Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,977
- 2,893
Movies: Horror Movie Discussion
- Thread starter izzy
- Start date
-
HFBoards is well aware that today is election day in the US. We ask respectfully to focus on hockey and not politics.
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,764
- 3,799
I'd be very happy if that's one of the mystery movies.
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
It's actually Sandra Bernhard... but Bernhard, Bernard, Bedard... what's the difference?
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
It's actually Sandra Bernhard... but Bernhard, Bernard, Bedard... what's the difference?
Well haven't seen either one in anything since 90's at end of day
Blackhawkswincup
RIP Fugu
Dogs (1976)
I forgot all about this movie until seeing it listed on Prime. It was one of many 'Natural Horror" films to come out in 70's especially after Jaws runaway success. If I recall it appeared on TBS (Back when they showed old movies on weekend mornings) among films like Night of the Lepus, etc
Upon rewatching this I was reminded why it was so forgettable. One of the worst entries in the Natural Horror genre of time
Predictable, poorly acted and the dogs attack scenes are essentially just dogs giving people hugs
David McCallum as star in this film gives zero effort. A phoned in performance for a check is best way to describe it
And of course, the ending ties up nothing with no explanation of why Dogs are suddenly attacking. Just some lame 'Scent" that gets thrown in there without much explanation
Ends on very predictable note (So many of these films in 70's end on this) of radio broadcast revealing it is occurring elsewhere and only effecting dogs. Then a cat walks onto side of road and roars (Well not really, just some noise that doesn't sound like a cat hiss/meow/etc) implying Cats are going to soon start attacking
2/10
If your fan of genre its something you will want to watch once at least. But its very weak entry into genre
I forgot all about this movie until seeing it listed on Prime. It was one of many 'Natural Horror" films to come out in 70's especially after Jaws runaway success. If I recall it appeared on TBS (Back when they showed old movies on weekend mornings) among films like Night of the Lepus, etc
Upon rewatching this I was reminded why it was so forgettable. One of the worst entries in the Natural Horror genre of time
Predictable, poorly acted and the dogs attack scenes are essentially just dogs giving people hugs
David McCallum as star in this film gives zero effort. A phoned in performance for a check is best way to describe it
And of course, the ending ties up nothing with no explanation of why Dogs are suddenly attacking. Just some lame 'Scent" that gets thrown in there without much explanation
Ends on very predictable note (So many of these films in 70's end on this) of radio broadcast revealing it is occurring elsewhere and only effecting dogs. Then a cat walks onto side of road and roars (Well not really, just some noise that doesn't sound like a cat hiss/meow/etc) implying Cats are going to soon start attacking
2/10
If your fan of genre its something you will want to watch once at least. But its very weak entry into genre
Primary Assist
The taste of honey is worse than none at all
- Jul 7, 2010
- 6,063
- 6,087
Ok, watched Hausu. I have some thoughts. Kind of impossible to watch this movie and not have thoughts.
It was OK. Very well made, it's clear the director and crew were very deliberate when crafting every scene. They also had a game plan and they stuck to it. Really I can't think of anything bad to say about this film - I am clearly not its target audience.
The whimsy at the beginning was great. The closest comparables I can think of are the video game Earthbound meets the Wizard of Oz. The purposely fake backdrops add a lot of charm, and I can't tell if the director intended the paintings to not fill up the entire frame, or if that was due to a change in aspect ratio 35+ years later on streaming compared to film. If it was deliberate, hey that's a tasteful wink to the audience that this guy really knows what he's doing.
The film starts to go downhill, both for the characters and for me as the viewer, once the haunted house aspect kicks in. It's certainly not a flaw that it's mean-spirited, if you will pardon the pun, but it didn't add much to me as part of the viewing experience.
The one-dimensional characters are a bit grating, but that again seems deliberate. Perhaps a meta commentary on the one note cannon fodder characters in the horror genre - especially female ones.
The movie seems to have strong roots in a post-Hiroshima world. The clash of the not-quite-right Western rock meeting the monotonous piano score is jarring, something I like in a horror movie.
To wrap this up, there is one really cool character (Kung Fu, who knows Kung Fu) and a few really funny scenes. Including one where a cat just randomly jumps into the villain's lap. But overall, there were a lot of parts of the movie that just didn't do it for me. Probably more a reflection of myself than on the acclaimed filmmaker.
