Horror Movies

[Jiddy]

Also catching up, I thoroughly enjoyed Black Phone. I know it was overly hyped and then got some backlash but those 2 things combined may have tempered my expectations and I thought it was a fun ride.

Also saw The Menu which I guess is horror adjacent? It was very meh, thought it tried a little too hard.

Spoiler

"Gonna be honest here, Black Phone could have amazing with a "The bad guy was making the phone calls the entire time" twist and the kid ate it. Really blew a golden opportunity...But still was good."

 

[returnofjakedog]

View attachment 319393

True!

 

[returnofjakedog]

A couple more teen oriented horror offerings. One doe relatively right, the other kinda a shitshow.

Freaky (2020)-

This one has been discussed here a bit, but not indepth.

It starts with a bang with a Scream-style intro that includes several graphic kills, including a bottle/throat explosion that I consider an "all timer". From that start I was expecting something great.....instead we got something reasonably decent.
A high school chick whose father died deals with bullying from the usual suspects while her stereotype friends and broken family while a crazed serial killer (Vince Vaughn) is busy chopping up the town. The killer attacks the girl with a magically cursed Aztec sacrifical dagger but doesn't kill her, thus transferring their souls. The now chickie killer roams the halls of the school while 6'5" Vince runs from the police and tries to transfer herself back into her body.

A solid entry overall but it has it's flaws.
*Looks good. Competently shot, edited, directed, etc.

*Performances range from decent to not so much. Most at least seem to be trying hard. Vince Vaughn trying to play it like a 17 year old girl is a bit strange.

*The storyline is where things start to falter a bit. This is straight up Freaky Friday blended with Happy Death Day (same writer/director, but we will get to that). But they lean into the comedic aspects a bit too much and it hurts the film (the kiss scene between VV and the love interest boy being a prime example). If they had followed the vibe of the intro it would have been much better imo.

*This was written and directed by Christopher Landon. Kinda weirdly he is the late Michael Landon's son. A bit more importantly he has been a writer/director/producer for the likes of 5 Paranormal Activity movies, the two Happy Death Day films, and various other projects like Disturbia, Viral, Scouts Guide to the Zombie Apocalypse, etc. So he seems rather focused on the teen horror.

6.5 outta 10 area for me. I was thinking 8+ was possible from the opening but too much comedy audience pandering brought it down some. Landon essentially tried to recapture/remake the Happy Death Day vibe but was a bit to cookie-cutter on the nose with it. Also too many offscreen kills. But still a decent watch.

Unhuman (2022)-

A group of high school kids on a field trip get thrown into a z-pocalypse after their bus wrecks. They are then chased and attacked through a big deserted structure out in the woods.

Unfortunately I got roped in by the Amazon 4 out of 5 star rating, but I should know by now not to trust app ratings at all.

The good-
Not much.
*The cinematographer, lighting, and camera folks tried very hard by using brilliant colors and lightings to give the movie a slick, distinctive feel. They succeed on some level, but unfortunately it comes off as a band-aid trying to cover up the movie's other issues and lack of budget.

*A couple of half decent gore fxs, but used very limited.

The bad-
*I'll just jump straight in and state that the script is absolute shit. They try to be clever but instead it is just incredibly stupid. Everything feels dumb and forced to the point where it pissed me off. The twist is ridiculously stupid and driven way into the ground. The ending, where essentially everything is retconned including all the deaths, leaves you feeling hollow and cheated.

*I'd blame some of the actors for the lacking performances but considering what they were given to work with I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and lay the blame wholly onto the director and writers.
-This is a bit strange because these guys did the schlocky but fun Feast franchise as well as a bunch of Saw movies. So why they decided to fully jump into a low budget movie that panders to teens and has little scares or gore seems to be an odd choice.

Bottomline is maybe 4 outta 10 and that might be a bit generous. Fails on too many levels to be good. Plus all of the characters are annoying intentional stereotypes.

The "interesting" thing is that both of these are Blumhouse movies from approximately the same time period that are trying to get the teen audiences but, obvious budget differences aside, one largely works while the other largely fails.

