documentaries on the disc are excellent watches regarding the making of the film and the production/distribution company which produced/released it. Actually I watched Spookies on Shudder, but if I come across the VS blu-ray I'll definitely check out the documentaries. The behind-the-scenes story sounds interesting, from what I know. Something along the lines of two or three different directors filming separate segments, then all footage was cobbled together for the full running time. The documentary is sort of one-sided because mainly the original crew/and cast are interviewed, as the second director brought in to finish the film with new crew/ and cast was not involved (by choice). But it’s enjoyable, because no one takes it too seriously. All the stuff going on behind the scenes was more crazier than the film itself.
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Jul 7, 2021 3:07:44 GMT
I like Horror of Frankenstein as a comedy. "That's your answer for everything isn't it? If you can't beat them, bed them." The humour felt natural. That’s why I love the ending, along with Bates’ reaction. I thought it was very unexpected in how everything plays out. I wasn’t expecting this at all. The dialogue exchanges at times was very sharp, and perfectly delivered. Namely Bates.
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Jul 7, 2021 21:47:43 GMT
The Snorkel (1958) The poster is somewhat misleading in how the snorkel was used in the film, but still this was a surprisingly good low-energy thriller by Hammer films. After the death of her mother, the daughter believes her step-father was behind it and goes about trying to prove it while everyone else doesn’t believe her. It plays around with the usual tropes and questionable actions, however the performances are on key and there’s a nice ironic sting in its tail. Watched on YouTube.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,043
Likes: 3,297
|
Post by mgmarshall on Jul 7, 2021 22:55:16 GMT
Re-Animator
It's been years since I last watched this one, and it definitely still holds up. Sure, it's not all that close to the Lovecraft story, but who cares? It's much too fun to be bothered by that. It's a genuine splatter classic- excellent make-up and effects work, bucketloads of gore, an atmospheric, Bernard Hermann-aping score, and one of the most notorious "sex" scenes in all of cinema. I do have to admit, while I admire the balls it must've taken to write and shoot something like that, the scene is a little off-putting. I mean, if you were to show this movie to someone who knew nothing about it you'd pretty much have to warn them in advance that that was coming. But of course, the real centerpiece here is Jeffrey Combs's eye-catching, career-making performance as Herbert West. And he absolutely sells this shit, stealing every scene that isn't nailed down with his deliciously pompous, slimy, coldhearted countenance. It really says something for you as an actor when you can take a character that's existed for decades, that's in the public domain, and has been adapted across multiple forms of media, and yet your portrayal is the one that's lasted in the public consciousness more than thirty years later. But Combs is just that good an actor, and his West is just that iconic of a performance. He'll forever be identified with the character, and he deserves it. Bride of Re-AnimatorEh, this one's alright. It's a little sloppier than the original, and despite being a theatrical release it really smacks of direct-to-video at times. Still, there's a lot to like here. The effects team clearly had a lot of fun on this one (and make sure you're watching the uncut version, the R-rated cut is completely butchered), it easily surpasses the original in terms of gore and creative effects work. Jeffrey Combs is also expectedly still fantastic in the role of Herbert West. He gets to go full Dr. Frankenstein with the character this time around, big melodramatic speeches and all. It's a thing of beauty to behold. Also, it's pretty fun to watch West descend further and further into madness. If the re-agent was ever intended to help people or advance science, that goal is long in the past for West. Now he's just playing with human and animal body parts like they're Tinker Toys. And the results of these experiments are incredibly well-realized by the effects team and vividly, memorably gruesome. The Bride herself is also pretty great once we get to her. It's an effective melding of some very strong acting by Kathleen Kinmont and some phenomenal makeup effects. She's a real showstopper. Where the movie really falters for me though, is in its utter lack of continuity with the original. To begin with, the movie just opens up with West and Dan Cain suddenly in Peru, working together again. No explanation of what happened to Meg. No explanation of how West survived the previous movie's ending. Nothing. (And yes, I know that they shot that prologue that picked up where the original ended, but it's not in the finished movie, is it? Doesn't count.) And while I'm certainly happy to have David Gale back as the maniacal Dr. Hill (and while it is fun to see him get wings in this one), this movie doesn't remotely succeed in convincing me that his head survived the damage it took at the end of the previous movie. "Skull fracture," my ass. He was ground beef. Also, and I do realize this one is a bit of a nitpick, the three surviving zombies do not resemble anybody from the original movie in the slightest. Still, despite these minor gripes, it is an okay sequel, and it certainly does its best in upping the ante on the original.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Spencer on Jul 8, 2021 3:16:27 GMT
