What Films Have You Seen Recently?

[trebor8273]

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1445633979.661333.jpg

Well I didn't excepted to enjoy this half as much as did. A wonderful love letter to 80s horrors/slashers. Basic story of a young woman who a few years after the death of her mother in a car accident go to see a special screening of a famous slasher film she stared in and end up inside the movie. Not hard to see that the film makers have a deep love of 80s horror movies. Well worth seeking out for any fan of 80s horrors. Just shows they are some great "new" horrors out there. 9/10

[Justin101]

Originally Posted by trebor8273

Attachment 171595

Well I didn't excepted to enjoy this half as much as did. A wonderful love letter to 80s horrors/slashers. Basic story of a young woman who a few years after the death of her mother in a car accident go to see a special screening of a famous slasher film she stared in and end up inside the movie. Not hard to see that the film makers have a deep love of 80s horror movies. Well worth seeking out for any fan of 80s horrors. Just shows they are some great "new" horrors out there. 9/10

I'm glad you enjoyed this, i was bleating on about how good this was last week and was worried perhaps others might not enjoy it as much, but it's actually really fun and I enjoyed it much more than my rewatch of Friday 13th the following night

[Frankie Teardrop]

NIGHTCRAWLER – Not many movies do the whole 'staring long and hard into the abyss of the human soul' thing all that well, but 'Nightcrawler' does. It's a pretty disturbing film. It's also excellent. Jake Gyllenhaal is Louis Bloom, a small time thief who aspires to the big bucks. He finds a way up the ladder when he encounters an underworld of crime scene lurkers who film local atrocities and sell their footage on to news stations. Lewis is prepared to go further than most in giving the viewing public what they want, up to the point of concealing police evidence, engineering a major crime and, ultimately, murder. 'Nightcrawler' could be read as a warped thriller, but its mind is on tricky questions about the media. What does it say about us when we flock to see our fellow humans in the aftermath of RTAs and drive bys? What does it say about us when we queue to consume the bloodied, ravaged images of ourselves on prime time, and fund a multi-billion dollar industry dedicated to the same? Louis clearly doesn't give a toss about any of this. He's a chilly character to put it mildly, a bit like 'Videodrome's Max Renn but with even less humanity (in fact, weirdly enough I thought Gyllenhaal looked spookily like a young Cronenberg here). With a business plan where his personality should be, Louis is pretty much the living embodiment of deregulated market forces, his goofy but plastic charm never really concealing the reptilian engine underneath the facade. The parallels with early Cronenberg don't end with the lead character – 'Nightcrawler' is ultimately about what happens when humans end up as commodified images, although the idea is served up in the register of neon lit noir rather than apocalyptic sci-fi. The bleakest moment – when the station news editor and Louis view that final awful footage and, lit like graveyard statues, rhapsodise about how great it is... truly the twilight of humanity. Great film, see it.

[Vipp]

Circle - (Netflix UK)
Dir. Aaron Hann, Mario Miscione.

- This is a great Sci-Fi flick based on a simple idea, a bunch of folks wake up in a circle and a device in the center of the room kills them at increments of about 5 mins. They all have the joy of finding out the what where whys and whens of how they came to be standing in the room as they get picked off.

The film is very well executed, It stays simple and never over complicates what it's trying to achieve. The social commentary on the movie is really putting the finger on the pulse of American (and other countries) culture. A mature movie with a great ensemble of mixed ability actors, all pull together to create a very entertaining sci-fi flick.

My only criticism is the end of the film, like most sci-fi movies it goes in a direction that it didn't really need too (in my opinion).

The film makers can look forward to a long career making programs if this is an example of what they can do.

Check it out on Netflix UK if you fancy a watch. You could do worse things with your time, like read my crap.

- I also watched Contamination but fell asleep, man that film is slow, but i really enjoyed what i saw.

I just want the Scarlet Boxset to show up.

[keirarts]

Originally Posted by Frankie Teardrop

NIGHTCRAWLER – Not many movies do the whole 'staring long and hard into the abyss of the human soul' thing all that well, but 'Nightcrawler' does. It's a pretty disturbing film. It's also excellent. Jake Gyllenhaal is Louis Bloom, a small time thief who aspires to the big bucks. He finds a way up the ladder when he encounters an underworld of crime scene lurkers who film local atrocities and sell their footage on to news stations. Lewis is prepared to go further than most in giving the viewing public what they want, up to the point of concealing police evidence, engineering a major crime and, ultimately, murder. 'Nightcrawler' could be read as a warped thriller, but its mind is on tricky questions about the media. What does it say about us when we flock to see our fellow humans in the aftermath of RTAs and drive bys? What does it say about us when we queue to consume the bloodied, ravaged images of ourselves on prime time, and fund a multi-billion dollar industry dedicated to the same? Louis clearly doesn't give a toss about any of this. He's a chilly character to put it mildly, a bit like 'Videodrome's Max Renn but with even less humanity (in fact, weirdly enough I thought Gyllenhaal looked spookily like a young Cronenberg here). With a business plan where his personality should be, Louis is pretty much the living embodiment of deregulated market forces, his goofy but plastic charm never really concealing the reptilian engine underneath the facade. The parallels with early Cronenberg don't end with the lead character – 'Nightcrawler' is ultimately about what happens when humans end up as commodified images, although the idea is served up in the register of neon lit noir rather than apocalyptic sci-fi. The bleakest moment – when the station news editor and Louis view that final awful footage and, lit like graveyard statues, rhapsodise about how great it is... truly the twilight of humanity. Great film, see it.

