Search
Search results
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Cursed (2005) in Movies
Sep 18, 2020
the cgi (2 more)
production problems
PG-13 not R
Hollywood's Own Werewolves
Cursed- could of been better. It had a good young cast of people. Just the movie itself was so-so. The cgi/visual effects were bad, like really bad. So bad it made the movie bad.
The only thing making this film good is its young cast and the horror.
The plot: In Los Angeles, siblings Ellie (Christina Ricci) and Jimmy (Jesse Eisenberg) come across an accident on Mulholland Drive. As they try to help the woman caught in the wreckage, a ferocious creature attacks them, devouring the woman and scratching the terrified siblings. They slowly discover that the creature was a werewolf and that they have fallen victim to a deadly curse. Now that they have been sliced by the werewolf's claws, they will be transformed into werewolves themselves.
Originally planned for 2003, the film is a notable example of development hell, taking over two more years to be made than originally planned, during which producers Bob and Harvey Weinstein kept asking for reshoots and changes to the plot, re-edited the movie to give a PG-13 rating rather than the original intended R-rating, and fired legendary makeup artist Rick Baker to replace the werewolves he had created with computer-generated ones.
The film was a box-office failure and was panned by critics; Craven himself was very displeased with the final result.
The set used for the high school is Torrance High School, the same used for Sunnydale High on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and West Beverly High on Beverly Hills, 90210 and its spin-off 90210.
However, the film soon suffered numerous production and script issues and was postponed for over a year. While production was stalled, several cast members had to be replaced due to scheduling conflicts with other films. When the movie was rewritten and reshot, many cast members had been cut entirely, including Skeet Ulrich, Mandy Moore, Omar Epps, Illeana Douglas, Heather Langenkamp, Scott Foley, Robert Forster, and Corey Feldman.
Only about 90% of the original version was filmed, leaving the original ending unfilmed. Although, while filming the original version, producer Bob Weinstein told Wes Craven he was happy with the film, he later changed his opinion and ordered for the movie to be reshot with a new plot. After massive reshoots which included filming a new ending, Weinstein told Craven he didn't like the new ending, leading to another ending where Jake attacks Ellie and Jimmy in their home, despite some incoherence with the rest of the film.
In the fall of 2004, Dimension cut the film to a PG-13 rating instead of the planned R rating. Speaking to the New York Post, Wes Craven commented, "The contract called for us to make an R-rated film. We did. It was a very difficult process. Then it was basically taken away from us and cut to PG-13 and ruined. It was two years of very difficult work and almost 100 days of shooting of various versions. Then at the very end, it was chopped up and the studio thought they could make more with a PG-13 movie, and trashed it ... I thought it was completely disrespectful, and it hurt them too, and it was like they shot themselves in the foot with a shotgun.
Its a decent movie.
The only thing making this film good is its young cast and the horror.
The plot: In Los Angeles, siblings Ellie (Christina Ricci) and Jimmy (Jesse Eisenberg) come across an accident on Mulholland Drive. As they try to help the woman caught in the wreckage, a ferocious creature attacks them, devouring the woman and scratching the terrified siblings. They slowly discover that the creature was a werewolf and that they have fallen victim to a deadly curse. Now that they have been sliced by the werewolf's claws, they will be transformed into werewolves themselves.
Originally planned for 2003, the film is a notable example of development hell, taking over two more years to be made than originally planned, during which producers Bob and Harvey Weinstein kept asking for reshoots and changes to the plot, re-edited the movie to give a PG-13 rating rather than the original intended R-rating, and fired legendary makeup artist Rick Baker to replace the werewolves he had created with computer-generated ones.
The film was a box-office failure and was panned by critics; Craven himself was very displeased with the final result.
The set used for the high school is Torrance High School, the same used for Sunnydale High on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and West Beverly High on Beverly Hills, 90210 and its spin-off 90210.
However, the film soon suffered numerous production and script issues and was postponed for over a year. While production was stalled, several cast members had to be replaced due to scheduling conflicts with other films. When the movie was rewritten and reshot, many cast members had been cut entirely, including Skeet Ulrich, Mandy Moore, Omar Epps, Illeana Douglas, Heather Langenkamp, Scott Foley, Robert Forster, and Corey Feldman.
