never again. Ugh.
It was even worse than the Texas Chainsaw remake.
And it had plenty of gratuitous nudity to "help it" where as TCM did not.
Why do they make these movies? I mean seriously?
They were never -good- to start with... but they only have gotten worse.
They were never -good- to start with... but they only have gotten worse.
Why did you watch this one if you didn't like the old ones? I've only ever seen the first one, and I have to admit there was a guilty pleasure in watching it. It was a friend's movie, so I didn't have to pay, but I would probably have been upset if I spent money on it.
Why did you watch this one if you didn't like the old ones? I've only ever seen the first one, and I have to admit there was a guilty pleasure in watching it. It was a friend's movie, so I didn't have to pay, but I would probably have been upset if I spent money on it.
Social gathering with friends. We figured we could just Mystery Science Theater it. We were the only 3 in the theater so it was "Weapons Free" when it came to Snark. The originals were at least bearable when coupled with Snark and puns at the movie's expense.
But even that wasn't enough.
Some people just don't get these types of movies, though, so I can see why you wouldn't like it if you're going into it with the wrong mindset.
You have to seperate "good" into different categories when judging movies. I generally seperate movies into Star Wars good(all around good movie), Friday the 13th good(enjoyable movie, sometimes for the wrong reasons :D ), Troll 2 good(so bad its good), and Zombie Strippers good(a guilty pleasure movie).
I don't know what you people are talking about. Friday the 13th was an awesome movie. It's one of the few movies I've actually gone to see in the cinema more than once, with different groups of friends each time, of course. :D
Some people just don't get these types of movies, though, so I can see why you wouldn't like it if you're going into it with the wrong mindset.
You must be joking.
I can't even say it was bad B movie "I don't take myself seriously" style bad.
Scifi channel makes better movies than this!
MusicOfCreation: I'm not the only one that watched Zombie Strippers on this forum? Awesome.
...and yes the gratuitous nudity was also quite nice... :P
Also: Zombie Strippers is a real movie? I thought that trailer was just a joke. o.o
And strangely enough has more plot than Jason's newest flick.
No it's quite real. And it's hilarious. It's actually a comedy, and it's funny.
And strangely enough has more plot than Jason's newest flick.
Are they fast zombies or slow zombies?
They were never -good- to start with... but they only have gotten worse.
I suggest you watch the documentary Going to Pieces. As both a cinéaste and horror buff, I can understand that the original films might be dated and sometimes deliberately campy (read: sleeping bag murders), that's no excuse for having no idea of what you are talking about and making statements like this.
Its cool to say you didn't like it, but don't judge unless you have perspective and a sense of objectivity.
P.S. the reboot of Friday brought nothing new to the series. It was mediocre at best (just throwing in my 2 cents).
Are they fast zombies or slow zombies?
Both.
Depends on the zombie. Some of them are more akin to Corpse Vampires. But the average ones are just zombies.
I suggest you watch the documentary Going to Pieces. As both a cinéaste and horror buff, I can understand that the original films might be dated and sometimes deliberately campy (read: sleeping bag murders), that's no excuse for having no idea of what you are talking about and making statements like this.
Its cool to say you didn't like it, but don't judge unless you have perspective and a sense of objectivity.
P.S. the reboot of Friday brought nothing new to the series. It was mediocre at best (just throwing in my 2 cents).
Are you saying a person can't think that a movie series is bad unless he reads a particular book about it? How can you objectively think something is bad? Is badness objectively measurable now?
It doesn't sound like he was looking for Citizen Kane II. he was looking for a light, fun, campy movie – exactly what most slasher flicks are advertised as.
Are you saying a person can't think that a movie series is bad unless he reads a particular book about it? How can you objectively think something is bad? Is badness objectively measurable now?
It doesn't sound like he was looking for Citizen Kane II. he was looking for a light, fun, campy movie – exactly what most slasher flicks are advertised as.
Perhaps I jumped the gun. You can't watch the original 13th while having the expectations of what a typical viewer expects from a blockbuster of 2009. Perhaps the Cpt. didn't, and honestly can't see the quality of the original(s).
For example, I get a headache every time my girlfriend makes me watch Singin In the Rain. On the other hand, I can objectively identify many of the qualities that makes it one of the best musicals ever made. So, yep, objectivity is measurable by your quality of judgement. I don't like chicken noodle soup, either, but I can tell you when I had a good bowl of it.
