Horror Movies

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Although the franchises aren’t linked, the Insidious movies are commonly thought to intertwine with these movies. They are in the same vein and just as fun, but they aren’t connected.

Patrick Wilson is making his directorial debut in the next Insidious film, that should be interesting. He has a ton of work with Wan, so who knows.

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Just watched Aliens for the first time. While it took a bit to get started, I think I liked this one better than the original.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Just watched Aliens for the first time. While it took a bit to get started, I think I liked this one better than the original.

Wait, first time?

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Wait, first time?

Yeah. I watched some of the others years ago and wasn’t a fan so I never watched one and two. I watched one a few months ago and liked it and finally got around to this one. This was the original cut and not the extended cut.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Very concise and thorough, I greatly appreciate it!

No problem man! Feel free to tag me or any of the other heathens in here for more recommendations if you're interested… There’s like a 95% probability that at least 1 of us has seen whatever it is you're interested in!

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Yeah. I watched some of the others years ago and wasn’t a fan so I never watched one and two. I watched one a few months ago and liked it and finally got around to this one. This was the original cut and not the extended cut.

@returnofjakedog is our resident Alien franchise expert but those movies are very well regarded in here.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Patrick Wilson is making his directorial debut in the next Insidious film, that should be interesting. He has a ton of work with Wan, so who knows.

That ought to be good! Hope he takes it in a different direction to be honest. After the 4th film it was sorta obvious that they are merely rinse & repeating plots & just trying to be more clever about it.

 

[UVA_Guy81]

@returnofjakedog is our resident Alien franchise expert but those movies are very well regarded in here.

I saw Prometheus and didn’t like it at all and skipped Covenant but from what it sounded like, I didn’t really miss a good movie.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

I saw Prometheus and didn’t like it at all and skipped Covenant but from what it sounded like, I didn’t really miss a good movie.

Jakedog & I liked Covenant… Don’t recall our exact sentiments but I believe we wrote lengthy reviews on it in this thread if you were interested in reading those

 

[Blackshirts BLVD]

Yeah. I watched some of the others years ago and wasn’t a fan so I never watched one and two. I watched one a few months ago and liked it and finally got around to this one. This was the original cut and not the extended cut.

Damn, saved the best for last though. The first two are far and away the best.

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Jakedog & I liked Covenant… Don’t recall our exact sentiments but I believe we wrote lengthy reviews on it in this thread if you were interested in reading those

I’ll trust you on that. Maybe at some point I’ll go back and watch it but I remember just disliking Prometheus so much that I had zero interest in that one at the time it was out.

 

[UVA_Guy81]

Damn, saved the best for last though. The first two are far and away the best.

How much of a difference did the extended or directors cut make? I saw it was an additional 17 minutes or so of run time.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

How much of a difference did the extended or directors cut make? I saw it was an additional 17 minutes or so of run time.

I’d have to rewatch the DC to be honest. But jakedog wrote some lengthy breakdowns of each film and I’d be willing to bet he included his thoughts on the director’s cuts.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Just watched Aliens for the first time. While it took a bit to get started, I think I liked this one better than the original.

It all depends what you are looking for. The Alien franchise, like so many others, has a lot of ups and downs in many respects.
*Alien (79)- pure sci-fi horror. Written by Dan O'Bannon (Return of the Living Dead, Heavy Metal, Total Recall, Lifeforce, etc, etc). H.R. Giger designed the xenomorphs and all of the related "engineer" stuff. Most importantly, directed by Ridley Scott.
*Aliens (86)- James Cameron wrote and directs. Much more action oriented. Stan Winston did a great job on the fxs.

