Unpopular opinions!

Discussion in 'General' started by _pi_, Nov 6, 2007.

  1. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,463
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    50 odd pages later and I came up with one: It only tells 3 stories. Just imagine what it could have been like had they attempted to pad it out to 2 hours and 5 stories like the first film!
     
  2. thing

    thing Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,833
    Likes Received:
    199
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    New Zealand
    I liked 2 out of 3 creep show stories and those two better than anything in the first creepshow
     
  3. Matt89

    Matt89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2004
    Messages:
    6,122
    Likes Received:
    1,406
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Toronto
    HAH.

    I just tell him he's prejudiced against old movies the way some people are prejudiced against gays. I tell him he's "one of THEM". GIVE 'EM A TRY. :lol:

    ~Matt
     
  4. DVD-fanatic-9

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

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    How does it feel to have no taste?
     
  5. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,463
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    Well since we are on the subject of Swayze, Steel Dawn beats Red Dawn.
     
  6. UFAlien

    UFAlien New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    -Poltergeist is an unscary haunted house movie for kids with a laughable overreliance on special effects.

    -Freddy's Revenge is better than Dream Warriors.

    -Day of the Dead is the best of Romero's zombie trilogy.

    -The American remake of Dark Water was excellent and superior to the original; it just wasn't a horror movie.

    -Silent Hill is one of the best horror films of its decade. You won't find me defending Revelation, though.

    -Going by the Director's Cuts, Rob Zombie's Halloween II is not only better than his first one, it's nearly great.

    -Also going by the Unrated Cut, The Ring Two is pretty solid.

    -The Grudge 2 is not only better than The Grudge, it's better than the theatrical Ju-On movies.

    -1408 was a piece of crap.

    -The Exorcist is very well-made, but completely unscary.
     
  7. Body Boy

    Body Boy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,081
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Canada
    FR is the best of the serious in my opinon. It used to be DW, but upon my dozen or so rewatch of it, it's not particularly well made is it?

    Is the director's cut where Laurie is sprawled out at the end like she's on a cross? If so, I agree. RZ's Halloween II is better than 4 and 6/7/8/RZH for me.
     
  8. UFAlien

    UFAlien New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2012
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Yep, that's it. And I also find it better than a lot of the original series.

    While I'm on the subject:
    -Apart from the Laurie vs. Michael climax, Halloween H20 sucked.
     
  9. Body Boy

    Body Boy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    2,081
    Likes Received:
    125
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Canada
    YES! I watched it again last summer and wow. Who knew the guy who gave us F13 II and III would stoop down to H20, a bland and useless entry in the already uneven Halloween series. I think it's the worst next to Resurrection. What a waste.
     
  10. DVD-fanatic-9

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

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    Halloween H20 > Halloween 5. Easily.


    Agreed. But it's fun enough.


    The nostalgic apologist window for Dream Warriors is seriously beginning to close forever for me. I rewatched it last summer and found so little in it to keep me invested. The acting, the music score, and the horrendously preachy religious angle make it really hard to defend this film. It's pretty choppy and bland and ... what the fuck happened to the Hypnocil? Zero explanation on that.

    But it still has more meat on its bones than Freddy's Revenge. I love Mark Patton in that film, to death. But, if we're going to praise the ideas, can't we be realistic enough to say that the film should have done some more interesting things with the premise? I know I said this was 7/10 about four years ago. I made a mistake. Patton's commitment to giving the part his all has zero connection to anything as equally brave in the writing. This is not a compelling story, it's more a collection of campy set-ups with incredibly overly-serious reactions to them. Patton seems to be the most terrified male actor/character in horror history but the movie's not giving us that fear to feel or understand. It's all inside of him and watching it from the outside, given how silly the film is, is extremely alienating. The film does a terrible job of letting us see inside Jesse. The film isn't scary, dramatic, dark, or deep. Much as I intensely want it to be- we still don't have a great gay horror story about "being different."


    Secure am I that this will forever be an unpopular opinion. With good reason.
     
  11. Anaestheus

    Anaestheus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,659
    Likes Received:
    192
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Completely agree, but I will add that the Laurie vs. Michael climax is the best thing out of all the films that followed the original.
     
  12. Anaestheus

    Anaestheus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,659
    Likes Received:
    192
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Better than "Dawn.."? I am slowly coming around to agree with that.

    Better than "Night..."? Inconceivable!

    There are few films that I hold in higher regard than the original NotLD.
     
  13. buck135

    buck135 Kanamit

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,597
    Likes Received:
    1,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    A dimension of sight, sound and mind.
    NOTLD is just groundbreaking. It's documentary feel and clostrophobic atmosphere is unmatched. The groups inability to work together is what killed them. NOTLD wasn't a pleasant experience. Dawn had fun with the locations, the effects, the shooting, etc. The soundtrack is great (stock and Goblin), the effects are very good and the acting is pretty good. This film is a fun experience. Day on the other hand isn't pleasant. Everyone hates one another and is a threat to kill one another. The cast and crew were all ill just from filming it in the underground mines. It would have been Land of the Dead had they amassed the full budget for the original script. The soundtrack is the films biggest drawback.
     
