The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

An ongoing project to survey the best films of individual decades, genres, and filmmakers.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1751 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Jan 31, 2020 2:17 pm

barryconvex I agree with you, but I think we’re in the minority. Not only is it on lists of ‘worst eps’ but I’ve encountered plenty of people in my personal life who agree with that assessment. However, I don’t love the show in general so my opinion is bound to be a bit off kilter- even if I agree with a popular opinion that Pine Barrens is by far the best!

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Ask me about my visible cat breasts
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1752 Post by DarkImbecile » Fri Jan 31, 2020 2:25 pm

Not surprising that you don't like The Sopranos, as you don't seem particularly interested in psychiatry or treatment

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1753 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Jan 31, 2020 3:46 pm

Oh I like the show fine, I just don’t think it’s God’s gift to television like most people, which is why I used the word “love” - I can’t really say anything bad about it though.

Except now that you mention it, as far as therapy/treatment, it probably has the worst depiction of the process I’ve ever seen. I should have mentioned it in the Sibyl thread, but while that film has more ethical problems, The Sopranos’ therapy scenes are so problematic for too many reasons to get into fully- not just inappropriate interventions but dated methodology. She’s not just a psychodynamic therapist, a perfectly wonderful modality rooted more directly in Freud; but instead displays terrible backwards qualities of a therapist: not client-centered at all, too confrontational delivering formulations based on air, and so purely Freudian it’s as if Chase wrote the scenes based on a 50s housewife’s understanding of the profession and engagement. Not that this affected my feelings on the show really, since it was just a joke as a sideline to the real meat, but I legit forgot therapy was even a part of the show until you mentioned that which is as good an indication as any for my feelings on its treatment of the therapeutic process.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1754 Post by colinr0380 » Sat Feb 01, 2020 7:26 am

Rayon Vert wrote:
Mon Jan 27, 2020 11:16 pm
colinr0380 wrote:
Mon Jan 27, 2020 6:49 am
I mostly love the way that The Birds uses language and treats it as kind of an irrelevance (the romantic scenes are often as much about placement of character in landscape as the content of their words, which are often white lies or at least concealments of true feelings) or even just another animal noise that needs to be tempered, eventually muting everyone down into silence. Even the birds themselves seem curiously placid at the end, as if they have managed to quieten down the hubbub of human noise (including those children singing their circular nursery rhyme, for which they must pay the price! Or the whine of the motorboat necessitating drastic measures to mess up the skipper's hairstyle and perfect composure!) to acceptable levels! Which of course makes turning the car on in the final scene all the more scary!
That's a very interesting angle. I don't know if I'm completely onboard with that analysis but it definitely expresses how, yes, the film's human drama to a certain extent is made irrelevant by the bird apocalypse. I think it's a major strength of the film, and shows up how most horror films, then and now, are a lot more simple-minded by comparison, in that the film takes so much interest, time and care in developing this drama narrative, and the bird attacks are completely non-germane to it and their out-of-the-blueness traumatizes that narrative itself, until it almost collapses. It makes it all the more horrifying and disturbing. These characters and their relationships are clearly not written and built up just to be pawns in a horror plot.
This aspect really comes across to me much more after seeing the films which followed The Birds which play with moments of silence or paring down the soundtrack in more obvious (and not always the most satisfying) ways - I'm thinking of something like the chase through the art museum with the sound of the footsteps emphasised in Torn Curtain or particularly a number of sequences in Topaz, such as the view of the goings on in the hotel lobby as seen from the perspective of a character across the street. The Birds is perhaps where this use of silence as an affectation became most obviously foregrounded for enormous stretches of the film but it is perhaps there already in the long, wordless, methodical post-murder clean up scene in Psycho too, or the long sequence of following Madeline around San Francisco in Vertigo. I have not really checked to see if someone has already done this, but there might be a good essay to be written on "Hitchcock's Use of Silence in Sound Films", potentially theorising that with these later films he is trying to get back to some of the purely visually powerful sequences of his early silent films.
Last edited by colinr0380 on Sun Feb 16, 2020 5:36 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1755 Post by Rayon Vert » Sat Feb 01, 2020 10:19 am

Good point. Yes, Googling the topic reveals many already have picked up and written on it!