Either way, thank you Hockey's Future for introducing me to a film I never would have seen otherwise. I truly have not seen anything like it. The movie was certainly not a waste of time even if I didn't enjoy it that much, and a great start to the spooky season for me.
Next up on the list: HBO's documentary on stealing the election. Not a traditional horror movie of course, but one that will likely frighten me to my core.
It was OK. Very well made, it's clear the director and crew were very deliberate when crafting every scene. They also had a game plan and they stuck to it. Really I can't think of anything bad to say about this film - I am clearly not its target audience.
The whimsy at the beginning was great. The closest comparables I can think of are the video game Earthbound meets the Wizard of Oz. The purposely fake backdrops add a lot of charm, and I can't tell if the director intended the paintings to not fill up the entire frame, or if that was due to a change in aspect ratio 35+ years later on streaming compared to film. If it was deliberate, hey that's a tasteful wink to the audience that this guy really knows what he's doing.
The film starts to go downhill, both for the characters and for me as the viewer, once the haunted house aspect kicks in. It's certainly not a flaw that it's mean-spirited, if you will pardon the pun, but it didn't add much to me as part of the viewing experience.
The one-dimensional characters are a bit grating, but that again seems deliberate. Perhaps a meta commentary on the one note cannon fodder characters in the horror genre - especially female ones.
The movie seems to have strong roots in a post-Hiroshima world. The clash of the not-quite-right Western rock meeting the monotonous piano score is jarring, something I like in a horror movie.
To wrap this up, there is one really cool character (Kung Fu, who knows Kung Fu) and a few really funny scenes. Including one where a cat just randomly jumps into the villain's lap. But overall, there were a lot of parts of the movie that just didn't do it for me. Probably more a reflection of myself than on the acclaimed filmmaker.
Either way, thank you Hockey's Future for introducing me to a film I never would have seen otherwise. I truly have not seen anything like it. The movie was certainly not a waste of time even if I didn't enjoy it that much, and a great start to the spooky season for me.
Next up on the list: HBO's documentary on stealing the election. Not a traditional horror movie of course, but one that will likely frighten me to my core.
Didn’t see the 2022 Danish version so I can’t speak to what’s better but the 2024 American version of Speak No Evil was quite good I thought.
Don’t let people walk all over you folks!
8.1/10
Don’t let people walk all over you folks!
8.1/10
I’ll be checking it out at some point in the next week I hope, looks very interesting
Pranzo Oltranzista
Registered User
- Oct 18, 2017
- 3,977
- 2,893
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Hey! We won!
- May 30, 2003
- 15,764
- 3,799
Chucky was just canceled after 3 seasons, really disappointing because the show is great.
shadow1
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2008
- 16,721
- 5,516
Seed of Chucky (2004) - 3/10
A struggling actress looks to regain the spotlight, while killer dolls Chucky and Tiffany find out they have a child.
Jennifer Tilly stars as a fictionalized version of herself that's struggling to land big movie roles. Tilly ends up in the movie "Chucky Goes Psycho," where she acts with the dormant dolls of Tiffany (also played by Tilly) and Chucky (Brad Dourif). When Chucky and Tiffany's genderfluid child Glen/Glenda (Barry Boyd) sees the two on TV, they travel to Hollywood and resurrect their parents. Now together as a family, the trio schemes to get out of their dolls bodies, while Tiffany and Chucky make a pact to stop killing for the sake of their child...
Seed of Chucky was written and directed by Don Mancini. This marked the directorial debut of the longtime series writer, who took this entry further in the direction of dark comedy. The film plays partial homage to the 1953 Ed Wood film, Glen or Glenda. How does Seed of Chucky fare?
This series has officially jumped the shark. Seed of Chucky tries to do several things all at once: it attempts to have a scathing take on Hollywood; it attempts to be meta; it attempts to tell an LGBTQA+ about gender identity; and it attempts to be a raunchy dark comedy. In that sense, this movie feels like a mash-up of Scream 3 (2000), Wes Craven's New Nightmare (1994), the aforementioned Glen or Glenda (1953), and any John Waters movie (Waters plays a major supporting role in this film, by the way).
