Movies: Last Movie You Watched and Rate it | {Insert Appropriate Seasonal Greeting Here}

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Witness. Probably odd to compare a Peter Weir thriller to a James L. Brooks drama, but I watched these two movies in pretty close succession and it really underlined to me one of things that Weir is great at and that is presenting very humane, logical (at least within the script) characters. Brooks knows character too (very heightened characters), but really lost his way at some point, as in the above example.

Weir's long been one of my favorite directors and while he's a deft technical hand, he has this masterful grasp on people. Even in some of his more fantastical movies (The Truman Show, Fearless), the decisions, the emotions, just makes clear sense within the stories he tells. Certainly not a coincidence he's directed many to Oscar and award nominations and often career-best work.

Witness is among his very best. A straighforward thriller. Amish family goes to the city. The child witnesses a murder. A weary detective saves their lives and is forced to hide in their community both for his and their safety. This is a fish-out-of-water setup but in Weir's hands, nothing is MISUNDERSTOOD. There are disagreements and tensions, but also respect and understanding. Harrison Ford's John Book knows where he is and the community knows who he is. They co-exist and much of the film is about making that work as best as these complex humans can. And when the violence inevitably comes, the climax is a rather brilliant melding of those two worlds.

Another thing that was striking — it's a relatively quiet movie. Even the bad guys are generally low key (making them all the more menacing).

Weir's got plenty of flare. The murder scene. Samuel identifying the killer. The killers approaching the house on foot. One genuinely horrifying way to die that's been stuck in my mind since I first saw this decades ago.

This is Harrison Ford's only Oscar nominated role. Dude just movie stars the absolute hell out of this. He's so unbelievably charismatic and effortless. I know that's his brilliance but I feel it's sometimes taken for granted (even by himself) in his roles that aren't the big franchises. (Weir followed this by directing Ford in The Mosquito Coast which has its flaws but lets Ford turn that charisma into something much darker to great effect).

 

[BMann]

8/10. Netflix should have done a season six instead of getting the scriptwriters to condense all the material they normally would have for a series into two hours. It's therefore extremely fast paced.​

 

[BMann]

Witness. Probably odd to compare a Peter Weir thriller to a James L. Brooks drama, but I watched these two movies in pretty close succession and it really underlined to me one of things that Weir is great at and that is presenting very humane, logical (at least within the script) characters. Brooks knows character too (very heightened characters), but really lost his way at some point, as in the above example.

Weir's long been one of my favorite directors and while he's a deft technical hand, he has this masterful grasp on people. Even in some of his more fantastical movies (The Truman Show, Fearless), the decisions, the emotions, just makes clear sense within the stories he tells. Certainly not a coincidence he's directed many to Oscar and award nominations and often career-best work.

Witness is among his very best. A straighforward thriller. Amish family goes to the city. The child witnesses a murder. A weary detective saves their lives and is forced to hide in their community both for his and their safety. This is a fish-out-of-water setup but in Weir's hands, nothing is MISUNDERSTOOD. There are disagreements and tensions, but also respect and understanding. Harrison Ford's John Book knows where he is and the community knows who he is. They co-exist and much of the film is about making that work as best as these complex humans can. And when the violence inevitably comes, the climax is a rather brilliant melding of those two worlds.

Another thing that was striking — it's a relatively quiet movie. Even the bad guys are generally low key (making them all the more menacing).

Weir's got plenty of flare. The murder scene. Samuel identifying the killer. The killers approaching the house on foot. One genuinely horrifying way to die that's been stuck in my mind since I first saw this decades ago.

This is Harrison Ford's only Oscar nominated role. Dude just movie stars the absolute hell out of this. He's so unbelievably charismatic and effortless. I know that's his brilliance but I feel it's sometimes taken for granted (even by himself) in his roles that aren't the big franchises. (Weir followed this by directing Ford in The Mosquito Coast which has its flaws but lets Ford turn that charisma into something much darker to great effect).

Always enjoyed Weir's direction in all of his films and his painterly direction and attention to minor details. This is one of my favourite scenes with music by Jarre/JS Bach reinforcing the communal aspect of striving for a goal.

A clash of cultures but entirely sympathetic to the Pennsylvania Amish and a question posed which is pertinent to many today a retreat from the mad, material driven hectic world of today.​

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Got Weir'd one last time with Green Card. Perhaps the biggest outlier in Peter Weir's filmography. A simple, frothy romantic comedy about a pair of people who marry each other for convenience — he needs a green card, she wants a cool New York apartment — and gradually (shock shock) fall in love. What I like about the Oscar-nominated script co-written by Weir is that it's pretty grounded. It's an unambiguously sweet romantic comedy but it never resorts to some of that genre's tricks. The characters are smart and confident and nothing feels forced in a way that these movies sometimes operate.