Secondly, I would never associate a horror film with Citizen Kane... and as I said, I'm a big horror buff. So if you can't recognize the qualities of a film you just mentioned (light, fun, campy... Scream comes to mind) and appreciate the film for what it is, then you need not criticize it.
I suggest you watch the documentary Going to Pieces. As both a cinéaste and horror buff, I can understand that the original films might be dated and sometimes deliberately campy (read: sleeping bag murders), that's no excuse for having no idea of what you are talking about and making statements like this.
Its cool to say you didn't like it, but don't judge unless you have perspective and a sense of objectivity.
P.S. the reboot of Friday brought nothing new to the series. It was mediocre at best (just throwing in my 2 cents).
Oh look there's a Jason fan boi.
I don't know let's compare it to actually good horror movies shall we? Like Alien.
There's no suspense, no real plot. No drama to speak of and it fails miserably at creating an atmosphere, all of which are critical to a good horror movie. Especially on the atmosphere, and the lack of suspense building.
It fails. Miserably.
Where as Alien succeeds on all of these fronts. Which is what makes it so terrifying, especially when you watch it in a dark room with heaven forbid surround sound.
Unless you are trying to tell me that the Jason movies existence was to be so miserably bad that you can't even laugh at them as being their point. As a horror movie they've always -not been good-. On a good release. On a bad release such as this last film.... utterly terrible. Which means as horror movies they are failures.
Also, apples to oranges.
Jason is a slasher film, Alien is not.
Care to make a critical analysis comparing the two? I'm up to the task.
Disclaimer: We're both rational guys, I'm not trying to flame. I just think jumping in and calling 13th (which might apply equally to any slasher type film) horrible without substance to the argument merits some sort of counter argument, or at least a rational discussion showing why they aren't horrible films.
Not a "fan boi".
Also, apples to oranges.
Jason is a slasher film, Alien is not.
Care to make a critical analysis comparing the two? I'm up to the task.
Disclaimer: We're both rational guys, I'm not trying to flame. I just think jumping in and calling 13th (which might apply equally to any slasher type film) horrible without substance to the argument merits some sort of counter argument.
But there is plenty of substance. When comparisons to Alien and others have already been made :P
Also, Saw I (Notice I said nothing about the ones that come after) falls under the slasher category doesn't it? It in my opinion is better than the Jason movies have ever been. Though to be fair it not being made in the 80s (I think that's when the first Jason was made? or was it the 70s?) probably helps it in this regard.
Most Slasher films are terrible anyway in my opinion for much the same reasons Jason is.
Partly because it relies on the idea that the Victims are too stupid to either properly get away or kill their would be murderer. (And given how many people die in them, that's pushing the brink of reality in of itself. 7 people in a group vs one guy, even when said guy has a gun unless he's a world class shooter I'm betting on the terrified for their lives nothing to lose people ganging up on said one guy every time, let alone something inane like a retard with a machete or chainsaw).
Partly because it also relies on the concept that said traveling people (or in this movies case a guy who's sister's gone missing and he thinks someone has kidnapped or killed her) not carrying any means of defending themselves.
So it relies totally on people's Flight Or Fight response not working at all. In order to even be believable from the start.
In the 13th's case it also relies on you knowing the plot of the movie before coming to see it. Which as a Series Reboot/Sequel is a Huge No No. They give maybe and I mean maybe two paragraphs worth of dialogue describing events that lead up to the movie.
Then there's the issues of plot holes a plenty which 13th suffers from in all of the films but this most recent one to the greatest extent. Such as the townsfolk apparently knowing Jason and what he does but doing nothing about it at all. People going missing all the time from him. And hell apparently even seeing him somewhat regularly. (The guy that stole the pot recognized Jason!) and no explanation is ever given for this.
Also, there's a nagging issue of a guy being dumb enough to leave his keys by the motorcycle. And a few others pop up related to this one.
For context, a close friend of mine is a film critic (not very popular, however) and he constantly berates me with the fact that horror films rarely win awards from any sort of organization.
Okay finished with the first post.