These 2 are considered the standard bearers for the franchise. They also highlighted the stylistic division between the 2 movies.
-Scott used lingering shots and developing a sense of isolation and dread. His use of lighting to offset his very limited budget was one of the best examples ever of these circumstances. Installing fear and a sense of isolation was the priority.
-Cameron was an fxs prodigy who worked with Roger Corman who got the Aliens gig after his breakout The Terminator 2 years before. He wasn't concerned with a slow build persay (comparatively speaking) and brought a whole different dimension to the Alien universe. He did a great job with the action scenes that hit hard and fast.
Both movies share GREAT casts, which is something that future enteries struggled with. But both the crew of the Alien move and the Aliens marines were likeable or at least well defined and quite relatable.

Both directors did great jobs and accomplished exactly what they were going for. I propose that the question of which movie was better is typically purely a matter of personal taste as it would be hard to pick a winner by debating quality.
Also keep in mind that Alien had about a $10 million budget and Aliens was about $19 million. Both were made peanuts by today's standards, even accounting for inflation.

*Alien 3 (92)- David Fincher's (Seven, Fight Club, Gone Girl, Zodiac, etc) first studio directorial work. Sadly this one is most infamous for studio meddling, and Fincher didn't yet have the power to impose his vision over studio mandates. They also went through many scripts and rewrites with many different writers, which rarely works out well. That includes the likes of cyberpunk legend William Gibson, and Eric Red (The Hitcher, Near Dark).
The final product contained much less action than originally intended, as well as only 1 xenomorph (well, technically 2 if you include the finale) which goes against threequel policy.
Not a horrible movie but also not very accessible to the general public. They should have gone a different direction. Killing off both Corp. Hicks and the kid Newt at the beginning was a bafflingly bad decision that literally everyone hated.

*Alien Ressurection (97)- Ripley's last appearance, this one attempts to return more to the action genre ala Aliens. Again, I didn't find it a bad movie (but I am hugely biased towards this franchise) however it is again flawed. Some good characters but also a bunch of forgettable ones.
They brought in Jean-Pierre Jeunet to direct and he remains largely unknown to western audiences to this day but he did have The City of Lost Children and Delicatessen under his belt. I feel the bigger issue was bringing in Joss Whedon to script it. I enjoy some of Whedon's work but I think his need to try to inject humor in everything can be a negative to a franchise such as Alien. Other issues include some rather dated cgi and not many liking the mother-child themes.

*Alien vs Predator (04)- Well, what to say? Personally my least favorite movie in the Alien franchise.
Predators keep a hunting lodge pyramid under the Antarctic ice where they go on weekends to fight xenomorphs?? The predator guy works with the humans?? Wtf??
It makes little sense and us poorly executed in the sense that it has all of the action of Aliens but no personality.
A missed opportunity here as both James Cameron and Ridley Scott were actually talking to each other about a 5th movie! Instead the studio hired Paul W.S. Anderson, most noted for the Resident Evil movies, to write and direct. No offense to Anderson (his Event Horizon is a fav of mine) but I would have loved to see a Scott/Cameron compilation!
Lots of action and good fxs (but too dark lighting). If you turn off your brain it is ok, but I can't recommend it.

*Alien vs Predator Requim (07)-
The studio brought in the guy who wrote Armageddon, and a bunch of the Hawaii Five-O episodes, and had the Strause Brothers, a couple of fxs guys, direct (note that they only directed 1 more film after this).
I think it is a better film than it's predecessor, but it is still big, brainless action. It mainly involves a Predator/Alien hybrid, and a Predator trying to kill it and the other xenomorphs that escaped the pyramid.
To be clear: both of the AvP movies are pure schlock. Now there is nothing wrong with schlock, particularly in action and horror genres, but it needs to be done in an interesting way. AvP both fail in plot, characters and direction. While I don't have a specific problem with any of the writers or directors, I do feel that they have basically been ill-suited for the franchise since Ressurection, and studio meddling fucked up the 3rd movie.