Only about 90% of the original version was filmed, leaving the original ending unfilmed. Although, while filming the original version, producer Bob Weinstein told Wes Craven he was happy with the film, he later changed his opinion and ordered for the movie to be reshot with a new plot. After massive reshoots which included filming a new ending, Weinstein told Craven he didn't like the new ending, leading to another ending where Jake attacks Ellie and Jimmy in their home, despite some incoherence with the rest of the film.
In the fall of 2004, Dimension cut the film to a PG-13 rating instead of the planned R rating. Speaking to the New York Post, Wes Craven commented, "The contract called for us to make an R-rated film. We did. It was a very difficult process. Then it was basically taken away from us and cut to PG-13 and ruined. It was two years of very difficult work and almost 100 days of shooting of various versions. Then at the very end, it was chopped up and the studio thought they could make more with a PG-13 movie, and trashed it ... I thought it was completely disrespectful, and it hurt them too, and it was like they shot themselves in the foot with a shotgun.
Its a decent movie.
Daniel Boyd (1066 KP) rated Gerald's Game (2017) in Movies
Oct 13, 2017 (Updated Oct 13, 2017)
Top Notch Performances. (1 more)
Effective Scares.
Hard To Watch, Yet Impossible To Turn Away
Contains spoilers, click to show
After being underwhelmed by the major blockbuster release of IT, I didn’t have much hope for this small Netflix movie with a limited cast, a low budget and being an adaption of what is regarded as one of Stephen King’s lesser works. I am happy to report that I was pleasantly surprised when I sat down to watch this one, in fact I’d go as far as to say it blew me away.
This is a movie that lives and dies on the performances of the actors involved. For those of you not familiar with the story’s premise, it involves a married couple driving out to a holiday cottage in the woods for a dirty weekend. The couple is played by Carla Gugino, (Jessie,) and Bruce Greenwood, (Gerald,) who both totally nail their respective roles in the movie. Once they get to the cottage and the door is conveniently left ajar, Gerald handcuffs Jessie to the bed and goes to the bathroom to pop a Viagra. Once he comes back and explains how he has made sure the gardeners and the cleaners won’t disturb them for a few days, he takes a heart attack and collapses onto the floor and dies.
From this point on, Carla Gugino spends the vast majority of the movie handcuffed to the bed and she gives an absolutely stellar performance, possibly the best of her career. She goes though a vast array of emotions in convincing, believable form and shows everything, from despair, to sadness, to anger, to fear, to resilience. I don’t think anyone has ever been Oscar nominated for a straight-to-Netflix movie, but if there is one performance that deserves to be, it is this one.
If you haven’t seen the movie yet, please don’t read on past this point as I am going to have to delve into spoilers in order to discuss the other aspects of the movie that I enjoyed. I thought the way that Gerald appeared to Jessie as a sort of devil on her shoulder was really effective and Greenwood delivered the required level of intense cruelty perfectly. Then the fact that Jessie appeared to herself as a sort of angel on the shoulder to oppose Gerald’s negative thoughts, meant that Gugino was required to deliver a dual character performance, on top of the already challenging role of being chained to the bed.
Flashback sequences in movies can go either way for me. They usually either tend to detract from the story at hand and become an unnecessary tangent, or they compliment what is going on and add to the movie overall. Thankfully in this movie, it is the latter. The flashback scenes are uncomfortable and hard to watch, but they do add context to what is going on in the character’s mind and make for a more interesting dissection of the effect that child abuse can have on a person in later life and how psychologically, even as adults people are still affected by the dreadful things that occurred in their past.
I also thought that this film was extremely effective in terms of its fear factor. As opposed to IT, which was scary at the start, but became repetitive and managed to desensitise its audience for what to expect by the halfway mark, Gerald’s game retains an unpredictable level of uneasiness throughout.
As far as the viewer knows during the first half of the movie, the main conflict facing the protagonist is starvation and the dog that is gnawing on Gerald’s dead body, but then things take a much more sinister turn. In what is possibly the creepiest scene I have seen in a movie this year, Jessie wakes up during the night after passing out for a few hours and she looks into the corner of the room, squinting her eyes. The camera follows where she is looking and the general shape of something can be made out. Then the shape begins to move forwards into the moonlight and is revealed to be a huge, deformed man holding a trinket box. This was so unexpected and freaky, and I loved it. I thought it was so effective in the context of the movie and was executed perfectly to be as disturbing as possible. It is also a relatable scare, as we have all experienced that moment; glancing at the corner of the room, something catches our eye and looks off in the darkness, but you just brush it off and fall back asleep. Jessie’s worst fears are confirmed here though, as she really did see something in the corner of the room and she is helpless to get away from it.