Still, I just didn't buy it. Not a failure in concept, but I think in execution (and maybe in my personal biases). Two big problems with the movie. One is that I've always felt Andie McDowell is pretty terrible actress and I'd submit this as a piece of evidence. Two, I just don't get Gerard Depardieu. Never have. He looks like a cave troll and I'm perplexed why he'd be appealing. He ain't THAT charming here.

 

[Neil Racki]

Witness. Probably odd to compare a Peter Weir thriller to a James L. Brooks drama, but I watched these two movies in pretty close succession and it really underlined to me one of things that Weir is great at and that is presenting very humane, logical (at least within the script) characters. Brooks knows character too (very heightened characters), but really lost his way at some point, as in the above example.

Weir's long been one of my favorite directors and while he's a deft technical hand, he has this masterful grasp on people. Even in some of his more fantastical movies (The Truman Show, Fearless), the decisions, the emotions, just makes clear sense within the stories he tells. Certainly not a coincidence he's directed many to Oscar and award nominations and often career-best work.

Witness is among his very best. A straighforward thriller. Amish family goes to the city. The child witnesses a murder. A weary detective saves their lives and is forced to hide in their community both for his and their safety. This is a fish-out-of-water setup but in Weir's hands, nothing is

I like the way you write.

------------
Seeing lebowski in the theaters tonight .. im bringing stuff to make white russians in the movie theater.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

I like the way you write.

------------
Seeing lebowski in the theaters tonight .. im bringing stuff to make white russians in the movie theater.

Thanks man.

Enjoy those White Russians.

 

[OzzyFan]

So I decided to run through The Nightmare on Elm Street Franchise’s 7 original films this past week. Didn’t watch 2003’s Freddy vs Jason or the 2010 remake, but off my head both were middling based on their potential. Overall it was good.


Nightmare on Elm Street 84’ is still one of the most clever horror/slasher concepts, killing victims in their dreams/sleep. Well executed, but definitely imperfect. From this movie's murderer's design as a creepy disfigured burn victim with a handful of long razor finger blades and gleefully psychotic demeanor. To his unforgivable backstory and understandable revenge plot. To even most of the dream sequences being creative enough with solid character/reality confusion going on. And the murders correlating into the real world were fun and visually enthralling, most of the time. To even the main target playing the "must never fall asleep card" very well with her acting and actions. To even the catchy Freddy Krueger 'theme song' (One Two Freddy's....). There are many iconic things in this film. A must see classic in the horror slasher genre.


Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge 85’ I feel is the most boring film in the franchise and pretty tame. They try to turn Freddy into a puppeteer possessing a male teen, which has mixed results at best and is fairly unnotable until the last third of the film. And the last third of the film is ok, with most notably a body horror sequence with Jesse (the protagonist) in Grady’s room that is excellent. Overall feels like a bad 80’s teen drama knockoff most of the film “that they are supposedly going for deeper ideas” on. Supposedly a theme of repressed homosexuality is within, but I didn’t feel it glaringly so.


Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors 87’ is an excellent progression of the franchise all around with its sleep deprived mental hospital story. The film takes the plot and setting to a logical place, creates further favorable backstory, adds notable characters, Hypnocil is introduced, and starts the trend of excellent dream sequences to go along with some solid kills. I might even add that a touch of cool is thrown in too. The visuals/visual-effects create some really fun settings and events throughout with variety, to go along with a solid ending.


Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master 88’ delivers the scares and the laughs in great measure, while he uses one female teen to spread his killer presence. This is the first film in the franchise that I’d say Freddy’s one liners hit more often than not and are enjoyable. I feel this entry also has the most jump scares in the franchise, or most effective/noticeable jump scares from my view. Seems to create more interest or better pacing than the average film in the franchise. This film also continues with strong characters, some new and some older. And has another set of great and different dream sequences and visuals. At its worst it’s good cheesy fun that’s endearing. And the ending includes a superb body horror scene that is possibly my favorite in the franchise, at minimum it's my favorite conclusion in the series.


Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child 89’ is an odd entry that utilizes the sleeping mind of our protagonist’s unborn child as a weapon. While I get what they were going for, the majority of things turn out pretty weak and uninspired. I did enjoy 1 dream/murder sequence and the ending along with some bits, and the mom/son angle isn’t bad, but overall it’s a let down. Supposedly production and after editing was an issue for this film, with MPAA watering down the film from “X-rating” quality violence and graphicness to R qualifications…alongside other things. Maybe that’s why the film felt overall as it did.


Nightmare on Elm Street 6: The Final Nightmare (Freddy’s Dead) 91’ takes a mostly dark comedic angle while adding notable backstory to “try and end” the franchise with closure and clarity. On one end, it’s blasphemy to turn Freddy Kreuger into a killer clown that is barely scary. On the other hand, he’s pretty funny and entertaining while selling this material for the last half of the film. Some funny cameos from Roseanne, Tom Arnold, and Johnny Depp. The story does a good job of toying with its audience too as it unveils the deepest backstory and explanation on Freddy Kreuger within the franchise. I was plenty entertained, even if it was a bit incongruent with the franchise’s style.


Wes Craven’s New Nightmare 94’ is an analytical entry, bringing the meta and the concept of Freddy Kreuger into the real world of the cast and crew, well mostly Heather Langenkamp’s family. While it doesn’t go full bore, the film touches on how the film franchise and character would affect Heather’s young child and other indirect/direct implications from its existence on creators and outsiders. This approach also gets the audience more emotionally involved as a nice plus. That aside, we don’t get much in the terms of creative dream sequences or memorable murders. We mostly get “second hand” child symptoms of Freddy instead, which have a couple tension scenes but nothing else notable. While the concept is good and fresh, there are definitely some aspects left wanting that made the franchise fun in the first place.


Ranking them in order of entertainment value and/or quality:

1=Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

2=Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

3=Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)

4=Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994)

5=Nightmare on Elm Street 6: The Final Nightmare/Freddy’s Dead (1991)

6=Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989)

7=Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985)


Definitely a fun time, especially if you enjoy creative slasher thrills. I don’t have plans on running through any other horror franchise soon, but am not sure where to go. Friday the 13th appears to have some very low lows, Texas Chainsaw Massacre has some bumpy turns, Final Destination I’m not quite sure how to evaluate within the discussion, and Scream might be worthy. Probably Aliens I’d guess.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

one of the most clever horror/slasher concepts, killing victims in their dreams/sleep.

Next watch Dreamscape if you haven't seen it - cheaply made, but a close cousin that I just recently saw for the first time. There's a reference to it on the Nightmare's poster.

Ranking them in order of entertainment value and/or quality:

1=Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

2=Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

3=Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)

4=Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994)

5=Nightmare on Elm Street 6: The Final Nightmare/Freddy’s Dead (1991)

6=Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989)

7=Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985)

I always enjoy a nice post on horror films, but this is just wrong! (Just kidding). To me, New Nightmare is easily the second best film in the series, followed by an important gap. After that, rank 'em however you want (and I guess it depends a lot on what you think of part 2, which I personally enjoy quite a bit), but part 6 has to be last. Pure crap.

Definitely a fun time, especially if you enjoy creative slasher thrills. I don’t have plans on running through any other horror franchise soon, but am not sure where to go. Friday the 13th appears to have some very low lows, Texas Chainsaw Massacre has some bumpy turns, Final Destination I’m not quite sure how to evaluate within the discussion, and Scream might be worthy. Probably Aliens I’d guess.

Always fun to do so! I did Texas not so long ago. Hellraiser too. One I had a lot of fun doing, and that is probably a less seen/known franchise, was Phantasm.

 

[OzzyFan]

Evil Dead Rise (2023)
2.90 out of 4stars

"A twisted tale of two estranged sisters whose reunion is cut short by the rise of flesh-possessing demons, thrusting them into a primal battle for survival as they face the most nightmarish version of family imaginable."
A great supernatural horror and worthy addition to the franchise's nameplate with it's fun over the top blood/gore, violence, dialogue, and creepiness. Still not close to the heights of it's originator(s), most especially in the departments of pitch black humor, gonzo-ness, shock value, or a powerful lead with many kudos to Bruce Campbell there.

Next watch Dreamscape if you haven't seen it - cheaply made, but a close cousin that I just recently saw for the first time. There's a reference to it on the Nightmare's poster.


I always enjoy a nice post on horror films, but this is just wrong! (Just kidding). To me, New Nightmare is easily the second best film in the series, followed by an important gap. After that, rank 'em however you want (and I guess it depends a lot on what you think of part 2, which I personally enjoy quite a bit), but part 6 has to be last. Pure crap.