Great review as always Frankie. Nightcrawler was at the top end of my 10 best films of last year. I need to get it re-watched soon.

[Rik]

We watched The Green Mile last night. Even after all this time, it still has the same impact, fantastic film!

10/10

[Vipp]

Thinner
(Netflix UK)
Dir. Tom Holland

I think i hate Stephen King, for reasons i can't accuratly explain. I enjoy his stories but they leave me feeling uncomfortable. The twilight Zone does the same thing to me, It (What ever the Twilight Zone is) manages to either punish or set free it's visitors based (usually) on what moral desicion they make whilst trapped inside of the zone.
I feel the same about Stephen king, he has a 'Zone' which his characters exist BUT stories like Thinner arn't as simple to unravel as the ones we find in the Twilight Zone.
In Thinner, our main character is getting a BJ from his wife whilst he drives home from a reasturant, as he is clearly distracted, he runs down a walking steriotype of a gypsie... she dies and because our man is a lawyer the judge and the cop get him off free...

The father of the gypsie puts a curse on the judge, our guy and the cop and they all experience different kinds of horrible body horror.
This is where i start to wonder what goes off is Kings mind? Why would the father gyspie put such horrible and painful curses on these guys? why not a quick death? it's unbalanced... he didn't even bother to get an appeal or a re-trial or anything just over reacted and turned three men into walking carnival attractions.

so that's why i get annoyed at King. Every action has an equil reaction unless its Stephen king, where. if you accidentally fart whilst walking past a witch you can bet your ass your kids and wife will be turned into living blobs by supper time!

I enjoyed the film (Who doesn't enjoy a good Tom Holland movie) but it stressed me out. Haha.


My Bloody Valentine
(Netflix UK)
Dir. Patrick Lussier

Got 3 minutes in and realised i had seen enough dull American Horror flicks and didn't need to add another to my list. Instead i left the horror section of Netflix and found Sorry, Wrong Number... (see below)


Sorry, Wrong Number...
(Netflix UK)
Dir. Anatole Litvak

Bert Lancaster and Babs Stanwyck help to create a wonderfully tense and dark thriller in which a woman over hears a plot to murder her at 11:45pm that day. The film unfolds via a series of phone calls (as our main character is bed ridden) and with each phone call the storyline unfolds to the big reveal at the end.

I loved this movie folks, grab yourself a glass of whisky and some pringles like i did (classy right!) and enjoy this awesome thriller from 1948.

[keirarts]

Halloween (1978)