It also throws a twist into a story that has so far been based in what could be a real situation. You start to wonder, is Jessie experiencing something supernatural, or is she just hallucinating due to lack of food and water? Then the Gerald hallucination asks her if ‘The Moonlight Man,’ that she saw isn’t real, then why did the dog run away when he was in the room? Just like Jessie, the audience starts to wonder if he could be real, perhaps he is death and he has come to take Jessie to hell. All of these questions add to the already intense and disturbing tone of the movie and I thought it worked perfectly.
Eventually the movie wraps up with Jessie having an epiphany that if she smashes the glass of water and cuts her wrist, the blood can help her slip her hand out of the cuffs. What follows is a gory, brutal, difficult to watch de-gloving scene that will have you wincing and watching through your fingers. Then in true Stephen King fashion, the movie goes on to reveal another twist. It is revealed that ‘The Moonlight Man,’ really was in the room with Jessie. He was a serial killer that collected various body parts form dead people and he was taking parts from Gerald’s body while Jessie was chained to the bed. I can see why this ending could be polarizing for some, but I loved it and I thought it added an extra layer of craziness to the already insane sequence of events that we just witnessed.
Overall, Gerald’s Game is fantastic. A truly unsettling, chilling Stephen King adaption that showcases fantastic performances from its cast, makes the most of its minimal setting and managed to creep me out way more than any other horror movie I have seen this year.
This is a movie that lives and dies on the performances of the actors involved. For those of you not familiar with the story’s premise, it involves a married couple driving out to a holiday cottage in the woods for a dirty weekend. The couple is played by Carla Gugino, (Jessie,) and Bruce Greenwood, (Gerald,) who both totally nail their respective roles in the movie. Once they get to the cottage and the door is conveniently left ajar, Gerald handcuffs Jessie to the bed and goes to the bathroom to pop a Viagra. Once he comes back and explains how he has made sure the gardeners and the cleaners won’t disturb them for a few days, he takes a heart attack and collapses onto the floor and dies.
From this point on, Carla Gugino spends the vast majority of the movie handcuffed to the bed and she gives an absolutely stellar performance, possibly the best of her career. She goes though a vast array of emotions in convincing, believable form and shows everything, from despair, to sadness, to anger, to fear, to resilience. I don’t think anyone has ever been Oscar nominated for a straight-to-Netflix movie, but if there is one performance that deserves to be, it is this one.
If you haven’t seen the movie yet, please don’t read on past this point as I am going to have to delve into spoilers in order to discuss the other aspects of the movie that I enjoyed. I thought the way that Gerald appeared to Jessie as a sort of devil on her shoulder was really effective and Greenwood delivered the required level of intense cruelty perfectly. Then the fact that Jessie appeared to herself as a sort of angel on the shoulder to oppose Gerald’s negative thoughts, meant that Gugino was required to deliver a dual character performance, on top of the already challenging role of being chained to the bed.
Flashback sequences in movies can go either way for me. They usually either tend to detract from the story at hand and become an unnecessary tangent, or they compliment what is going on and add to the movie overall. Thankfully in this movie, it is the latter. The flashback scenes are uncomfortable and hard to watch, but they do add context to what is going on in the character’s mind and make for a more interesting dissection of the effect that child abuse can have on a person in later life and how psychologically, even as adults people are still affected by the dreadful things that occurred in their past.
I also thought that this film was extremely effective in terms of its fear factor. As opposed to IT, which was scary at the start, but became repetitive and managed to desensitise its audience for what to expect by the halfway mark, Gerald’s game retains an unpredictable level of uneasiness throughout.