Secondly, I would never associate a horror film with Citizen Kane... and as I said, I'm a big horror buff. So if you can't recognize the qualities of a film you just mentioned (light, fun, campy... Scream comes to mind) and appreciate the film for what it is, then you need not criticize it.
What I am saying is that Cpt. Micha did go looking for exactly those qualities, and therefore is qualified to criticize it.
Also, what would you call Alien if not a slasher flick? It's the same basic formula as a slasher flick – a group of people trapped somewhere, with no way out and few options, attempting to survive against an unreasonable sociopathic killer who picks them off one by one. If you go back and look at the original trailer, it was advertised very much as a high-brow slasher flick. ("In space, nobody can you hear you scream.") The detail that the psychokiller is an alien instead of a mysterious, unkillable guy in a mask and the story takes place in space instead of at a summer camp are mostly irrelevant to the aspects we are discussing.
First one I remember seeing in theater was Part V 'A New Beginning'. My favorite of the series is 'Jason Goes to Hell'. Didn't really care for 'Freddy vs Jason' although it was a bonified hit I hear. Kane Hodder is who comes to mind when I think Jason Vorhees.
Speaking of Freddy, I also enjoyed the first Nightmare on Elm Street. In theater, scariest movie I ever saw-- didn't sleep for a week. The sequels were a let down-- tried to be too over-the-top funny.
I'd only be disappointed in movies like Friday the 13th if I didn't know what to expect ahead of tiime; each movie delivers-- gore and boobs, by the boat-load. I tell my friends (who don't quite get it), "It goes like this: Cha, cha, cha, Boobs, Poke, cha, cha, cha, Boobs, Stab, [suspensful pause] Slice, movie ends with Jason in the lake." :P [Or whatever that sound effect is]. As long as I get this, I feel like my money is, ah ;) . . . well spent.
I enjoy movies where I have to actually think and ponder (like 'No Country For Old Men' for instance) but I also enjoy movies where it's not required so much.
What I am saying is that Cpt. Micha did go looking for exactly those qualities, and therefore is qualified to criticize it.
Also, what would you call Alien if not a slasher flick? It's the same basic formula as a slasher flick – a group of people trapped somewhere, with no way out and few options, attempting to survive against an unreasonable sociopathic killer who picks them off one by one. If you go back and look at the original trailer, it was advertised very much as a high-brow slasher flick. ("In space, nobody can you hear you scream.") The detail that the psychokiller is an alien instead of a mysterious, unkillable guy in a mask and the story takes place in space instead of at a summer camp are mostly irrelevant to the aspects we are discussing.
This too.
Also, what would you call Alien if not a slasher flick? It's the same basic formula as a slasher flick – a group of people trapped somewhere, with no way out and few options, attempting to survive against an unreasonable sociopathic killer who picks them off one by one.
A quick response. This is a good argument, but has its own flaws.
1. People trapped
2. No way out
3. survive (sociopathic killer) [disclaimer: a slasher may have more than one killer... like Scream.]
Films that are not slashers that fit the criteria:
The Descent
Feast
Night of the Living Dead
the Ruins
Just a few, and hope it gives some thoughts to the genre.
More to come.Basically, I think you left off hunted, which is probably the most important aspect, I think. You could argue that the characters in The Ruins are being hunted psychologically, and I would definitely be open to that interpretation, although the quality seems very different.
As for Feast and Descent, I never saw those
And a video of the new 13th with a comedic twist, which talks about its merits and downfalls. Not that I thought the reboot was especially good, but it helps give a better perspective.
http://spill.com/Movie-Reviews/MovieReview.aspx?Name=Friday%20the%2013th&VideoId=420112
A quick response. This is a good argument, but has its own flaws.
1. People trapped
2. No way out
3. survive (sociopathic killer) [disclaimer: a slasher may have more than one killer... like Scream.]
Films that are not slashers that fit the criteria:
The Descent
Feast
Night of the Living Dead
the Ruins
Just a few, and hope it gives some thoughts to the genre.
Also:
Snakes on a Plane
Terminator
When Mars Attacks
Basically every movie where something is trying to kill someone. Fully 90% of all action movies ever made.
You must be joking.
I assure you I am not. :P
Also, I've seen Zombie Strippers as well. I'm amazed somebody could think that was good and not see the appeal of Friday the 13th.