Re-Animator
It's been years since I last watched this one, and it definitely still holds up. Sure, it's not all that close to the Lovecraft story, but who cares? It's much too fun to be bothered by that. It's a genuine splatter classic- excellent make-up and effects work, bucketloads of gore, an atmospheric, Bernard Hermann-aping score, and one of the most notorious "sex" scenes in all of cinema. I do have to admit, while I admire the balls it must've taken to write and shoot something like that, the scene is a little off-putting. I mean, if you were to show this movie to someone who knew nothing about it you'd pretty much have to warn them in advance that that was coming. But of course, the real centerpiece here is Jeffrey Combs's eye-catching, career-making performance as Herbert West. And he absolutely sells this shit, stealing every scene that isn't nailed down with his deliciously pompous, slimy, coldhearted countenance. It really says something for you as an actor when you can take a character that's existed for decades, that's in the public domain, and has been adapted across multiple forms of media, and yet your portrayal is the one that's lasted in the public consciousness more than thirty years later. But Combs is just that good an actor, and his West is just that iconic of a performance. He'll forever be identified with the character, and he deserves it. Bride of Re-AnimatorEh, this one's alright. It's a little sloppier than the original, and despite being a theatrical release it really smacks of direct-to-video at times. Still, there's a lot to like here. The effects team clearly had a lot of fun on this one (and make sure you're watching the uncut version, the R-rated cut is completely butchered), it easily surpasses the original in terms of gore and creative effects work. Jeffrey Combs is also expectedly still fantastic in the role of Herbert West. He gets to go full Dr. Frankenstein with the character this time around, big melodramatic speeches and all. It's a thing of beauty to behold. Also, it's pretty fun to watch West descend further and further into madness. If the re-agent was ever intended to help people or advance science, that goal is long in the past for West. Now he's just playing with human and animal body parts like they're Tinker Toys. And the results of these experiments are incredibly well-realized by the effects team and vividly, memorably gruesome. The Bride herself is also pretty great once we get to her. It's an effective melding of some very strong acting by Kathleen Kinmont and some phenomenal makeup effects. She's a real showstopper. Where the movie really falters for me though, is in its utter lack of continuity with the original. To begin with, the movie just opens up with West and Dan Cain suddenly in Peru, working together again. No explanation of what happened to Meg. No explanation of how West survived the previous movie's ending. Nothing. (And yes, I know that they shot that prologue that picked up where the original ended, but it's not in the finished movie, is it? Doesn't count.) And while I'm certainly happy to have David Gale back as the maniacal Dr. Hill (and while it is fun to see him get wings in this one), this movie doesn't remotely succeed in convincing me that his head survived the damage it took at the end of the previous movie. "Skull fracture," my ass. He was ground beef. Also, and I do realize this one is a bit of a nitpick, the three surviving zombies do not resemble anybody from the original movie in the slightest. Still, despite these minor gripes, it is an okay sequel, and it certainly does its best in upping the ante on the original. Re-Animator is a modern horror classic to be sure, and agree it still holds up well. When I first saw it as a teenager in the 80s the VHS tape was, unfortunately, the heavily-censored R-rated version. It wasn't until years later when I finally saw the complete uncut version. Haven't seen Bride yet.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,043
Likes: 3,297
|
Post by mgmarshall on Jul 8, 2021 5:17:10 GMT
Re-Animator