The night HE came home, He being mute psychopath Michael Myers who we see in the opening scene butchering his sister after some surprisingly quick teen sex, I mean seriously, they are up the stairs undressed done and the bloke is leaving in the time it takes for the murder moppet to grab a blade and head upstairs. Two bumps and a shiver seems to be a marathon for the Haddonfield boys, this is pretty much confirmed with a later sex scene with the lovely P.J Soles, I have to admit I'd be pretty 'eager' with her myself but I do wonder what would happen if any of these girls met a man with any sort of staying power... But I digress.
Michael has been locked away in smiths grove sanatorium for 10 years staring at a wall. His psychiatrist Dr Sam Loomis, played by veteran character actor Donald Pleasence (who is needless to say bloody marvellous in the role) has pretty much dismissed any idea of rehabilitation and instead has opted for the 'keep the bastard locked up and sedated' approach to mental health care after getting scared shitless by what he found after the few therapy sessions he attempted. Sadly it seems that smiths grove has the Arkham Asylum revolving door policy on security and Loomis finds himself headed to the hospital with Nurse Marion chambers only to find a mass break out and lots of the residents wandering the grounds like a scene from Night of the Living dead. Michael promptly nicks Nurse Chambers car and speeds off into the night. Loomis, who seems to have decent insight into Michael correctly deduces that Mikey is headed home. Back in haddonfield a group of babysitters, including wallflower Laurie Strode, are planning Halloween night blissfully unaware that evil has come to their little town and is planning a carve up.
It's a sign of a films quality that it holds up today, a lot of younger, seasoned slasher fans might find Halloween somewhat predictable and tame forgetting it pre dates the slasher craze and in fact was the film that kicked it all off. Certainly there are earlier films one can point to, most notably Black Christmas, however the sheer cultural impact of the film, combined with a huge profit, ensured that low budget film makers looking for a quick buck had a formula to follow and exploit. Later films (including the Halloween franchise itself) would get bloodier and bloodier in an attempt to one up each other, but the original does not need nor warrant this level of mayhem.
Halloween is a film about the hidden evil and terror that can Lurk in the seemingly peaceful middle class suburbs of small town America. Myers own identity is actually sort of irrelevant as he's supposed to represent the urban myth, the bad thing that happened at that one house down the road that fuels the suburban ghost stories the same way Jason Voorhies represents the invisible evil in the woods. Essentially he's the Boogeyman, the thing in the closet, the creature under the bed the thing that keeps kids up at night and the cause of many bed wetting's. The film pretty much confirms this by the end when Myers apparently disappears at the end, its not so much there as an invitation to sequel but to show that its an idea that cannot ever be truly killed off and can be lurking anywhere. Michael himself is refereed to as 'the shape' not so much a man as a thing that you glimpse from the corner of your eye, a thing lurking in the darkness. His mask (apparently a William shatner mask!) is blank and lacks any detail adding to the idea that Michael himself is merely an avatar for our own fears and neurosis A pretentious film student might even go so far as to suggest Dr Loomis obsessed search for Michael represents the frustrated and unending battle of the forces of psychiatry on the primal fears of mankind. As much as he can win a battle against Michael he cannot win the war.
Carpenter's score is simple and effective, no overly dramatic flourishes, just plain, catchy and to the point and really delivers the goods. Apparently screenings without Carpenters score didn't go so well and it was only really after the score was added that the films ability to inspire terror was apparent. The adoption of Stedicam, combined with the excellent photography from Dean Cundy also helps to sell the film giving it a fluid almost dream-like feel, as if we are trapped in some kind of suburban nightmare with enough dark spaces in frames that the shape could be hiding anywhere and in one memorable scene does indeed emerge as if from the shadows themselves.
Halloween is still a terrific film to watch today, even after numerous sequels, comic book spin-offs ect it still works effectively well. Ignore the TV version which has some added scenes to help tie it in to part 2, it sort of ruins the pacing and It's better to see them as deleted scenes.

[keirarts]

Halloween 2

after making its backers a huge profit on the back of a small budget and inspiring a bunch of imitators who also made some big bucks and franchise success on the back of the films popularity and formula it was almost inevitable that Halloween would get a sequel. John Carpenter himself wasn't entirely interested, however he's never been one to kick cash out of bed so with Deborah Hill began working on a script that would be handed over to Rick Rosenthal to deliver a film that continues directly over from the events in part one. Here the shape, having been shot six times and fallen out a window only to disappear is continuing his murder spree through Haddonfield. discovering Laurie strode has been taken to the local hospital our Mikey makes a beeline there after one or two murders before hand. The hospital itself is pretty much empty, showing Haddonfield warrants a large healthcare facility that its fortunate to not need (until tonight). Here in the empty hallways the shape begins killing off nurses and doctors one by one looking for HIS SISTER
Yes the soap opera contrivance I always hated rears its ugly head. It turns out, in spite of no mention at all in the previous film, that Laurie strode was adopted and in fact the baby sister of Michael Myers who has been babysat somewhere else when Michael had made his way home to kill big sis. Apparently the records had been sealed, which makes a sort of sense until you consider Haddonfield is small town mid-america where everyone knows everyone else's business and it seems f*****g WEIRD that no-one at any point would suss that firstly the Myers youngest would be put into care and adopted, in spite of the Myers parents being alive after Michael's first killing and that even if they had been deemed unfit parents, why would the child be given to a local family in the same community that the killings occurred. Someone would figure that shit out is what I'm saying. Personally I think if they were going down that route then they should have made Laurie JUDITHS kid, even having her be the product of abuse that might have indicated why this was all kept under wraps. It would even add more of a sharp, barbed critique of the sort of hidden horrors to be found in suburbia. Even then, Loomis, as Michaels therapist would have been made aware of this, considering it might factor into any therapy Michael would receive and loomis would have been bound by doctor-patient confidentiality.
I'm probably over-thinking it in all honesty and even Carpenter himself admits it was something thrown in, in order to add something new to a film that would otherwise be pretty much more of the same. It's certainly a more bloody affair than the first film, this one is post Friday the 13th and the same year as friday part 2 and at this point the blood & guts approach to slasher pictures set in and the series 'needed' it to compete. The gore scenes are pretty good admittedly and provide enough splatter for the slasher audience..
Director Rick Rosenthal does a good job with the material and delivers a film that manages to for the most part tie together with the first film pretty well. Certainly as slasher sequels go its one of the better ones, and the attempt to kill the franchise off at the end was a noble but ultimately doomed one as not only can evil never be truly killed, neither can the opportunity for a quick buck.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Vipp

My Bloody Valentine
(Netflix UK)
Dir. Patrick Lussier

Got 3 minutes in and realised i had seen enough dull American Horror flicks and didn't need to add another to my list.

Personally i think My Bloody Valentine is excellent. Suspenseful and full of great kills.