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1756 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Feb 02, 2020 12:32 pm

The Reptile (Gilling 1966). (1st viewing) Not only was this filmed back to back with The Plague of the Zombies, and features the same Cornish setting, sets and some of the personnel, but the basic narrative isn’t that different: a male-female duo arrive in a new community and come upon mysterious circumstances involving strange deaths, and we sort of know who’s responsible but we’re going to follow them slowly discovering the how and why. The comparison shows up how this is much inferior though. The horror quotient is lower, and the script in general isn’t the most exciting. Also, again in comparison to The Plague, the lead actors, both for the two hero protagonists and the main villain, are quite bland. That being said, there are still things that make the thing enjoyable, like the cinematography and the atmosphere for the first half or so, and sequences like those involving John Laurie playing quite the eccentric. But the promise in the build-up isn’t realized in the end, and for my tastes this ends up being the weakest Hammer film I’ve reviewed here so far.


Nightmare (Francis 1964).
(rewatch) Mr. Sausage wrote that sometimes people criticize the second half – I actually saw something more to criticize with the first half, in the sense that it’s fairly obvious the girl is not actually having nightmares and that, combined with knowing this is a Sangster screenplay, makes you know strings are being pulled and distances you from her suffering. But the film definitely makes up for that in the way that when the first twist comes, things are definitely a lot more complicated than you assume, and from there they just coming and coming. Sangster was definitely trying to outdo himself here with every succeeding film. It’s a pretty wild ride and suspension of disbelief is required for how warped these characters can get. But indeed it’s also an extremely stylishly-photographed film, and that together with the craziness of the narrative really makes for a noteworthy piece.


Countess Dracula (Sasdy 1971).
(rewatch) I definitely didn’t watch the Ingrid Pitt films with the right spirit in mind originally because again for this one I didn’t find anything wrong with it the second time around. Based on the Elizabeth Bathory legend, it’s got nothing to do with Dracula or vampires, except of course the victims are still getting emptied of their blood. It’s really a fairy tale with the aging hag bathing with the blood of young virgins to regain her youth temporarily (in order to satisfy her lust), but getting uglier every time the spell wears out. The horror element really is secondary here to the fable and slightly camp drama. Fun film with good performances, especially Nigel Bruce, and Pitt’s role is pretty meaty, and it looks good too with the extremely nice, Eastern European-flavored Pinewood sets and the slightly post-medieval atmosphere. Sasdy is at home with the subject being Hungarian-born, and the Polish Pitt not so far removed. A variety of interpretive perspectives are invited here, as you could find the film’s theme either anti- or pro-feminist (a woman’s social value are in her looks vs. a woman as the desiring agent manipulating and ultimately controlling her masculine target), and then there’s the class angle of the nobility using the very life of the peasants to prolong their kicks.


13 Ghosts (Castle 1960). (1st viewing) I knew going in this was slightly more of a kids/pre-teens’ movie but it still has somewhat of an edge. The gimmicky ghost scenes are extra-cheesy and sometimes laborious to get through, but the rest of this, in terms of the build-up, the mise-en-scene and actors, is in a minor way enjoyable in itself.


Frankenstein Created Woman (Fisher 1967). (1st viewing) I was looking forward to finally seeing this, expecting something good and this definitely did not disappoint. Maybe I’m too knee deep in Hammer right now to have any objectivity, but what a terrific film! Starts off thrillingly with that great first guillotine sequence and doesn’t let up from there. This is really a very good script by Tony Hinds, and it’s got so many interesting things in it, whether it’s the life after death experiments and the soul transference business, the Clockwork Orange-y dandies, or the film’s evolution into a proto-slasher. It also gives a new meaning to a meeting of souls! Fisher’s direction here is very vital and visually bolder than usual, and Cushing gives an especially good performance, his character by now definitely more on the more (anti-)heroic side. His assistant is also the most fun yet. I’ve got to revisit Destroyed, but this is easily the best of the Frankenstein films for me up to this point (Universal included), and among my very top Hammers.