Always fun to do so! I did Texas not so long ago. Hellraiser too. One I had a lot of fun doing, and that is probably a less seen/known franchise, was Phantasm.

Thanks. Dreamscape I will look into. Lol, yeah, I know my feelings on the franchise film by film seem to be against the norm. I get the variability on ratings, especially given different criteria basis. Nice choices on the horror franchise binge throughs. Phantasm is an interesting and unique one for sure.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Beau is Afraid. Ari Aster made two widely praised and successful horror films (Hereditary rules, but I'm in the minority in thinking Midsommar tedious and dramatically overrated). His new movie switches gears to ... well I'm not quite sure how to describe it. Sort of a semi-comic navel-gazing nightmare of sexual repression, guilt and deep mommy issues. It's the kind of movie where you want to find Aster, give him a hug and say, 'Hey bud, you doing alright?' It's VERY MUCH in the vein of a Charlie Kaufman movie. So much so that if you took the credits out I'd swear he had a hand in it since it's nearly nonstop dreamy/surreal introspection of a damaged middle-age white dude. Was also hard not to think of the Coen Brothers and movies like Barton Fink and A Simple Man where they run their hapless protagonists through almost Biblical gauntlets of tests.

What Aster does really exceptionally here is nailing that dream feeling of things being both simultaneous real and not real. Like when you dream you're in a place that is your home, but it's also not actually your home. And you know both of these things are true. He taps into some real anxieties — feeling that you're a burden, feeling that you're being stalked or haunted, having an inability to get to the one place you desperately need to go, to name a few. It feels co-written by his therapist. The thing that saves this all from being unbearbly uncomfortable is the fact that it often times manages to be very funny as well. Now do you want to sit in that for three hours? Mileage is going to vary.

I feel like it is maybe a tad longer than it should be and yet nothing jumped out as being incredibly superfluous. Though in the spirit of it both being things and not being things, I could also say the entire thing is superfluous. Still it moves at a pretty good clip.

Joaquin Pheonix is his normal, committed self, so much so that he might be off-putting. He's so meek and damaged he vacillates between being sympathetic and frustrating. You can't decide if you want to hug him or smack him. But I also think that's the point. Another notch in his damaged weirdo belt.

I admire the balls of creators who are given free reign and turn in something as weird and personal as this. And speaking of balls ... well, I won't spoil anything other than saying Aster continues his commitment to putting floppy flacid dongs on film. Good for him.

 

[Sentinel]

Haven't posted for a while, here are the last three:

Amsterdam (2022). First, let’s get one thing straight: there is a 5 second stock footage of Amsterdam in this movie and about 5 minutes of the story take place in Amsterdam. That’s it. Having just been to Amsterdam, I wish this movie actually had something to do with its title. It did not. The other obvious thing is the murderer’s row of acting talent: Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, Rami Malek, Zoe Saldana, Michael Shannon, Mike Myers, and, to top them off, Robert De Niro! Hell, there is even Taylor Swift, and, fortunately, she quickly gets killed. But instead of being a supergroup superfilm, this feels more like a Wes Anderson “throw them all together for comedic effect” work. The story is a period piece mystery (from 1917 to 1933) that takes a political turn. All actors are good to various degrees, and the story is OK but one thing kept irritating me: everything was explained and re-explained over and over again. I felt like I was reading a warning on a car: “Do not drink the brake fluid.” Plus, it’s fairly revolting. Not a waste of time, but not exactly a highlight of my cinema-watching career. 5/10

Banshees of Inisherin (2022). CAUTION: SPOILERS AHEAD!! My MO is “on time for people, late for trends.” So I finally got around to watching this Oscar nominee. And I’m really torn up about it. The good: great acting and great directing from the team that brought us an all-star classic In Bruges (director Martin McDonagh, actors Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson). The bad: WTF did I just watch? This has to be one of the most ridiculous premises and storylines I have ever seen. A friend, out of the blue, without a slightest provocation, decides to cut ties with his bestie because the bestie is “boring” and stops his personal and artistic development. And that’s not the only thing he decides to cut. In fact, he now hates his old friend so much, he goes on to mutilate himself to shame his friend into abandoning him! The weirdest thing is that the movie is fully aware of how ridiculous this situation is. “You have nine fingers, that’s the epitome of mad,” says the abandoned and thoroughly shocked friend. Is there a moral in this story? Cutting off fingers doesn’t exactly help one’s songwriting either (otherwise I am sure Max Martin and Dr. Luke wouldn’t have any fingers between them), and the Gleeson character Colm surely realizes that after the first finger. I utterly fail to grasp the main idea here, or an allegory / symbolism of any kind. To sum up, this movie is good but after it’s done, I was left with one of the biggest “WTF did I just watch?” moments of my life. In Bruges, dark and depressing as it was, is a brilliant allegory of men with heaven around them and hell within. This one is dark, depressing, and completely pointless. With movies like this, it’s no wonder theatrical profits are dropping. Had I seen this in theater, I’d be reluctant to go back for at least a year. 4/10

