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

Early impression of hidden in the woods is that this director can't decide between his love for overwrought melodrama and incest and his hatred for people keeping their appendages.

This is just stunningly terrible

Ok having said that and then hitting a sudden total fucking turn, I don't even know what to think any more. I rescind judgement until I have a little more time with this one.

is the title sequence of TED terrible on purpose or something? i loled
http://i1354.photobucket.com/albums/q686/tinyservants/Screenshot2013-10-23at20936AM_zps5213dc82.png

Think of it as a warning about what to expect

yeah, hidden in the woods is a total mess, nonsensical but not in the likeable grindhousy exploitation way, just incoherent and mediocre and frankly super gross while being mind-numbingly stupid. the turn i was talking abt up there had some momentary "huh is this about to get interesting" and then is followed by another 45 minutes of drudgery, terrible terrible acting, and a very bizarre semi-telenovelo soundtrack that is just so so wrong.

one to avoid.

huge warning: megan is missing is extremely disturbing. i'd go into it, but maybe this will clarify -- unless you need to watch dea+hdr0ne: the movie, i would strongly recommend not watching it on account of several memorably horrific scenes. truly horrifying. bravo, i guess? i wish i had never seen it. yet, i did.

maniac remake soundtrack is on spotify btw

not too interested in watching it tbh but cool soundtrack dude

I had no idea Maniac had been remade. I'm gonna pass, but I needed a new dn so

Sorry to pipe in, but can I suggest the next rolling ILS fashion thread be titled "ok lets all shirt and pants to something new"

Yes, Megan really sticks with you.

huge warning: megan is missing is extremely disturbing. i'd go into it, but maybe this will clarify -- unless you need to watch dea+hdr0ne: the movie, i would strongly recommend not watching it on account of several memorably horrific scenes. truly horrifying. bravo, i guess? i wish i had never seen it. yet, i did.

― sweat pea (La Lechera), Wednesday, October 23, 2013 11:48 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

heavens! *downloads furiously*

maniac was terrible. great soundtrack tho

grave encounters was alright

the devil was lol

The one about the elevator? I'm watching that now.

Ha, the internet went out and when it came back on, I tried to return to the movie but it was NOWHERE TO BE FOUND. Clearly the work of... THE DEVIL.

Also I read the wikipedia summary for Megan is Missing and I wish I had not done that.

I didn't read anything about it, I only knew "internet predator" which sounded...not that scary but turned out to be horrrrrrrrific.

can't see myself getting less enjoyment out of a premise than that, like that kind of horror in the first place isn't my favorite type (though if it's good i'll give it props) but when it's horror of that type being visited upon 14 yr old characters it's a bridge too far.

OTM

Also I read the wikipedia summary for Megan is Missing and I wish I had not done that.

yeah, no thanks

I only posted about it to tell you NOT to watch it!! I feel bad enough already. Don't need shame on top of the intrusive thoughts.

Nobody's trying to shame you!

Sorry, that sounded accusatory. Any criticism I have is about the movie, not about people who watch it. Also I pretty much always read the Wikipedia summaries of the movies mentioned on this thread that I am pretty sure I won't watch.

likewise read the synopsis and just .... yeah what is the point of that

I pretty much always read the Wikipedia summaries of the movies mentioned on this thread that I am pretty sure I won't watch.

lol me too (cf Martyrs tetc.)

DUMPLINGS!, Human Centipede etc

Ha, yes, all of the French "new wave of horror," A Serbian Film, the Woman...

They are not my scene but I am usually too curious to leave it alone entirely.

xp!

I've seen both DUMPLINGS! and Human Centipede! Human Centipede is surprisingly tame, actually. I liked it!

DUMPLINGS! was more gross in concept than execution, I thought.

But everybody has different tolerances. jjjusten and Hal Jam and EIII are probably like "WTF wouldn't you watch Martyrs?"

This is one of my favorite threads though I know I'm too much of a wimp to watch like 80% of the films on here. I'm one who reads the wikipedia entries as well, but I was so taken aback by the one for Martyrs I decided to stop that as well.

I feel some discomfort/shame about having sat through the whole thing, but tbh the first part was pretty well done. The two girls had a charming unconventional (yet totally familiar) friendship and were convincingly early teenlike. I have to give the actors props for that. The rest of the movie was sick in the worst way and I wish I hadn't seen it. I'd be ok never talking about it again!

Human Centipede 2 is basically everything people were afraid the first would be but wasn't.

In many ways, reading the Wiki description of "A Serbian Film" - a movie I am torn about, but largely supportive of, in the abstract - is an experience in and of itself, because as you read it you think no fucking way, but then you see it and it turns out to be both beat by beat accurate but also nowhere near as horrifying as you imagined it to be. Which introduces its own conflicting feelings. Would I prefer it was harder to take? Why? Is there anything that would be truly too hard to take? Why? Etc.

I have so many things to say right now

Human Centipede 2 was boring me so I turned it off.

About to start "Twixt", expecting a show down between modern Roman Polanski and modern Val Kilmer to see who can fuck this up more.

God damn it, I mean Francis ford coppola

Hold on, could this actually be...awesome?

Nope, never mind, the brief what the shit greatness that happened in the first half hour has sunk into a mire of dumb as dick garbage.

Even Bruce Dern mowing down on the scenery and a totally awesome cameo from Don Novello (!) can't save this from itself.