As far as the viewer knows during the first half of the movie, the main conflict facing the protagonist is starvation and the dog that is gnawing on Gerald’s dead body, but then things take a much more sinister turn. In what is possibly the creepiest scene I have seen in a movie this year, Jessie wakes up during the night after passing out for a few hours and she looks into the corner of the room, squinting her eyes. The camera follows where she is looking and the general shape of something can be made out. Then the shape begins to move forwards into the moonlight and is revealed to be a huge, deformed man holding a trinket box. This was so unexpected and freaky, and I loved it. I thought it was so effective in the context of the movie and was executed perfectly to be as disturbing as possible. It is also a relatable scare, as we have all experienced that moment; glancing at the corner of the room, something catches our eye and looks off in the darkness, but you just brush it off and fall back asleep. Jessie’s worst fears are confirmed here though, as she really did see something in the corner of the room and she is helpless to get away from it.
It also throws a twist into a story that has so far been based in what could be a real situation. You start to wonder, is Jessie experiencing something supernatural, or is she just hallucinating due to lack of food and water? Then the Gerald hallucination asks her if ‘The Moonlight Man,’ that she saw isn’t real, then why did the dog run away when he was in the room? Just like Jessie, the audience starts to wonder if he could be real, perhaps he is death and he has come to take Jessie to hell. All of these questions add to the already intense and disturbing tone of the movie and I thought it worked perfectly.
Eventually the movie wraps up with Jessie having an epiphany that if she smashes the glass of water and cuts her wrist, the blood can help her slip her hand out of the cuffs. What follows is a gory, brutal, difficult to watch de-gloving scene that will have you wincing and watching through your fingers. Then in true Stephen King fashion, the movie goes on to reveal another twist. It is revealed that ‘The Moonlight Man,’ really was in the room with Jessie. He was a serial killer that collected various body parts form dead people and he was taking parts from Gerald’s body while Jessie was chained to the bed. I can see why this ending could be polarizing for some, but I loved it and I thought it added an extra layer of craziness to the already insane sequence of events that we just witnessed.
Overall, Gerald’s Game is fantastic. A truly unsettling, chilling Stephen King adaption that showcases fantastic performances from its cast, makes the most of its minimal setting and managed to creep me out way more than any other horror movie I have seen this year.
Darren (1599 KP) rated I Spit On Your Grave: Vengeance (2015) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Characters – Jennifer/Angela, is the victim from the first movie that got her revenge on her rapist, now back in the real world, she is still experiencing nightmares from sexual assault and fantasies of killing anyone that shows any sexual interest, be it a look or inappropriate touching. This becomes a reality once her new friend is killed and now she sets out to kill anyone that has victimised members of the rape support group. Marla is the new friend Angela makes, she has been a victim of an abusive ex-boyfriend and gets to show a looser side when working with Angela to get their message across to the guys in their lives. Oscar is a member of the support group that has seen his daughter raped before she killed herself and the rapist walked free, he talks the revenge game, never sure whether to take the step. Detective McDylan is investigating the murder of Marla and tries to help Angela when the suspect gets murdered, this is a generic cop figure.
Performances – Sarah Butler returns to the franchise (that what it is now?) she is clearly the star of the show here and continues to bring us a strong character in every scene. Jennifer Landon is good in her supporting role getting to be wild at times. Sadly, the rest of the cast are just fine, while the characters they are playing are interesting, we don’t get to see much from them as the film is centred around Sarah’s character and interactions with these characters.
Story – The story here picks up with the life of Jennifer as she has tried to start a new life after the events in the previous film, yes, we skip the second films events all together. This brings us back to the real world where the hate she feels is still strong, though the motive to act on it is being held back, until her friend is murdered and now she needs to get back to her blood vengeance she is going through to help clean up the streets.
Horror – The horror from this film comes from the horrors that the victims have been through and how Angela goes out to get her own justice.
Settings – The film being set in the big city, is a big change, it shows us how the city can be filled with people you would never know their darker secrets and how cleaning them up can be difficult.
Special Effects – The effects in this movie are used lightly, but when they are used they are brutal and effective to show the horror being put on the victim.
Scene of the Movie – The first real murder, it is graphic as they come.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Too many dream sequences.
Final Thoughts – This is a good sequel to a film that didn’t feel like it needed one, showing the lasting effects of what happened to Jennifer is the highlight of the film and something you do want to continue watching.
Overall: Nice sequel that works in the right ways.
Performances – Sarah Butler returns to the franchise (that what it is now?) she is clearly the star of the show here and continues to bring us a strong character in every scene. Jennifer Landon is good in her supporting role getting to be wild at times. Sadly, the rest of the cast are just fine, while the characters they are playing are interesting, we don’t get to see much from them as the film is centred around Sarah’s character and interactions with these characters.