I'm not saying that Zombie Stripper was bad at all (or rather, it definitely was bad, but it was trying to be, so it's okay). I'm just saying that it takes pretty esoteric taste to enjoy that movie, taste more esoteric than I think would be required to enjoy Friday the 13th...
They should really just start subtitling these things "Friday the 13th: Here We Go Again", or "Friday the 13th: You Know the Drill", or just "Friday the 13th: Jason Kills Stupid Young People".
That was exactly why this new one was good. I went to see a Friday the 13th movie, and I got a Friday the 13th movie. It was exactly what I went wanting to see. They didn't try to do anything stupid or edgy like sending Jason to space.
(The guy that stole the pot recognized Jason!)
Uh, what? How did you get that impression?
That was exactly why this new one was good. I went to see a Friday the 13th movie, and I got a Friday the 13th movie. It was exactly what I went wanting to see. They didn't try to do anything stupid or edgy like sending Jason to space.
That's how I felt; I saw 'exactly' the kind of movie I was expecting to see. How many movies can that really be said about, eh ;)?
On the other hand, I enjoyed 'Jason X' mainly because it was such a departure from the typical Friday the 13th movie. Undeniably corny but still fun for a slasher pic in space. Fans of the series talked about such a far-fetched possibility for years ('bout as much as a Freddy vs. Jason flick)-- never thought they'd do it, myself.
Funny thing: I never really consider myself a 'Jason' fan-- until a new movie comes out-- then I realize how much I actually enjoy these mindless movies ;).
I'm not saying that Zombie Stripper was bad at all (or rather, it definitely was bad, but it was trying to be, so it's okay). I'm just saying that it takes pretty esoteric taste to enjoy that movie, taste more esoteric than I think would be required to enjoy Friday the 13th...
Uh, what? How did you get that impression?
The look on his face, (the one that was feeling up the mannequin) and what he said, both were clear signs of recognition.
The reason why I don't appreciate Jason is at no point do they make an effort to show you it's meant to be anything but serious. They try to play it as if it's a horror movie. Zombie Strippers is a comedy first and foremost (it's even in the comedy sections) and thus conveys it's self successfully since it's you know, funny. Where as Jason... I don't think they were shooting for laughable.
And hell it wasn't even that if they were. Just groan inducing. I almost walked out of the theater it was so bad.
Also:
Snakes on a Plane
Terminator
When Mars Attacks
Basically every movie where something is trying to kill someone. Fully 90% of all action movies ever made.
None of these qualify. Terminator has the unstoppable killer aspect, and snakes on a plane has the trapped aspect, but they do not put them together in the proper formula, like, at all. Mars Attack, I don't know how you get. You need to read my original post:
It's the same basic formula as a slasher flick – a group of people trapped somewhere, with no way out and few options, attempting to survive against an unreasonable sociopathic killer who picks them off one by one.
And I later clarified "picked off" as "hunted."
The look on his face, (the one that was feeling up the mannequin) and what he said, both were clear signs of recognition.
I know who you're talking about, and there were definitely no signs of recognition.
I think you're losing it. ;)
The reason why I don't appreciate Jason is at no point do they make an effort to show you it's meant to be anything but serious.
Do they need to?
I'm pretty sure everybody knows. I mean, it does have a reputation.
It's the same reason why the Watchman trailer doesn't give viewers any indication at all of the plot. It doesn't need to, because it has a reputation.
Partly because it relies on the idea that the Victims are too stupid to either properly get away or kill their would be murderer. (And given how many people die in them, that's pushing the brink of reality in of itself. 7 people in a group vs one guy, even when said guy has a gun unless he's a world class shooter I'm betting on the terrified for their lives nothing to lose people ganging up on said one guy every time, let alone something inane like a retard with a machete or chainsaw).
I think this may fall under Nash Equilibrium. All 7 people are going to initially run from a dangerous foe barring exceptional circumstances. All 7 people may know that if they band together they can probably kill them with a few casualties, but all 7 people know that if only 1 of them face the murderer than they are almost guaranteed to die a horrible death. None of the 7 hope to die so they all run away despite it being not the best option over all. It would be unrealistic to expect any group other than an armed fighting unit(military, militia, gangs, etc...) to have that sort of innate coordination, trust in the person next to them, or willingness to self-sacrifice. You definitely can't expect it out of a group of horny stoned teenagers.
