Horror Movies

[MilkSpiller22]

Watched The Vast of Night on Amazon. Not a horror movie, it's a sci-fi/suspense but really solid flick. Definitely worth a watch.

I too saw it last night... I liked it... But did have complaints about it.. I thought it was over-acted... it felt like a stage play...


I also thought it was too wordy... would have liked to see the 2 backround stories by the 2 elderly people...

 

[Shanemansj13]

it doesn't have to be. I actually thought it was both of them, but he was speaking to her in certain scenes and they never alluded to recordings or that the suit could do that or play them and to me, that doesn't fit the organic nature of the scene. As I mentioned, I think a person that was traumatized because of the mental manipulation and the way they were spoken to would be able to recognize cheap tricks. To me, she stabbed Adrian in the hospital - and he was talking to her about how he will hurt those she cares about and go after Sydney, no way was that recorded and in my opinion lends more creedence that she knew it was Adrian. Then she shot and killed Adrians brother at the house (where I actually thought they were both there). I think that was why she did what she did, because she knew it was both, but that Adrian was the one pulling the strings.

The fact that we are discussing this indicates how not well told this was lol.

There are a lot of movies that leave questions or discussions though...I don't particularly like it but some make you think after. I don't think they should be knocked for it but I also agree about the fact this movie has some logic flaws. I just didn't think they were big enough where it trumped how entertaining it was.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

it doesn't have to be. I actually thought it was both of them, but he was speaking to her in certain scenes and they never alluded to recordings or that the suit could do that or play them and to me, that doesn't fit the organic nature of the scene. As I mentioned, I think a person that was traumatized because of the mental manipulation and the way they were spoken to would be able to recognize cheap tricks. To me, she stabbed Adrian in the hospital - and he was talking to her about how he will hurt those she cares about and go after Sydney, no way was that recorded and in my opinion lends more creedence that she knew it was Adrian. Then she shot and killed Adrians brother at the house (where I actually thought they were both there). I think that was why she did what she did, because she knew it was both, but that Adrian was the one pulling the strings.

The fact that we are discussing this indicates how not well told this was lol.

im confused... I didn't even think that was a question that they were both doing it... I mean the brother even said it was Adrian with the whole baby thing.... which also confirmed that he was part of it too...

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

it doesn't have to be. I actually thought it was both of them, but he was speaking to her in certain scenes and they never alluded to recordings or that the suit could do that or play them and to me, that doesn't fit the organic nature of the scene. As I mentioned, I think a person that was traumatized because of the mental manipulation and the way they were spoken to would be able to recognize cheap tricks. To me, she stabbed Adrian in the hospital - and he was talking to her about how he will hurt those she cares about and go after Sydney, no way was that recorded and in my opinion lends more creedence that she knew it was Adrian. Then she shot and killed Adrians brother at the house (where I actually thought they were both there). I think that was why she did what she did, because she knew it was both, but that Adrian was the one pulling the strings.

The fact that we are discussing this indicates how not well told this was lol.

I do agree that we were supposed to believe it was Adrian. Just thinkin that being the manipulator he was made out to be, I don't find it hard to believe he would have made a predetermined/pre-recorded threat to harm her friend. That's manipulation 101. Threaten the lives of those they care about to force their hand. He had to know that if push came to shove he'd need alternate means of forcing her hand.

The PTSD aspect was meant to create a sense of disillusionment & psychological entanglement as she battles to perceive her reality. She was supposed to be perceived as wildly confused for the most part. Even on her path to discovery. So being able to recognize cheap tricks based on her trauma is a stretch. Or at least goes against the focus of the movie.

Yes this is definitely an indicator of both logical flaws & writing holes. But as @Shanemansj13 said, most movies leave holes in the writing by design to leave a lasting impact on the viewer. Sometimes it works ok, and other times it just agitates lol. The logical flaws however feel like oversights or just post-production fallout. Still felt like the movie was entertaining enough to overcome those flaws though.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

I too saw it last night... I liked it... But did have complaints about it.. I thought it was over-acted... it felt like a stage play...


I also thought it was too wordy... would have liked to see the 2 backround stories by the 2 elderly people...

Definitely felt like a stage play a bit. I chalk a lot of your complaints up to budget. I'm guessing it was relatively low budget and whatever budget they had went to renting classic cars.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Definitely felt like a stage play a bit. I chalk a lot of your complaints up to budget. I'm guessing it was relatively low budget and whatever budget they had went to renting classic cars.

yea, it was definitely worth the watch... and better than most I have watched in quarantine... easily top 10 Quarantine movie(2020)

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

There are a lot of movies that leave questions or discussions though...I don't particularly like it but some make you think after. I don't think they should be knocked for it but I also agree about the fact this movie has some logic flaws. I just didn't think they were big enough where it trumped how entertaining it was.

im confused... I didn't even think that was a question that they were both doing it... I mean the brother even said it was Adrian with the whole baby thing.... which also confirmed that he was part of it too...