It's all half-baked, though. Seed of Chucky introduces all these concepts, but there's no (or very little) payoff to any of it. For exmaple, the most interesting concept, gender identity, devolves into a Jekyll and Hyde act by the end of the movie. Most of everything else introduced fades away as the movie progresses, aside from the raunchiness. Seed of Chucky is a film that tries to cover up its faults by being outrageous and edgy, but it doesn't work. The story is so fundamentally unengaging that at times the movie feels like a vignette of over-the-top scenes loosely tied together by two dull plots (the Jennifer Tilly meta plot and the doll plot).
Once the two plots merge, things don't feel like they reach their logical conclusion. Character motivations bend and change, culminating in an unsatisfying mess of an ending. Of significant note, Chucky takes a back seat in this movie. He's in it the entire run time, but is firmly a supporting character that's more jester than slasher icon.
Furthermore, despite a relatively decent budget ($12M) that should've gone further due to being shot in Romania, Seed of Chucky looks very rough at times. In the still image above, the scene is out of focus, and though most of the time the dolls look great, there are multiple times when they look off. I'm not sure if this is a stop-motion thing or a computer graphics issue, but certain scenes look cheap. This movie was released in theaters, but to me felt more like an MTV made-for-TV movie.
Overall, Seed of Chucky is a mess. A quick search revealed the film seems to have some cachet with fans of the series, largely due to its progressive characters and John Waters-esque qualities. For me, those things don't override the numerous and significant flaws this movie has, but your mileage may vary. Seed of Chucky was the final Child's Play/Chucky movie released in theaters, and the series went into a 9-year hiatus following this entry. It earned $24.8M against its $12M budget.
Had no idea that the Glen/Glenda stuff actually stemmed from a preexisting movie, that's interesting.
I was not a fan of this movie either and agree with a lot of what you said.
Do you plan on watching the reboot movie that stared Mark Hamill as the voice of Chucky? That one has nothing to do with the rest of the movies and TV show.
I was not a fan of this movie either and agree with a lot of what you said.
Do you plan on watching the reboot movie that stared Mark Hamill as the voice of Chucky? That one has nothing to do with the rest of the movies and TV show.
He somehow made it through all of the Leprechaun, Howling and Children of the Corn movies. I think that he's committed, and that can be interpreted two different ways, both of which may be true at this point.
Last edited:
I can't remember...has shadow1 covered the Jaws movies? That would be interesting to cover. Start with what is considered one of, if not, the best horror movie of all-time, and end the reviews of the franchise with one of the worst movies of any genre of all time with Jaws: The Revenge.
Split
I’m an M Night guy so I thought as far as PG13 horror goes it was pretty solid. James McAvoy stole the show. I guess it’s a silent sequel to Unbreakable and that they made Glass to kind of merge the two. I heard Glass kinda stunk. Oh well I’ll watch sometime
7.5/10
I’m an M Night guy so I thought as far as PG13 horror goes it was pretty solid. James McAvoy stole the show. I guess it’s a silent sequel to Unbreakable and that they made Glass to kind of merge the two. I heard Glass kinda stunk. Oh well I’ll watch sometime
7.5/10
shadow1
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2008
- 16,721
- 5,516
Curse of Chucky (2013) - 6/10
A paraplegic and her family are tormented after receiving a mysterious doll in the mail.
Fiona Dourif stars as Nica, a paraplegic who lives with her mentally ill mother Sarah (Chantal Quesnel) in a large secluded handicap accessible house. They receive a package in the mail with no return address - a Good Guy doll named Chucky (Brad Dourif). During a visit from extended family, a series of dangerous and deadly events cause Nica to believe the doll is alive...
Curse of Chucky was once again written and directed by series creator Don Mancini. Following the poor reception of Seed of Chucky (2004), Mancini decided to take the series back to the darker direction of the first Child's Play (1988). Originally planned as a remake, Curse of Chucky ended up being a sequel and was the first movie in the franchise not to be released in theaters. How does the first direct-to-video Chucky movie fare?
It's rock solid. Curse of Chucky is not only one of the best movies in the Child's Play series, but one of the better brand-name direct-to-video horror movies out there. Even without knowing the history, you can somewhat tell this film was originally conceptualized as a remake, as it follows some of the same story beats as the original Child's Play. Only this time, it's in an old dark house.
There's a scene early on that reminds me of a scene used in a Quentin Tarantino movie (I'm being vague) that's tense and uncomfortable as you're waiting for something awful to happen. What a breath of fresh air compared to the previous series entry, in which we were subjected to watching Chucky at the gas station of love using the self-service pump. There were also some fun twists to side plots that kept me on my toes that I thought showed off clever writing.
