rewatched again quite recently and genuinely ālikedā it. Thought it achieved what it set out to do pretty well, was nicely grisly and dirty, and did pretty well at showing the real idiots as the imperialist tourists and not the locals (though still indulging in plenty of āooh arenāt these natives so crazy and unhingedā) as well
animal stuff can obviously be a sticking point for many and itās plenty violent and graphic, but idk - it felt earned and not torture-porny at least? Think it truly is an exploitation film in every sense of the word
I totally know what you mean about Phantasm. I think this is one of the few films where my opinion has been completely turned around by seeing a decent copy of it. I had it on VHS back in the day, wrong aspect ratio, super dark print and it just didnāt connect at all. When I got a DVD player, I bought it again for some inexplicable reason and completely fell for it - in fact, the Phantasm series is probably my favourite horror franchise. Just knowing the love that went into all the films, the fact that Don Coscarelli was involved in all of them and that they managed to keep using mostly the same cast members in all of them makes them very special (to me).
I really donāt know what it is, I think itās a sort of cheapness aesthetic to it which makes me feel a bit uneasy - but I donāt mean uneasy in a scary or creepy way, like it doesnāt sit right with me? This is a weird comparison but like when you see knock off toys like the below
I get the same sort of feeling. Itās the same way stuff like Sharknado or things like that donāt appeal even as a novelty value, thereās just something about the production which goes through me and I think those sort of 80s films are kind of the same?
Iām aware this makes me sound really snobby which isnāt the intention at all!
God - having watched soooo many crappy rental copy VHS horrors in the early 90s, I wonder how surprised I might be to see them polished up for the modern day.
Actually, there used to be a pirate video guy who frequented my stepdadās garage from whom I picked up various ābannedā films that I watched for the first time in terrible quality. Reservoir Dogs, A Clockwork Orange, The Exorcist - watched all of them through a grungey fog and only realised years later what well filmed movies they are. Aside from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre - that looked pretty much the sameā¦
Watched recently: David Cronenbergās The Fly Had gradually been making my way through the original Fly films. The first one is a classic, the second one not so much and the third is largely a Fly movie in name only, but is a lot of fun. Now, Iām pretty sure that Iād never seen the '86 version all the way through before but Iāve definitely seen bits of it on TV. Probably not much point in a recap because Iām guessing I might be the only one here that hasnāt seen it. Overall, I thought it was good. Maybe even great. Butā¦ maybe not a film that really did that much for me. Like, itās undoubtedly a well-made piece of horror with good performances and amazing effects. But I donāt think Iād ever include it in a personal top 100 say, unlike a lot of online reviewers. Iāve not seen a ton of Cronenberg, as body horror isnāt my favourite sub-genre. I do have a lot of time for Videodrome, but this felt way more Hollywood and nowhere near as subversive as some of his other stuff. Nothing wrong with that necessarily, but again, it just didnāt do much for me. Weird.
Read recently: The Restless Dead by Hugh B Cave Books like this are complete comfort reading for me; just over 300 pages of well enough written horror thatās not going to change my life but which is completely engrossing for the time youāre reading it. All the blurb on this is keen to point out that Cave was a āgrandmasterā of horror. This was published in 2003 and Cave started writing for the original American pulps back in the day, so fair enough. The story here is voodoo-themed and with Cave having lived in Haiti for several years, he certainly seems familiar with the language and processes of voodoo ritual. Throw in giant animals, mysterious underwater caves, a creepy old family in the Florida backwaters and an old woman who randomly develops psychic powers halfway through and youāve got a book thatās well worth picking up if you ever come across it in a second-hand bookshop some day.
Watched recently: The Changes I posted about the first episode of this recently, so I figured Iād come back now that Iām done with it. I loved this. Of all the 70s kids horror/sci-fi shows Iāve seen over the past couple of years, this is easily up there with Children of the Stones as one of my favourites. The plot sees Nicky Gore, a young English schoolgirl, doing her best to survive by herself after the changes of the title occur: most of the population is inexplicably compelled to destroy all modern technology. The series is based on a trilogy of novels and the series here follows that same basic sequence. The middle sequence is maybe the closest to real horror territory that the show visits, with a folk horror/Witchfinder General-esque sequence in which Nicky is accused of being a witch. But if youāre a fan of 70s TV aesthetics, youāll find so much more to enjoy about this. The finale is very pleasing too and takes the story in a very different direction to much of whatās come before while still remaining tonally consistent. Again, I loved this and canāt recommend it enough.
Wanted to see Vortex but missed the showing so went to Firestarter. Had neither seen/read the original film or the book, or even heard of them so went in totally blind. Fuck me it is a dull slog. Never a fan of 'kid has special powers and parent hides them from authoritiesātype films but this was just nothing of a film and has an absolute bollocks ending.
I also saw Spontaneous on Netflix which i know is a favourite on here but i found it far too smug and pleased with itself. Think Iād even say I hated it
This gets straight into the supernatural element from the first scene, which was pleasing. It then takes a pause to pivot to a Mean Girls style girls school clique, which felt a little jarring, before eventually steering back toā¦a vengeful ghost, a serial killer, something else? This is something of a mashup of genres, and Iām not convinced itās always super successful. The cast are entertaining enough, particularly the central pairing of Brits Suki Waterhouse and Ella Rae-Smith, although some of the supporting cast are essentially only there to up the body count. Curiously for a horror, the film seems rather coy at actually showing any violence or gore*. The ending is fairly ridiculous, but overall this is fine as a 90 minute popcorn flick. 5/10
So I think the Happy Death Day films are genuinely the best horror-comedies to come out in the last years, and probably some of my fav timeloop films just in general
Rewatched the second one last night, wondering if Iād been too generous on first watch since I was massively high at the time, but nope - it was still great. Engaging lead character, they got a lot of laughs from me for how they handled the repetition, loved the maths montage, and all the stuff with her mum was properly emotionally affecting. Not a lot of easy accessible horror that deals with those questions of fate and trauma and acceptance!
Agree - think they are both great. Assumed the first one would just be some lightweight fluff when I first watched it, but it is really good. Then loved the switch to a completely different yet consistent tone for the second. Inspired my look for Halloween 2019 tooā¦