Men (2022). Question #1. Do you hate men? Do you really, really hate men? Do you think all men are creepy, gross, disgusting misogynists and гарists? Question #2. Can you stomach a film that, while not exactly Human Centipede, is not NOT Human Centipede either? If the answer to any of these questions is “no,” stay as far away from this nightmare as possible. What’s even more disappointing is that Alex Garland directed Ex Machina, my 2015 Movie of the Year. Had Steven Spielberg followed Schindler’s List with Deuce Bigolo, I would’ve been shocked and disappointed less. As for the film itself: suffice to say that every character in the town where the main heroine arrives to recuperate from her domestic troubles is played by the same actor (Rory Kinnear). I’ve revealed enough, and you’re better for it. 1/10

 

[OzzyFan]

Beau is Afraid. Ari Aster made two widely praised and successful horror films (Hereditary rules, but I'm in the minority in thinking Midsommar tedious and dramatically overrated). His new movie switches gears to ... well I'm not quite sure how to describe it. Sort of a semi-comic navel-gazing nightmare of sexual repression, guilt and deep mommy issues. It's the kind of movie where you want to find Aster, give him a hug and say, 'Hey bud, you doing alright?' It's VERY MUCH in the vein of a Charlie Kaufman movie. So much so that if you took the credits out I'd swear he had a hand in it since it's nearly nonstop dreamy/surreal introspection of a damaged middle-age white dude. Was also hard not to think of the Coen Brothers and movies like Barton Fink and A Simple Man where they run their hapless protagonists through almost Biblical gauntlets of tests.

What Aster does really exceptionally here is nailing that dream feeling of things being both simultaneous real and not real. Like when you dream you're in a place that is your home, but it's also not actually your home. And you know both of these things are true. He taps into some real anxieties — feeling that you're a burden, feeling that you're being stalked or haunted, having an inability to get to the one place you desperately need to go, to name a few. It feels co-written by his therapist. The thing that saves this all from being unbearbly uncomfortable is the fact that it often times manages to be very funny as well. Now do you want to sit in that for three hours? Mileage is going to vary.

I feel like it is maybe a tad longer than it should be and yet nothing jumped out as being incredibly superfluous. Though in the spirit of it both being things and not being things, I could also say the entire thing is superfluous. Still it moves at a pretty good clip.

Joaquin Phoenix is his normal, committed self, so much so that he might be off-putting. He's so meek and damaged he vacillates between being sympathetic and frustrating. You can't decide if you want to hug him or smack him. But I also think that's the point. Another notch in his damaged weirdo belt.

I admire the balls of creators who are given free reign and turn in something as weird and personal as this. And speaking of balls ... well, I won't spoil anything other than saying Aster continues his commitment to putting floppy flacid dongs on film. Good for him.

You nailed Beau is Afraid incredibly well in your review. I'm going to requote you for exactly what people should expect going into this film, as you put it pitch perfectly:
"nightmare of sexual repression, guilt and deep mommy issues."
"What Aster does really exceptionally here is nailing that dream feeling of things being both simultaneous real and not real. "
That's how I see it, an overall psychological drama mostly about those 3 issues and does so in a way that blends reality and fantasy superbly, which will either amuse or frustrate you.

I'd say while there were funny moments in the film, I would not call this a black comedy, even if it's possible to consider it satirical. The delivery is too scattershot and film too tonally hostile/distressing to warrant a lot of laughter, much thanks to Phoenix (who as you said, is both sympathetic and frustrating).

Still trying to piece together how I feel if I'd rank the film. It's very ambitious and good weird/different, while not hitting all the marks it wants to. Doesn't warrant it's 3hours runtime, but I'm not sure how much I'd cut from it or exactly where (maybe bits and pieces from a couple "phases"). Definitely a great film but not quite excellent. Better than Midsommar imo, but I still put Hereditary above it.