 

[Diamondeye]

Just watched Terrifier 2.

The gore hounds will largely get what they expect, though the budget appears stretched at times and shows in some of the effects.

The movie really had no business being over two hours long. It's like they couldn't make up their minds whether they wanted to focus more on adding depth to the "Art the Clown" character or just filling the screen with blood, so they just crammed both in there

The ending was somewhat of an incoherent mess, even by horror standards.

Art is still a great slasher villain, as he is creepy, vicious and funny/entertaining here, but the first movie just paced better and told a more concise story with the right amount of blood/gore.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Just watched Terrifier 2.

The gore hounds will largely get what they expect, though the budget appears stretched at times and shows in some of the effects.

The movie really had no business being over two hours long. It's like they couldn't make up their minds whether they wanted to focus more on adding depth to the "Art the Clown" character or just filling the screen with blood, so they just crammed both in there

The ending was somewhat of an incoherent mess, even by horror standards.

Art is still a great slasher villain, as he is creepy, vicious and funny/entertaining here, but the first movie just paced better and told a more concise story with the right amount of blood/gore.

Finally some else actually watched it!

While I don't wholly agree with some of it, your analysis is fair.

*It is definitely too long. Cutting 20 of so minutes shouldn't have been hard to do.

*It was a crowd-funded movie, and what they did with $250k was pretty amazing.

*The director is an fxs guy, and it shows in both good and bad ways. The fxs are often amazing (again, considering budget). But the shots and editing are probably best described as competent.

*In regards to the excessive gore, well, it was always going to have that. However it was actually covid lockdown that allowed for some of the nastier stuff like the bedroom scene. They were quarantined so the spent an extra 10 days or so beyond the original plan revamping and shooting it.
-I do want to note that while I do embrace the "gorehound" label, I don't really view the excess as others do as I see a face getting ripped off and try to analyze exactly how the fx was done. The masters like Savini, Stan Winston, Screaming Mad George, etc are my "gods"!

*While I agree that the ending is "messy" (and goes on too long), it is actually purposeful and is setting up the next (and supposedly last) movie in the trilogy. I will withhold final judgement until I see where they go with it.

*The first movie really had very little story to it. There are no real protagonists. There are no arcs. I loved it (again, the inner fxs gorehound) but it exists seemingly as a promotional vehicle for Art the Clown.

*Art the Clown is an awesome villian and the actor does an incredible job with it.

Obviously we don't fully agree but I can very easily see where you are coming from. This is not a movie that is going to appeal to everyone. It is over the top, and it does have weak points.

 

[Diamondeye]

Finally some else actually watched it!

While I don't wholly agree with some of it, your analysis is fair.

*It is definitely too long. Cutting 20 of so minutes shouldn't have been hard to do.

*It was a crowd-funded movie, and what they did with $250k was pretty amazing.

*The director is an fxs guy, and it shows in both good and bad ways. The fxs are often amazing (again, considering budget). But the shots and editing are probably best described as competent.

*In regards to the excessive gore, well, it was always going to have that. However it was actually covid lockdown that allowed for some of the nastier stuff like the bedroom scene. They were quarantined so the spent an extra 10 days or so beyond the original plan revamping and shooting it.
-I do want to note that while I do embrace the "gorehound" label, I don't really view the excess as others do as I see a face getting ripped off and try to analyze exactly how the fx was done. The masters like Savini, Stan Winston, Screaming Mad George, etc are my "gods"!

*While I agree that the ending is "messy" (and goes on too long), it is actually purposeful and is setting up the next (and supposedly last) movie in the trilogy. I will withhold final judgement until I see where they go with it.

*The first movie really had very little story to it. There are no real protagonists. There are no arcs. I loved it (again, the inner fxs gorehound) but it exists seemingly as a promotional vehicle for Art the Clown.

*Art the Clown is an awesome villian and the actor does an incredible job with it.

Obviously we don't fully agree but I can very easily see where you are coming from. This is not a movie that is going to appeal to everyone. It is over the top, and it does have weak points.

Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed it and will definitely see the third movie.

I did not intend to seem overly critical of the effects. They worked overall and got me to turn my head a few times. The bedroom scene was nuts.