Inbred (Chandon 2011).
(1st viewing) Deliverance in a remote Yorkshire village, as four teenage offenders and their two caretakers on some kind of a weekend trip fall prey to the yahoos. Lots of extreme, over-the-top killings and gore. A black comedy horror film that’s maybe close to The Devil’s Rejects in tone, but less realistic and gritty, and more cartoonish. Nothing too original and not completely successful as either horror or comedy, but it’s entertaining enough while it lasts, at the same time that it’s completely forgettable after it’s over.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1757 Post by knives » Sun Feb 02, 2020 1:08 pm

The lack of horror is a huge part of why The Reptile is actually one of my favorites. I don't believe Gilling cares for the genre and instead view his films as an attempt to show the seams. They're almost bretchian comedies mixed with a little bit of humans are more frightening than monsters.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Projec

#1758 Post by therewillbeblus » Mon Feb 03, 2020 1:41 am

domino harvey wrote:
Mon Aug 27, 2012 9:10 pm
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane (Jonathan Levine 2006) Exceedingly clever twist on the genre as the slasher format is usurped for perceptive commentary on the general resentment held by both sexes towards "pretty girls" (at any age, really, but here in high school). The film's opening sequence is a stunner (never in my life did I anticipate a horror film opening with a Bedroom Walls track), showing the film's carefully captured tack of sexual jealousy and entitlement taken to a swift and grisly conclusion. The film functions more as a slow burn from there onward, but the ultimate message is a true kicker:
SpoilerShow
With Heard "getting away" with all of her assorted machinations, the pic both confirms and counteracts its own thesis. True to the suspicions of her peers and hangers-on, there just is something about Mandy Lane that somehow keeps her hands resolutely clean of fawning paramours from both classes, even after engineering all of their deaths. Here is a film that comments on the dangers of entitlement from various vantages (the Friend Zoned Columbine wannabe, the jocks and stoner studs, even the marginally less attractive alpha blonde all concurrently judge and desire Mandy Lane) before suggesting that yes, being Mandy Lane does mean you can walk away taller than the rest. The film dares to depict the logical extreme of a culture of entitlement, made all the more troubling by its message's ultimate ambiguity with regards to the morality of such behaviors (on both sides).
I didn't go into the film expecting to be instigated by a trenchant philosophical critique, but how fortunate that it's there amidst the blood and marrow!
I don't have much to add to this, though I didn't like it as much as you, I did admire the twist's power in disempowering the 'other,' which encompasses the masses, even further. Also eyecatching were the visual choices that meshed high stylization with jarring naturalism. There was a realism to the sunlight or darkness blocking out action as much as intensely brutal closeup kills, not to mention a lot of passive deaths without expected beats of buildup every time. This inconsistency helps feed the horror but the subdued attention from this aids a focus on the themes which are important for the film to land as hard as it does. For all the cutting moments there is a lot of angsty fog from an objective stance looking at impenetrable teens who are clearly subjectively struggling as much as they are putting off both us and each other through selfish and self-pitying behavior. I think the film is smarter than it is good, but there's enough puzzlement in the narrative to make it fresh in its engagement.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Projec

#1759 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Feb 05, 2020 1:12 am

swo17 wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:02 pm
For whatever reason you guys just reminded me of this must-see recommendation from zedz:
zedz wrote:
Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:07 pm
Just popping in to "recommend" the late Andrew Getty's insane The Evil Within. It's an overbudgeted labour of love, or desperation, or something, and it really has to be seen to be believed.

This is a bad, bad film in almost every conceivable way, but it's certainly not boring. Just when you think the film has finally found its woeful groove, some fresh absurdity is lurking around the corner. Try to imagine a filmmaker with Tommy Wiseau-level skills (and understanding of human behaviour), cursed with an unlimited budget, trying to make the kind of horror movie that somebody who wasn't really paying attention might think that David Lynch would make.

Our protagonist is a 'retard' (they don't just go there: they barely go anywhere else) who has a thing going on with a cursed mirror that orders him to perform escalating atrocities. Animatronics may be involved. This movie doesn't have the best mirror acting you've ever seen, but I'm pretty sure it has the most! Badly drawn and performed characters bumble into and out of the story, most meeting a sorry end, some just hanging in the air like a stale fart as narrative non sequiturs. The plot lurches and judders around scenes that were never shot, or possibly the disjunctions are because we're experiencing different generations of script filmed at different times.

