What are your thoughts on The Conjuring? I thought that was OK. The later films and spin offs, though…Michi wrote:Last batch before October rolls around:
Buried Alive
The title says "Edgar Allan Poe's", but that's only because "Lightly inspired by the works and themes of Edgar Allan Poe" would have been way too long. It's just a mish-mash of ideas that Poe had, shoved together into a slasher story. In fact, they seem to have used the "kitchen sink" method with much of the plot, too. You've got a mystery, a creepy school, secretive teachers, hallucinations, bugs, teenagers that are clearly no longer teens, and Donald Pleasence in a wig that looks suspiciously like the scruffy end of an old mop. It's a mess of ideas and nothing is really unique, except for maybe the death by kitchen hand-mixer. Gotta admit that I haven't seen that one before.
The Rift
Also known as Endless Decent, this is another one of the six ocean themed horror films that was released in the same year. Sadly, this one isn't one of the better ones. It's just too derivative and predictable. You can pretty much see every plot twist coming long before it gets there. It does have R. Lee Ermy in it, and some nice monster effects at the end, but the good stuff feels way too short to be worth it.
Dolls
It's Charles Band working with living dolls/puppets years before Puppet Master came about, but it's directed by Stuart Gordon, so it doesn't suck. I actually really like this one. It's got some plotting issues, and it ends too abruptly to feel fully satisfying, but the great atmosphere, all the neat animated dolls and the kid protagonist make it feel like a (very) dark fairytale. I dig it.
Out of the Dark
This is a slasher that looks great, has a lot of good characters/actors, and also has some increasingly bloody and dramatic deaths, but unfortunately the plot starts to fall apart in the second act. The mystery starts to falter, the editing gets wonky, characters and plotlines get abruptly forgotten and abandoned... It kinda feels like maybe the filmmakers either bit off more than they could chew, or the second half needed a few more edits. It still ends up entertaining enough, but the second half really drags it down from the greatness it could have achieved.
The Nun
Oh look, another Conjuring movie (which I didn't realize when I started it). This one is an origin story for the Nun demon from the second Conjuring film. The movie is beautiful, with some stunning vistas, excellent use of color/composition, and even some impressive camera work (and I rarely take note of the camera work.) But good gravy is the plot of this thing a hot mess. The beginning is gripping and the end is fun, but everything in between is a logical conundrum, filled with gaping plot holes and historical inaccuracies so bad that history buffs will want to tear their hair out. Thanks goodness for the visuals, but this is really something you'll probably HAVE to turn your brain off to enjoy.
What was the last movie you've seen?
-
prfsnl_gmr
- Next-Gen
- Posts: 12411
- Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:26 pm
- Location: Charlotte, North Carolina
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
I liked the first Conjuring. I thought the second one was better. The third one was okay, but I did like that they moved away from the "haunted house" motif. Annabelle was...meh. I'm hoping to get around to watching the other two films there soon. The Nun is pretty, but the plot is awful. And I haven't seen it, but I haven't heard anything promising about The Curse of La Llorona.prfsnl_gmr wrote:What are your thoughts on The Conjuring? I thought that was OK. The later films and spin offs, though…
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
And you won't. It's not a good movie. Great folklore to pull from, terrible usage.Michi wrote:And I haven't seen it, but I haven't heard anything promising about The Curse of La Llorona.
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
Mystery Men. I swear they used to put more effort into silly movies pre-2000s than the more serious ones today. They had some sort of a "good feel" to them. Movie ends with a smile on your face.
I just wonder how can the guys pitching such movies keep a straight face talking to investors and asking for millions of dollars
Looked it up and seems the movie failed to make a profit, IMO they over spent ($68M)
I just wonder how can the guys pitching such movies keep a straight face talking to investors and asking for millions of dollars
Looked it up and seems the movie failed to make a profit, IMO they over spent ($68M)
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
Finished watching Hocus Pocus 2 last night with the wife. On the whole I think we liked it. The film tries very hard to stick to a similar feel and flow while modernizing and updating significantly.