  14. DVD-fanatic-9

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

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    Dawn of the Dead is the best film of the franchise. I actually think it has the best analogical meat in the story, the best setting for Romero's social commentary, the strongest characters (by far), the strongest female character, the strongest black male lead character, the irony never bends back at the film to hurt it, it has the best music, and it's the most alive film while still being incredibly cold and creepy.

    There's just no question. No contest. No competition. Even if the majority will agree that Night is the best film. They're wrong- unless they want to take the risk of supporting the truly shocking statement that the ending is making, ironically: the racist, Mr. Cooper, was right all along. The cellar was the safest place. He was killed after he had a change of heart and decided to help Ben board up the front door, Ben was only saved by what the white racist gave him (a screaming reminder that "if you run to the cellar, I'll have been right"), and died the minute he left this shelter. Killed by a white racist. (Or so, I'm told, is implied) But, another racist tried to save him. While at the same time nearly killing him.

    Are you okay with supporting that? I personally think it's a bit problematic.

    Day of the Dead, on the other hand, is a royal mess. It's easily the least of Romero's original trilogy. In fact, it's a bad film.
     
  15. Anaestheus

    Anaestheus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,659
    Likes Received:
    192
    Trophy Points:
    63
    What is ironic is that NotLD is seen as having any racial message at all. Ben was never written as a black man. There are no racial slurs or identifiers in the film. Romero had said that the reason they cast Duane Jones was because he was the best actor available. They didn't even see his race as being that big of an issue when they were filming. It's only the viewer who sees the film as any sort of metaphor for racism, because the viewer is the one dealing with their own issues about a black male lead.

    You are correct that they should have listened to Cooper. But, there is nothing in the script to imply that any of his anger/resistance to Ben was racially motivated. He was just a bit selfish.

    As for Dawn..., as fun as it is at times, I find there to be a lot of long stretches of boredom, particularly once they take over the mall. And, as wild as the raid at the end was when I first saw it. Now, it seems like it's a bit poorly paced and that Romero and Savini are more interested in screwing around than building any momentum. I mean, in the middle of a slaughter one biker stops to check his blood pressure? And, I don't think the blue zombies was a really good decision. It makes the make-up too obvious.

    But, NotLD is lean, mean, and wonderfully efficient.
     
  16. buck135

    buck135 Kanamit

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,597
    Likes Received:
    1,231
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    A dimension of sight, sound and mind.
    You're wrong. The attic was the safest place. :lol: Had Ben, or everyone else, gone up there and stayed there until the mob wiped out all the zombies and left, all would have been well.
     
  17. X-human

    X-human I ate my keys

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    9,172
    Likes Received:
    1,538
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Illinois
    That's what I love about the movie, it is a by the book Greek Tragedy. It takes a lot of craft to convince the audience to follow Ben, be empathetic to Ben, to root for Ben, even though Ben is completely wrong.

    The point in all of Romero's dead trilogy is that there is a right course of action, and a wrong course of action. Despite what social or animal instincts may tell you is the right course of action, that doesn't mean it is the right course of action. You must use logic.

    This is true of Dawn, it was a mistake to hold up in the mall and try to fortify it (too conspicuous of a target, too large to protect [also not a sustainable enough resource worth holding{that was the critique of consumerism in general}]). This is true of Day, it was a mistake to contact the outside world and still try to save it (they had it pretty good where they were if they could work together).

    In all three films Night, Dawn and Day the protagonists are wrong about the best course of action. The antagonists are right about the best course of action. That was Romero's genius; playing the audience, tricking the audience, and having them thank him for it. Brilliant really.

    It's also why I really didn't like Land of the Dead. Broke the trend and made for a predictable and anticlimactic film. Diary got closer to it again but was too directionless to really create a firm path; I suppose whats-her-name gave meaning to her boyfriend's shallow documentary in the end [commentary of heartless media].
     
  18. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,463
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    Except Ben wasn't wrong. He did everything right, it was everybody else that kept fucking up. Barbara was a useless, catatonic mess, the teenagers got themselves blown up, Mr. Cooper was just a completely uncooperative asshole. If he listened to Mr. Cooper, then everybody would have been trapped in the cellar with a zombie girl.
     
  19. DVD-fanatic-9

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

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    411
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horror
    That won't hold up so well in court. One zombie Karen's size is not a threat to a group of people that large, only the people in that group who can't emotionally divorce themselves from the idea of killing her or just tossing her out the door. You really have to face that Ben made it clear from his position that the cellar was a trap. It was not, as it turns out. He said it was certain death. It was not in the slightest. As almost anyone could have told you. Ben is in the percentage of people in the house who "kept fucking up." And don't forget what the ending implies.

