Search
Search results
Darren (1599 KP) rated House of 1000 Corpses (2003) in Movies
Nov 23, 2019
Verdict: This Really Is Messy
Story: House of 1000 Corpses starts when four friends Jerry (Hardwick), Mary (Jostyn), Bill (Wilson) and Denise (Daniels) go on tour of at Captain Spaulding (Haig) house of horrors and learning about mysterious tree, they go off in search in a storm, picking up a hitchhiker Baby Firefly (Moon), they find a place to stay, right around when the news is reporting about missing teenagers.
The four friends find themselves being the latest victims of the Firefly family with Otis (Moseley) willing to do anything to get his pleasure for pain, their only hope is that Denise’s father comes looking for them after they didn’t arrive at his house the night before.
Thoughts on House of 1000 Corpses
Characters – Captain Spaulding is the one that has his own house of horrors that he encourages tourists to look around, he knows the legends of the area, which is why he knows how to get the curiosity of the people to want to go in search for the legends about his house. Otis is the leader of the firefly house, he will talk the most, do the most torturous treatment of their victims. Baby Firefly is the one that brings people back to the house, the youngest member of the family that is just getting started in her ways compared to the rest. Mother Firefly is always looking for a younger man to play with before they murder.
Performances – Sid Haig does bring his character to life to be one of the very few highlights in this film, while Bill Moseley knows that he needed to make this character over the top, while the victims are generic performances, they are fine, but the rest of the cast struggles to work with the awful material.
Story – The story here follows four friends that find themselves being the latest victims of the sadistic firefly family that like to torture, mutuality and kill their victims. The biggest problem with this story is that we cut away way too many times, it always looks like we are going into watch a torture filled horror story, which isn’t everyone cup of tea, but if we had stuck to this idea, we could have had a good story. The problems involve countless city away scenes of just random footage of violence happening to people, rather than having any context towards them. This story is mess and never makes you care about the victims, while not making the villains people you want to see either, making most shots of the film hard to care about.
Horror – The horror in the film is meant to be focused on the different levels of violence that could be given to the victims, it is more for shock than making any sense.
Settings – The film is mostly set in the one house/ranch like environment where the family can do what they want without anybody coming to disturb them.
Special Effects – The effects are used to show the violence, though most gets covered over with random slips of something else happening.
Scene of the Movie – Captain Spaulding’s tour.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The random cut clips that make no sense.
Final Thoughts – This is a truly messy horror that misses on every mark, leaving it look and feeling like something you would forget within a hour of finishing it.
Overall: Poor and messy.
Story: House of 1000 Corpses starts when four friends Jerry (Hardwick), Mary (Jostyn), Bill (Wilson) and Denise (Daniels) go on tour of at Captain Spaulding (Haig) house of horrors and learning about mysterious tree, they go off in search in a storm, picking up a hitchhiker Baby Firefly (Moon), they find a place to stay, right around when the news is reporting about missing teenagers.
The four friends find themselves being the latest victims of the Firefly family with Otis (Moseley) willing to do anything to get his pleasure for pain, their only hope is that Denise’s father comes looking for them after they didn’t arrive at his house the night before.
Thoughts on House of 1000 Corpses
Characters – Captain Spaulding is the one that has his own house of horrors that he encourages tourists to look around, he knows the legends of the area, which is why he knows how to get the curiosity of the people to want to go in search for the legends about his house. Otis is the leader of the firefly house, he will talk the most, do the most torturous treatment of their victims. Baby Firefly is the one that brings people back to the house, the youngest member of the family that is just getting started in her ways compared to the rest. Mother Firefly is always looking for a younger man to play with before they murder.
Performances – Sid Haig does bring his character to life to be one of the very few highlights in this film, while Bill Moseley knows that he needed to make this character over the top, while the victims are generic performances, they are fine, but the rest of the cast struggles to work with the awful material.
Story – The story here follows four friends that find themselves being the latest victims of the sadistic firefly family that like to torture, mutuality and kill their victims. The biggest problem with this story is that we cut away way too many times, it always looks like we are going into watch a torture filled horror story, which isn’t everyone cup of tea, but if we had stuck to this idea, we could have had a good story. The problems involve countless city away scenes of just random footage of violence happening to people, rather than having any context towards them. This story is mess and never makes you care about the victims, while not making the villains people you want to see either, making most shots of the film hard to care about.
Horror – The horror in the film is meant to be focused on the different levels of violence that could be given to the victims, it is more for shock than making any sense.
Settings – The film is mostly set in the one house/ranch like environment where the family can do what they want without anybody coming to disturb them.