Story – The story here picks up with the life of Jennifer as she has tried to start a new life after the events in the previous film, yes, we skip the second films events all together. This brings us back to the real world where the hate she feels is still strong, though the motive to act on it is being held back, until her friend is murdered and now she needs to get back to her blood vengeance she is going through to help clean up the streets.
Horror – The horror from this film comes from the horrors that the victims have been through and how Angela goes out to get her own justice.
Settings – The film being set in the big city, is a big change, it shows us how the city can be filled with people you would never know their darker secrets and how cleaning them up can be difficult.
Special Effects – The effects in this movie are used lightly, but when they are used they are brutal and effective to show the horror being put on the victim.
Scene of the Movie – The first real murder, it is graphic as they come.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – Too many dream sequences.
Final Thoughts – This is a good sequel to a film that didn’t feel like it needed one, showing the lasting effects of what happened to Jennifer is the highlight of the film and something you do want to continue watching.
Overall: Nice sequel that works in the right ways.
Acanthea Grimscythe (300 KP) rated Deep Blue Sea (1999) in Movies
May 12, 2018
Deep Blue Sea will always have a special place in my heart. At the time of its release, I was eight years old and it’s one of the few horror movies (if you can call it that) that I was allowed to watch. With that said, it’s a guilty pleasure and finding it on Netflix the other night was pretty amazing.
They say the path to Hell is paved with good intentions and Deep Blue Sea reminds us exactly how such proverbs can come true. Dr. Susan McAlester’s unhealthy obsession with finding a cure for Alzheimer’s guides her to costly extremes – and no price is too high in her book. It’s a classic example of sacrificing the few to aid the many, and it is, admittedly, a little overdone.
That said, this movie has some pretty awesome, if dated, death scenes – which I won’t go into detail about in case you haven’t seen it. What I can say is that this is actually a movie where Samuel L. Jackson doesn’t say “motherfucking.” (Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall hearing it at all, which was a shocker.)
Naturally, Deep Blue Sea isn’t something that’s breathtakingly amazing. It’s got its moments though, and it is a fun jaunt through what goes wrong when you mess with things you don’t know about. Seriously, it’s worth a watch for some of its silly little comedic moments, at that. Pretty solid three out of five.
They say the path to Hell is paved with good intentions and Deep Blue Sea reminds us exactly how such proverbs can come true. Dr. Susan McAlester’s unhealthy obsession with finding a cure for Alzheimer’s guides her to costly extremes – and no price is too high in her book. It’s a classic example of sacrificing the few to aid the many, and it is, admittedly, a little overdone.
That said, this movie has some pretty awesome, if dated, death scenes – which I won’t go into detail about in case you haven’t seen it. What I can say is that this is actually a movie where Samuel L. Jackson doesn’t say “motherfucking.” (Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall hearing it at all, which was a shocker.)
Naturally, Deep Blue Sea isn’t something that’s breathtakingly amazing. It’s got its moments though, and it is a fun jaunt through what goes wrong when you mess with things you don’t know about. Seriously, it’s worth a watch for some of its silly little comedic moments, at that. Pretty solid three out of five.
Sensitivemuse (246 KP) rated Creed in Books
Feb 21, 2019
Quick but Disappointing
This one read out like a B movie. Entertaining for the most part, but then you’re left empty and at times it felt like you were cheated out of a potentially good story. It was over so quickly hence why you get the feeling you were cheated. Which is too bad. The plot had promise, but it fell short.
It started off well. Just enough to get your attention, the creep factor was all set. A breadcrumb trail was set up and it was good enough to keep the plot going steady. Considering the length of the story, you don’t really have the time to connect with the characters, which is all right. I suppose the same would be said of characters in a horror movie. You’re just there to see their untimely end ;)
Despite there being a shocking moment in the book, it wasn’t enough to redeem the plot. There were so many unanswered questions and a rather drab mediocre last third of the book. You wanted to know so much and yet nothing much was produced. I’m not sure if that was meant to be a teaser but it was disappointing.
It was a quick read, this could be considered something to read in between books, or a light one to pass the time. Nothing eye opening or any wow factor will redeem this one. You’re not going to miss much if you pass this on.