*Prometheus (12)-
Ridley Scott returns to try to explore the Alien universe backstory.
I get why some people didn't lìke it. I really do. The characters were often underdeveloped, plot points ended up going nowhere, very slow moving, very few xenomorph connections, etc. But I f'n loved it!
I watched it with my bro-in-law who has the attention span of a guppy, and isn't happy unless someone is shooting at someone. He fell asleep about 40 minutes in. But I love Scott's style with spectacular, wide sweeping shots, and slow development that builds to a head. Many people had similar complaints about Blade Runner 2049 (an admittedly better written story) but that is what I loved about it.
The 2 points that I think no one can argue against are the special fxs, and the casting of Michael Fassbender, who carries a lot of both Prometheus and Covenent.
I think that the biggest issue with Prometheus might be it's failings as a stand-alone movie. If you are into the mythos and have familiarity with the franchise you are probably going to like it but someone who just watches this as a solo work is going to be confused and possibly bored.

*Alien Covenant (16)-
Scott is back to direct but this one takes a different approach than Prometheus, I think largely due to studio backlash. This one does go more action.
It does have it's problems. The cast is hit and miss. There are a couple of really stupid decisions that the characters make. But lots of xenomorphs (well, technically sub-species of xenos-) and another great performance by Fassbender. It also has some great, slimey, and gory fxs, perhaps the best in the franchise!

I was looking forward to the next chapter with Fassbender terrorizing the space colony but it might never happen. However I do see that the rumored Alien series is on track for '23, so yee-haw for that!

 

[Chef99]

I loved all of the core Alien movies, even that made for tv one where Sigourney makes a hole in one, although that was not my favorite.

I thought "Prometheus" and "Covenant" were both brilliant. Not sure what's gonna happen after these.

 

[returnofjakedog]

It all depends what you are looking for. The Alien franchise, like so many others, has a lot of ups and downs in many respects.
*Alien (79)- pure sci-fi horror. Written by Dan O'Bannon (Return of the Living Dead, Heavy Metal, Total Recall, Lifeforce, etc, etc). H.R. Giger designed the xenomorphs and all of the related "engineer" stuff. Most importantly, directed by Ridley Scott.
*Aliens (86)- James Cameron wrote and directs. Much more action oriented. Stan Winston did a great job on the fxs.

These 2 are considered the standard bearers for the franchise. They also highlighted the stylistic division between the 2 movies.
-Scott used lingering shots and developing a sense of isolation and dread. His use of lighting to offset his very limited budget was one of the best examples ever of these circumstances. Installing fear and a sense of isolation was the priority.
-Cameron was an fxs prodigy who worked with Roger Corman who got the Aliens gig after his breakout The Terminator 2 years before. He wasn't concerned with a slow build persay (comparatively speaking) and brought a whole different dimension to the Alien universe. He did a great job with the action scenes that hit hard and fast.
Both movies share GREAT casts, which is something that future enteries struggled with. But both the crew of the Alien move and the Aliens marines were likeable or at least well defined and quite relatable.

Both directors did great jobs and accomplished exactly what they were going for. I propose that the question of which movie was better is typically purely a matter of personal taste as it would be hard to pick a winner by debating quality.
Also keep in mind that Alien had about a $10 million budget and Aliens was about $19 million. Both were made peanuts by today's standards, even accounting for inflation.

*Alien 3 (92)- David Fincher's (Seven, Fight Club, Gone Girl, Zodiac, etc) first studio directorial work. Sadly this one is most infamous for studio meddling, and Fincher didn't yet have the power to impose his vision over studio mandates. They also went through many scripts and rewrites with many different writers, which rarely works out well. That includes the likes of cyberpunk legend William Gibson, and Eric Red (The Hitcher, Near Dark).
The final product contained much less action than originally intended, as well as only 1 xenomorph (well, technically 2 if you include the finale) which goes against threequel policy.
Not a horrible movie but also not very accessible to the general public. They should have gone a different direction. Killing off both Corp. Hicks and the kid Newt at the beginning was a bafflingly bad decision that literally everyone hated.

