|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Nov 10, 2021 23:05:26 GMT
6/10Kinda predictable but entertaining film of a woman whos boyfriend disappears while in a hospital. One of Brittany Murphy last films. Shes really good in this.
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Nov 10, 2021 23:10:24 GMT
1/10Worst film of '21. Possibly one of the worst films ever made. With 1.3 on IMDB this thriller(?) is about a group of renegade Christians going against the new world establishment. It trys to put in Covid with the plot but it does not really fit. The whole film is made by Germans who cant speak English that well so its hard to make out the dialog. Its one of the messiest films ever made. It makes The Room look like a epic masterpiece.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Nov 10, 2021 23:29:29 GMT
4/10Basic and kinda predictable thriller about a socially awkward guy befriending and becoming obsessed with his co worker. Nothing great but Amber Tamblyn is fun to look at. Kind of forgot about this movie, as the DVD collects dust on the shelf. Also didn't remember Zachary Levi was in it. I recall thinking it was fine? Adam Green films generally induce eyerolling from me, but I recall this one being a little more ambitious than his usual work. May give it another look soon.
|
|
|
Post by ant-mac on Nov 11, 2021 0:06:44 GMT
IN THE MOUTH OF MADNESS... John Carpenter.
Good cast, interesting plot, enjoyable soundtrack, worth a re-watch to familiarize oneself with the material.
4/5.
|
|
|
Post by Penn Guinn on Nov 11, 2021 3:46:25 GMT
Biggest suspense is when will this be over so I can IMDb it and find out what the plot was supposed to be about. Lugosi's English is improving and he actually sincerely smiles a couple of times.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,164
Likes: 3,386
|
Post by mgmarshall on Nov 11, 2021 7:32:54 GMT
Biggest suspense is when will this be over so I can IMDb it and find out what the plot was supposed to be about. Lugosi's English is improving and he actually sincerely smiles a couple of times. I remember kind of liking this one, but it came smack in the middle of one of those 50 movie packs (and I only ever made like 10 or 15 in). So, by that caliber, it ain't too bad. Still, as far as the skid row Monogram pictures go, I would easily recommend something like Dead Men Walk or The Monster Maker or- if you really want watchable Lugosi cheapies, try The Devil Bat or The Corpse Vanishes. Those four are at least a little fun in their bottom-of-the-barrel ineptitude
|
|
|
Post by Penn Guinn on Nov 11, 2021 15:07:39 GMT
mgmarshallI never expect much from those Grade Z movies and am working my way through the Lugosi filmography as they turn up but this one was a particular muddle even for what it was. Perhaps reading the IMDb info BEFORE watching it would have helped (a little). Have seen the four you recommend and agree with your assessment.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,164
Likes: 3,386
|
Post by mgmarshall on Nov 11, 2021 22:03:54 GMT
mgmarshallI never expect much from those Grade Z movies and am working my way through the Lugosi filmography as they turn up but this one was a particular muddle even for what it was. Perhaps reading the IMDb info BEFORE watching it would have helped (a little). Have seen the four you recommend and agree with your assessment. What was that one where Lugosi goes into a trance and strangles people with a coat or a dressing gown or something like that? Invisible Ghost? I remember that one being kinda boring but watchable.
|
|
|
Post by Penn Guinn on Nov 11, 2021 23:45:07 GMT
mgmarshallHe goes into trances so often it's hard to keep the movies and evil deeds straight.
|
|
|
Post by Penn Guinn on Nov 12, 2021 2:56:09 GMT
EEGAHMake some popcorn, park your inner critic at the door and don't worry about the 2 hrs and 32 minutes (plus commercials) you'll never get back. Makes the acting in Plan Nine look Oscar worthy plus there are three musical interludes to try to distract you from the rest of the movie.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Spencer on Nov 13, 2021 18:20:25 GMT
Dracula: Dead And Loving It (1995) The count causes comical mayhem in England in this Mel Brooks spoof the classic vampire tale. It's always a pleasure watching Leslie Nielsen doing comedy, something he has mastered in later years after doing serious drama, and he is indeed a riot as Dracula. Unfortunately, this movie is short on real laughs. The humor is often weak and relies on tedious slapstick. There were only two gags I had a good laugh about, including the gynecologist one. The rest of the time I merely chuckled on occassion. Sadly this is one of Mel's worst, and nowhere near in the same league as his previous horror spoof Young Frankenstein.
|
|
|
Post by Penn Guinn on Nov 14, 2021 2:18:28 GMT
(1934)
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Nov 14, 2021 2:41:11 GMT
3/10
Eric Roberts drugs a young woman for a crazy murder experiment. Not too good.
|
|
|
Post by FridayOnElmStreet on Nov 14, 2021 2:42:58 GMT
2/10I watched this whole thing and really did not get what this was even about. Something about a haunted skating rink.
|
|
|
Post by Penn Guinn on Nov 14, 2021 14:40:19 GMT
(1937)
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Nov 14, 2021 21:32:02 GMT
Dracula: Dead And Loving It (1995) The count causes comical mayhem in England in this Mel Brooks spoof the classic vampire tale. It's always a pleasure watching Leslie Nielsen doing comedy, something he has mastered in later years after doing serious drama, and he is indeed a riot as Dracula. Unfortunately, this movie is short on real laughs. The humor is often weak and relies on tedious slapstick. There were only two gags I had a good laugh about, including the gynecologist one. The rest of the time I merely chuckled on occassion. Sadly this is one of Mel's worst, and nowhere near in the same league as his previous horror spoof Young Frankenstein. I had recently watched this too. Hoping that it was better than my initial memory. Sadly, it wasn’t the case. A couple moments work, but yeah, largely unfunny. Somewhat drags in spots, and a few gags get repetitive real quick. I don’t mind Neilson here, but I think I might’ve preferred him playing it straight-face instead being in on the gags too.