What makes the film remarkable, and worth seeing once, is that there's a genuinely original visual imagination evident at times - often at inappropriate times, as when a bland dialogue scene is shot with a trippy, continually tracking / wiping editing scheme that Raul Ruiz would have dismissed as too eccentric. The fact that the filmmaker was a Getty heir means that every fanciful / misguided CGI or effects whim could be catered to, which is kind of unique for this kind of shitty film. Almost by accident, you get flashes of eccentrics like Jodorowsky, Ottinger or Ruiz in the middle of a turgid Z-grade genre exercise.
I didn’t get very far into this before bailing- but until the insanely troubling characterization happened the initial dream sequence was definitely like Wiseau and I enjoyed its terribleness. This just becomes so lame and disengaging so quickly though, and it made me sick watching not because of the horror or technical choices but the awful understanding of human behavior and painful writing/directing. I guess this is the ultimate horror movie if one takes it on a meta level as a horror experience for the viewer watching this trash. Life is too short to sit through this alone. Maybe I’ll give it another go with a group one day.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1760 Post by therewillbeblus » Fri Feb 07, 2020 10:05 pm

Freeway was one I’d always been disinterested in seeing, misjudging as a generic 90s thriller programmer. The chess pieces get laid out early but instead of serving up an expected dish this winds up as a road movie journey that transcends that genre too and becomes like three movies in one. To say more explicits would be to ruin the adventure but it’s safe to say that this begins as a social problem kitchen sink drama, transforms into a road movie, physiological thriller, corporeal horror, then some other subgenres
SpoilerShow
(criminal injustice drama, prison escape)
before emerging again with the revenge piece. By the end we’ve felt the changes of the protagonist’s growth through our own intense endurance test. Is it a horror movie? Probably not enough for me to place it on my list, despite the obviously intentional Little Red Riding Hood reimagining and the unsettling bouts, especially at the end of the first (?) act, but that doesn’t mean it’s not good. The film doesn’t take itself seriously enough to place anyways for me, essentially taking serious topics and turning events around to create a cathartic emasculation of the toxic male killer. That’s not a complaint, it’s actually a wise and admirably bold decision, but most horror elements that are on the verge of succeeding in that space quickly retreat to allow Witherspoon to emerge as competent, resilient, or victor, minimizing trauma or other dramatic baggage in favor of loud fantasy.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1761 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:29 am

Image

The Skin I Live In

It may be an unpopular opinion but this is easily one of my favorite Almodovars, featuring what I think is the best example of his genius Russian doll storytelling. Returning to it a few years later after going through most of his filmography, I think it is also the most twisted of all his erotic expositions in taking the audience on the mysterious ride becoming complicit in the madness, while also validating all sensuality in the typically welcoming attitude. Who knew that Almodovar would make the best Hitchcock film in recent memory (if Hitchcock was alive today and became woke to flexible sexual content and expanded his perversity to lengths unfathomable in his era). I like Franju’s Eyes Without a Face, but using its basic premise to ignite this imaginative assemblance of cinema’s greatest gifts is perhaps Almodovar’s most glaring declaration of crediting his inspirations. This is a horror movie because of its thrilling mystery and unpleasant implications in the reveals, beyond the content of being trapped by a mad scientist. However, it will earn a spot on my final list not just because it’s one of my favorite movies that I’d categorize under the horror genre but because of how Almodovar uses his best innate skill of unconditional empathy to gently trick us into becoming involved in the narrative through the eyes of our surrogates as participants. Is it manipulative to levels of disrespect? I’d say the opposite. By recognizing the pain and beauty, flaws and strengths, and overall complexity of morals in humanity, Almodovar allows us into a world where we don’t think to pass judgment on people as a first act of assessment. So we are invited in only to discover information that clashes with that cultural urge and our own compasses. The end result is one not of shaking the audience awake or didacticism, but a kind reminder that the world is grey, and our inevitable individualized measurement of retreat after accepting such a view creates a dissonance that is our own to have, sit with, and respond to psychologically. Almodovar has only planted the seeds of knowledge to create the mirror that reflects our discomfort with ourselves against the grain of the world… and that is a lovely kind of horror. The love for camp, storytelling, technique, performance, and humanism only helps it go down a bit more smoothly.

