Page 4 of 286

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:22 pm
by Laymonite
I just saw American Haunting too. I didn't understand the end twist so much that I didn't even realize that there was meant to be a twist. Can anyone offer some kind of explanation?

And what was the point of the modern day scenes?

Scary Movie 4 was ok, better than part 3 but not on a par with the Wayans Brothers first 2. I think the Zuckers have had their day (nothing to be ashamed of when "their day" includes Naked Gun, Top Secret and Airplane). Though it's the kind of film that is better when you talk about it later than it is when you are actually watching it.

Alien Autopsy was pretty good, though it seemed to just end all of a sudden.

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 3:48 pm
by soulmining
*** SPOILERS ***

As I understand it, Betsy was being haunted by her own ghost having been abused by her father... quite how you can haunt yourself when you're not dead, I'm not sure, but I guess the ghost was supposed to represent her 'innocent' self. Quite why she was haunting Betsy and not just the father I don't know...

But then there was also the one flashback when you saw the mother walk in and witness the father in Betsy's room, but had obviously been in denial about the whole thing, so that makes me wonder if the ghost was real at all...

As for the modern day scenes I guess that was just a wrap-around story which made the modern-day mother aware that her daughter might also be the victim of incest... it was hardly required, although did give a rather unpleasant end to the film.

Posted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:41 pm
by Alex Kidd
I think that's the best way to describe this film - unpleasant.

The more I think about it the more I dislike it.

Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2006 9:36 pm
by streetrw
I also saw AMERICAN HAUNTING last week and wasn't impressed. in addition to the plot questions others have detailed above, a special mention must be made of the most overbearing score I've heard in years; not particularly good music, too much of it and mixed too loud for a lot of the dialogue to make its way through.

I actually preferred THE DARK.

silent hill

Posted: Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:19 am
by ghouldrool
decided to give both the dark and american haunting a miss.. with the dark to was down to it playing at neither of the Cineworlds i can get to and it not being a film i would pay cinema prices to see...with american haunting, well it just looked shit

eventually I forced myself to go see a sunday evening showing of Silent Hill...

id like to say something cliche like "oh i wish i hadnt" but as poor as the film was it did have some redeeming features..

the pre credits scene felt like a tagged on attempt to open with a bang.. then the film goes into a promising opening.. though we are never made aware as to why Rose and her husband are at odds.... the mood builds steadily and theres a good shot remiscent of Dead End.... then the film hits its first "hell" scene and while the imagery is admirably sinister it doesnt really go anywhere... then it stops for no reason...

the middle is tedious and gets really stupid once we are introduced to a bevy of silent hill residents who by the end seem to be existing in a kind of purgatory... yes folks its pretty much Carnival of Souls time again with yet another vengeful spirit thrown in...
why hire an aussie and a brit to play americans... Gans is clearly more interested in the brief hell sequences than in telling a coherent narrative leaving too much to intepretation at the end while in other places forcing rigid exposition... give this guy a budget and NC17 rating and Doug Bradley as Pinhead and let him loose in Barkers world THEN we would have a film to remember

by now i am rather tired of the town with guilty secret story and i saw the people killed by barbed wire "tentacles" before in Hellraiser 3 then again it was better here it just needed a better film to surround it.... tho its quite gory the gore itself is clearly CGi

there are two threads on this one film already on this site i know.... its clearly going to cause alot of debate which is either a sign of clever writing or poor writing the difference is point of view

Posted: Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:22 pm
by thesavageintruder
Just saw DEAD AND BREAKFAST on Anchor Bay's Region 2 DVD. An ace, unpretentious tribute to 80's splatter movies, with some cool slapstick, a spirited cast and loads of clever gore gags with chainsaws, drills and the puppeteered severed head of Jeremy Sisto. Perhaps the best of the recent spate of zombie flicks, it's cutest touch is the running-song commentary by Zach Selwyn. Worth checking out.

Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:06 pm
by ghouldrool
oh dear just got back from slither

supposedly a horror comedy it barely works as either... the humour feels shoe horned in relying on Nathan fillions meek charisma and the mayor character spouting "humorous" one liners.

if you want to make a horror comedy then dont shoot and light your film like it was a serious film... lighten thing..make the colours stronger...

yes we are back in poorly edited action territory and james gunn should never be let behind the camera again.. the pacing is wrong and the details arent paid any attention.. slimy worms and tentacles that leave NO slime trail? except when pressing the play button on a cd player...

many will site the film Night of the Creeps well good on you for seeing that flick however i havent yet it STILL felt like a rip off... the old cop out "shared memory" to explain whats going on (seen in Ghosts of Mars) ...groan

and the many shots of the less than attractive townsfolk makes the out come unsurprising

god two stinkers in a row.. i may well turn my back on this tempestous genre

Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 8:03 am
by Guest
Gouldrool, I have to agree with you about Slither, it was neither scary or funny... The film felt and looked cheap, and that's kinda how I felt when I walked out. If you go to see this movie, buy a LARGE popcorn!!!.... so you have something to do for the 90-odd minutes.
I think the most interesting part of the film was realising exactly how much Nathan Fillion looks like Jason Bateman!

Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:09 pm
by ghouldrool
over exposure to a genre can cause fatigue

..slither was flat in my opinion and it is insulting to a modern audience to have slimy worms not leave a slime makes it look like they didnt give a fuck about the reality of the situation.... then again it also featured a man being cut in half yet have no blood spurting any where

compare the picture quality of the final product shown in theatres to any publicity still and you will see a notable decrease in quality as far as the theatrical exhibition is concerened... how your picture is lit and shot effects the tone and mood ,the tonal shifts were irritably jumpy... plus the humour was ill timed

i do like the return to old school makeup effects but it made the cgi tentacles even worse looking when they appeared in the same scene as the Grant beast.

were you not the guy telling us not to take Dr Who so seriously... taking negative comments re slither a bit seriously arent you :wink: the set piece you mention was a good scene but needed to be in a better scene plus was ruined by the slime thing again, that lack of attention took me out of the scene,
who else felt that worm shud have gone into that girl another way...soz but your entitled to defend the film of course

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:22 am
by AndyJWS
Hang about a sec, from the comments about the lighting and comparison to solid pictures it sounds like a case of MPS - MultiPlex Syndrome (TM) where the assumption is made that how a presentation is viewed in a multiplex is how it is supposed to be viewed, ignoring crucial factors like a) insultingly bad emergency lighting that seriously affects the contrast and colour representation (Showcase being the biggest chain I can think of that avoids this, and that's still not exclusive), plus of course b) reflection of light from chav mobile phones, plus other arrogant customers who think that if the phone is on silent, the idea of "the use of mobile phones in the auditoria is prohibited" does not apply, even on the FACT advert... plus c) one projectionist for several screens not being able to spend sufficient time checking the presentation of each individual screen is as good as it could be, which leads to d) the start of lamp degredation which could actually explain the colour shifts through the film...

:lol: 8) :wink:

Time to try going to a quality cinema like the PCC to see how films should be shown, and see the difference? :wink:

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:27 am
by ghouldrool
k.. as of now i reckon i really should retire from these boards i seem always to hold the exact opposite view to most lol

grrr whatever :?

EDIT: i initially suspected there may be a prob with the projection as the cinema i saw it at seemed to have its volume too low too... however ... there was so much else wrong with that flick...

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:32 am
by AndyJWS
What, didn't you catch the line of smilies? :)

Not to be taken too seriously, chap, just having a bit of fun :) It is 1am on a Sunday morning... 12 hours of annoying 4-foot kids trying to get into Scary Movie 4 before pubbage is gonna leave me being a sarcy bastard, sorry if I offended you :oops:

(That the average multiplex presentation of movies is seriously bad is a real issue IMO, as I feel it affected last Frightfest...)

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:35 am
by ghouldrool
thing is i cud have let the bad quality of the film go if the pacing etc etc had been good

i remember you mentioning the effect the lighting had at last years FF, i felt the same too , too many lights on...

EDIT btw.. no offence was taken the whatever wasnt a dig at any particular personage... just a general disappointment really cos 2 b honest i was REALLY looking forward to slither...

sad to see it being sold as another shaun of dead

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:43 am
by AndyJWS
And I've just remembered the horror comedy that may drag your enjoyment back in the genre... Freak Out! - straight to DVD here next month, but seems to fit with the kind of films you have said you've liked... guessing you'll be avoiding Stay Alive next month - to be wary, although Half Light isn't a bad film, it's being severely mismarketed, is not even that much of a horror film per se!

Posted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 1:48 am
by ghouldrool
ill go see stay alive (i go to see alot of flicks i wouldnt normally see thanks to this Cineworld pass thing)... but it does look toss...was disappointeed with Kairo but will still see pulse too

seen mention of Freak out on EMB... though id rather see Feed which i missed at cinema.....