 

[John Price]

Super Mario Movie (2023): 9/10

Not really much to complain about. Despite widespread critical disdain, the audience score is much higher, and well deserved. This movie is a solid, quick tale of the origins of Mario and his brother Luigi. Lot of good easter eggs and retro references and callbacks for anyone who grew up a fan of the series.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

You nailed Beau is Afraid incredibly well in your review. I'm going to requote you for exactly what people should expect going into this film, as you put it pitch perfectly:
"nightmare of sexual repression, guilt and deep mommy issues."
"What Aster does really exceptionally here is nailing that dream feeling of things being both simultaneous real and not real. "
That's how I see it, an overall psychological drama mostly about those 3 issues and does so in a way that blends reality and fantasy superbly, which will either amuse or frustrate you.

I'd say while there were funny moments in the film, I would not call this a black comedy, even if it's possible to consider it satirical. The delivery is too scattershot and film too tonally hostile/distressing to warrant a lot of laughter, much thanks to Phoenix (who as you said, is both sympathetic and frustrating).

Still trying to piece together how I feel if I'd rank the film. It's very ambitious and good weird/different, while not hitting all the marks it wants to. Doesn't warrant it's 3hours runtime, but I'm not sure how much I'd cut from it or exactly where (maybe bits and pieces from a couple "phases"). Definitely a great film but not quite excellent. Better than Midsommar imo, but I still put Hereditary above it.

Thanks!

Looking back on what I wrote I can't believe I never mentioned a key word -- anxiety. The movie operates like how anxiety feels. Especially that first segment.

I wouldn't call it a comedy either but I really did laugh a fair amount especially in the first half or so. Again it kinda is and kinda isn't.

 

[OzzyFan]

Thanks!

Looking back on what I wrote I can't believe I never mentioned a key word -- anxiety. The movie operates like how anxiety feels. Especially that first segment.

I wouldn't call it a comedy either but I really did laugh a fair amount especially in the first half or so. Again it kinda is and kinda isn't.

Yes. Good addition too there. I wasn't trying to contradict you on the comedy part, just giving my opinion. I saw the comedy all over the place, but it just didn't hit, especially like it should have given the above I wrote.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Yes. Good addition too there. I wasn't trying to contradict you on the comedy part, just giving my opinion. I saw the comedy all over the place, but it just didn't hit, especially like it should have given the above I wrote.

Didn't think you were contradicting me. All good.

 

[shadow1]

So I decided to run through The Nightmare on Elm Street Franchise’s 7 original films this past week. Didn’t watch 2003’s Freddy vs Jason or the 2010 remake, but off my head both were middling based on their potential. Overall it was good.


Nightmare on Elm Street 84’ is still one of the most clever horror/slasher concepts, killing victims in their dreams/sleep. Well executed, but definitely imperfect. From this movie's murderer's design as a creepy disfigured burn victim with a handful of long razor finger blades and gleefully psychotic demeanor. To his unforgivable backstory and understandable revenge plot. To even most of the dream sequences being creative enough with solid character/reality confusion going on. And the murders correlating into the real world were fun and visually enthralling, most of the time. To even the main target playing the "must never fall asleep card" very well with her acting and actions. To even the catchy Freddy Krueger 'theme song' (One Two Freddy's....). There are many iconic things in this film. A must see classic in the horror slasher genre.


Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge 85’ I feel is the most boring film in the franchise and pretty tame. They try to turn Freddy into a puppeteer possessing a male teen, which has mixed results at best and is fairly unnotable until the last third of the film. And the last third of the film is ok, with most notably a body horror sequence with Jesse (the protagonist) in Grady’s room that is excellent. Overall feels like a bad 80’s teen drama knockoff most of the film “that they are supposedly going for deeper ideas” on. Supposedly a theme of repressed homosexuality is within, but I didn’t feel it glaringly so.


Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors 87’ is an excellent progression of the franchise all around with its sleep deprived mental hospital story. The film takes the plot and setting to a logical place, creates further favorable backstory, adds notable characters, Hypnocil is introduced, and starts the trend of excellent dream sequences to go along with some solid kills. I might even add that a touch of cool is thrown in too. The visuals/visual-effects create some really fun settings and events throughout with variety, to go along with a solid ending.


Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master 88’ delivers the scares and the laughs in great measure, while he uses one female teen to spread his killer presence. This is the first film in the franchise that I’d say Freddy’s one liners hit more often than not and are enjoyable. I feel this entry also has the most jump scares in the franchise, or most effective/noticeable jump scares from my view. Seems to create more interest or better pacing than the average film in the franchise. This film also continues with strong characters, some new and some older. And has another set of great and different dream sequences and visuals. At its worst it’s good cheesy fun that’s endearing. And the ending includes a superb body horror scene that is possibly my favorite in the franchise, at minimum it's my favorite conclusion in the series.


Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child 89’ is an odd entry that utilizes the sleeping mind of our protagonist’s unborn child as a weapon. While I get what they were going for, the majority of things turn out pretty weak and uninspired. I did enjoy 1 dream/murder sequence and the ending along with some bits, and the mom/son angle isn’t bad, but overall it’s a let down. Supposedly production and after editing was an issue for this film, with MPAA watering down the film from “X-rating” quality violence and graphicness to R qualifications…alongside other things. Maybe that’s why the film felt overall as it did.


Nightmare on Elm Street 6: The Final Nightmare (Freddy’s Dead) 91’ takes a mostly dark comedic angle while adding notable backstory to “try and end” the franchise with closure and clarity. On one end, it’s blasphemy to turn Freddy Kreuger into a killer clown that is barely scary. On the other hand, he’s pretty funny and entertaining while selling this material for the last half of the film. Some funny cameos from Roseanne, Tom Arnold, and Johnny Depp. The story does a good job of toying with its audience too as it unveils the deepest backstory and explanation on Freddy Kreuger within the franchise. I was plenty entertained, even if it was a bit incongruent with the franchise’s style.


Wes Craven’s New Nightmare 94’ is an analytical entry, bringing the meta and the concept of Freddy Kreuger into the real world of the cast and crew, well mostly Heather Langenkamp’s family. While it doesn’t go full bore, the film touches on how the film franchise and character would affect Heather’s young child and other indirect/direct implications from its existence on creators and outsiders. This approach also gets the audience more emotionally involved as a nice plus. That aside, we don’t get much in the terms of creative dream sequences or memorable murders. We mostly get “second hand” child symptoms of Freddy instead, which have a couple tension scenes but nothing else notable. While the concept is good and fresh, there are definitely some aspects left wanting that made the franchise fun in the first place.


Ranking them in order of entertainment value and/or quality:

1=Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

2=Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987)

3=Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988)

4=Wes Craven’s New Nightmare (1994)

5=Nightmare on Elm Street 6: The Final Nightmare/Freddy’s Dead (1991)

6=Nightmare on Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989)

7=Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge (1985)


Definitely a fun time, especially if you enjoy creative slasher thrills. I don’t have plans on running through any other horror franchise soon, but am not sure where to go. Friday the 13th appears to have some very low lows, Texas Chainsaw Massacre has some bumpy turns, Final Destination I’m not quite sure how to evaluate within the discussion, and Scream might be worthy. Probably Aliens I’d guess.

Awesome post! I need to give Part 4 another try based on your review. I know it's well liked but I've never been able to get into it (I've only seen it twice though, but once was recently).

Next watch Dreamscape if you haven't seen it - cheaply made, but a close cousin that I just recently saw for the first time. There's a reference to it on the Nightmare's poster.


I always enjoy a nice post on horror films, but this is just wrong! (Just kidding). To me, New Nightmare is easily the second best film in the series, followed by an important gap. After that, rank 'em however you want (and I guess it depends a lot on what you think of part 2, which I personally enjoy quite a bit), but part 6 has to be last. Pure crap.


Always fun to do so! I did Texas not so long ago. Hellraiser too. One I had a lot of fun doing, and that is probably a less seen/known franchise, was Phantasm.

Agree with you on part 2, which is near the top for me. It's definitely a maligned sequel but has gained a bit of cachet in recent years.

I did the Phantasm series not long before Covid, after having only seen Part 1 (numerous times). Really enjoyed parts 2 & 3. Watched part 5 the day I should surgery and was pumped full of drugs, which added to the bizarre experience...

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Awesome post! I need to give Part 4 another try based on your review. I know it's well liked but I've never been able to get into it (I've only seen it twice though, but once was recently).



Agree with you on part 2, which is near the top for me. It's definitely a maligned sequel but has gained a bit of cachet in recent years.

I did the Phantasm series not long before Covid, after having only seen Part 1 (numerous times). Really enjoyed parts 2 & 3. Watched part 5 the day I should surgery and was pumped full of drugs, which added to the bizarre experience...

Can't imagine, part 5 is absolutely terrible and nonsensical.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

I did the Phantasm series not long before Covid, after having only seen Part 1 (numerous times). Really enjoyed parts 2 & 3. Watched part 5 the day I should surgery and was pumped full of drugs, which added to the bizarre experience...