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1762 Post by nitin » Sat Feb 08, 2020 3:35 am

You are not the only one, I think it’s his best film since Talk to Her. Although rather than Hitchcock, it felt more like a De Palma film from the 70s/80s to me because of its embrace of camp and sensual melodrama.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1763 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Feb 08, 2020 3:54 am

I’d agree with that in the sense you mean, par for the course for Almodovar (who else takes camp so seriously without it feeling like an oxymoron?) but with that horror/thriller component in full tailspin rather than tested amongst the watercolors. Maybe I just don’t find most of De Palma’s thrillers to be as intricate or interesting beyond those surface elements where I find Hitchcock a more suitable comparison on skill. I still love a few De Palmas, I just wouldn’t chalk up the suspense narrative strengths to them like I would for this and Hitchcock’s work. Something like Blow Out, for example, gives me much different pleasures from the details in its milieu precisely because it takes a more comfortable path for audience involvement. Phantom of the Paradise is a condensed ball of creativity but that’s its own beast entirely.

nitin
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:49 am

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1764 Post by nitin » Sat Feb 08, 2020 4:08 am

Skill wise totally agree, Almodovar and Hutchcock > De Palma. I was referring more to the mood/vibe of De Palma’s 70s/80s output and The Skin I Live In.

User avatar
brundlefly
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 12:55 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1765 Post by brundlefly » Sat Feb 08, 2020 8:40 am

therewillbeblus wrote:
Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:29 am

The Skin I Live In

Is it manipulative to levels of disrespect? I’d say the opposite. By recognizing the pain and beauty, flaws and strengths, and overall complexity of morals in humanity, Almodovar allows us into a world where we don’t think to pass judgment on people as a first act of assessment. So we are invited in only to discover information that clashes with that cultural urge and our own compasses. The end result is one not of shaking the audience awake or didacticism, but a kind reminder that the world is grey, and our inevitable individualized measurement of retreat after accepting such a view creates a dissonance that is our own to have, sit with, and respond to psychologically. Almodovar has only planted the seeds of knowledge to create the mirror that reflects our discomfort with ourselves against the grain of the world… and that is a lovely kind of horror. The love for camp, storytelling, technique, performance, and humanism only helps it go down a bit more smoothly.
I love this movie and this assessment gets at why. When I see it left off best-of-decade horror lists that include other bold jabs at social and/or body horror or playful, formally adept works, I wonder whether Almodovar's genuinely warm, sympathetic, and mature perspective has somehow disqualified it. Even flush with influences, doesn't it seem as contemporary with its concerns as Get Out and (fingers crossed) Promising Young Woman?
SpoilerShow
If it weren't Almodovar, can you imagine someone making an even bearable film in this era where gender reassignment surgery is held up as the worst mad scientist punishment this side of The Human Centipede? Can you imagine this plot in the hands of a De Palma, who errs toward cruelty? But because it comes from the man it does, its body horror is not only trans-positive but gets at that universal feeling where a misguided, vengeful God-figure has punished you with some physical malady you don't deserve. But also! You sympathize with that God! And also! It's a lot of fun! It doesn't feel like a high-wire act at all, it feels like a wild walk amongst your fellow humans, it's just that good.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1766 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Feb 08, 2020 1:06 pm

Thanks brundlefly, I really enjoyed reading that and couldn’t agree more

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1767 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Feb 08, 2020 6:33 pm

zedz wrote:
Wed May 30, 2018 5:26 pm
Trouble Every Day (Claire Denis, 2001) - I consider this the weakest link in the amazing run Denis had from I Can't Sleep to 35 Rhums, but it's nevertheless a hell of a film, possibly her most tactile and atmospheric (which is saying something). The weak points for me are a handful of uncharacteristic expository scenes (between Vincent Gallo's character and various scientists). It's a Denis film, so it's pretty oblique as exposition goes, but those scenes are still bare patches amidst all the gothic richness. The other thing that occurred to me this time through that I'm still not 100% sure on is:
SpoilerShow
I think the reveal at the end that Gallo's Shane is the same kind of vampire as Dalle's Core might be intended as a surprise, and his other actions throughout the film are intended to be read as those of someone striving to eliminate the monster (i.e. he's Van Helsing, not Dracula). There's that bloody flashback he has in the aeroplane at the beginning, but that could work with either reading. However, Gallo's affect is so peculiar throughout that it never occurred to me the first time through that he could be kosher. That assumption in a way defangs the narrative, but it's hard for me to see the film the other way, with a surprise ending
The actual end of the film is absolutely superb, and a great moment to close on. I can't think of any other horror movies that end of such a moment of realisation.