I do agree that we were supposed to believe it was Adrian. Just thinkin that being the manipulator he was made out to be, I don't find it hard to believe he would have made a predetermined/pre-recorded threat to harm her friend. That's manipulation 101. Threaten the lives of those they care about to force their hand. He had to know that if push came to shove he'd need alternate means of forcing her hand.

The PTSD aspect was meant to create a sense of disillusionment & psychological entanglement as she battles to perceive her reality. She was supposed to be perceived as wildly confused for the most part. Even on her path to discovery. So being able to recognize cheap tricks based on her trauma is a stretch. Or at least goes against the focus of the movie.

Yes this is definitely an indicator of both logical flaws & writing holes. But as @Shanemansj13 said, most movies leave holes in the writing by design to leave a lasting impact on the viewer. Sometimes it works ok, and other times it just agitates lol. The logical flaws however feel like oversights or just post-production fallout. Still felt like the movie was entertaining enough to overcome those flaws though.

Could you provide examples of open ended stories by design. Obviously absent of sequel initiatives and philosophical nature. Obviously things like the Matrix aren't the same. Just so I can have something to compare to what you are talking about.

I only ask because to me, these aren't little missteps, they are crucial elements to the story. I suppose all the above is possible, but the house scene still bothers me. Again, from the order and angle of the things that were falling, someone fell in the corner of Sydneys room while she simultaneously runs out. To me, there is no way he gained ground on someone in sprint mode when they are falling over 5 feet away. This was the scene that made me think they were both involved. Even though again, I think the voice is a big factor as well. And I think it is all a big deal when we throw it in a story where the antagonist is a wordsmith manipulator.

lol all in good fun I guess though.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Could you provide examples of open ended stories by design. Obviously absent of sequel initiatives and philosophical nature. Obviously things like the Matrix aren't the same. Just so I can have something to compare to what you are talking about.

I only ask because to me, these aren't little missteps, they are crucial elements to the story. I suppose all the above is possible, but the house scene still bothers me. Again, from the order and angle of the things that were falling, someone fell in the corner of Sydneys room while she simultaneously runs out. To me, there is no way he gained ground on someone in sprint mode when they are falling over 5 feet away. This was the scene that made me think they were both involved. Even though again, I think the voice is a big factor as well. And I think it is all a big deal when we throw it in a story where the antagonist is a wordsmith manipulator.

lol all in good fun I guess though.

Well to me I was speakin in regards to ambiguity in writing, that offers multiple interpretations. The "writing holes" refers to the disconnect between the threads to offer that room for interpretation. Not at all referring to those that simply leave it open for sequels.

As far as examples... i'll try to stick within the realm of this thread (Horror/Sci-Fi/Thriller)...
Some classics that come to mind: American Psycho, The Shining, Jacob's Ladder, Blair Witch Project.
Other films like: Hereditary, Mother!, Coherence, Suspiria, The Endless, The Prestige, Black Swan, Triangle, Shutter Island, Babadook, Occulus

Obviously the ones I listed are more overt, or readily apparent to their open interpretation. But I think you'll catch my drift.

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Well to me I was speakin in regards to ambiguity in writing, that offers multiple interpretations. The "writing holes" refers to the disconnect between the threads to offer that room for interpretation. Not at all referring to those that simply leave it open for sequels.

As far as examples... i'll try to stick within the realm of this thread (Horror/Sci-Fi/Thriller)...
Some classics that come to mind: American Psycho, The Shining, Jacob's Ladder, Blair Witch Project.
Other films like: Hereditary, Mother!, Coherence, Suspiria, The Endless, The Prestige, Black Swan, Triangle, Shutter Island, Babadook, Occulus

Obviously the ones I listed are more overt, or readily apparent to their open interpretation. But I think you'll catch my drift.

I was discounting sequels as those obviously are open ended stories most of the time - just to clarify.

See, none of those (that I have seen) have a problem with the story. Sure, in Hereditary it leaves off with the demon Paymon (or whatever his name was, can't remember) inhabiting the body of the boy - but there is no confusion about the story up to that point. Everything is spelled out at this point. The only thing we have to accept is the supernatural nature of it, that spells work and all that and that should be a given for that type of movie. Same thing with movies like The Prestige or Shutter Island. There are no gaps, it just leaves off with an open ending.

Maybe it is me, because again it was clear to me that 2 people were orchestrating these attacks on her and having no clarity in the manner - but just choosing to kill anyone thats a suspect is belittling to the thought process of story making.

Perhaps I need to watch it again and I am simply misremembering or mis-saw something that didn't actually happen. But as of now, I am adamant lol.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

I was discounting sequels as those obviously are open ended stories most of the time - just to clarify.