The search engine won't find your posts about them

 

[shadow1]

The search engine won't find your posts about them

Didn't review those, it was before I discovered this wonderful thread (which is really sucking lately regarding notifying me about new posts).

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Phantom Lady (1944) - 6/10

I think once you've seen all the top noir films, they get increasingly empty calorie returns. There might be some nice shadowork and cinematography here, a clever line there, a very pretty lead actress in the case of this film here, but it's hard to get too invested in them. At least this one keeps the runtime short.

 

[shadow1]

Awesome post! I need to give Part 4 another try based on your review. I know it's well liked but I've never been able to get into it (I've only seen it twice though, but once was recently).



Agree with you on part 2, which is near the top for me. It's definitely a maligned sequel but has gained a bit of cachet in recent years.

I did the Phantasm series not long before Covid, after having only seen Part 1 (numerous times). Really enjoyed parts 2 & 3. Watched part 5 the day I should surgery and was pumped full of drugs, which added to the bizarre experience...

I meant to say "the day I had SHOULDER surgery"... I must still be pumped full of drugs or have permanent brain damage from Phantasm 5.

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Hadn't watch a (real) movie in a long time, pretty much only going through MST3K episodes right now (I guess I'll make a post about some of them at some point).

Pig (Sarnoski, 2021) - Pretty cool flick. It flirts with absurdity, never giving in, but always on the edge - it's actually kind of brilliantly done. It also plays with expectations through its intertext (from the casting of Cage to the Wick-ish "what have you done to my d̶o̶g̶ pig?"), and ends up not giving you much. Liked it quite a bit. 7/10

Crimes of the Future (Cronenberg, 2022) - Cronenberg considers this as an evolution of things he's done before, but is it? If you go from Shivers > The Brood > Videodrome > Crash, I think you can feel an evolution in themes and ideas, but eXistenZ already kind of felt like grandpa trying to be hip, now this new one just feels like David is late to his own party. Maybe if the film had been made 20 years ago, I would have thought it was an ok Cronenberg flick, but on the other hand, had it been made today by anybody else, I would have probably hated it. And I tend to love artists who are obsessed and kind of making the same film over and over - Breillat, Godard, and early Cronenberg. It's still full of ideas, and despite the numerous throwbacks to earlier Cronenberg stuff, manages to be its own thing. 4.5/10

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

Scream VI. I wasn't a fan of the previous movie. I know cutesy meta-commentary is essential to the series, but thought that aspect was really forced in part 5 and didn't really land for me. I recall feeling like for every joke or point that did hit, there was one that didn't. It was a movie very pleased with itself in a series that is built around being pleased with itself.

The new movie was a pretty decent step up from that. Transplanted to a New York City college, Tara and Sam Carpenter and their friends (surviving and new) are once again stalked by a movie and murder obsessed psycho (or PSYCHOS??). This one brought the cleverness back to the series the last one lacked. Good ... execution, to use a term. A few excellent sequences. A good, bloody time overall. Doesn't approach the best in the series but more than holds its own.

I kinda wish they'd steer more into the internet/reddit/true crime angle than they do. I know the series is built on movies and movie knowledge but times have changed and the former seems like a more fertile ground to mine for content and commentary (there's a passing joke/reference to it so they've clearly thought about it).

My biggest complaint (and this may be sacrilege for the series) but after the last two movies I think I want them to ditch "the rules" bit. It's felt really forced in the last two movies and was the worst part of both. It's not just that I don't buy the rules, but the movie and the characters really don't either. The original movies were toying with a real thing. These two recent ones feel like they're just making it up as they go and when it gets emphasized it makes the characters look stupid.

Unless they want to take jabs at true crime podcasts and TV ... again I think there's a lot there they could play with.

 

[ItsFineImFine]

Me and You and Everyone We Know (2005) - 7.5/10

Short indie film portraying strange slices of American life made by Miranda July. I'm overrating it a bit as it isn't as deep or melancholic as it thinks it is but I really like Miranda July and wish she made more films and acted in them too, could watch her strangeness for hours.

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (2002) - 6/10

Have to give it up to Nic Cage for being able to take the piss out of himself but that all adds to a gimmicky feel. Some amusing parts here and there but the gimmick is overextended into a ~2 hour film with some bad subplots and a story you care less about than the actual scenes between Cage and Pedro Pascal. It's not exactly Adaptation either but I guess some people really like Nic Cage and would probably love this.