Oh, and it occurred to me that this film really provides the template for Glazer's Under the Skin. There's a lot of hat-tipping in the later film when you think about it.
Doing a quick search through the forum’s history on this Denis horror, zedz’s above comments seem the most dead on, though I’d rank it higher amongst her work while still diagnosing it with the same flaws. This analysis does a better job at describing- with depth- the beginnings of my own ideas better than I could. I’m not convinced of the scientific plot line’s merits but if looking at it through my own analysis of last year’s High Life I’d make the case that there’s something to the act of science in Denis’ films carrying a sense of desperation to make the ineffable tangible, hidden beneath the artifice of confidence and logic.

Responding to Zedz’s spoiler,
SpoilerShow
I read the film the same way as you did although that alternate reading of Gallo trying to cure the illness is interesting. I interpreted it as another example of him trying to distract himself with tangible efforts and logic to hide from the truth about himself and the barriers of love and connection all of which he can’t grasp. I never doubted that he was also a vampire but one in denial or active suppression rather than on a dedicated mission to cure himself. Either way it’s interesting as that reading would suppose the battle of logic vs emotion, or fighting nature with science, and losing out in both, so regardless of the level of consciousness Gallo has or wants to have throughout the narrative, the ending and thematic value is still one that ends in the same place of surrender to the mysteriousness of, and uncomfortable apparent truths, of nature.
I don’t think this film is nihilistic, but melancholy in its admittance of the horrors innate in mankind, and this perspective adds a coating of existential terror to the already present genre details and escalates its effectiveness in the realm of cinematic horror.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1768 Post by Rayon Vert » Sun Feb 09, 2020 12:43 am

Homicidal (Castle 1961). (1st viewing) A Psycho knock-off and one that’s surprising in the extent to which it replicates very specific bits of imagery of the Hitchcock film, like the blonde driving in the night with a cop on her tail, the elderly mother figure (another mute, to go with the Tingler’s) and the house’s stairwell. But it nevertheless is its own film, especially with the central, provocative transgender dimension. There’s nothing remotely goofy here as in previous Castle outings also. The gender crossing angle makes this interesting (and the striking Joan Marshall/Jean Arliss performance is a part of that), it’s original and stylish despite the borrowings, but it’s far from a perfect movie, as some scenes meant to be suspenseful play out a little too slow and lack the required intensity.


Macabre (Castle 1958). (1st viewing) A doctor learns he has hours to rescue his daughter who’s been kidnapped and buried alive. The first of Castle’s independent horror films is more of a Clouzot-inspired thriller with occasional horror imagery. Lightly enjoyable in parts but really uneven and it features some awkwardly-written character reactions.


Lust for a Vampire (Sangster 1971). (1st viewing) Fisher, Pitt and Cushing pulled out of this one and it makes you wonder what the film could have been if they hadn’t. My overall positive appreciation of it nevertheless is much different than Mr. Sausage. I had low expectations and at first indeed the contrast with what’s missing from The Vampire Lovers is striking. Whereas the earlier film was all about mood and imagery, this is a much more traditional Hammer Gothic (albeit with lots more nudity than usual), and it’s a mostly brightly-lit and narrative-focused film. The young Swedish actress replacing Pitt doesn’t the slightly older actress’ personality and onscreen force (though she still looks a bit like her, in a cross with Olivia Newton-John maybe), and in combination with how her part is written can appear a bit vacant. That said, the story is about the resurrection/reincarnation of Carmilla a century later (the dates of what occurred in the previous film have been changed in this one), so that quality of her character fits the story here. Yes the “romantic” scene is fairly ruined by the inclusion of the awful pop song, but I did end up finding interesting the different places this film goes to, not completely coherent though they ultimately may be, with Marcilla a divided creature with her more human romantic/lustful and vampiric aspects. The film is nicely shot and photographed, and the script is pretty tight, so that it ends up a definitely less arty but nevertheless entertaining, fun romp if you’re not too much of a vampire purist.


