ok lets all shit our pants to something new: post 2005 horror film thread

Go into the light, Raimi.

it's being directed by the guy who did Monster House which i know has its fans (and is meant to be pretty Spielbergian)

Sort of, in the "we are referencing Spielberg" sense. But it is animated and not scary, so whatevs. GTFO with a "Poltergeist" remake.

i particularly liked the clinical/psychedelic horror touches of beyond the black rainbow , made me think of phase IV, altered states.
"when you learn that Panos Cosmatos's chief inspiration in making Beyond the Black Rainbow was half-remembered yet vivid recollections of old-timey VHS covers in the horror section of the video store of his youth, you might decide that the movie itself is the evidence, not his words."
didn't know this while watching and the guy who wrote that is on the mark, this is exactly why i liked it: bad horror movie with uncomfortable mood and interesting retro photography. same reason i liked house of the devil, Blackaria and Last Caress (thanks for mentioning the last 2 upthread mr Jam) . have to say i fell asleep on beyond the black rainbow but i will watch it again for sure. recommendations pls?

note: last caress have some of the retro-iest crass sexual objectification that has rarely if ever been seen, like at one point the gang get into the creepy manor, no trace of the owner in sight, and one of the girls get upstairs to get a bath , right, and the magicians in the editing room made a digital zoom-in on her stipping after she stripped: they made her strip twice. faut le faire! another one near the end: the "last girl" is hidden by a wall, looks around the corner for the boogeyman then quickly climb up the stairs. magicians in the editing room play that back in slow mo so we can have a better look at her ass! for real.

it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie, it's only a joke movie,

^^i kept repeating myself that and i did avoid fainting. on another subject, mr Jam upthread talked about another movie, "Gutterballs" , now that one i just couldn't find anything about it at all. i'm used to find something interesting in kitschy crap or just plain bad but that one i... couldn't , made me wonder if something about it flew above my head or something. beyond lousy: unwatchable. apparently they wanted to break the record of usage of the word fuck. so , there's that. oof.

yeah, i think you might have missed the raison d'être of Gutterballs, which was to be the gleefully excessive and vulgar '80s slasher we could never have gotten during that decade. c'mon, suffocation by '69!
you could try Nicholson's recent Famine, but i wouldn't bother. a fun riff on Slaughter High, but so poorly made that the technical shoddiness brought tears to my eyes. i don't know what went wrong.

since you liked the Gaillard/Robin films, see Andreas Marschall's Masks. has the audacity to remake Suspiria in all but name, with moments that rival the sensual intensity of Amer. i'm a big fan of his rough but promising Tears of Kali, so it's great to see him become even more formidable as a filmmaker. watch this guy.

Ok, just finished John dies at the end, thoughts tomorrow

quite liked 'evil dead', looked good and nice nasty streak. not mind-blowing but p fun, serviceable horror.

Wow, looked up "Gutterballs," which I had never heard of, and can't think of a movie I'd rather see less. Gosh.

FOAF worked on Gutterballs, movie is reportedly a classic case of having it both ways: he made it a parody so he could make the hateful scumbag movie he wanted to make.

Ok, just finished John dies at the end, thoughts tomorrow

curious to hear what you've got to say, cuz i started watching it last night at midnight, but quickly bailed in favor of sleep. initial moments weren't promising (mostly due to the overwritten, badly-delivered voiceover), but i was cheered by giamatti's appearance. gonna try again this evening.

ah! thank you for the info Mr. Hal Jam. i suspected that was my problem with gutterballs : i didn't "get" these guys. i naturally "got" similar stuff before , like when i was a kid and saw some troma films for an example, but these guys, idk why, but nope. i'm too old?! it is happening.

At last, a filmmaker brave enough to make the vulgar and excessive slasher film the '80s likely would have prosecuted.

Nicholson's heart is in the right place. At least physically, AFAIK. He's an über-fan making the sort of movies he always wanted to see. What he lacks in filmmaking talent, he makes up for in enthusiasm. And heart. Which, remember, is (probably) on the right side of his chest. Same as you or me.

Notice that i am not really recommending or endorsing any of his movies.

JDATE is a mess. But so is the book.

He's an über-fan making the sort of movies he always wanted to see.

