The Worst of Lucio Fulci

Discussion in 'Reader Polls' started by zombi3, Feb 2, 2003.

?

The Worst of Lucio Fulci

  1. Sweet House of Horrors

    7 vote(s)
    17.9%
  2. Cat in the Brain

    2 vote(s)
    5.1%
  3. Aenigma

    3 vote(s)
    7.7%
  4. The Black Cat

    1 vote(s)
    2.6%
  5. House of Clocks

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. Voices from Beyond

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. Rome 2072 AD: The New Gladiators

    2 vote(s)
    5.1%
  8. Touch of Death

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. Demonia

    8 vote(s)
    20.5%
  10. Manhattan Baby

    11 vote(s)
    28.2%
  11. Other...

    5 vote(s)
    12.8%
  1. EPKJ

    EPKJ Guest

    I voted for Demonia. It is a poorly done film. While it has its moments, they are too few and can't rescue the film. Having said that, I still enjoy watching this one every now and then.
     
  2. dwatts

    dwatts New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    16,580
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Crashed
    Just found this :) Have not seen all these films - but out of the ones I have, I went with Sweet House.
     
  3. ArrowBeach

    ArrowBeach Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2000
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I thought MANHATTAN BABY was cool, a true gallo classic. I just hated DEMONIA and ANEIGMA, they are too delivertive, a knock off on better movies, not a original like MANHATTAN BABY.
     
  4. Ichi

    Ichi Guest

    I think "MANHATTAN BABY" was awful. But Cat in the Brain and Black Cat kicks ass!!
     
  5. zombi3

    zombi3 Pure Evil

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2001
    Messages:
    2,237
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Shit Creek
    How the hell is Manhattan Baby a giallo?:confused:
     
  6. indiephantom

    indiephantom Horny Spirit

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2000
    Messages:
    4,014
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Ghost World
    I've only seen AENIGMA from this list and I actually like quite a bit...I haven't seen a Fulci film I didn't like, but the weakest is probably DON'T TORTURE A DUCKLING, which I still really enjoyed.
     
  7. Vasilis

    Vasilis New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2001
    Messages:
    259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Athens Greece
    Well i love fulci, but for me Aenigma is complete crap. And that cheesy song in the beginning, gets on my nerves everytime i listen to it.:glasses:
     
  8. Wermode

    Wermode New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2001
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Matool
    Sweet House of Horrors is pathetically sad and embarrassing to watch. I can at least sit through the others and enjoy them on some level. :eek2:
     
  9. dwatts

    dwatts New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    16,580
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Crashed
    --He did more bad films than good ones.--

    To my knowledge, Fulci made 52 movies. I have not seen even half of them (and some say his best is not even available on DVD) so I think we have to careful about making statements like this. Unless of course you HAVE seen most of them (if so, you lucky bastard!)

    Sweet Shop was what I voted for - but really, it's a strange outing that I somewhat enjoy. Don't forget, this was a TV production, meant for prime time italian showing, not a cinema release. I can only imagine how much I would have dug it if I had seen it at the time - on late night TV. It would have blown me away!

    In the context of today, sure it looks a bit strange - and other than two over-the-top sequences at the beginning, it is amazingly restrained (The flying car is hilarious). But it's Fulci, and there's nothing else that really needs saying.
     
  10. H0MOSareGAY

    H0MOSareGAY Guest

    Yeah, me and my PEEPS though this was WACK, so w KICKED IT OFF THE HEEZEY and BOUNCED, DAWG. The HOMEBOYS say Zombie is pretty FLY
     
  11. dwatts

    dwatts New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2002
    Messages:
    16,580
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Crashed
    :lol: :lol: :lol:
     
  12. Of the 4 I have seen on that list which are CAT IN THE BRAIN, THE BLACK CAT, ROME 2072 AD THE NEW GLADIATORS and MANHATTAN BABY, I voted for CAT IN THE BRAIN this film is just awful, shoddy at best, dire for a man who actually had alot of talent.

    THE BLACK CAT is a very good film and the scope photography is superb, and hell it has David Warbeck.

    ROME 2072 AD THE NEW GLADIATORS is just fast moving fun with a great cast of Italian B movie favourites.

    MANHATTAN BABY again features great scope photography and the excellent Christopher Connelly stars, I admit the film is flawed and not one of his best, but the desert sequences at the beginning are vintage Fulci.
     
  13. DVD-fanatic-9

    DVD-fanatic-9 And the Next Morning, When the Campers Woke Up...

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,079
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    The New York Ripper. None of the ineptness in his more zero-budget films can compare to the utter hatefulness and inexcusable sickness of that horrible "movie."
     
  14. Paff

    Paff Super Moderator

    Joined:
    May 14, 2000
    Messages:
    8,053
    Likes Received:
    379
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    SoCal

    Old old thread, but I gotta disagree with yout on The Psychic. I really dug that one, easily one of my favorite Fulcis now.

    Hopefully you've revisited this in the last 5 years and changed your mind.
     
  15. Vlachio

    Vlachio Guest

    Cat in the Brain biggest piece of turd I've ever seen. Tried watching it several times & sure shit I feel asleep. zzzzzzzZZZZZZZ :sleepy:
     
  16. The Chaostar

    The Chaostar Johnny Hallyday forever

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Messages:
    4,291
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Hell-as
    You just named the movie's best qualities. :p
    I don't agree with "inexcusable" though. And it's not a misogynistic film - it's a misanthropic film. I like it for the same reasons I like Sweeny Todd, come to think of it... :eek:
     
  17. ReelFear

    ReelFear New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    879
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    not on the list, but my 2 least favorite Fulci's are

    GHOSTS OF SODOM
    and
    DOOR TO SILENCE

    both are painfully boring and show none of the qualities that make Fulci films so great.
     