Just pointing out that the lack of money/resources shows up in some places.

By a more concise story, I mean the original film had a much more simple plot that it did not really deviate from.

This one had so many variables to it between the kids, their father, his sketchbook, the knife, the clown girl and all their suggested or implied connections to Art.

It's like they tried to wrap everything together at the end, but failed to do so in a satisfactory manner.

I kind of rolled my eyes at the "magic knife" bit. It just seemed so out of place with the spirit of first film and the first 90% of this one.

They could very well be setting the stage for part 3, but it seems like they may be getting too convoluted with things.

 

[returnofjakedog]

Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed it and will definitely see the third movie.

I did not intend to seem overly critical of the effects. They worked overall and got me to turn my head a few times. The bedroom scene was nuts.

Just pointing out that the lack of money/resources shows up in some places.

By a more concise story, I mean the original film had a much more simple plot that it did not really deviate from.

This one had so many variables to it between the kids, their father, his sketchbook, the knife, the clown girl and all their suggested or implied connections to Art.

It's like they tried to wrap everything together at the end, but failed to do so in a satisfactory manner.

I kind of rolled my eyes at the "magic knife" bit. It just seemed so out of place with the spirit of first film and the first 90% of this one.

They could very well be setting the stage for part 3, but it seems like they may be getting too convoluted with things.

I don't disagree. The budget was miniscule and it does show from time to time. That being said, it looks better than a lot I've seen with much more bank behind them.

The lore is a bit of a mess at this point. We have no answers to who or what Art even is. We have no information on how anything connects back to the father and family.

There were actually 2 shorts with Art that were eventually combined into an anthology movie called All Hallow's Eve that preceded Terrifier. It does play around with the supernatural aspects and in one of the shorts Art is more of a victim wrangler for some sort of weird mutated Satanist cult. So there is more out there, but it doesn't really clarify anything.

The 3rd movie at least be interesting to see where it goes.

Also, the little girl clown is as "fun" as Art! Love these characters!

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[returnofjakedog]

Crucible of Terror (1971)-


A broke art dealer manages to convince his slimy drunk friend to introduce him to the drunk's father who is a very talented but reclusive artist. So the boys with their girlfriends pack up and head to an isolated house on the coast where the crazed artist lives with his disposable muse, best friend, and his mentally regressed wife. The art dealer's gf catches the fancy of the artist who manipulates the situation into attempting to statue-ize her in bronze. Things get even nuttier from there as supernatural possession stuff gets tossed into the mix.

A mid-level entry in early 70s British lower budget horror. There is some good stuff, such as the bad guy artist played by Mike Raven who chews up the scenery playing an ego-crazed asshole, and the weird kinda out of nowhere twist conclusion (also the plethora of hot ladies to schlubby guys is nice). But there is also bad as the movie seems rather directionless most of the time and the majority of the performances range from ok to not so great. The fxs are light, the story meanders a bit.

Overall the reviews aren't great but I liked it a bit more largely based on the performance Mike Raven who went full on Vincent Price-lite as the baddy. I looked him up and he only did a few movies but he lived quite an interesting life being at one point or another a radio disc jockey (twice voted the UKs top pirate radio dj), actor, sculptor, writer, TV presenter and producer, ballet dancer, flamenco guitarist, sheep farmer, and photographer. In his later years he stuck to art but was rumored to have died and everyone thought he was a Mike Raven impersonator!

Overall I'll go 6ish outta 10 range, which is probably a point or two higher than most would give it. I liked the story and the characters probably more than it deserves and think a well done remake would have the potential to be good.

 

[DJ Fieri]

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

If from the makers of A Quiet Place maybe this will be rated R? Course if there's only two survivors there probably wont be any deaths. Either way could have a good horror vibe going - creature feature if anything.

Hopefully it'll be better than Afterbirth or whatever, with Will and his stupid kid.

 

[returnofjakedog]

If from the makers of A Quiet Place maybe this will be rated R? Course if there's only two survivors there probably wont be any deaths. Either way could have a good horror vibe going - creature feature if anything.