Special Effects – The effects are used to show the violence, though most gets covered over with random slips of something else happening.
Scene of the Movie – Captain Spaulding’s tour.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The random cut clips that make no sense.
Final Thoughts – This is a truly messy horror that misses on every mark, leaving it look and feeling like something you would forget within a hour of finishing it.
Overall: Poor and messy.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Alien: Covenant (2017) in Movies
Sep 29, 2021
Horrific Beasts and How to Avoid Them.
I seem to be in a bit of a minority in quite liking Ridley Scott’s last Alien outing – 2012’s “Prometheus”: a heady, if at times ponderous, theory to the origins of man. The first hour of that film is really good. But for me, what made the original 1979 film so enthralling was the life cycle of the ‘traditional’ Xenomorph aliens through egg to evil hatchling to vicious killing machine. This somewhat got lost with “Prometheus” with a range of alien-like-things ranging from wiggly black goo to something more familiar… and frankly I was confused. Some – repeat, some – of the explanation for that diversity of forms in “Prometheus” is made clearer in the sequel “Alien: Covenant”.
“Covenant” (named again after the spaceship at its heart) is a follow-on sequel to “Prometheus”, so it is worth re-watching it if you can before a cinema trip. At the end of that film we saw Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) and a reconstructed android David (Michael Fassbender, “Steve Jobs“) flying off in an alien craft still loaded with its cargo of nasty alien black goo. Shaw had a mission to seek out The Engineer’s home world – named “Paradise” – to find out why after creating man they were intent on going back to finish them off with a WMD. A neat prologue has been released which documents this… here:
We pick up the action 10 years later in a totally improbable 2104. (Give us a break writing team! [Story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green; screenplay by John Logan and Dante Harper]. We know they won’t have got through planning permission on the third Heathrow runway by then, let alone invented interplanetary travel…! 2504, maybe!)
Daniels (Katherine Waterston, “Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them“) has just suffered a sudden bereavement (an uncredited James Franco – – blink and you’ll miss him). She has also been rudely awakened from hypersleep due to a sudden system mishap: no, not to find Chris Pratt there like “Passengers“, but by the ship’s android Walter (also Michael Fassbender) who’s also revived the rest of the crew. While effecting repairs they receive a garbled John Denver track mysteriously beamed to them from an earth-like planet not too far away. As this might be a suitable homestead, and as spending weeks more in hypersleep is unattractive, Captain Oram (Billy Crudup, “Spotlight“) votes to check it out, against Daniels’ strong objections. Needless to say, this proves to be a BIG MISTAKE as the new film neatly links hands with the first film.
Kick-ass… Katherine Waterston being careful not to slip in the shower.
There’s a limit to what more I can say about the film without delivering spoilers (so I have added a few more comments in the spoiler section BELOW the trailer). It’s a far more action-oriented film than “Prometheus” and has enough jump scares and gore to please most Alien fans. (In fact, it’s a surprise to me that it got a UK “15” certificate rather than an “18”: how much more violence do you need to show in the film?) A shower scene towards the end of the film is particularly effective and will likely put an end to relaxing shower sex for many people for good!
It also looks visually stunning (cinematography is by Dariusz Wolski (“The Martian“, “Pirates of the Caribbean”) with location shooting in Milford Sound in New Zealand. The special effects are also a cut-above the normal CGI with a devastated Pompeii-like city, a picture of blacks and greys, being particularly effective.
In the acting stakes it is really all down to Waterston and Fassbinder. I wasn’t a great fan of Waterston in “Fantastic Beasts” – a bit insipid I thought – but here she adopts Ripley’s kick-ass mantle with ease but blends it beautifully with doe-eyed vulnerability. Some of her scenes reminded me strongly of Demi Moore in “Ghost”. Fassbinder is fascinating to watch with his dual roles of Walter and David, both slightly different versions of the same being. And the special effects around the Fassbinder-on-Fassbinder action, tending somewhat towards the homoerotic in places, are well done.
Unfortunately the rest of the crew get little in the way of background development, which limits the impact of the inevitable demises. They are also about as clinically stupid as the spaceship crew in “Life” in some of their actions; I guess you could put some of this down to the effects of panic, but in other cases you might see it as a simple cleansing of the gene pool in Darwinian fashion.
Also making uncredited guest appearances are Guy Pearce as Weyland (in a flashback scene) and Noomi Rapace.
Music is “by” Jed Kurzel, but to be honest he does little than wrap around re-versions of the original Jerry Goldsmith classics: not that this is a bad thing, since those themes are iconic and a joy to hear again on the big screen.