The Abominable Dr. Phibes
(Fuest 1971). (rewatch) This is pleasurable on many levels. The idea behind the film is ingenious, and it’s executed with such panache for a film of this budget. It isn’t only the art deco sets but the whole design of the film is consistently and effectively stylish. The humor is present in just the right doses, and doesn’t undercut the suspense and horror. All of the actors are fun to watch. And it’s one of the prototypes for the slasher, with some of the kills surprisingly still gruesome.


The Man Who Could Cheat Death
(Fisher 1959).
(1st viewing) Fairly similar to the Frankenstein story except the overreaching doctor is his own medical subject here, but whereas the Baron worked for an idea, Dr. Bonnett is motivated by purely selfish, prosaic reasons, specifically to prolong indefinitely his existence, and youthfulness. (Definitely analogous to Countess Dracula on this count.) Not the most exciting film, definitely a flawed and minor Hammer, but still somewhat enjoyable for secondary aspects like the setting and Asher’s photography. The scenes where Bonnett and his acolyte-turned-antagonist Professor Weiss over the morality of his quest are the best ones, while the ones with Lee are pretty perfunctory and dull.


Race with the Devil
(Starrett 1975). (1st viewing*) Satanists aren’t really scary right? Except when they’re basically coming out of the woodworks and covering the whole state of Texas! *Technically, this is a rewatch for me since this is one of the first actual going-out-to-the movies films I ever saw, at age 6-7 at the drive-in when it came out. (Why my parents thought it was OK to take us kids to see this I have no idea.) It’s surprising how impressionable a young mind is because watching it now almost half a century later my whole memory of it got retriggered, along with the creepy feeling of it (I definitely had an active memory of, and was waiting for, that freaky swimming pool scene.) Even though it stars Warren Oates and Peter Fonda, it’s surprisingly clumsy in terms of writing and directing at times, even acting a little, but the whole thing just gets more and more fun as it goes on and becomes more outrageous. Kind of like a Rosemary’s Baby paranoid thriller turned into a 70s car chase movie at the end. A wild ride, and so much fun that in all probability it’s going to make my list. Definitely recommended if you’re willing to go along with it.


Fanatic (Narizzano 1965)
. (1st viewing) Kind of strange at first to see one of Hammer’s non-Gothic, contemporary thrillers in color. It’s fitting in a way because this is distinct from all of the previous Sangster-written films as it doesn’t involve plot twists but is rather a straightforward abduction story not too dissimilar to The Collector from the same year. This is hag horror, though, with Tallulah Bankhead’s character a definite, just as crazy but not as scary forerunner of Carrie’s mother. Because it’s so unequivocal it’s not as interesting as those earlier movies, but it’s still pleasurable to some degree on the strength of the performances (both Bankhead and Stefanie Powers), Matheson’s dialogue and the able direction.


Coma (Crichton 1978). (1st viewing) Quite a good film. I had only a vague idea of what this was about, and I loved the very slow build-up to uncovering the mystery and the paranoid atmosphere that develops. Bujold is very good (so’s Widmark!) and the suspense, of which there is a lot, works. It’s really a hard film to categorize genre-wise, as it doesn’t snugly fit into the horror category. When humans are the source of the threat, they usually have to be abnormal in some way, or exceptionally perverse and sadistic, for it to cross over, which arguably isn’t completely the case here. It’s more of a thriller, but there’s a feeling of queasiness because of the subject and the sense of vulnerability it creates in the viewer, and then when you end up factoring in the bits of horror imagery (dead bodies), the paranoid atmosphere, and the behavior of the villains, yeah in the end it ends up fitting the bill enough. This will probably make my list too.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1769 Post by colinr0380 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 5:52 am

If you are looking for something else in the medical paranoia vein of Coma, 1996's Extreme Measures might be worthwhile to check out. The entire plot is pretty much spoiled in the trailer(!), and Sarah Jessica Parker is in the equivalent Michael Douglas role from Coma of 'suspicious love interest'!

User avatar
bottled spider
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1770 Post by bottled spider » Tue Feb 11, 2020 7:58 pm

Viy (Kropachyov/Ershov, 1967). Grrlz rule, boys drool. Recommended.

