Halloween Films

IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
Watched a fuck load of horror type stuff over the last few days. I first googled "best horror films 2023" and found a list of 88 films ranked by their aggregate review scores. I watched a few trailers and we picked a few randomly, and then I also watched three Halloween films that were on telly.

A few general points is that a few topics seemed to dominate; there were quite a few possession based films this year for some reason, unsurprisingly there was a push for up to date relevance with a number of films featuring social media or else influencers or some kind of covid type thing, another recurring theme is comedy horror, particularly "funny" slashers or other gore type films. In fact there is a lot of post-modern pastiche/parody/homage/ etc takes on older genres. What there isn't a lot of though is good old-fashioned straight up horror, and, more worrying than that, as one might extrapolate from the "are there any funny tv programmes?" thread, there aren't many scary horror films out there. In fact, one thing I noticed in particular is how little difference there is between most comedy zombie films and just normal zombie films. The jump scares and such are basically the same in both and the genres appear to be getting closer and closer together.

Anyway, once again I need to vanish in a sec, but here is a list of horror films I watched in the last two or three days...

Sick (covid related slasher)
The Wrath of Becky (not over the top enough pastiche of over the top grindhouse fare)
El Conte (totally bonkers vampire film in which the main character is Pinochet - I really ennoyed this in a strange sort of way but it's not a horror)
Malum (nasty satanic cult thing which had the scariest looking trailer but which sadly ran out of steam and punched itself out looooong befroe the end)
The Breach (demon summoning physics thing that's not too bad I guess apart from the acting and the fx)
Scouts vs Zombies thing the name of which I forget (exactly as you'd imagine)
Haunted House 2 (one of those Scary Movie type things based on the Conjuring and Annabel and Paranomral Activity and Sinister and etc etc very explicit, gory and momentarily funny at points although way way too long)
A Wounded Fawn (actually from 2023, promising weird surreal horror that reminded me a lot of that Berberian Sound Studio, In Fabric etc but which really went off course in Act 2, losing its atmosphere and pretty much everything else too sadly after a promising start)

And that's what I can remember, gotta rush but please say something interesting someone....
 
Clinamenic

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Yesterday I rewatched Arsenic and Old Lace and Beetlejuice, both of which I'm very fond of.

Arsenic makes for good light Halloween comedic fare.
 
R

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
saw dont look now and wickerman at the rio cinema. i didnt know they were released together for a time back in the 70s. dont look now seems quite bad and suffers from nicolas roeg's editing/narrative roeg-isms, several daft scenes, as well as a shockingly inept/abrupt/silly ending. wickerman, silly songs aside, has dated much better.
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
The editing on Don't Look Now is really... pronounced. When I was younger and I would read reviews with people talking about stuff like editing or sound design I would secretly feel ashamed or ignorant cos I wouldn't know what they were on about, and I think that even now although I obviously have more of a grasp of those sorts of concepts and what people mean when they say certain things about them, at the same time I do feel like a slow learner. There are often things that I notice only after people mention them, or supposedly obvious things that I can just about see for myself but congratulate myself when I do... until I hear that apparently they are "obvious".

The point here is that with Don't Look Now, it is one of the few where the peculiar nature of the editing really does stick out and I'm sure almost anymore couldn't help but remark on it. And on paper I suspect that is not a good thing - just as it's a truism that you don't notice a good ref or films should show and not tell, probably it's not generally considered a positive if something that is really a part of how a film achieves whatever it does is so noticeable in itself. On the other hand, the very fact of it being quite so prominent says to me that he was probably just having fun with it, in a sort of "I know the rules so I can break them" way and it is fun I reckon so I'll go with it.
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
The sex scene in that film was controversial at the time I think. Was seen as very explicit and cos it was deemed so real looking there were rumours that those debauched Hollywood deviants had actually duh duh "done it" on screen!

Of course, like lots of from tikes gone buy it doesn't seem so scandalous now - I doubt you batted an eyelid when you saw it. More noticeable/interesting to me is their non-perfect pasty white bodies, you'd not get that now right? i

Sort of related I think, there is the scene where Don Sutherland almost fallsvoff the platform and... it's interesting cos he looks crap swinging around in an ungainly manner. It's not THAT high and it doesn't all come down to millimeters as it would now, but cos of that it looks much more real, it is much more real in fact, that is pretty much how you or I would be in that circumstance I'm sure; crap, out of control and panicked - after all he's an academic, not James Bond - but if there was a similar scene now I'm sure it would be all glossy and look much higher and more dangerous, the hero would pull off some kind of last minute jump that we'd think was plausible cos it's what happens in films, but really noone could actually pull it off.

I imagine there are lots of similar scenes in older films that look crap/real compared to the way they are done now but that one really struck me.
 
R

rubberdingyrapids

Well-known member
I find DLN a bit try hard. Same with Performance actually which was best when it wasnt trying to make any sense and failed when it did. With DLN its fine to remove conventions, if you want to avoid cliche or as with many british arty genre films, appear understated, but its like he didnt replace it with enough. But that ending was pitiful. DLN is basically early elevated horror. Give me Mario bava any day.

The sex scene is still very good. Not just cos its julie christie either.

And the swinging scene, i guess theres something admirably rough hewn about it but Donald Sutherland doesnt look truly scared enough. Or maybe its not made dramatic enough.
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
rubberdingyrapids said:
I find DLN a bit try hard. Same with Performance actually which was best when it wasnt trying to make any sense and failed when it did. With DLN its fine to remove conventions, if you want to avoid cliche or as with many british arty genre films, appear understated, but its like he didnt replace it with enough. But that ending was pitiful. DLN is basically early elevated horror. Give me Mario bava any day.
Click to expand...

Isn't it based on Daphne DuMaurier or something? Though that's a cop-out, he obviously had the power to change the ending of he wanted to.

rubberdingyrapids said:
The sex scene is still very good. Not just cos its julie christie either.
Click to expand...

Yeah it does look pretty real which is probably one of the aims so you can call it a success, just saying that I doubt it shocks anyone these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top