See, none of those (that I have seen) have a problem with the story. Sure, in Hereditary it leaves off with the demon Paymon (or whatever his name was, can't remember) inhabiting the body of the boy - but there is no confusion about the story up to that point. Everything is spelled out at this point. The only thing we have to accept is the supernatural nature of it, that spells work and all that and that should be a given for that type of movie. Same thing with movies like The Prestige or Shutter Island. There are no gaps, it just leaves off with an open ending.

Maybe it is me, because again it was clear to me that 2 people were orchestrating these attacks on her and having no clarity in the manner - but just choosing to kill anyone thats a suspect is belittling to the thought process of story making.

Perhaps I need to watch it again and I am simply misremembering or mis-saw something that didn't actually happen. But as of now, I am adamant lol.

Definitely agree. Those movies were far more polished in terms of writing. Maybe I should come up with more sci-fi related material since that definitely presents us with more logical flaws lol.

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Looks awesome. Adding to my list! Thanks for the rec!

Side note... Love it when people recommend movies in here. New material, old material... Horror, sci-fi, thrillers. Whatever. I'm always thirsty for more!

Horror that relies more on suspense is what I enjoy most. I guess that's why I really enjoyed The Thing and Rear Window (if anyone would consider these horror). The ones today to me aren't nearly as interesting as they usually seem to rely more on the jump scares that more often than not, don't amount to anything.

 

[Chef99]

So, which movie was better, Hollow Man or Invisible Man?

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Watched Tucker and Dale vs Evil the other day. It wasn't bad but I felt like it could've been so much better.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Hey folks! Figured I'd drop in after such a long time and provide my 2 cents!

So I finally broke my 30 some year "No Micheal, no watch" policy and sat through Halloween 3: Season of the Witch. Is it as bad as many say? Is it a hidden cult classic as some claim? Well.......


A mixed bag in my opinion. Essentially everything here is a mixture of good and bad.
*Acting? Tom Atkins is good. The main bad guy is decent. The eye candy is meh for acting . A few peripheral characters are kinda just bad (like the tourist family).
*Storyline? Well, the no Michael Meyers thing aside, it isn't a bad story. It is bit too simplistic considering the scale of the bad guy's plan. Also the dialog is often a bit too clunky.
*FXs? Fairly lacking until they suddenly are not (like when they face melt the sales lady). Its the prevalence of offscreen or obscured kill ratios that get me a bit po'd.

Positives:
*Tom Atkins. Stop it! Please! You've got to stop it! Stop it! Stop it! STOP IT!!!!!
*A semi coherent storyline (though the execution of it is a bit woggy).
*The bad guy (Cochrane) is generally well played. Reminds me a bit of the venerable Tall Man in the Phantasm series.
*The guy that played Grimbridge did a good job.
*The love interest is pretty hot (acting ability is apparently secondary though).
*The FXs are decent when they actually decide to use them.
*The scenes towards the end (escaping in the car with the love interest, and then Tom screaming into the phone) are excellent!
*The gas station attendant looks like the illegitimate son of Sammy Davis Jr.!
*Classic John Carpenter soundtrack!

Negatives:
*Not all characters/dialog or aspects of the story come off as realistic. Some characters babble exposition like overly caffeinated 14 year olds. While the overall ideas are cool, the plot execution is a bit ridiculous. Etc.
*As previously mentioned, the prevalence of offscreen and obscured kills are annoying. Just give us some gore already! We are not expecting a kids movie here after Halloween and Halloween 2.
*Much like the gore, the lack of T&A. Unto itself it isn't a big deal but when you have scenes with the hot lead chick flashing Tom (a few times), showering, and a long sex scene and we don't see so much as a nipple (they worked way too hard to film it so we don't see anything), only to have Tom's ass the following morning as the only nudity just made me angry.
*They Bond villained the scene where they tie up Tom. If you just shoot him instead of tying him up and leaving him alone in a room then you win! Where is Seth Green when you need him?

Overall: 4.5 to 5 out of 10. A must see for Halloween fans (if only to understand the franchise in its entirety) but non-horror fans won't like it much and the feel and story is very dated. I could see an updated version using the internet as a means actually being better if done correctly. But I'm glad I finally watched it. Not sure where it ranks on my best to worst Halloween series movie list but it is certainly not towards the top.

 

[Chef99]

Hey folks! Figured I'd drop in after such a long time and provide my 2 cents!

So I finally broke my 30 some year "No Micheal, no watch" policy and sat through Halloween 3: Season of the Witch. Is it as bad as many say? Is it a hidden cult classic as some claim? Well.......