I too have read Wikipedia summaries for movies that sounded too torturey -- for example, I've read about Martyrs and A Serbian Film and have not sought either of them out. But I had no idea going into Megan is Missing what I was getting myself into. So while I would have avoided it had I known better, I didn't know better, and I'm ultimately glad that I saw it. It brings up the old dilemma of how to react to a piece of art that is deplorable in a number of ways but also really well made and effective and emotionally genuine in others. One of the things that often signifies true "horror" to me in either movies or books is that sense you get, at some point during it, that the filmmaker or writer is not to be trusted, that his or her moral compass may be off and you're being led to a seriously bad place. (Classic old-school example: The Texas Chain Saw Massacre.) Usually, though, by the end of the movie or book, you are either returned to a point of relative safety or are given enough evidence of sensitivity and intelligence throughout that you let the artist off the hook, or even admire them for what they've done.

Megan is Missing does have those moments of sensitivity and intelligence to differentiate it from truly redeemless crap like Captivity -- but the last 22 minutes of the movie let go of all that good work, abandoning us without warning into apparently pointless terror. This could be seen as brave or inexcusable and I don't know which one it is. But here I am still thinking about it, and I like that, even if I can't like the film.

That's really interesting. I think there's something positive to be said for a movie (any creative product) that does not take you back to that safe space at the end, although I think brave overstates it a little.

As with so many things, it's subjective and what it boils down to for me is that I don't want to go to a seriously bad place. Coming from someone who styles herself a fan of horror movies (and books and comics and whatever else) that makes me sound like a big phony, maybe, but it's the truth. From what I've read, I wouldn't want to see Megan is Missing even if it did have a (relatively) happy ending (a la Texas Chainsaw Massacre, for example, which only ends happily by the most miserly definition of happy).

That doesn't mean I think it shouldn't have been made (or even if I think so that I would seriously espouse that argument), or that people are bad for watching it or wanting to watch it. Just that I think with movies that go off the rails and fail to return, it is very valid to say, "Nope. Not for me."

well see now i have to watch it

Ditto.

Ha! This would have been the moment where I pointedly avoided it!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/Diffrentstrokes.jpg

But everybody has different tolerances. jjjusten and Hal Jam and EIII are probably like "WTF wouldn't you watch Martyrs?"

― carl agatha, Wednesday, October 23, 2013 6:06 PM

actually I'm like "wtf wouldn't *I* watch martyrs" but everybody else can make their own decisions abt what they can handle

the thnig expressed most of my thoughts on the subject. avoiding disturbing content when it comes to horror movies seems like a fools errand and can result in missing out on some powerful + thoughtful aesthetic experiences (eg snowtown), or even just an entertaining one - if you read a description of a film where the coda involved a man's decapitated head being used to rape a naked + bound college coed you might say no thanks, not for me, but I don't think re-animator is an exceptionally disturbing experience to be avoided. the human centipede is a great example of a movie that's far less graphic than ppl expect, and I love it in part because the *idea* is more horrifying than anything displayed onscreen. martyrs on the other hand *is* exceptionally grueling, for me there are redeeming meta aspects in there but many here have found their mileage varying on that front.

either way there's no reason for anybody to endure needless psychic trauma, the irl world is traumatizing enough

I mean, not that there's anything wrong with staying on the ground-level floor of things like The Conjuring, but I like heights.

Human Centipede is surprisingly tame, actually. I liked it!

― carl agatha, 2013年10月24日 星期四 上午9:04 (Yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

the concept was so deeply horrifying that i couldn't sleep for weeks just thinking about it. by the time i got around to seeing it i was pretty much over the visceral reaction, and the women's acting was so bad that in execution it was just silly.

myriad comments upthread re favouring wikipedia over actually watching some of these movies is wholly otm. like hell i'm sitting through child rape, jesus christ.

The "bad place" argument is sort of fascinating to me. Someone pointed out recently how so many revenge movies spend as much or more time on the inevitable rape or other violation as they do on the revenge. So how should I feel sitting through that stuff? Obviously, I am meant to be disturbed (or titillated?), to some extent. But how am I supposed to feel during the revenge? Relieved? Excited? Thrilled? Entertained? That's why "Irreversible" provides such a strangely unique vantage, seeing as it gets both rape and revenge over with, so a degree, pretty early on, taking them out of the equation. And then also, because the movie has such a more overtly "arty" pedigree, does that put it above your more gormless, typical torture porn? Or does its pedigree provide me a moral "out" while I'm watching it, because I'm doing so in the name of Art? Haven't seen "12 Years a Slave" yet, but I imagine it introduces a similar conflict. Slavery was an outright horror, an atrocity. Do I need to see a movie to emphasize something that really needs no further emphasis in my mind? Am I a coward for not wanting to see its horror confirmed again? Am I a fool for subscribing to a recreation as a legitimate substitute for a horrifying reality I can never know? Is the fact that this particular movie depicts this particular horror in apparently greater detail/verisimilitude something to be praised? Enjoyed?

All sorts of stuff to think about that I honestly rarely think about, even though it's always swimming around up/in there all the time.

I don't watch them as much as I used to but I went through a very big slavery/racism epic phase that was partially informed by wanting an entertainment-based hook into some of the horrific back channels of American history and how it directly impacted my forebears, but mostly because I wanted to support movies that cast African-Americans in lead roles or cast a lot of African-Americans is supporting roles; in 2013, this means you are either watching a lot of Tyler Perry (or Tyler Perry-influenced) movies or a lot of slave movies. In that landscape, something like "Think Like A Man" comes across so much better than it would if there were still movies like "Eve's Bayou" and "The Inkwell" to challenge it.