Boy am I disappointed.
I think this may fall under Nash Equilibrium. All 7 people are going to initially run from a dangerous foe barring exceptional circumstances. All 7 people may know that if they band together they can probably kill them with a few casualties, but all 7 people know that if only 1 of them face the murderer than they are almost guaranteed to die a horrible death. None of the 7 hope to die so they all run away despite it being not the best option over all. It would be unrealistic to expect any group other than an armed fighting unit(military, militia, gangs, etc...) to have that sort of innate coordination, trust in the person next to them, or willingness to self-sacrifice. You definitely can't expect it out of a group of horny stoned teenagers.
After the second one dies, they'd realize there's no way in hell they could escape on their own, or survive so at the very least they should be trying to stick together. After he seems to be magically everywhere, they'd also soon realize Flight is not the response they should be using. But Fight. While they still have a chance at taking him down. But then again, they didn't even do Flight at all as an option until it was down to the last three people. This is why these movies are stupid and full of Fail. The rely entirely upon there not being the Flight Or Fight response at all within the victims.
After the second one dies, they'd realize there's no way in hell they could escape on their own, or survive so at the very least they should be trying to stick together. After he seems to be magically everywhere, they'd also soon realize Flight is not the response they should be using. But Fight. While they still have a chance at taking him down. But then again, they didn't even do Flight at all as an option until it was down to the last three people. This is why these movies are stupid and full of Fail. The rely entirely upon there not being the Flight Or Fight response at all within the victims.
Usually the victims do run. The classic slasher scene is the blond teenager running braless while the creepy psycho stalks at a snail's pace after her. There are also movies where they make token attempts to fight back.
But I think the fear that slasher movies are trying to tap into is the fear of a situation that you can't run from and you can't fight back against, like those dreams where something is chasing you and you keep running, but it never gets any further away, and you never see what it is because you're too afraid to look behind you. It doesn't matter if you run away or fight, Jason will kill you super dead. The only way to escape him is to be virginal until your wedding night.
I also doubt that a bunch of stoned teenagers would be thinking rationally after seeing two of their friends chopped up. Sure it's possible – we all know that guy who stays calm no matter what happens, but we also all know that guy who flips out when you run out of beer.
First, your sense of what would happen requires at least three people to remain calm enough to fight, which would be hard with even one person freaking out, and to override their sense of self-preservation enough to charge a guy who's armed and an experienced killer.
Second, it assumes that they know something about how the first two victims died. These aren't forensic scientists. They don't know if there was a struggle, if their friends ran or fought, or even how many assailants there were. They can't calculate their odds based on two dead bodies, because all they know is that people died. They don't know how or why.
Lastly, you assume that these people know the plot from the start of the movie. If you're in the woods and a single killer is chasing you, and that killer shows a marked aversion to running, it may make a lot of sense to scatter and hide. Even if he found one of you, he might waste hours trying to find the rest. Rush a guy with a chainsaw and he might take down three of you before you over power him. Run and hide and he has to find you and you catch you first, and then he has to repeat the process two more times in order to get the same number of victims. The only way to know that the killer has a preternatural sense of where his victims are hiding and can catch up to them without even breaking a sweat is to be familiar with slasher movie tropes from the very first body.
Why they chose to run in the woods, when there was a perfectly good car sitting there (which had keys in it no less) is beyond me. Or for that matter they could have taken the Officer's gun off his body. Especially since three of them were not stoned nor drunk and one of them had already demonstrated good survival instincts up to that point.
Except for the whole issue that the main group didn't run. They stayed cluster **** in the house. Three of the characters did stick together at least. (well two did and a third got added later)
Why they chose to run in the woods, when there was a perfectly good car sitting there (which had keys in it no less) is beyond me. Or for that matter they could have taken the Officer's gun off his body. Especially since three of them were not stoned nor drunk and one of them had already demonstrated good survival instincts up to that point.
Well, I don't know anything about this particular movie. You were making a blanket statement about slasher films, which was contrary to my experience with them.
Please do not take anything I have said as an argument that the Friday the 13th remake was an awesome movie.
Please.
I'm begging here.
