Umbrage

[Pumpkin]

I thought the best bit was in the Q&A when one of the girls said "the script was so good it made our lives easy". I nearly choked trying to suppress my laughter. Loved the soundtrack, loved the way some it was shot but my god. It just didn't have a clue what it was and even a great actor like Mr Bradley looks like a plonker with the stilted non-sensical sh1t he had to spout.

[nekro]

the director should just give up and do something else with his life

[Hello Doris!]

I apologise for laughing so much, but it was soooo bad. Also why did he have to have the pointless 2x sex scenes and that nasty tongue kiss? Burgh!

[ghostdog]

in reaction the the naysayers always being more outspoken than they yaysayers....

sure ok - it wasn't perfect - mostly it just wasn't a horror... and didn't really pretend to be - what it was doing showing at frightfest is anyone's guess.

if nothing else, it was fresh and different, and kudos to them for being brave/stupid enough to step outside what we all expect.

the cowboy vampire was cool as hell tho, and the bits that were meant to be funny actually were funny (i think!) - i liked the ideas and the playfulness - it looked ropey in places, but then we know it's ungraded. the performances were mostly solid and the references fun... id be surprised if it didn't strongly divide opinion tho.

not sure about the director's explanation of putting in the 'fuck communism' zippo just cos the preacher comics are 'cool'

patroldave - you should be careful of karma - spreading vitriol above a link to a trailer for some dodgy cheap looking video feature uve made - be careful ur not just envious that someone else's film is getting screened!

[Hello Doris!]

I think the volume of laughter and lack of questions at the end proved that the film went down like a pile of steaming dog poop.

[The Soapmaker]

I thought the Q&A actually went pretty well - nowhere near the embarrassing silence that greeted Gnaw last year!

But oh God, this was rubbish.

It was just a jumble of silly, unrelated ideas (what the hell was the point of the Shadows?). Stupid characters, rubbish acting (Doug Bradley is NOT a "great actor", he's just a bloke who had the sheer good luck to be mates with Clive Barker and land an iconic role). Some of the scenes just went on and on and on........

If you really thought there was a psychopathic, possibly supernatural, "cowboy" in your barn would you really just ponce about loading your car in the yard whilst casting an occasional glance at the barn door?

And how could anyone put up with that gobby twat Rachel for more than 24 hours, let alone insist she moved with them to a remote country house?

[PatrolDave]

Ouch Ghost Dog.....You are really stepping out to defend this film.
As for our cheapy video effort, until it's finished, i don't expect it to be screened.
However, if Umbrage can do it, I guarantee we will.

And no, it is not brave. The western genre is commonly used as a hybrid, or sub genre, because it looks stylish. Mr Cunningham obviously wanted to make the most stylish film he could, hence the heavy heavy color grade [some of the interiors didn't resemble anything. I don't expect a 'realist' look, but a little subtlety in the grade goes a long way].

If cowboy vampires are you're thing, I can't take that away from you. However, when that cowboy vampire does nothing but speak shit and stand around in the barn, then I definitely can complain.

Also, I like the idea of pushing boundaries, but Mr Cunningham shouldn't be allowed to shoot rape scenes. It was totally irresponsible, without irony, or emotion. It was in true, exploitative, bad taste. However, when you are making a 'bad taste' movie, you cannot end you're film with a powerfully composed, final shot which tries to evoke emotion, when there is absolutely none to be had.

He was just a smug bastard and I am happy to flame him.

As for comparing my effort with his. He had about £100,000 to spend [according to IMDB] and Pinhead at his disposal. We had less than £5,000, but a script which contains real scenes, real characters and a final shot which does not burn the eyes.

Fuck Karma, I have heart.

[maxmum]

when that cowboy vampire does nothing but speak shit and stand around in the barn, then I definitely can complain.

I just choked on my coffee laughing

[Grindhouse]

[quote="The Soapmaker"]I thought the Q&A actually went pretty well - nowhere near the embarrassing silence that greeted Gnaw last year!

But oh God, this was rubbish.

It was just a jumble of silly, unrelated ideas (what the hell was the point of the Shadows?). Stupid characters, rubbish acting (Doug Bradley is NOT a "great actor", he's just a bloke who had the sheer good luck to be mates with Clive Barker and land an iconic role). Some of the scenes just went on and on and on........

If you really thought there was a psychopathic, possibly supernatural, "cowboy" in your barn would you really just ponce about loading your car in the yard whilst casting an occasional glance at the barn door?

And how could anyone put up with that gobby twat Rachel for more than 24 hours, let alone insist she moved with them to a remote country house?[/quote]

Wasnt the stepdad banging her,thats why folks were putting up with that,although the stepmother didnt know.

[Grindhouse]

i was rather kind in my post on this,but its not as bad as last years Gnaw,and it does need some editing
Take out all that bollocks about the shadows as it leads to nothing.
take out the folk music
edit it down to 75 80 mins remove the pointless adam & eve rape scene,dub the cowboys voice with someone with more presence to hold the lines.
give doug bradley less time on screen as he is quite a poor actor and throw in more female nudity that always goes down well.

[Rufus]

It certainly couldn't be called good, but I didn't think it was as absolutely horrible as some did. I did go in with very low expectations though.

Upside: Opening was OK and I actually quite liked the idea of the shadows (though the execution of it was rubbish and it didn't really have any connection to the main plot).

On the downside, the complicated backstory without the budget to show us any of it, and the large amount of unwitty dialogue.

I dunno if the rape scene was supposed to be played for laughs or if that's just what it turned out like, but either way it just seemed like a cheap (literally) attempt to inject some "edginess" into the film to break up all of the dialogue scenes.

[streetrw]

First off, it's Drew Cullingham not Cunningham.

Second off, it's Adam and Lilith, not Adam and Eve, in the sex/rape scene - and it is part of the character's story (thus not exploitative or in bad taste). It came over comedic but I don't believe it was supposed to.

Third off, they said it wasn't graded properly and should look a lot better than the pixellated image we had - compare, say, the promo reel of Book Of Blood we saw with the finished article some time later. The colours were perhaps too muted to sepia, I'll grant. On a tangent to that, I felt the sound was too loud, but again there may still be work to do on the sound mix.

Fourth off, I was sincerely hoping (quite unforgivably) that someone, probably Bradley, would lamp the annoying stepdaughter.

[olbas006]

People, I beg you answer my two questions:

1) Why is the wife of Jacob committed suicide?

2) Doug Bradley's character (Jacob) survived or not?

Please answer!

[sherbetbizarre]

Have you been thinking about this for the past 8 months..?

[olbas006]

Have you been thinking about this for the past 8 months..?

That's not funny!

Somebody answer me or not?