From what I've read about Gutterballs - and keep in mind, I've seen A Serbian Film, and will defend it - it sounds like the biggest piece of shit ever, one that begins with a gang rape (in the first five minutes?) capped by rape-by-bowling pin, then goes downhill from there. And then to top it off, he re-released it with explicit sex cut in amidst the death by 69, sodomy by sharpened bowling pin and close-ups of castrations, eye sockets plugged with used condoms, etc.. That's the sort of movie he always wanted to see? Good for him for making his dream come true, but that's fucked up, even if it's in service of "parody," which the sort of bottom-scraping exploitation/slasher stuff he's referencing from a distance pretty much does on its own. Shock in and of itself does not seem a good goal if, by many accounts, the movie is not scary, well-acted or even particularly funny. Sleaze for sleaze's sake is a chump's game.

Don C's Bogus Journey.

i haven't seen gutterballs, but it's hard to be a truly dedicated horror/gore/exploitation fan and keep a clean conscience. i mean, i have a weird affection for herschell gordon lewis, this despite the fact that his films are exploitative, at least arguably misogynist and very poorly made. the cynical service they offer to the drive-in audience's most tawdry desires is part of their "charm", a quality that's only magnified by antiquity. what in its era seemed like reprehensible filth often comes in time to be seen as quaint kitsch. it happened to the naive gore and nudie flicks of the 50s-60s a while back, and now it's happening to the more feral strains of sleaze unleashed in the 70s and 80s (e.g., rob zombie, eli roth). on that level, i can see why someone might want to cross pieces with, say, forced entry in making a fond tribute to misspent youth.

personally, i can't compartmentalize graphic depictions of rape and torture as cheerfully transgressive genre thrills. regardless of context, i find that kind of stuff absolutely repellent.

it's hard to be a truly dedicated horror/gore/exploitation fan and keep a clean conscience.

I absolutely agree with this, to an extent, though the dividing line I suppose is being able to see a piece of shit for what it is, or even to have a personal dividing line. Granted, that may be a a fine line, but one-upping sleaze for the sake of sleaze is a dubious achievement, especially if it's achieved largely by just depicting gruesome or repellent acts in greater detail than ever before. Things get even more questionable when you factor in moral transgression, which, admittedly, is subjective. But while you will find very few people who will defend rape, obviously there are different ways it can be handled and depicted in films, to different ends. To shock, to challenge, to satirize, whatever. But the further a film leans on mere transgression as its theme, the thinner the ice becomes. Which doesn't mean these sorts of films shouldn't be made, but does often warrant the right to cry foul (pun intended).

Again, I'll happily defer to someone who has seen it, but it does not sound like "Gutterballs" does any of its gross stuff with an degree of wit or craft, which leaves ... what? The re-release with explicit material just makes the whole enterprise sound that much more cynical. No one said those shitty slasher films of the '80s were particularly good, and I don't imagine any save a select few had a problem with the fact that the past 60 or so years of exploitation lacked in the rape and gore and violence department. To push that stuff even further in service of some vague aim of "parody" is, like I said, a chump's game. To do something fresh or smart or funny or stylish with it takes talent.

anybody see Cronenberg's son's joint Antiviral? no idea if I liked it or not at this stage in the game (watched it on a bus ride while half asleep), but simultaneously impressed and amused by how blatantly dude is biting his daddy's stylistic cues.

Is this the one where celebrity itself is a virus or something?

i am watching john dies at the end. slow going.

The two leads are kind of awful, which doesn't help. I think there's an absurdist thing going on that I ended up enjoying, but in the same way that I enjoyed Rubber, which most of y'all hated iirc.

I am more than a little convinced at this point tht coscarelli can't really direct his way out of a paper bag, but somehow that works for him a lot of the time? He does feel a little bit like he is keeping the inadvertent shock schlock genre alive, but in a genuine way, not a wink wink way. Because he might actually be really terrible at what he does, but in a way that I find oddly charming.

All told, I really liked JDATE.

But it is also an unraveled baffling mess.

^ mostly the latter. the opening wasn't at all promising, but i gave it a fair shake on phantasm's behalf. it has moments and, yeah, a kind of dunderhead charm, but it's ultimately a trainwreck. done in by charisma-free lead performances, gratingly wacky dialogue, and lazy plotting that seems driven by nothing so much as a desire to seem "random".

i'm not the biggest rubber booster, but i enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than this.

I watched Resolution last night and although I wasn't too happy with it's own resolution it was a very unsettling, freaky ride. Excellent film for a low budget debut and if the ending had been handled differently it would be A+.