Well, I don't know anything about this particular movie. You were making a blanket statement about slasher films, which was contrary to my experience with them.
Please do not take anything I have said as an argument that the Friday the 13th remake was an awesome movie.
Please.
I'm begging here.
Even so, it makes no sense for groups to split up and run away once the bodies start showing up! Especially when they don't know who the killer is! (After all it could be one of their friends.. best to stay together to keep an eye on them)
God forbid they are stupid like this and are miles and miles away from civilization. And make no effort to run towards said civilization.
Even so, it makes no sense for groups to split up and run away once the bodies start showing up! Especially when they don't know who the killer is! (After all it could be one of their friends.. best to stay together to keep an eye on them)
God forbid they are stupid like this and are miles and miles away from civilization. And make no effort to run towards said civilization.
I thought I just explained how it made sense.
Your assumption that a group of people would sit down and think this through rationally just isn't based in reality. There have been cases of a killer walking into a house full of teenagers and taking them out one by one all by his lonesome (Richard Speck, 8 victims, Ted Bundy, 4 victims), because when a guy starts slashing everybody's instinct is to get the hell away from him. Yes, if they sat down and thought about it, they'd probably realize that one guy with a knife is no match for a group of them with improvised weapons, but that's just not how people think when their lives are threatened.
Some of the most important training law enforcement and soldiers go through is how to keep their heads and do these calculations rationally (of have them drilled into their skull so hard they do the instinctively). Drunk sixteen-year-olds? Not as good at it.
Oddly enough, it looks like "The last house on the Road" or somehting might go this route.
I thought I just explained how it made sense.
Your assumption that a group of people would sit down and think this through rationally just isn't based in reality. There have been cases of a killer walking into a house full of teenagers and taking them out one by one all by his lonesome (Richard Speck, 8 victims, Ted Bundy, 4 victims), because when a guy starts slashing everybody's instinct is to get the hell away from him. Yes, if they sat down and thought about it, they'd probably realize that one guy with a knife is no match for a group of them with improvised weapons, but that's just not how people think when their lives are threatened.
Some of the most important training law enforcement and soldiers go through is how to keep their heads and do these calculations rationally (of have them drilled into their skull so hard they do the instinctively). Drunk sixteen-year-olds? Not as good at it.
Agreed. Also, through out the movie most of the kids didn't know what was going on until the end when it was down to about 3-4 of them. Even then the ******* kid pretty much was calling shenanigans which many people might do in that situation. You know how crazy teenagers(and adults for that matter) like to play sick jokes on their friends.
-There will be 3 Friday the 13ths this year. Feb, March, and Nov I believe. This only happens once out of every 11 years I believe.
The 13th hour is also 1am, ie)the witching hour.
Think there was a plug in The daVinci Code about one of the Popes betraying the Knights Templar on a Friday the 13th in a move more or less like Order 66 (Star Wars). But, when did G. Lucas really show much creative vision or originality to begin with anyway? He should direct slasher movies...
-Slasher is a subgenre of horror and not a good one at that most of the time. The "big 3" are Freddy, Jason, and Michael, that's it. Leatherface & Pinhead do not go there as they are not products of slasher iconic film. The later 2 are from decidedly higher brow fare, TCM remakes, however, err, no. Old school is the one. We didn't see it in Film class for nothing.
-Slasher movies do not compete for horror so much as sudden starteling scenes or easy moments of "Oh, sh-t!"; villian suddenly appears, cat leaps out of closet, lights go out. Often gimmicky. Truly compelling horror lingers and doesn't rely on cliched acts. See "The Shining" as a near perfect example. The music score alone, my God. Not much gore, not much fluff/filler, but somehow scary as Hell. Less is more sometimes.
-Horror, for the most part, gets the sh-t end of the stick. When do they ever get Oscars? Seriously, name 1. Crying shame. Almost always dramas. Closest reach I can theorize is Hitchcock, namely "Psycho" which wasn't really horror so much as mystery/thriller. Awesome work, but hard to nail down genre wise. We're seeing more of that genre bleeding these days too. Sci-fi/horror, black comedy, action/mystery, romantic comedy, uh, documentary porn?