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Nov 14, 2021 21:46:03 GMT
48. The Last Will And Testament Of Rosalind Leigh (2012; Rodrigo Gudino) – This must be one of the most underrated horror movies of the 21st century. Despite being championed by Clive Barker I rarely hear it mentioned anywhere. Shot in a single location, an old villa, it tells the story of Leon (Aaron Poole), a young antique dealer whose mother (Vanessa Redgrave only heard through voice-over narration) has died. She belonged to a mysterious sect and her house is crammed full of statues of angels. Now Leon must come to grips with his mother’s legacy and deal with his own grief over her death. Some have found this movie incredibly slow-moving, pointless and dull. Others like me think it’s beautifully understated, thoughtful and haunting. 7.5/10 Haunting film. The production design of the house, and the ornaments were great too.
|
|
|
Post by lostinlimbo on Nov 14, 2021 22:11:58 GMT
Cave of the Living Dead(1964) aka Night of the Vampires. Stumbled across this B&W Euro horror on YT while looking for something else. An Inspector goes to an isolated village to investigate a number of deaths that the locals are attributing to Vampires. Certainly not one of the better vampire movies I've seen, but the visual quality was surprisingly good and I was pleased to see a 60s horror that I had not seen or even heard of. 5/10 I found this one a little on the dry side favouring an investigative mystery set-up, but did have striking visuals and a couple unique ideas. Especially involving the vampires’ connection to the town’s light source when they kill.
|
|
mgmarshall
Junior Member
@mgmarshall
Posts: 2,164
Likes: 3,386
|
Post by mgmarshall on Nov 14, 2021 23:27:46 GMT
Maps to the StarsWatching this, David Cronenberg's last movie to date, after bingeing so much of his early work makes for an empty, depressing experience. He's starting to repeat himself, and to vastly lesser effect. In particular, John Cusack's icky, fondling therapy sessions with Julianne Moore seem pulled straight from Oliver Reed and Samantha Eggar's similar routine in The Brood; and Mia Wasikowska's entire character is a pale, weaker imitation of Rosanna Arquette's in Crash. The movie as a whole feels muddled and bland in a way that Cronenberg almost never is for me. He doesn't seem to have much to say about Hollywood, beyond that celebrity worship is unhealthy. He doesn't seem to have much he wants to do with the characters, either. There are some strong performances- especially from Cusack, Moore, Olivia Williams, and Robert Pattinson- but the whole thing just leaves me cold. It's been nearly eight years. It would be a real shame if this was what Cronenberg left on. Here's hoping that Crimes of the Future remake he's working on pans out to be something worth a damn...
|
|
|
Post by Nalkarj on Nov 15, 2021 19:41:54 GMT
Saw In the Mouth of Madness (1995, dir. John Carpenter) on Saturday. Carpenter always baffles me: How could the same director helm a movie as good as The Thing and as bad as Prince of Darkness? Good and bad are probably too vague for what I mean: The Thing looks like it was made by a master of his craft, with each shot intelligent and surprising, each character delineated and each actor bringing his A game, and each scare terrifying. Prince of Darkness, only five years later, looks like it was made by someone who just learned how a camera works. No kidding, some of the movies my classmates and I made in high-school film class looked more professional. Nor is it a budget thing: Halloween had a tenth of Prince of Darkness’s budget and is ten times better. Unfortunately, In the Mouth of Madness is closer to Prince of Darkness than to The Thing. It’s just kind of an unpleasant, unscary mess. The idea is strong, the beginning is intriguing, but Carpenter doesn’t seem to have any interest in going anywhere with this story. We just get random scenes that don’t even fit the movie’s theme: The confusing premise is, as best as I can understand it, that Sam Neill et al. are characters in a story by Stephen King Sutter Cane. Or that they used to be real, but now Sutter Cane can remake reality because of the power of Cthulhu. Or something like that. Anyway, the way to do this story is to make the surface reality as bland and, well, “real” as possible—to suck the viewer into thinking the world is as quotidian as real life is before revealing that it isn’t real. (Does that make sense?)
The Matrix is good at this: Keanu Reeves’s world seems bland, making all the more intriguing and, for the viewer, slightly creepy that that world ends up being an illusion.
Here, though, Neill’s world is weird and off-kilter to begin with, so we’re never surprised when the world ends up being an illusion. The lack of scares is, again, pretty astounding coming from the guy who directed Halloween and The Thing. The most laughable part: A sweet old woman keeps her husband chained to her leg. It’s played for a shock, complete with jump-scare music chord, but it’s about as scary as it sounds. So much goes wrong with this movie, from the muddled-ness of the plot elements (Stephen King spoof, publishing industry satire, what-is-reality, small town scares, Lovecraftian monsters, the apocalypse, American obsession with fame… Just pick something and do it well!) to Julie Carmen’s poor acting to Carpenter’s complete waste of David Warner, John Glover, and Charlton Heston to Neill’s hilarious this-is-a-con attitude even after he sees the supernatural. I really wanted to like this, but almost nothing works, and the mystery of John Carpenter carries on.
|
|