What Films Have You Seen Recently?

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Inspector Abberline

cool poster........

With that i do agree.

[Demdike@Cult Labs]

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

It's one of many films I have bought and only watched once so, when I have revisited it, I'll try and add my 2 cents.

From memory, I thought it was daft, a bit dull at times, but watchable.

It's certainly no Slasher Classic.

[Rik]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

It's certainly no Slasher Classic.

TBH most of their slasher range aren't

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

It's certainly no Slasher Classic.

Originally Posted by Rik

TBH most of their slasher range aren't

Never mind classic, a good few of them are barely slashers.

[J Harker]

Anyone else ever get to about the 45 minute mark and can't decide whether they should not waste the next 45 or capitalise on their investment and persist?

[trebor8273]

Originally Posted by J Harker

Anyone else ever get to about the 45 minute mark and can't decide whether they should not waste the next 45 or capitalise on their investment and persist?

Yes. But in thought I've paid for it I should watch till the end, but all that did was made me wish I never watched it in then first place. Sold it next day.

[Deadite]

Originally Posted by trebor8273

Yes. But in thought I've paid for it I should watch till the end, but all that did was made me wish I never watched it in then first place. Sold it next day.

To be fair mate, you've got a higher turnover of stock than HMV.

[gag]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Scalps (1983)

I vaguely remember seeing this in the 80's and quite enjoying it. However here and now in 2016 i can safely say it's ****ing terrible. The film has a creative soundtrack that is both memorable and ever so eerie, setting up this tale of possession by Indian spirits of those who desecrate their burial grounds, rather well.

But for a 75 minute film (plus end credits) it's almost criminal that nothing of note happens until almost the hour mark. We have endless scenes of chatter, camping, archeology, more camping, a lot of driving around but nothing of note. As for the film's title. We have one scalping scene. It's gory but unrealistic with the end result looking more like The Mekon from Dan Dare strips than anything else. In fact the film is so poor one extra features 'horror expert' Justin Kerswell attempting to justify the films existence.

I realize this film was low budget (although it was shot entirely on location so it wasn't that low ) but the presentation is dreadful. 88 Films (who released it) claim this is a 2K scan but it looks no better than a 'Digitally Remastered' film from the likes of Vipco, in other words very soft, incredibly grainy, and occasionally muted colour levels, in fact a poor vhs rip comes to mind. As for the added gore which is from a poor vhs tape, well there isn't much difference. How this is out on blu-ray mystifies me.

It baffles me how some films out there are on Blu ray , when so many better films haven't even been transferred over from vhs to dvd yet, and companies seem to constantly keep releasing the same film over and over again, how many times can films like tcm and Burning be released ?

[Cinematic Shocks]

Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015)

***1/2 out of *****

[J Harker]

Originally Posted by Deadite

To be fair mate, you've got a higher turnover of stock than HMV.

glad someone else said that!!