-Slasher movies can be entertaining. It's just, they aren't "good film" per se. Sometimes you just want to watch a popcorn movie, you know? Fluff/filler for the brain. Ok, I'll buy that, it's just sad as there is a growing demographic in America that seems to just want to be entertained mindlessly w/out having to be engaged on any level at all. Seriously, they f'ing brought back Knight Rider & American Gladiators...wtf?
Continuing, not a big Friday the 13th fan if you could've guessed, but wouldn't lambast anyone that digs it. It's cool, just not what I would call clever writing, direction, cinematography, etc. Still, they have appeal somehow. For instance, I dig zombie movies. Not exactly "high art" you know, but it's my bag and has been since I was 11.
Now, don't get me wrong, they don't ususally compete w/ "Citizen Kane", "Schindler's List", "Ben Hur", [insert another Best Picture here], bla bla bla, but it's in my blood, what can I say. Whatever you ID w/, who knows. I guess, it's like my dad said, "We were camping for 7 days, eating steak non stop. You know, by that 6th day, I would've killed for a hot dog."
Also, another childhood tidbit; Billy Cosby routine I saw in Cincy about horror movies when he was a kid vs. the ones we have now (paraphrased).
"When I was a kid, there were the main movie monsters, scary guys, you know, and you could always count on hiding under the bed to save you;
-Frankenstein [sic] (the monster) was too stiff/rigid. Couldn't bend over enough to reach you under the bed. Same thing w/ the Mummy, he's bound tightly.
-Dracula, well, everyone knows bats can't fly under beds.
-Creature from the Black Lagoon can't be out of water too long
etc. etc.
Now a' days, you got Jason. Jason will get you! It doesn't matter. You could be surrounded by steel and concrete and Jason will still get you."
Now a' days, you got Jason. Jason will get you! It doesn't matter. You could be surrounded by steel and concrete and Jason will still get you."
You could be in SPACE and Jason would still get you.
He's just that cool. Yeah, cool. That's the word for it... :P
Cool isn't the word I'd use :D
You could be in SPACE and Jason would still get you.
Yeah, that little abortion of celluloid...
I still remember the tagline, "Evil gets an upgrade." They were trying to make $, pure and simple. Old movie formulas. Same thing w/ the Saw franchise. I cannot respect those producers sucking at the proverbial teet...
Thematically, Jason, though, as an image of intimidation, he cuts quite a figure ;), heh. Just those little edits where you catch a breif snippet, yeah. It's the mask for one. That anonymity it affords makes you less human, etc; scarier. Worked for Michael too, right? Further removed from the prey & their mentality, the less they can understand. And ppl fear what they don't understand.
When he had the burlap sack on in the 1st one, I thought that was more "real", scarier. Actually, there's a ton of masked killers when I think about it.
He's just that cool. Yeah, cool. That's the word for it... :P
Keep trying, it'll come to you one of these days.
To me,
-Pinhead, Chatterer & Girl from "Hellraiser I & II" are cool. Butterball, not so much.
-The crawlers from "The Descent", the xenomorphs in "Aliens", the zombies in most Romero, Boyle, Snyder, & some Russo fare, they were cool. Same premise really; masses of relentless enemies, small microcosm of survivors.
-1st Michael & 1st Freddy films, they were cool, not played out and hoaky yet.
-The alien in "The Thing", Jack in "American Werewolf in London", etc. were cool.
I am to be the adding to... how you say? The Netflix, no?
Descent... was that the one about the cave?
I am to be the adding to... how you say? The Netflix, no?
A cave was involved, yes.
To me,
-Pinhead, Chatterer & Girl from "Hellraiser I & II" are cool. Butterball, not so much.
-The crawlers from "The Descent", the xenomorphs in "Aliens", the zombies in most Romero, Boyle, Snyder, & some Russo fare, they were cool. Same premise really; masses of relentless enemies, small microcosm of survivors.
-1st Michael & 1st Freddy films, they were cool, not played out and hoaky yet.
-The alien in "The Thing", Jack in "American Werewolf in London", etc. were cool.
I remember the first time seeing Hellraiser and getting to where Kirsty opens the box and Pinhead does his pseudo monologue. I don't think I've seen any other movie get so ominous. Pinhead from Hellraiser 1 probably is the most badass horror movie character in my opinion. He also had some of the best dialogue from that movie.