Fiona Dourif, the daughter of Chucky himself Brad, gives a solid performance as Nica, the best protagonist this franchise has had in a while. The casting isn't the only throwback, as we learn a little more about Chucky/Charles Lee Ray's past prior to his tenure trapped inside a Good Guys doll. While this is technically retconning, I have no problem with it considering we're six movies in and this is the first time the series has even attempted to flush out the character.
I don't have a ton of criticisms for Curse of Chucky, but I do have some. Though not bad by any means, the third act is probably the weakest part of the film because there is a lot of info dump and exposition, which doesn't do the tension any favors. I'm really nitpicking here, but there are scenes in this movie that scream "direct-to-video." I'm talking about that slightly overexposed, slightly too harshly lit look that uses 4000K+ white lighting. It's a product of this movie's incredibly low budget so I'm an idiot for even mentioning it, but I'm only mentioning it because the nighttime scenes (mostly) look great, but the daytime scenes look like that awful I Spit On Your Grave (2010) remake (which actually hit theaters, but had a similarly low budget... I'm rambling).
Overall, Curse of Chucky feels like a series revival for the Child's Play franchise. Though it's not as good as the original film, it honestly isn't that far off. I may rate this one higher during future rewatches. Curse of Chucky, which had a $5M budget, sold well in the home video market, earning $3.8M in the first month alone.
No I haven't, I haven't seen any of the sequels... or rip-off sequels (like 1995's Cruel Jaws).
I already liked you a lot, but if you continue quoting Weird Al, I might have to propose.
shadow1
Registered User
- Nov 29, 2008
- 16,721
- 5,516
All I can say is I'm a calligraphy enthusiast with a slight overbite and hair the color of strained peaches.
the squared circle
Registered User
Just watched Apartment 7A, which is a prequel to one of my favourite horror movies ever - Rosemary's Baby.
I definitely do not recommend.
Tonight I will start my annual October attempt (yes i know tomorrow is October), at one horror movie per night until Halloween. I usually start with Dracula and then three or four Universal Monster movies, including Abbot and Costello meet Frankenstein. Such a funny movie!
I definitely do not recommend.
Tonight I will start my annual October attempt (yes i know tomorrow is October), at one horror movie per night until Halloween. I usually start with Dracula and then three or four Universal Monster movies, including Abbot and Costello meet Frankenstein. Such a funny movie!
I saw that movie yesterday on peacock or Paramount I forgot which and was curious about it but that's disappointing to hear it wasn't any good.
I watch horror all year long so I try not to drive myself too crazy trying to do the 31 in 31, it's just tough to get a movie in every night when hockey starts.
Azrael
It was a very unique watch- think The Descent meets In A Violent Nature with a little religious cult infusion. Samara Weaving once again crushes a role where she’s being hunted down for an entire movie. If you like her from Ready or Not then you’ll like her in this. I got winded from watching.
No dialogue btw. Not as beautifully shot as In a Violent Nature but a better overall movie imo
7.7/10
My scale broken down btw
10- a true classic, a masterpiece
9- excellent
8- very good
7- good
6- solid enough
5- meh
4- not good
3- bad
2- atrocious
1- unwatchable
I consider myself your average person that likes going to the movies- not a film student or expert so I don’t really know what I’m looking at when it comes down to the actual craft of film making. But I can watch something and be like “hey that’s pretty sweet”
It was a very unique watch- think The Descent meets In A Violent Nature with a little religious cult infusion. Samara Weaving once again crushes a role where she’s being hunted down for an entire movie. If you like her from Ready or Not then you’ll like her in this. I got winded from watching.
No dialogue btw. Not as beautifully shot as In a Violent Nature but a better overall movie imo
7.7/10
My scale broken down btw
10- a true classic, a masterpiece
9- excellent
8- very good
7- good
6- solid enough
5- meh
4- not good
3- bad
2- atrocious
1- unwatchable
I consider myself your average person that likes going to the movies- not a film student or expert so I don’t really know what I’m looking at when it comes down to the actual craft of film making. But I can watch something and be like “hey that’s pretty sweet”
It's that time of year again when I get to resurrect this thread. Except, this year, someone wouldn't let it die, so it doesn't need bumping. Thanks for ruining one of the few things that I look forward to every year, shadow1! 