My expectations for this movie were sky-high, as it was hinted as a return to form for the franchise. And in many ways it was, with a “man, Gods and androids” theme adding depth to the traditional anatomical-bursting gore. But to be honest, some of the storytelling was highly predictable, and I left slightly disappointed with the overall effort. If my expectations were an 11/10, my reality was more like a 7/10. It’s still a good film, and I look forward to watching it again. But perhaps this is a franchise that has really run its course now for Mr Scott and he should look to his next “Martian”-type movie for a more novel foundation to build his next movie “log cabin on the lake” on.
“Covenant” (named again after the spaceship at its heart) is a follow-on sequel to “Prometheus”, so it is worth re-watching it if you can before a cinema trip. At the end of that film we saw Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace, “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”) and a reconstructed android David (Michael Fassbender, “Steve Jobs“) flying off in an alien craft still loaded with its cargo of nasty alien black goo. Shaw had a mission to seek out The Engineer’s home world – named “Paradise” – to find out why after creating man they were intent on going back to finish them off with a WMD. A neat prologue has been released which documents this… here:
We pick up the action 10 years later in a totally improbable 2104. (Give us a break writing team! [Story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green; screenplay by John Logan and Dante Harper]. We know they won’t have got through planning permission on the third Heathrow runway by then, let alone invented interplanetary travel…! 2504, maybe!)
Daniels (Katherine Waterston, “Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them“) has just suffered a sudden bereavement (an uncredited James Franco – – blink and you’ll miss him). She has also been rudely awakened from hypersleep due to a sudden system mishap: no, not to find Chris Pratt there like “Passengers“, but by the ship’s android Walter (also Michael Fassbender) who’s also revived the rest of the crew. While effecting repairs they receive a garbled John Denver track mysteriously beamed to them from an earth-like planet not too far away. As this might be a suitable homestead, and as spending weeks more in hypersleep is unattractive, Captain Oram (Billy Crudup, “Spotlight“) votes to check it out, against Daniels’ strong objections. Needless to say, this proves to be a BIG MISTAKE as the new film neatly links hands with the first film.
Kick-ass… Katherine Waterston being careful not to slip in the shower.
There’s a limit to what more I can say about the film without delivering spoilers (so I have added a few more comments in the spoiler section BELOW the trailer). It’s a far more action-oriented film than “Prometheus” and has enough jump scares and gore to please most Alien fans. (In fact, it’s a surprise to me that it got a UK “15” certificate rather than an “18”: how much more violence do you need to show in the film?) A shower scene towards the end of the film is particularly effective and will likely put an end to relaxing shower sex for many people for good!
It also looks visually stunning (cinematography is by Dariusz Wolski (“The Martian“, “Pirates of the Caribbean”) with location shooting in Milford Sound in New Zealand. The special effects are also a cut-above the normal CGI with a devastated Pompeii-like city, a picture of blacks and greys, being particularly effective.
In the acting stakes it is really all down to Waterston and Fassbinder. I wasn’t a great fan of Waterston in “Fantastic Beasts” – a bit insipid I thought – but here she adopts Ripley’s kick-ass mantle with ease but blends it beautifully with doe-eyed vulnerability. Some of her scenes reminded me strongly of Demi Moore in “Ghost”. Fassbinder is fascinating to watch with his dual roles of Walter and David, both slightly different versions of the same being. And the special effects around the Fassbinder-on-Fassbinder action, tending somewhat towards the homoerotic in places, are well done.
Unfortunately the rest of the crew get little in the way of background development, which limits the impact of the inevitable demises. They are also about as clinically stupid as the spaceship crew in “Life” in some of their actions; I guess you could put some of this down to the effects of panic, but in other cases you might see it as a simple cleansing of the gene pool in Darwinian fashion.
Also making uncredited guest appearances are Guy Pearce as Weyland (in a flashback scene) and Noomi Rapace.
Music is “by” Jed Kurzel, but to be honest he does little than wrap around re-versions of the original Jerry Goldsmith classics: not that this is a bad thing, since those themes are iconic and a joy to hear again on the big screen.
My expectations for this movie were sky-high, as it was hinted as a return to form for the franchise. And in many ways it was, with a “man, Gods and androids” theme adding depth to the traditional anatomical-bursting gore. But to be honest, some of the storytelling was highly predictable, and I left slightly disappointed with the overall effort. If my expectations were an 11/10, my reality was more like a 7/10. It’s still a good film, and I look forward to watching it again. But perhaps this is a franchise that has really run its course now for Mr Scott and he should look to his next “Martian”-type movie for a more novel foundation to build his next movie “log cabin on the lake” on.