    Plus, she's just a little girl. She literally had to have the mother on the floor to kill her. (Unless she had bitten her, and even then this is not a threat to 90% of the people in that house. This situation was entirely manageable.)


    You honestly think the meaning of the film doesn't change at all with a black man in this role? Fighting over control of the house? Fighting over what is right for a white woman? Fighting over what it will mean for Cooper's family if they don't do the right thing? Fighting over the only weapon they have? In the 1960's? Okay, then tell me this- what does that ending, especially the end credits sequence, remind you of? You have 3 guesses and only one of them counts.


    The only thing wrong with the cellar was keeping Karen down there. And if they'd gone into the attic, they'd have been vulnerable through the windows. Which, admittedly, no zombies would have successfully climbed into- but you watched them actually throw things to smash up the car. They would have figured out they were up there. Can you actually tell me the attic door was stronger? That it was possible to board up? That no zombie would have thrown something into the window and injured someone?


    Any filmmaker will tell you a film changes when it is filmed, that it's not the same anymore as it was when it was a script-only.


    That is seriously underestimating it. You think for one second that's why so many people regard it so highly? In the horror community? Read my last reply again, please, and tell me where you see me say it's the best film because it's just "fun."


    I have no idea how you can call the film boring at all. And I purposefully watch the longest cut of the film once they get to the mall. It is so unbelievably rich in its angle of horror by hypnotization, it's like watching the insides of people eating at McDonalds- you get, right away, what's disturbing about it and the music and the look in Fran's face, etc, prove that the scenes of them indulging in the mall have a transformative quality to them. They begin to make you feel like this is, in fact, a deathtrap. Changing them as people, weakening them, turning them into zombies themselves, etc. To me- every scene showing this is crucial. And you're probably being bored by that 2 hour, 9 minute cut while I'm watching the longest version of almost everything- so I'm seeing more than 10 extra minutes. I still say it's all crucial. Every horror film would love to make you feel that humanity itself - you and me - are more dangerous than anything a movie can invent. This film proves it. While making it incredibly cinematic. It's not the same thing the whole time, glamour shots of the mall- it actually has a full arc and valleys all the way down from the top of the hill, making the viewer feel subtle and potent dread building up through staying so long in the mall and playing video games and fooling around in the mirror.

    As for the bikers, the same thing applies but in a different way- they're not meant to be making rational decisions. They're portrayed pretty much how we know from reality that this "gang of road warriors" would actually play out: they're savages. And they're also kinda conformist. So, tell me all about how one person would stop acting like the group and make an independent decision which isn't aping something someone else in the group is doing. Try to argue it, but, not sure that argument will hold up in court.


    But I'm arguing that it is not the best barometer of what Romero can do with zombies. Dawn is. By far. Plus, I mentioned Romero's irony. Something he sometimes runs crazy with and uses to bomb his films, crippling them severely (especially Day of the Dead- which, even with the film's abominable acting, is an act of terrorism when it comes to characterization).


    At the end of the day, I say it can only work once. I mean- it never fooled me for a second. I knew something was tricky in this equation as a teenager when I saw Night of the Living Dead in the 90's. Me. The guy who has in 22 or so years only successfully guessed the identity of a killer in a slasher / whodunit maybe 3 times. Tricking audiences is not smart. And rarely works if you pay attention. And, in the case of Day especially, fucks everything up. I won't go totally overboard and say it does the same to Night because to me that film is an experiment. A test run for Dawn. Which still makes it clear through Fran that the protagonists are doing the wrong thing. The only trick there, and this is why it easily works best here, is that it's the woman who is the voice of reason. Not the only one, of course since there are a series of conflicts over the course of the film but she is indeed the consistent theme-stater of the film. And she actually does challenge the audiences. To accept a woman who doesn't just run and scream as the one who should have been leader. As the calmest head. Which is my cue to say: Peter is of course a stronger character than Ben, playing an actual "hero" with very ultra-masculine Clint Eastwood swagger (and, again, he's black so there's just a tiny bit of residual The Crazies going on here forcing the audience to really see him as the one they all accept is in charge)... but he is also being used semi-ironically to comment on the hot-headedness of Ben. For awhile, he is just as domineering ("you ain't just here by yourself, boy!").
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2014
  20. maybrick

    maybrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2001
    Messages:
    11,463
    Likes Received:
    1,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Keene, NH
    On the contrary, Ben said they could always go into the basement as a last resort, but there was no need to rush down into the basement before it was necessary. And you're wrong about the little girl not being a threat. The end result would end up being the same as it was in the remake: Ben would kill the little girl and mr Cooper would kill Ben in retaliation for killing his daughter. And then they would all die anyways. Ben would rise and kill everybody else. Because the remaining survivors are all worthless.
     

Share This Page