It started off well. Just enough to get your attention, the creep factor was all set. A breadcrumb trail was set up and it was good enough to keep the plot going steady. Considering the length of the story, you don’t really have the time to connect with the characters, which is all right. I suppose the same would be said of characters in a horror movie. You’re just there to see their untimely end ;)
Despite there being a shocking moment in the book, it wasn’t enough to redeem the plot. There were so many unanswered questions and a rather drab mediocre last third of the book. You wanted to know so much and yet nothing much was produced. I’m not sure if that was meant to be a teaser but it was disappointing.
It was a quick read, this could be considered something to read in between books, or a light one to pass the time. Nothing eye opening or any wow factor will redeem this one. You’re not going to miss much if you pass this on.
Steve Fearon (84 KP) rated Sadako Vs Kayako (2016) in Movies
Oct 2, 2018
Versus movies claim another victim
I love Ringu.
And I love Ju-on.
So although I was skeptical about this movie (Damn you Alien v Predator: Requiem), I was intrigued by how it would work.
How does Sadako, a well dwelling ghost of a psychic little girl, that killed people through terror, end up battling with the curse/spirit of a murdered woman who now makes cricking noise and crawls down stairs and under sheets.
Both combatants kill via terror/mental means, so what does this mean in terms of this movie?
Well an hour or so of the film is basically a mediocre version of Ringu and Ju-On, with some good tension, and a skill for unsettling moments in that way J-Horror still possesses, and I was very much enjoying the ride.
However, as the two titular characters meet...it all starts to get a bit...well silly really.
I won't spoil anything specific, but the final act is a mess of new mythos, old mythos, off-screen battling and really, REALLY weird choices.
I was left feeling frustrated, and that the film had cheapened the brands with their choice of resolution, which though surprising, failed to really add anything to either franchise.
Not a terrible film, but not a great either.
And I love Ju-on.
So although I was skeptical about this movie (Damn you Alien v Predator: Requiem), I was intrigued by how it would work.
How does Sadako, a well dwelling ghost of a psychic little girl, that killed people through terror, end up battling with the curse/spirit of a murdered woman who now makes cricking noise and crawls down stairs and under sheets.
Both combatants kill via terror/mental means, so what does this mean in terms of this movie?
Well an hour or so of the film is basically a mediocre version of Ringu and Ju-On, with some good tension, and a skill for unsettling moments in that way J-Horror still possesses, and I was very much enjoying the ride.
However, as the two titular characters meet...it all starts to get a bit...well silly really.
I won't spoil anything specific, but the final act is a mess of new mythos, old mythos, off-screen battling and really, REALLY weird choices.
I was left feeling frustrated, and that the film had cheapened the brands with their choice of resolution, which though surprising, failed to really add anything to either franchise.
Not a terrible film, but not a great either.
LoganCrews (2861 KP) rated Phoenix Forgotten (2017) in Movies
Sep 19, 2020
For what it's worth this is incredibly, incredibly convincing for what it is. The problem is that it's actually *too* convincing - this is so caught up in crafting a dead-ringer documentary (albeit admirably so) that it forgets to actually put horror movie stuff in too until the last act when this type of movie is required to spiral out of control. Essentially a beat-for-beat ripoff of all three Blair Witch movies but with aliens instead of the witch, honestly not a terrible concept and this still ends up being way better than at least one of those films anyway. Decently immersive, brisk, and engaging for the dirt cheap prices you can find this for even if it never fully sells itself on its premise. On the one hand I appreciate that this never (bar one sole time) jumps the gun by throwing in cheap jump scares before the buildup has set in (a rarity with these things) but that buildup just lasts too damn long, no excuses. Super well put together but it needed a lot less (or at least more fleshed-out) docu-stuff with that crushingly blandass lead (who conveniently is the only less-than-perfect performance in a film chock full of expert ones [particularly Chelsea Lopez, who gives a tour de force one]) and more eerie found footage stuff with the teens. Eventually turns into exactly what you'd expect. Far from that bad, but still a shame.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated House on Haunted Hill (1959) in Movies
Oct 4, 2019
The Hill House
House on Haunted Hill- is one of the best horror movies of all time. Its terrorfying, horrorfying, scary, spooky, terrorfying and more.
