Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Luvtemps, Sep 30, 2021.
Excellent film. The ending still gives me the creeps. So glad Ingrid Pitt got cast in this.
Amityville Horror remake and original...
Direct 40 years later? Ok. I'll check it out.
I don't really do horror movies, but I did watch Stephen King's Rose Red miniseries on dvd today.
I appreciate your reply. For the record, I do actually consider II a decent sequel and quite like the way it picks up literally the second after Halloween. I can actually forgive the some of the continuity errors you mention. Bride of Frankenstein, which actually betters its predecessor, is guilty of the same thing. It is, however, just a sequel that was ultimately unnecessary and doesn't really add anything, despite being somewhat enjoyable. Kind of like Psycho II- a chance to revisit a cool story, and plenty of fun, but not the real deal for lack of a better word. The other sequels and the remake I think are just ridiculous, until we get to 2018, which is a bit better, but still not really my thing.
I haven't got around to the Thing prequel, but I'll do that this year based on your rec. Also I think I'm gonna do the Universal and maybe some Hammer this year.
Have you watched Sierra de Cobre yet/before? I found the extended cut tedious to the extreme and wonder if I had watched the original, shorter version instead I would have a higher opinion of it.
This is from the trailer and seems to show Michael and Dr. Loomis outside the house in a 1978 flashback. Original mask and everything.
I'm currently watching Midnight Mass, a 7 part limited series on Netflix.
Liking it a lot.
Dead of Night (Deathdream) (1974, Bob Clark)
A young soldier killed in Vietnam inexplicably shows up to his family home one night.
Clever, no-budget, zombie allegory of a returning Vietnam vet. I didn't think the creepy music was even necessary - Richard Backus' performance as the young soldier was enough. Good one.
I watched the original The Thing on Warner Archives Blu-ray...I haven't seen it in many a year.
The first thing I got from it was the dialog was fairly natural...the military guys are sitting around talking about women and tease some of the other guys...it just feels less stilted than some other sci-fi of the era. Characters speak over each other and the cast is fairly large but I never felt like I was missing any dialog. The only character that is kind of a jerk is the news reporter.
While quite tame by todays standards and certainly no the horror of the John Carpenter version, it does have it's moments.
There is a haunting image when they realize just what has crashed into the ice, and another scene that must have freaked audiences out when the Thing is fighting the dogs.
Mad Monster Party
A Bucket of Blood
The Mummy's Tomb
The Mummy's Ghost
The Mummy's Curse
Son of Dracula
House of Dracula
Son of Frankenstein
The Ghost of Frankenstein
Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
House of Frankenstein
Planet of the Vampires (aka: Demon Planet)
The Mummy (1959)
Frankenstein & the Monster from Hell
The Host (2006, Bong Joon Ho)
A monster emerges from Seoul's Han River and begins attacking people. One victim's loving family does what it can to rescue her from its clutches.
New to me, I've read comparisons to Gojira (Godzilla) and Jaws. YT just added it today. Here's hoping they up the ante on decent monster flicks til the 31st!
With regard to the continuity issues, you can seriously forgive the fact that they gave Laurie a different hairstyle even though the second film picks up from the moment Loomis shoots Myers and the cops/ambulances arrive? That was kind of jarring to me and always was/will be...
Or are you referring to the other elements I mentioned, such as Michael randomly killing the people as he makes his way to the hospital?
And, yeah -- definitely give The Thing prequel a watch. It's a good film, with some of the feel of Carpenter's 82 flick, sans some really ****ty CGI work. The best part about it is that we're given a glimpse into what actually occurred at the Norwegian outpost/camp before the Americans are exposed to the alien organism, even if, again, there are some major issues with connections between the 2011 and 1982 films (with regard to character setups and the way the Americans find certain burned remains of the creature).
I guess they eventually catch up to him outside the house, even though he's shown at the end of the original completely missing from the area (presumably, as we see the grass below empty). Will be cool to see how this plays out. Thanks for sharing!
There's another difference between the end of the original and the beginning of II - in the original you see a shot of normal grass where Michael had landed. In the second movie opening there is a large outline of him compressed in the ground. I can remember someone behind me saying "that wasn't in the original!".
I didn't think anyone else ever caught that....if I am not mistaken, the outline of his body in the grass is also caked in blood (which Loomis touches in the beginning of the sequel before shouting "Call the sheriff! Tell him I shot him!!!") and this is totally not seen at the end of the first...
There’s more. In II, Loomis shoots Myers seven times (only six in the original film). Plus, in Halloween, Myers stumbles and falls off of the balcony into the backyard. In II, it’s inexplicably the front yard now.
The opening of II is a mix of footage from the original film (including at least one alternate take, I think) and new footage recreating the scene.
For some reason, Tony Moran’s face, which was clearly visible for a brief second when Laurie unmasks Michael in the 1978 film, is (deliberately?) obscured in the same shot in II (again, possibly an alternate take). I’ve wondered why that is. Moran is still credited at the end of II, nonetheless.
Grey Area Films (grey-area-films.myshopify.com)
I won't even post the youtube link for the trailer... you can find it there...
From what I saw in the censored trailer, this makes Rob Zombie's films look like Muppet Movies.
Even scarier was the $20 shipping fee on top of the $33.33 blu ray... I'll pass for now.
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1979, Philip Kaufman)
When strange seeds drift to earth from space, mysterious pods begin to grow and invade San Francisco, California, where they replicate the residents into emotionless automatons one body at a time.
Think I prefer the 1956 original but this remake has its charms. Great cast including a fun cameo by Kevin McCarthy who starred in the first one.
Are you sure about the backyard thing? I could have sworn he shoots him to fall off the front of the house, as further depicted in the opening of the sequel...
Correct -- that always bothered me.
What also gets under my skin is the fact that when Laurie shoots Michael between the eyes at the end, the eye holes of the mask drool blood...but that wouldn't happen if you blasted someone between the peepers. It was almost like someone took forks and gouged out both eyes, the way he was bleeding...
One of my faves.
I’m open to changing my mind, but I’m pretty sure. If you watch the 1978 film closely, Michael stumbles off of an open balcony with a roof, which is a type usually built on the backside of houses, not the front.
In Halloween II, it’s now a balcony without a roof, and attached to the front of the house, as you can see. It’s also obviously a different balcony altogether.
I have no idea why this was changed. My guess is that it might have been easier, and more visually dynamic, to shoot Donald Pleasance emerging from the front door, rather than having him look for Michael Myers in the backyard, run along the side of the house, then start yelling for someone to call the police.
Regarding the hospital scene, I once read a claim by someone on the Internet that Laurie actually shot Myers in the temple, and therefore he’s only bleeding through the eyeholes in the mask. This would actually make more sense, but I do not see a bullet hole anywhere on the mask after she fires the gun.
Hang on a second - Laurie fires two shots and then he starts bleeding from the eyes so I've always just assumed that she shot him in each eye. Is that not right?
Separate names with a comma.