I've also had a strange love for the bridge scene from TCM 2, due to how it can make me think "**** is hitting the fan!" and "WTF is going on?" at the exact same time. Its quite the mind**** the first time you see it.
Same thing w/ the Saw franchise. I cannot respect those producers sucking at the proverbial teet...
Trivia: Did you know that Saw 3-6 were actually all written at the same time and specifically meant to be a continuous story so they don't just add on arbitrarily every movie like everybody thinks so long as they're making money? :P
Granted Saws 3-5 definitely haven't lived up to the pure brilliance and magnificence that was the first two... I wanna say they should have made it a TV series instead after that, but I don't think that it's a TV audience kind of thing...
-There will be 3 Friday the 13ths this year. Feb, March, and Nov I believe. This only happens once out of every 11 years I believe.
The 13th hour is also 1am, ie)the witching hour.
Think there was a plug in The daVinci Code about one of the Popes betraying the Knights Templar on a Friday the 13th in a move more or less like Order 66 (Star Wars). But, when did G. Lucas really show much creative vision or originality to begin with anyway? He should direct slasher movies...
The 13th hour is actually 1 PM. ;)
Also, the 11 years thing could be correct. It depends on how many leap years there are in those 11 years. Furthermore, did you know that pretty often, when you come of an age that is divisible by 11 (11, 22, etc.) it often is on the same day of the week that you were born? (This also depends on how many leap years there have been of course.)
I'll stop the off-topic now. :o
Pinhead from Hellraiser 1 probably is the most badass horror movie character in my opinion. He also had some of the best dialogue from that movie.
Truly clever, terribly well spoken, methodical, etc. Yes, much respect for him. He was considered a sex symbol in Japan in the 80's if you can believe it.
Yeah, Pinhead is kind of this enigmatic antagonist, though I think I would be in error to call him a villain per se. Though, to be fair, he aids Kirsty, sort of, by recapturing Frank and saving her from the doctor & Julia in #2.
Sets the tone for why ppl all want to look for the "box". Visionaries, sadists, masochists, etc. They pretty much explain it in the text; you should check out C. Barker's The Hellbound Heart (short story) which Hellraiser is based off of. Totally decent. Most of his work (lit) is high end horror.
I've also had a strange love for the bridge scene from TCM 2
The old series (II), not the remakes? 2, w/ Dennis Hopper, right?
Not what I'd call a good horror movie, but I still enjoyed it. And yes, the bridge scene where Leatherface has "Nubbins" the cadavre, tied to his own body and saws through the driver's head (head slides off in 2 planes), classic. The wacky Vietnam vet brother too and his Sonny Bono whig, etc.
The industrial band Skinny Puppy have a song called "Shadowcast" where they sample the Hell out of that film, particularly the assault @ the radio station. And Primus samples it in "Jerry was a Race Car Driver", also the radio station attack on the girl, "Heh heh, dog will hunt!" What a f'ed up movie.
Crimson_Concerto: Did you know that Saw 3-6 were actually all written at the same time and specifically meant to be a continuous story so they don't just add on arbitrarily every movie like everybody thinks so long as they're making money?
Actually, they do that for financial reasons usually. Especially now a' days w/ 7 figure budgets. Cheaper to do it in bulk, less creative differences, etc. Consolidation is usually pretty wise. Case in point, LotR, all 3 at once. Except, that franchise was notable in that it was good IMO.
Granted Saws 3-5 definitely haven't lived up to the pure brilliance and magnificence that was the first two
Plot twists don't necessarilly equate to "brilliance" IMO. Just ask M. Night Shamalan, you know? The 1st Saw had promise, this is true, but they dropped the ball and kept grinding out the same "clever trap master" shtick. After 2 came out, the studies went very formulaically in that it was very profitable per the research between budget, marketing, and endgame.M-bark: The 13th hour is actually 1 PM.
Yes, if you are speaking of military time, 1300 is correct. However, that concept did not exist in the time of witch hunts and high superstition which was where I was alluding to given the nature of the integer and all that jazz.
I never would've figured on Pinhead being a sex symbol in any country. I read the Hellbound Heart and I enjoyed it greatly. I generally refrain from calling Pinhead a villain outside of Hellraiser 3 & 4, due to him being more of a force of nature as opposed to a true protagonist.