*Alien Ressurection (97)- Ripley's last appearance, this one attempts to return more to the action genre ala Aliens. Again, I didn't find it a bad movie (but I am hugely biased towards this franchise) however it is again flawed. Some good characters but also a bunch of forgettable ones.
They brought in Jean-Pierre Jeunet to direct and he remains largely unknown to western audiences to this day but he did have The City of Lost Children and Delicatessen under his belt. I feel the bigger issue was bringing in Joss Whedon to script it. I enjoy some of Whedon's work but I think his need to try to inject humor in everything can be a negative to a franchise such as Alien. Other issues include some rather dated cgi and not many liking the mother-child themes.

*Alien vs Predator (04)- Well, what to say? Personally my least favorite movie in the Alien franchise.
Predators keep a hunting lodge pyramid under the Antarctic ice where they go on weekends to fight xenomorphs?? The predator guy works with the humans?? Wtf??
It makes little sense and us poorly executed in the sense that it has all of the action of Aliens but no personality.
A missed opportunity here as both James Cameron and Ridley Scott were actually talking to each other about a 5th movie! Instead the studio hired Paul W.S. Anderson, most noted for the Resident Evil movies, to write and direct. No offense to Anderson (his Event Horizon is a fav of mine) but I would have loved to see a Scott/Cameron compilation!
Lots of action and good fxs (but too dark lighting). If you turn off your brain it is ok, but I can't recommend it.

*Alien vs Predator Requim (07)-
The studio brought in the guy who wrote Armageddon, and a bunch of the Hawaii Five-O episodes, and had the Strause Brothers, a couple of fxs guys, direct (note that they only directed 1 more film after this).
I think it is a better film than it's predecessor, but it is still big, brainless action. It mainly involves a Predator/Alien hybrid, and a Predator trying to kill it and the other xenomorphs that escaped the pyramid.
To be clear: both of the AvP movies are pure schlock. Now there is nothing wrong with schlock, particularly in action and horror genres, but it needs to be done in an interesting way. AvP both fail in plot, characters and direction. While I don't have a specific problem with any of the writers or directors, I do feel that they have basically been ill-suited for the franchise since Ressurection, and studio meddling fucked up the 3rd movie.

*Prometheus (12)-
Ridley Scott returns to try to explore the Alien universe backstory.
I get why some people didn't lìke it. I really do. The characters were often underdeveloped, plot points ended up going nowhere, very slow moving, very few xenomorph connections, etc. But I f'n loved it!
I watched it with my bro-in-law who has the attention span of a guppy, and isn't happy unless someone is shooting at someone. He fell asleep about 40 minutes in. But I love Scott's style with spectacular, wide sweeping shots, and slow development that builds to a head. Many people had similar complaints about Blade Runner 2049 (an admittedly better written story) but that is what I loved about it.
The 2 points that I think no one can argue against are the special fxs, and the casting of Michael Fassbender, who carries a lot of both Prometheus and Covenent.
I think that the biggest issue with Prometheus might be it's failings as a stand-alone movie. If you are into the mythos and have familiarity with the franchise you are probably going to like it but someone who just watches this as a solo work is going to be confused and possibly bored.

*Alien Covenant (16)-
Scott is back to direct but this one takes a different approach than Prometheus, I think largely due to studio backlash. This one does go more action.
It does have it's problems. The cast is hit and miss. There are a couple of really stupid decisions that the characters make. But lots of xenomorphs (well, technically sub-species of xenos-) and another great performance by Fassbender. It also has some great, slimey, and gory fxs, perhaps the best in the franchise!

I was looking forward to the next chapter with Fassbender terrorizing the space colony but it might never happen. However I do see that the rumored Alien series is on track for '23, so yee-haw for that!

Just to summerize:

I think that the Alien franchise suffers from a couple of points:
*Aliens, though a great movie, put an expectation for some that these will be action movies. But that is not the core of the series. Scott set the stage with a straight up horror movie, then Cameron subverted expectations. Every movie since then struggles to fit into that dynamic and will inevitably suffer depending on the expectations of the viewer. If the viewer is expecting straight up action then Prometheus is going to be disappointing, which, for example, is why Scott shifted gears and added quite a bit more action in Covenent after the criticisms of Prometheus.