Begotten (Merhige,1990). The notoriously gruesome content is considerably muted by the distancing effect of "distressed" black-and-white photography, which is so grainy and over-exposed at times as to render the image illegible. Whatever it is that's going on, it's going on at some sort of impersonal, mythopoetickal level: the eviscerations are not, er, visceral. Whether this is a work of staggering genius or a misbegotten pile of pretentious twaddle, it's unlikely to make anyone throw up.

Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary (Maddin, 2002). Trigger warnings: ballet; Mahler.

Pontypool (McDonald, 2008). For the first time in my adult life I am really proud of my country. Here's a clip of the opening monologue, which a youtuber has subtitled with 'kinetic typography', and a brief talk by author Tony Burgess.

Lemora (Blackburn, 1973). The first few scenes are full of depraved promise, and there's some beautiful moonlit photography in the chase scene of the final act, but in between is tedium.

The Others (Amenábar, 2001). Accomplished in atmosphere and mounting tension; wrong-headed about music and pacing. The incontinent score, written by the director himself, impairs as often as it enhances the intended effect. (To accompany one relatively innocuous scene after another with scare music is a bit like crying wolf). Moreover, the script is repetitive, elongating suspense to the point of impatience. Those two irritations aside, I'll vote for it because of its many individually perfect scenes. Out of everything I've watched for this project so far, that spine-chilling moment when the girl dances in front of the mirror in her communion dress remains the most vivid in my memory.

Embrace of the Vampire (Goursaud,1995). Alyssa Milano's breasts do the best they can with the material they are given. One instance of comically inept staging made me burst out laughing, but overall this is more cringemaking than unintentionally funny.

The Eternal (AKA 'Kiss of the Mummy', AKA 'Trance') (Almereyda, 1998).
My spotlight, if we're doing that. This is an automatic masterpiece for including the best of all horror themes, the classic Real Mother / Killer Mother Doppelganger Dilemma, solved here with Solomonic panache. This work of surpassing beauty wears its 4.4 IMDb rating as a badge of honour.

Exorcist II: The Heretic (Boorman, 1977). This work of surpassing beauty wears its 3.8 IMDb rating as a badge of honour. I'm afraid to watch the original in case it doesn't live up to the sequel.

It Follows (Mitchell, 2014). My latest favourite cinematic image: from a medium distance we see the protagonist lying face down on the backseat of a car, with the car door open, gazing at the ground in post-coital languor, then it switches to a point-of-view shot of her red-painted fingernails brushing over a flowering weed.

The weird premise, which I was entirely willing to go along with at first, becomes increasingly naff as the film wears on. This is largely redeemed, however, by the appearance of
SpoilerShow
the mother of all Killer Mother Doppelgangers
Boxer's Omen (Kuei Chih-Hung,1983) Fun, super gross, bat shit crazy, and about forty minutes too long.

Carrie (De Palma, 1976).
Touching. I was moved. Camp and pathos are not incompatible. (Or I'm a sap).
Kael's enthusiastic reviews: capsule and long version.
I like the artful symmetry of the "kindly prank" giving occasion to an evil one of utmost poetic cruelty. I don't know what King is like as a writer, but Carrie's plot is top drawer.

The Vampire's Kiss (Bierman,1988) Cage's fearlessly over-the-top performance is something to behold. I'm undecided if that makes it a good movie.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1771 Post by knives » Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:06 pm

Would it change your feelings If I mentioned McDonald is actually American despite being Canada's greatest filmmaker since fellow expat McLaren.

User avatar
bottled spider
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 2:59 am

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1772 Post by bottled spider » Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:21 pm

You lying, dog-faced pony soldier.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1773 Post by knives » Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:29 pm

Image

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1774 Post by Mr Sausage » Tue Feb 11, 2020 9:31 pm

knives wrote:
Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:06 pm
Would it change your feelings If I mentioned McDonald is actually American despite being Canada's greatest filmmaker since fellow expat McLaren.
I assume you're joking?

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: The Horror List Discussion and Suggestions (Genre Project)

#1775 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Feb 11, 2020 9:52 pm

I remember seeing The Others in theatres and being irritated that it revolved around a twist that was a complete ripoff even if it was far more successful than the twist it copied.

Post Reply