It's been years since I last watched this one, and it definitely still holds up. Sure, it's not all that close to the Lovecraft story, but who cares? It's much too fun to be bothered by that. It's a genuine splatter classic- excellent make-up and effects work, bucketloads of gore, an atmospheric, Bernard Hermann-aping score, and one of the most notorious "sex" scenes in all of cinema. I do have to admit, while I admire the balls it must've taken to write and shoot something like that, the scene is a little off-putting. I mean, if you were to show this movie to someone who knew nothing about it you'd pretty much have to warn them in advance that that was coming. But of course, the real centerpiece here is Jeffrey Combs's eye-catching, career-making performance as Herbert West. And he absolutely sells this shit, stealing every scene that isn't nailed down with his deliciously pompous, slimy, coldhearted countenance. It really says something for you as an actor when you can take a character that's existed for decades, that's in the public domain, and has been adapted across multiple forms of media, and yet your portrayal is the one that's lasted in the public consciousness more than thirty years later. But Combs is just that good an actor, and his West is just that iconic of a performance. He'll forever be identified with the character, and he deserves it. Bride of Re-AnimatorEh, this one's alright. It's a little sloppier than the original, and despite being a theatrical release it really smacks of direct-to-video at times. Still, there's a lot to like here. The effects team clearly had a lot of fun on this one (and make sure you're watching the uncut version, the R-rated cut is completely butchered), it easily surpasses the original in terms of gore and creative effects work. Jeffrey Combs is also expectedly still fantastic in the role of Herbert West. He gets to go full Dr. Frankenstein with the character this time around, big melodramatic speeches and all. It's a thing of beauty to behold. Also, it's pretty fun to watch West descend further and further into madness. If the re-agent was ever intended to help people or advance science, that goal is long in the past for West. Now he's just playing with human and animal body parts like they're Tinker Toys. And the results of these experiments are incredibly well-realized by the effects team and vividly, memorably gruesome. The Bride herself is also pretty great once we get to her. It's an effective melding of some very strong acting by Kathleen Kinmont and some phenomenal makeup effects. She's a real showstopper. Where the movie really falters for me though, is in its utter lack of continuity with the original. To begin with, the movie just opens up with West and Dan Cain suddenly in Peru, working together again. No explanation of what happened to Meg. No explanation of how West survived the previous movie's ending. Nothing. (And yes, I know that they shot that prologue that picked up where the original ended, but it's not in the finished movie, is it? Doesn't count.) And while I'm certainly happy to have David Gale back as the maniacal Dr. Hill (and while it is fun to see him get wings in this one), this movie doesn't remotely succeed in convincing me that his head survived the damage it took at the end of the previous movie. "Skull fracture," my ass. He was ground beef. Also, and I do realize this one is a bit of a nitpick, the three surviving zombies do not resemble anybody from the original movie in the slightest. Still, despite these minor gripes, it is an okay sequel, and it certainly does its best in upping the ante on the original. Re-Animator is a modern horror classic to be sure, and agree it still holds up well. When I first saw it as a teenager in the 80s the VHS tape was, unfortunately, the heavily-censored R-rated version. It wasn't until years later when I finally saw the complete uncut version. Haven't seen Bride yet. Oh, definitely check it out as long as you can find it uncut.
|
|
|
Post by gspdude on Jul 8, 2021 11:52:28 GMT
Slaughter High(1986). 8 former classmates who disfigured a student in a April Fools prank gone wrong years earlier are invited to a bogus class reunion and begin getting knocked off. Despite being trapped and in danger, these idiots do every thing they can to get themselves killed: drink, do drugs, have sex, split up, not finishing the maniac off when having the chance. I'm thinking "Have these people never seen a single horror movie?". Their stupidity, even by slasher standards, was annoying me. there are pluses: some gore, some nudity, Caroline Munro(not nude, unfortunately), and a twist at the end, and it does have it's fans, but these couldn't overcome my annoyance and the best I can give it is 3.5/10.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,043
Likes: 3,297
|
Post by mgmarshall on Jul 9, 2021 9:20:23 GMT
Slaughter High(1986). 8 former classmates who disfigured a student in a April Fools prank gone wrong years earlier are invited to a bogus class reunion and begin getting knocked off. Despite being trapped and in danger, these idiots do every thing they can to get themselves killed, drink, do drugs, have sex, split up, not finishing the maniac off when having the chance. I'm thinking "Have these people never seen a single horror movie?". Their stupidity, even by slasher standards, was annoying me. there are pluses: some gore, some nudity, Caroline Munro(not nude, unfortunately), and a twist at the end, and it does have it's fans, but these couldn't overcome my annoyance and the best I can give it is 3.5/10. I always got the impression that this movie was supposed to be a parody of slasher tropes.