*Time frames: Alien was '79, then Aliens was '86, Alien 3 was '92, Alien 4 was '96, AvP was '04, AvPR was '07, Prometheus was '12, Covenent was '16, and now the series will be '23.
That is 9 movies/series over 44 years, which seems like a lot but it is an average of 5.5 years between enteries. That might work for a mass appeal franchise like Star Wars were you pander to the public by making it as widely accessible as possible but with an Alien franchise that struggles from "tonal anxiety" it is going to further confusion among the public.

 

[Chef99]

Just to summerize:

I think that the Alien franchise suffers from a couple of points:
*Aliens, though a great movie, put an expectation for some that these will be action movies. But that is not the core of the series. Scott set the stage with a straight up horror movie, then Cameron subverted expectations. Every movie since then struggles to fit into that dynamic and will inevitably suffer depending on the expectations of the viewer. If the viewer is expecting straight up action then Prometheus is going to be disappointing, which, for example, is why Scott shifted gears and added quite a bit more action in Covenent after the criticisms of Prometheus.

*Time frames: Alien was '79, then Aliens was '86, Alien 3 was '92, Alien 4 was '96, AvP was '04, AvPR was '07, Prometheus was '12, Covenent was '16, and now the series will be '23.
That is 9 movies/series over 44 years, which seems like a lot but it is an average of 5.5 years between enteries. That might work for a mass appeal franchise like Star Wars were you pander to the public by making it as widely accessible as possible but with an Alien franchise that struggles from "tonal anxiety" it is going to further confusion among the public.

Btw, I totally agree with you about Alien 3. Killing off Hicks and Newt just ruined the entire movie for me, even as depressing as it was anyway.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Necronomicon: Book of the Dead (93)-

So Brian Yunza and Jeffery Combs team up again for this anthology film based on 3 H.P. Lovecraft tales and a framing story.

I say "again" because Yunza produced the Stuart Gordon directed Re-Animator, and From Beyond. He also co-wrote From Beyond and Honey, I Shrunk the Kids(!) before moving into directing with various horror movies, including Society, before directing 2 parts of this movie (the other 2 stories were directed by a French and a Japanese director).

Anyways..........Combs plays H.P. Lovecraft who, for some reason, has access to an elaborate monastery library. While there he steals a key and breaks into a vault where the Necronomicon is being stored. He then "reads" (or is "shown") 3 tales from book.
The first story is about a man, played by the creepy Richard Lynch, who returns to his family's deserted estate and uses the Necronomicon to revive his dead wife who returns in the form of an illusion created by a giant slimy monster, much the same as his uncle did with his wife and daughter 60 years previous.

Tale #2 involves a young lady who moves into a boarding house where a doctor living upstairs suffers from a condition that requires he remains in extreme cold conditions at all time. The girl's abusive stepfather tracks her down and assaults her but the doctor intervenes. Later, the girls witnesses the doctor operating on the stepfather and sucking out his spinal fluid. This is all told by a lady living in the house to a reporter who is investigating disappearances in the area.

The 3rd story involves 2 police officers who pursue a serial killer into a huge deserted old building, only to be captured and given to the weird alien bat creatures who live in the fleshy walls of the basement.

The movie culminates with Lovecraft fleeing the monastery with the stolen Necronomicon in hand.

I love horror anthology movies, but some, as this one, do suffer from pacing issues. It feels more like it should have been a series with each tale being a seperate episode. That way they could have fleshed out everything a bit more. Also some of the acting is hit and miss.

Despite this, there is a lot of fun and good here. Yunza is known for slimey gore and he delivers here in a big way. Tom Savini, Screaming Mad George, and John Carl Buechler (among others), all 3 legends in the industry, provide special fxs and they do not disappoint. Flesh is peeled from bone and slime drips everywhere!