JDATE

Lol, I hope this is intentional.

110%

Need to see Resolution. And It's in the Blood.

watched the Criterion of Goke: The Body Snatcher From Hell (okay it's from 1968 so not post 2005 but whatever) - campy as fuck but some great really arresting imagery too

If any of you have the chance, see Upstream Color while it's in the theater. The sound stuff is amazing, and it's basically a horror movie, what with the worms and the surgery and the plants and the mind control stuff.

what if I hated Primer

I don't know because I honestly can't remember if I saw it or not. Pretty sure I didn't.(I know it's a cult favorite but I'm not a member of the cult is what I'm saying.) Anyway, I thought Upstream Color was scary and good fwiw.

but this threads for good and scary.

That's why I mentioned it!

i mentioned it on the appropriate thread but y'all should be made aware that Upstream Color is really just a horror movie at heart.
― gr8 tr∞lls i have known (forksclovetofu), Friday, April 12, 2013 4:22 AM

i dunno if i would recommend this if you hated primer

So, Resolution. I had such high hopes for this one. Nope. It's never quite boring, and generates a good amount of uneasiness at times, but the story is underdeveloped and ultimately very unsatisfying. It just doesn't add up to quite enough. a curio with a high YMMV factor. for me, Dawning did this sort of ultraminimalist character-driven genre-"ish" thing more effectively. and of course Absentia, which remains the gold standard. I should add Lovely Molly and The Pact, with reservations.

The shadow of Ti West's inflence grows e'er longer.

I finally saw Evil Dead. I was kinda happy to find that I really dug it! Definitely in the spirit of the original, even if it pales in comparison. I was kind of frustrated that there wasn't any one character to take you through the whole thing, it was like the brother, the sister, and Lou Taylor Pucci sort of had their interchangeable Ash moments throughout the thing. The brother/sister backstory was layed on waaaaaay too thick, the song and the mom and the ugggh stop.

But, I mean, like aero said upthread...once they get in the cabin and they find the demony stuff and then there's the book and the kooky music it's like your favorite horror movie blanket. I liked the uber-gore, and there were a few little humorous moments, like Lou Taylor Pucci slipping on the tongue like it's a banana peel was p lol

I enjoyed that it looked like a lot of it was done with practical effects. It was a nice reverential touch, I thought. Oh, and the rusted out Classic in the backyard <3

Watched Mama, was ok with a few jump scenes. Only gripe was the "mama", cgi face was ridiculous.

Always excited to make fun of "Evil Dead" some more. Like the scene where the sister, drooling and limping, walks into the room dragging a shotgun and they're all, sister, are you all right? What's wrong sister?

And then she shoots him.

Ha ha. What a moronic movie. Sound and fury signifying etc.

i completely cant get behind that critique/style of critique but maybe thats more of a general topic for the horror films why do we/don't we like them thread more than this one since it isn't specific to this movie.

It's In the Blood another disappointment. well-made but unremarkable. getting frustrated.

rob zombie's new one: predictably dumb as fuck, but without evil rednecks (!) and has at least one weird demonic midget thing (!!). dunno if i'd call it good, but i wasn't bored really. his wife really shouldn't act ever again, though.

a friend also loaned me a dvd-r of the Maniac remake, which i'm real skeptical of obv but what the fuck, i'm sure i'll end up watching it

I concede it's a pretty fickle standard. Obviously people being stupid shouldn't invalidate horror films, because otherwise I would dismiss some of the best horror films ever made. I suppose somewhere in my calculations I consider style/originality/effects/general effectiveness/wit/surprise/shock/scares/mood, etc.. The "Evil Dead" remake was an example of a film that failed on all of these levels save perhaps effects, which is why I guess stuff that doesn't usually bother me really bothered me. Also, the characters were really, really stupid, which reduced it to the level of an exercise for me, both as a film and as a filmgoing experience. Especially coming just a year after "Cabin in the Woods," "Evil Dead" was like watching a children's balloon animal fart out all its air and flutter aimlessly across the screen.

xpost

i think part of the problem was that the remake brought character to the fore in a way the original never did, spending all that time building up the protagonist's tragic backstory, the strained relationships, etc. it attempted to be roughly "realistic" in the manner of most contemporary commercial horror films (and failed, imo), while the characters in the '81 version are distanced and framed by weird naive-but-knowing stylization of that era. the latter approach is much more forgiving, since the audience is never really asked to believe in what they're seeing.