|
|
|
Post by stefancrosscoe on Jul 9, 2021 13:27:48 GMT
Re-Animator
It's been years since I last watched this one, and it definitely still holds up. Sure, it's not all that close to the Lovecraft story, but who cares? It's much too fun to be bothered by that. It's a genuine splatter classic- excellent make-up and effects work, bucketloads of gore, an atmospheric, Bernard Hermann-aping score, and one of the most notorious "sex" scenes in all of cinema. I do have to admit, while I admire the balls it must've taken to write and shoot something like that, the scene is a little off-putting. I mean, if you were to show this movie to someone who knew nothing about it you'd pretty much have to warn them in advance that that was coming. But of course, the real centerpiece here is Jeffrey Combs's eye-catching, career-making performance as Herbert West. And he absolutely sells this shit, stealing every scene that isn't nailed down with his deliciously pompous, slimy, coldhearted countenance. It really says something for you as an actor when you can take a character that's existed for decades, that's in the public domain, and has been adapted across multiple forms of media, and yet your portrayal is the one that's lasted in the public consciousness more than thirty years later. But Combs is just that good an actor, and his West is just that iconic of a performance. He'll forever be identified with the character, and he deserves it. Re-watched this absolute cult-classic, last year, and surely one of the funniest, well paced, acted and directed horror films of the 80s, and one which I am glad is not only remembered because of the gore and violent stuff, but because people love the crazy stuff, the characters and the incredible performances, and yeah, Combs as Herbert West, is up there with Ash from the Evil Dead films, when we discuss true iconic horror cult-anti-heroes, and they sure don't make 'em like they used to, sadly. The sex scene, did you think of the head giving head part, with David Gale and Barbara Crampton? I think it was Brian Yuzna, who said during an interview, either taken from one of my DVDs of Re-Animator or his own Society (1989), that it pretty much ended Gale's marriage, there and then. As the day, when they shot the scene where he stuck his head far up, between the lovely legs of Crampton, Gale's wife, all of a sudden arrived, and yeah, it did not end too well for David afterwards. Bride of Re-AnimatorEh, this one's alright. It's a little sloppier than the original, and despite being a theatrical release it really smacks of direct-to-video at times. Still, there's a lot to like here. The effects team clearly had a lot of fun on this one (and make sure you're watching the uncut version, the R-rated cut is completely butchered), it easily surpasses the original in terms of gore and creative effects work. Jeffrey Combs is also expectedly still fantastic in the role of Herbert West. He gets to go full Dr. Frankenstein with the character this time around, big melodramatic speeches and all. It's a thing of beauty to behold. Also, it's pretty fun to watch West descend further and further into madness. If the re-agent was ever intended to help people or advance science, that goal is long in the past for West. Now he's just playing with human and animal body parts like they're Tinker Toys. And the results of these experiments are incredibly well-realized by the effects team and vividly, memorably gruesome. The Bride herself is also pretty great once we get to her. It's an effective melding of some very strong acting by Kathleen Kinmont and some phenomenal makeup effects. She's a real showstopper. Where the movie really falters for me though, is in its utter lack of continuity with the original. To begin with, the movie just opens up with West and Dan Cain suddenly in Peru, working together again. No explanation of what happened to Meg. No explanation of how West survived the previous movie's ending. Nothing. (And yes, I know that they shot that prologue that picked up where the original ended, but it's not in the finished movie, is it? Doesn't count.) And while I'm certainly happy to have David Gale back as the maniacal Dr. Hill (and while it is fun to see him get wings in this one), this movie doesn't remotely succeed in convincing me that his head survived the damage it took at the end of the previous movie. "Skull fracture," my ass. He was ground beef. Also, and I do realize this one is a bit of a nitpick, the three surviving zombies do not resemble anybody from the original movie in the slightest. Still, despite these minor gripes, it is an okay sequel, and it certainly does its best in upping the ante on the original. I believe I actually watched this one, before I got to the original, and were not quite impressed, even if it contains a ridiculous amount of gore and violent stuff, but over the years, I have probably softened up a bit, think I rated it with a generous 7/10, where the first film for me is a perfect 10/10 on the entertainment scale. Kind of sad, that Bruce Abbott never became bigger star back then, I mean he put in some solid roles, of course not anywhere near the level of Combs, but as the "everyday" man, suddenly trapped into total chaos, he was such a likeable fella, and showed a certain vulnarbility when things got WAAAAY out of hand, and I also liked his guest star, on the tv-show Beauty and the Beast, which I guess were made, when he was still married to Linda Hamilton. I might need to watch all three films some time, maybe later this year, but anyway, nice reviews and love the original movie poster, as well.