I'll go about a 6.5 to 7 outta 10 range. This is probably a bit high but I've boosted it for the great gore, and the always fun Lovecraft stories.
If you liked Re-Animator and From Beyond then you will probably enjoy it!

 

[returnofjakedog]

Btw, I totally agree with you about Alien 3. Killing off Hicks and Newt just ruined the entire movie for me, even as depressing as it was anyway.

Yeah. It was a really stupid decision by the writer and studio. The script was still being rewritten when the production and shooting began (that seems ridiculous for a movie of that scope and budget), and they seemed to just make a split second decision.

*Apparently, many of the submitted scripts and drafts killed off Newt as they found her annoying. I hate annoying kid characters as much as anyone but I didn't have a big problem with Newt. Sure, she screamed too much but the situations warranted it, sooooo........??

*Killing off Hicks made even less sense. I feel he would have made a good protagonist partner for Ripley, and they could have killed him off in heroic fashion later in the movie for a much greater emotional impact. The opening scene where they just basically say "Oh, they're both dead" and then move on like nothing happened was fucking retarded and I'd slap the writer upside the head if I was given a chance.

But that wasn't the only problem with Alien 3. I actually like it more than most do but I would have loved to see a David Fincher version where he had script control and was already powerful enough where he could overcome studio meddling.

If it were me in charge, and we keep the basic concept: Hicks and Newt are both alive but Newt is infected. A xenomorph bursts from her before Ripley can intervene. Hicks and Ripley then both navigate to prison mining colony together, and at some point (probably the last 3rd of the movie) Hicks get killed off while saving Ripley.

Simple. You still get rid of Newt but you do it in a way that is shocking and upsetting (a kid's innards explode out!) and introduce another xenomorph threat. Hicks then helps to establish a strong protagonist carry over from Aliens and it provides a much greater emotional impact when he dies sacrificing himself.

How can a studio as a whole not see this? Is it group stupidity? Did no one have the guts to speak up?

Anyways, there is a much better version of Alien 3 out there somewhere in the multiverse. I just wish we could have seen it here!

 

[Chef99]

Yeah. It was a really stupid decision by the writer and studio. The script was still being rewritten when the production and shooting began (that seems ridiculous for a movie of that scope and budget), and they seemed to just make a split second decision.

*Apparently, many of the submitted scripts and drafts killed off Newt as they found her annoying. I hate annoying kid characters as much as anyone but I didn't have a big problem with Newt. Sure, she screamed too much but the situations warranted it, sooooo........??

*Killing off Hicks made even less sense. I feel he would have made a good protagonist partner for Ripley, and they could have killed him off in heroic fashion later in the movie for a much greater emotional impact. The opening scene where they just basically say "Oh, they're both dead" and then move on like nothing happened was fucking retarded and I'd slap the writer upside the head if I was given a chance.

But that wasn't the only problem with Alien 3. I actually like it more than most do but I would have loved to see a David Fincher version where he had script control and was already powerful enough where he could overcome studio meddling.

If it were me in charge, and we keep the basic concept: Hicks and Newt are both alive but Newt is infected. A xenomorph bursts from her before Ripley can intervene. Hicks and Ripley then both navigate to prison mining colony together, and at some point (probably the last 3rd of the movie) Hicks get killed off while saving Ripley.

Simple. You still get rid of Newt but you do it in a way that is shocking and upsetting (a kid's innards explode out!) and introduce another xenomorph threat. Hicks then helps to establish a strong protagonist carry over from Aliens and it provides a much greater emotional impact when he dies sacrificing himself.

How can a studio as a whole not see this? Is it group stupidity? Did no one have the guts to speak up?

Anyways, there is a much better version of Alien 3 out there somewhere in the multiverse. I just wish we could have seen it here!

But here's the thing for me; Newt, much like Ripley's cat, represented the beacon of hope for the horrors that Ripley (and crew) were up against. Hicks represented that hope that Ripley could settle down with him and they'd live happily ever after. Lol, call me a romanticist!