See, if you go back and watch the original today, it mostly holds up due to nostalgia. The strongest aspect of the original was the incredibly chemistry in the performances of Bette Midler, Kathy Najimy, and Sarah Jessica Parker. Whatever else may be wrong with the first film, and there's quite a lot, those three constantly steal the show, and that's really the foundation upon which the love of the film is built. All the other characters are pretty forgettable.
Hocus Pocus 2 kind of subverts this. The kids in 2, along with the other "normal" characters, are all quite good. In fact, the surrounding context of 2 compares quite favorably against the original. The film is actually at its weakest when it calls back a little too closely to the original, and that is largely due to the fact that the original was pretty cringe-worthy in places and that the actresses playing the Sanderson sisters have aged significantly. Make no mistake, the Midler/Najimy/Parker trio is still quite a potent combo. They get some good lines and clearly still love to chew the scenery. But they just don't have quite the same level of manic energy (though Bette does an impressive job trying). It adds a level of cringey embarrassment to the song and dance sequence, for example.
Hocus Pocus 2 is really at its best when it's forging its own path through the narrative of the film and at its worst when it most closely apes the original. Thankfully, it does more of the former than the latter. Overall this is a good watch. It's not spectacular but it is entertaining, though it may have you questioning some of your nostalgia for the original even as you enjoy it.
See, if you go back and watch the original today, it mostly holds up due to nostalgia. The strongest aspect of the original was the incredibly chemistry in the performances of Bette Midler, Kathy Najimy, and Sarah Jessica Parker. Whatever else may be wrong with the first film, and there's quite a lot, those three constantly steal the show, and that's really the foundation upon which the love of the film is built. All the other characters are pretty forgettable.
Hocus Pocus 2 kind of subverts this. The kids in 2, along with the other "normal" characters, are all quite good. In fact, the surrounding context of 2 compares quite favorably against the original. The film is actually at its weakest when it calls back a little too closely to the original, and that is largely due to the fact that the original was pretty cringe-worthy in places and that the actresses playing the Sanderson sisters have aged significantly. Make no mistake, the Midler/Najimy/Parker trio is still quite a potent combo. They get some good lines and clearly still love to chew the scenery. But they just don't have quite the same level of manic energy (though Bette does an impressive job trying). It adds a level of cringey embarrassment to the song and dance sequence, for example.
Hocus Pocus 2 is really at its best when it's forging its own path through the narrative of the film and at its worst when it most closely apes the original. Thankfully, it does more of the former than the latter. Overall this is a good watch. It's not spectacular but it is entertaining, though it may have you questioning some of your nostalgia for the original even as you enjoy it.
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
After YEARS and YEARS of subpar takes on the mythos crafted by Clive Barker for his novella The Hellbound Heart and then its film adaptation Hellraiser, we FINALLY get a great, excellent reimagining of Hellraiser that actually tries to earn its use of the Hellraiser name.
Rather than simply re-adapt the original source material, they took the world of Hellraiser, or at least the good parts, and make something new yet familiar and way more terrifying.
It's on Hulu. Enjoy.
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
Merry Christmas!Kassandra Hobbs wrote:A raged character and all options are met for the allotment for the citizens. The tings of the RANDOM URL REMOVED are inclined to the turns. The pattern is fit for the hopes. skills are hidden for the use of the options for the alike features for the use of the options by all issues.
Systems: TI-99/4a, Commodore Vic-20, Atari 2600, NES, SMS, GB, Neo Geo MVS (Big Red 4-slot), Genesis, SNES, 3DO, PS1, N64, DC, PS2, GBA, GCN, NDSi, Wii
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
Just finished Halloween Ends and while I enjoyed this end to the story I can still see why folks wouldn't enjoy it.
Re: What was the last movie you've seen?
Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama, a cheesy cult "classic" that's worth a watch once or twice, depending on your tastes.
Also, apparently one of the cute nerdy guys was played by the same guy as Rick from Nightmare on Elm Street 4. Also, he was Jeff in Night Trap.
Also, apparently one of the cute nerdy guys was played by the same guy as Rick from Nightmare on Elm Street 4. Also, he was Jeff in Night Trap.