|
|
|
Post by stefancrosscoe on Jul 9, 2021 13:34:53 GMT
Slaughter High(1986). 8 former classmates who disfigured a student in a April Fools prank gone wrong years earlier are invited to a bogus class reunion and begin getting knocked off. Despite being trapped and in danger, these idiots do every thing they can to get themselves killed, drink, do drugs, have sex, split up, not finishing the maniac off when having the chance. I'm thinking "Have these people never seen a single horror movie?". Their stupidity, even by slasher standards, was annoying me. there are pluses: some gore, some nudity, Caroline Munro(not nude, unfortunately), and a twist at the end, and it does have it's fans, but these couldn't overcome my annoyance and the best I can give it is 3.5/10. I think I did a re-watch of this, earlier this winter. Somehow, I have always kind of enjoyed it, even though it is anyway near being a "good" or decent slasher film, as it is very silly and probably loses steam, far too early on. However, it contain the lovely Caroline Munro, among with a bunch of other pushing 30s, or older, rather than teenagers, and still, it makes it look even more goofy. Not sure how many students there were at the school, but felt like about 8-10, along with a greasy gym teacher and of course the geeky victim. I rated it a bit higher, due to me enjoying this cheesy ride, but not among the ones I will see too often. Still, it has that classic 80s b-movie charm going, and again, Munro is always a nice welcome.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,043
Likes: 3,297
|
Post by mgmarshall on Jul 9, 2021 18:17:43 GMT
Beyond Re-AnimatorOkay, this was just silly. The performances are hammy and cartoonish, the production values are low, there's some embarrassingly bad CGI, and by and large it's about on par quality-wise with a Sci-Fi Channel movie. Still, there are some positives to focus on here, first and foremost being Jeffrey Combs. He slides right back into the role with ease as if the first two movies were made just yesterday. His presence lends the movie far more dignity and gravitas than it likely deserves. Sadly, Bruce Abbott is not back for this one (Dan "turned state's evidence" on Herbert somehow?!), and his replacement, Howard Phillips (yeah, ha ha, guys) is about as bland and forgettable as they come. Most of the cast around Combs is pretty amateurish, to be honest. Although Simón Andreu is pretty fun as the pervy, rat-mutated warden. The prison setting is pretty cool, too. Though it occurred to me halfway through that this movie is basically kinda ripping off Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell. I also quite liked the prologue- very atmospheric and featuring an amazing practical zombie puppet. In fact, the few non-CGI effects the movie has to offer are all top notch. It's ultimately not a terrible movie, just a sloppy and very ridiculous one. It never once matches the tone of the first two, but since I guess that long-proposed House of Re-Animator is probably never gonna happen, it's nice that we got to see one last turn from Jeffrey Combs in his most iconic role.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Spencer on Jul 10, 2021 5:12:22 GMT
The Driller Killer (1979) Reno Miller is a struggling young artist living in a seedy apartment with his lesbian roommates, and is on the verge of a major sale for one of his paintings. Reno is also a psycho who kills derelicts with a power drill. Abel Ferrara's first feature length film (not counting the porno he made previously) sets the pattern for many of his other movies yet to come; gritty urban settings, alienation, and religious themes. You can just feel the scuzziness that drips from The Driller Killer. In some ways it reminded me of Basket Case due to the similar way it presents living in the seedy underbelly of New York City. Both films even had similar budgets. No great shakes in terms of story and acting, and it is often dull because of scenes that just go on and on aimlessly. But at least it does boast some effective murder set pieces that are quite gruesome, and Ferrara's feel for urban grittiness keep it at an average level.
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Jul 10, 2021 6:59:30 GMT
I, MADMAN 1989 - I had never seen this before--it's trying to create another kind of 80s slasher character and is rather effective at it. A character in 1950s pulp crime novels comes to life and torments a book store employee. I wonder if this was an influence on Candyman or In The Mouth of Madness because it goes into similar territory and at times Jenny Wright reminds one of Virginia Madsen--if her hair was curled--she would be hard to tell apart. One thing I really wonder about--why does late 80s movies like this look so cheap in the lighting department? It looks like it was shot for tv on on video and yet I believe it was shot on film.
Some of the decisions have to do with the desire to make it seem like a 1950s pulp book cover but the modern-day stuff has that bright cheapy look we often see from this time period.
|
|