The Introduction by Vincent Price is perfect, he introduces the movie and tells us the viewer what were going to witness. Vincent Price's spooky and creepy introduction is terrorfying.
The Plot: Rich oddball Frederick Loren (Vincent Price) has a proposal for five guests at a possibly haunted mansion: Show up, survive a night filled with scares and receive $10,000 each. The guest of honor is Loren's estranged wife, Annabelle (Carol Ohmart), who, with her secret lover, Dr. Trent (Alan Marshal), has concocted her own scheme to scare Loren's associate, Nora Manning (Carolyn Craig), into shooting the potentially crazy millionaire. But more spooks and shocks throw a wrench into the plan.
The film is in the public domain.
The film was remade as the 1999 film House on Haunted Hill, which had a 2007 sequel titled Return to House on Haunted Hill. The 1999 film was released to middling reviews but was a box office success, while the 2007 sequel was direct-to-video and widely panned. Dont watch those films.
In 2017, another remake is in development and a prequel to the original film, which the latter will be written by Castle's daughter Terry Castle. That will be intresting if it happens.
I would highly reccordmend this movie.
The Introduction by Vincent Price is perfect, he introduces the movie and tells us the viewer what were going to witness. Vincent Price's spooky and creepy introduction is terrorfying.
The Plot: Rich oddball Frederick Loren (Vincent Price) has a proposal for five guests at a possibly haunted mansion: Show up, survive a night filled with scares and receive $10,000 each. The guest of honor is Loren's estranged wife, Annabelle (Carol Ohmart), who, with her secret lover, Dr. Trent (Alan Marshal), has concocted her own scheme to scare Loren's associate, Nora Manning (Carolyn Craig), into shooting the potentially crazy millionaire. But more spooks and shocks throw a wrench into the plan.
The film is in the public domain.
The film was remade as the 1999 film House on Haunted Hill, which had a 2007 sequel titled Return to House on Haunted Hill. The 1999 film was released to middling reviews but was a box office success, while the 2007 sequel was direct-to-video and widely panned. Dont watch those films.
In 2017, another remake is in development and a prequel to the original film, which the latter will be written by Castle's daughter Terry Castle. That will be intresting if it happens.
I would highly reccordmend this movie.
Goosebumps Night of Scares.
Games
App
No Advertisements - VR compatible! - Featuring Jack Black as the Voice of R.L. Stine ...
Awix (3310 KP) rated Hellbound: Hellraiser II (1988) in Movies
Jul 30, 2020
Slightly discombobulating horror sequel. Following the events of the first movie Kirsty Cotton unsurprisingly ends up in a loony bin run by brain surgeon and keen puzzle-box fan Dr Channard (Kenneth Cranham tries mightily to bring a touch of Peter Cushing-style class to an underwritten part). As Channard is a lunatic, he resurrects Kirsty's evil stepmother, and because he is clearly either very forgetful or slow off the mark, together they give a puzzle box (which he already had) to a traumatised patient who's good at puzzles (who he likewise already had about the place) and together they begin to explore the realm of the box.
Meanwhile... oh, does it really matter? As you can perhaps begin to discern, the plot of Hellraiser II Makes No Sense Whatsoever (the Cotton house appears to have teleported from London to New York City in the gap between films, and this is only a minor issue), and there is something baffling and miraculous about the fact the film is as coherent and watchable as it is. Then again, it's not actually about logic, plot, or the motivation of the characters, just a succession of grisly, visceral, nightmarish, surreal images. In this respect at least the film is an astonishing success. Doesn't stop the story from being nonsense, though. Manages to be a very bad movie but also a terrific one, frequently at exactly the same time. Like I say, discombobulating.
Meanwhile... oh, does it really matter? As you can perhaps begin to discern, the plot of Hellraiser II Makes No Sense Whatsoever (the Cotton house appears to have teleported from London to New York City in the gap between films, and this is only a minor issue), and there is something baffling and miraculous about the fact the film is as coherent and watchable as it is. Then again, it's not actually about logic, plot, or the motivation of the characters, just a succession of grisly, visceral, nightmarish, surreal images. In this respect at least the film is an astonishing success. Doesn't stop the story from being nonsense, though. Manages to be a very bad movie but also a terrific one, frequently at exactly the same time. Like I say, discombobulating.