A mixed bag in my opinion. Essentially everything here is a mixture of good and bad.
*Acting? Tom Atkins is good. The main bad guy is decent. The eye candy is meh for acting . A few peripheral characters are kinda just bad (like the tourist family).
*Storyline? Well, the no Michael Meyers thing aside, it isn't a bad story. It is bit too simplistic considering the scale of the bad guy's plan. Also the dialog is often a bit too clunky.
*FXs? Fairly lacking until they suddenly are not (like when they face melt the sales lady). Its the prevalence of offscreen or obscured kill ratios that get me a bit po'd.

Positives:
*Tom Atkins. Stop it! Please! You've got to stop it! Stop it! Stop it! STOP IT!!!!!
*A semi coherent storyline (though the execution of it is a bit woggy).
*The bad guy (Cochrane) is generally well played. Reminds me a bit of the venerable Tall Man in the Phantasm series.
*The guy that played Grimbridge did a good job.
*The love interest is pretty hot (acting ability is apparently secondary though).
*The FXs are decent when they actually decide to use them.
*The scenes towards the end (escaping in the car with the love interest, and then Tom screaming into the phone) are excellent!
*The gas station attendant looks like the illegitimate son of Sammy Davis Jr.!
*Classic John Carpenter soundtrack!

Negatives:
*Not all characters/dialog or aspects of the story come off as realistic. Some characters babble exposition like overly caffeinated 14 year olds. While the overall ideas are cool, the plot execution is a bit ridiculous. Etc.
*As previously mentioned, the prevalence of offscreen and obscured kills are annoying. Just give us some gore already! We are not expecting a kids movie here after Halloween and Halloween 2.
*Much like the gore, the lack of T&A. Unto itself it isn't a big deal but when you have scenes with the hot lead chick flashing Tom (a few times), showering, and a long sex scene and we don't see so much as a nipple (they worked way too hard to film it so we don't see anything), only to have Tom's ass the following morning as the only nudity just made me angry.
*They Bond villained the scene where they tie up Tom. If you just shoot him instead of tying him up and leaving him alone in a room then you win! Where is Seth Green when you need him?

Overall: 4.5 to 5 out of 10. A must see for Halloween fans (if only to understand the franchise in its entirety) but non-horror fans won't like it much and the feel and story is very dated. I could see an updated version using the internet as a means actually being better if done correctly. But I'm glad I finally watched it. Not sure where it ranks on my best to worst Halloween series movie list but it is certainly not towards the top.

Lol, glad to see you back, but DAMN, this was a terrible movie.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Lol, glad to see you back, but DAMN, this was a terrible movie.

Good to see ya also!

I certainly wouldn't describe it as "good" but does have some redeeming features.

It might be better than Halloween 5, and/or Resurrection. But probably those 3 at the bottom of the along with maybe the 2 Rob Zombie additions depending on your views (I don't really like either).

 

[Chef99]

Good to see ya also!

I certainly wouldn't describe it as "good" but does have some redeeming features.

It might be better than Halloween 5, and/or Resurrection. But probably those 3 at the bottom of the along with maybe the 2 Rob Zombie additions depending on your views (I don't really like either).

See, I'm judging it as a Halloween movie, and here's where they made a fatal mistake: no Michael Myers.
And while I agree with you on Rob Zombie's 2nd, you didn't like the 1st? Man, I thought it was very well done.

 

[returnofjakedog]

See, I'm judging it as a Halloween movie, and here's where they made a fatal mistake: no Michael Myers.
And while I agree with you on Rob Zombie's 2nd, you didn't like the 1st? Man, I thought it was very well done.

I might need to re-watch the Zombie ones but I generally haven't been a big fan. Some of his are better than others though.
As far as the no-Michael Halloween 3, I totally relate. I have boycotted it for all these years, and this was my first time watching it. After so many good and bad additions to the series I figured it was time to at least go ahead and check it out.

 

[Taddy Mason]

Those are some bad flaws in my opinion lol. I will say that I thought Moss did a fair job with the paranoia and anxiety, the bigger problem with that was understanding the abuse that we never got to see first hand. It starts out with her leaving. She isn't hurt, locked up, or anything... she actually has full access to everything including the alarm system and the security cameras. Whenever they talk about the abuse, they say stereotypical stuff... 'he had a way to get inside your head', 'he made me believe', 'he manipulates people' - yada yada yada which may explain why there are no physical signs of abuse, but they never dive deep enough for me to really believe it especially since again, she had access to everything. The ending really bothered me too.

i forget what other movie came out around that time or maybe just one i watched at the same time, but i was disappointed with how both treated the abuse as if it was made up and the invisible man and via that thought process, the abuse was made up. that said, i don't recall any problems with any of the acting in the film so many dumb choices made by everyone to suggest moss was crazy to what we're seeing on the screen while they're trying to make denials for it.

 

[Taddy Mason]

Watched Tucker and Dale vs Evil the other day. It wasn't bad but I felt like it could've been so much better.

i mean, i thought it was great. always a fan of labine and tudyk, what didn't you like about it? that's what you're saying when you think you could have improved it.