  18. It's me Billy

    It's me Billy New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2004
    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Exactly. The fact that the film is so brutal in its violence and because it features a sinister, intelligent, and mysterious mass murderer are probably the primary reasons why its fans like it. It's film...and it's entertainment. It isn't because we hate all women and secretly wish to see beautiful women brutally slaughtered in real life. If you're going to use that argument against fans of The New York Ripper, you've got to apply it to all horror/slasher movies as well. Do men who watch and enjoy the Friday the 13th movies secretly want to put on a hockey mask and kill a bunch of people with a machete? No, of course not.

    And if NYR really was a misogynistic film, all of the women would have been portrayed as negative. I can think of at least two that were portrayed very positively. The woman at the beginning that was killed on the Staten Island Ferry was very sweet and likeable, and of course, Fay Majors, who had all of the positive qualities a young woman should have including intelligence and strength. And even the other women in the film weren't bad. Yeah, they engaged in kinky sex - so what? That doesn't by any means excuse what happened to them.

    The New York Ripper is a dark, brutal, and depressing film, yes. That is the point. There really are people like that in this world and any attempt to block that sort of story from being told is censorship.
     
  19. DVD-fanatic-9

    DVD-fanatic-9 And the Next Morning, When the Campers Woke Up...

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,079
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    Fulci doesn't know how to tell a story. All he knew how to do was make an ugly, dark movie with a small degree or artfulness to it. None of Fulci's movies were about story. In my opinion, Zombie worked for awhile because the gore was decent and the pacing was methodical. Which are good traits to have if your movie has no story, and none of Fulci's movies seem to have. The Beyond worked because it had a surprising grace to it. Fulci seemed to want to make a ghost movie and did some great... I'm not a technical-term person much, but the way camera follows Liza in the movie was striking and inviting. After that, it's the music that does that trick. But all of Fulci's films are insulting to the viewer's intelligence if you think about the story. We're not talking a simple lack of logic, but a free-for-all logic which is fine if you just want to see beautiful blonde-haired women walking around. Which I've never minded, I adore Carnival of Souls.

    The New York Ripper is a cheap and sleazy movie, there's no question about that. Is cheap and sleazy a bad thing? Not necessarily. I'm not putting down people liking something that is different from the norm. And I'm not bashing themes with elements of perversion in them. But what I am saying is that some filmmakers know how to film these subjects with dark humor or intelligence, without making the film completely offensive or insulting. Fulci's not one of them. A film with women being brutalized to the degree they are in this film - and the degree is an important factor in my argument, this film goes way too far and there's a reason most horror filmmakers don't go as far as this did - and in the way this film does it, is not about a story for the audience or the audience at all, it's about what the filmmakers think the victims deserve. And probably, women they had met in real life.

    I'm not making a general statement about content. This is not about all horror movies or all slasher movies. This is completely specific to this movie and its' content being downright hateful and simplistic when the alleged story here is dealing with something serious - sexual violence against, and violation of, women. This is not the kind of theme to just be gory and sleazy and exploitative. There should be a message here, since the problem in reality was still real and serious at the time the film was made. But the message ends up being that the filmmakers are hateful and apathetic. I don't see how a movie this sleazy and simple-minded could have anything positive to say about this. It's just a visual exercise in feeding people shit.



    I'll admit to a few things. I don't really ever want to see a movie about a killer slicing women's vaginas. I think the image is pointless, exploitative, and tasteless. And if the only excuse for it is that it's brutal, disturbing, and that it goes too far - that's not good enough. Then, I never thought Fulci was a good filmmaker. Only a few of his movies even impressed me, yet the guy worked for several decades. He should have learned something about filmmaking, he should have been able to produce more. But he didn't, so I see his talent in a less flattering light than his fan club does.

    I was once talking about this with someone. That the issue was I think some movies go too far and they thought there's no such thing as going too far. Like most filmmakers believe that too. Then I pointed out that I've never seen a scene or even heard about there being any scene in a horror film where a baby, a real young baby, was brutally murdered onscreen. I'm talking slashed or eaten or ripped apart and killed. I'm pretty sure that's never actually been shown (to look) realistically in a horror movie (am I wrong?). And I always use that as proof that every horror filmmaker believes there's a line they wouldn't cross. So I don't think I'm being irrational.

    Don't go reducing this to accusing me of wanting censorship. Bite your tongue. And don't suggest that I'm a hypocrite because I don't see this material as the same thing as a Friday the 13th film. There is a world of difference between the two. Low budgets and a lot of blood and gore does not make 2 films related! And to even make such an argument is ridiculously short-sighted. None of the Friday the 13th films had a scene of slicing a woman's vagina. Most slasher films are about killers killing people. They don't target sexual organs as often as you seem to think.



    In the end, you know I can't say anything definitively. But I think what I'm saying is true evidence that this movie was doing something really sick for kicks. And that maybe most of the people who like this movie don't understand or care about the severity of this kind of thing in reality. Isn't it a possibility?

    I guess maybe I believe this wouldn't be going too far some filmmakers. Maybe someone who can put this kind of violence against women in proper context. So that it's not manipulative and spiteful. That someone is certainly not Fulci.
     
  20. The Chaostar

    The Chaostar Johnny Hallyday forever

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Messages:
    4,291
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Hell-as
    Check Subconsious Cruelty. The baby is brutaly butchered at birth with a razor blade (its neck is slashed) by the mother's brother who then procedes to spray his sister with the baby's blood.
     

Share This Page