Hopefully it'll be better than Afterbirth or whatever, with Will and his stupid kid.

*The directors are the writers from A Quiet Place. They have directed a little before but on basically on independent shorts, tv stuff.

*Sam Rami is one of the producers. Now, as we have discussed here before, being a producer could mean being heavily involved in major aspects such as script, casting, final edit approval, etc, or it could simply be a person who finances the project and nothing more. Regardless of his level of participation, Sam being attached to it typically means it will be between decent and excellent!

*Will obviously be very cgi reliant. But this is necessary for a modern dinosaur epic.

So lots of horror related history with the people making it and the trailer does seem to try to lean into the horror aspects.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

*The directors are the writers from A Quiet Place. They have directed a little before but on basically on independent shorts, tv stuff.

*Sam Rami is one of the producers. Now, as we have discussed here before, being a producer could mean being heavily involved in major aspects such as script, casting, final edit approval, etc, or it could simply be a person who finances the project and nothing more. Regardless of his level of participation, Sam being attached to it typically means it will be between decent and excellent!

*Will obviously be very cgi reliant. But this is necessary for a modern dinosaur epic.

So lots of horror related history with the people making it and the trailer does seem to try to lean into the horror aspects.

I hope it does. Good horror movies can be PG-13 as well, although I'd still love to see a good rated R dinosaur movie. Jurassic Park was planned to be rated R and I think Spielberg said he thought it would sell better as PG-13. And of course now nearly every dinosaur movie is PG-13 because "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!?" since dinosaurs are cool. Saying we need more Carnosaur! Think the closest we've had since is Raptor Ranch? LOL.

Give me Dino Crisis rated R DAMMIT! Or hell just remake the game like they did with Dead Space or the RE series.

 

[returnofjakedog]

I hope it does. Good horror movies can be PG-13 as well, although I'd still love to see a good rated R dinosaur movie. Jurassic Park was planned to be rated R and I think Spielberg said he thought it would sell better as PG-13. And of course now nearly every dinosaur movie is PG-13 because "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!?" since dinosaurs are cool. Saying we need more Carnosaur! Think the closest we've had since is Raptor Ranch? LOL.

Give me Dino Crisis rated R DAMMIT! Or hell just remake the game like they did with Dead Space or the RE series.

It isn't listed yet but the fact the there seems to be basically only 2 characters and one of them is a pre/young teen girl means PG-13.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

It isn't listed yet but the fact the there seems to be basically only 2 characters and one of them is a pre/young teen girl means PG-13.

Oh for sure. The deaths sound like they'll be offscreen or something with the crew not surviving the crash (trailer or video I linked literally says that) and it's up to the two of them to escape. Props though if they have the guts to NOM NOM the girl. Hopefully she doesn't use her gymnastic skills to boot a raptor off a ledge or something

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Watched Choose or Die this weekend and enjoyed it more than I was anticipating. I know it was stated in here how this concept has been beaten into the ground and most of them are terrible so I went in with low expectations. They kept it pretty simple, minimal cast so they could spend a bit more on FX, pretty well done.

I don't understand why more horror movies don't get this concept. Keep everything tight. Get 2-3 decent actors, create a creepy setting/antagonist and just let it cook. Use whatever tiny budget you have on FX.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Nope....LOL.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Loved the original but based on the souless, miss the entire point/feel of the more recent Stephen King remakes I'm pretty skeptical:

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Loved the original but based on the souless, miss the entire point/feel of the more recent Stephen King remakes I'm pretty skeptical:

Oh I see.... we gotta do the women empowerment thing with this one. Woman as the cult leader, woman as the lead in the movie.. woman as the henchman... kill off those EVIL men...

Can Hollyweird just stop? Naturally this will be rated PG-13... Horror movie my ass. Isaac was quite possibly one of the best asshole kids (even though he was an adult and had a condition) in horror movie history.

Wicker Man kind of did the whole women cult thing well... but if a bunch of sadistic 10 year old girls tried to start shit, best believe they're getting f'd up by a grown ass man. That Ring well bitch crawls out of my TV ruining it in the process, and she's taking it up the ass, just sayin.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]