Spiral - ah, Spiral/Rasen, "the forgotten sequel" to Ring/Ringu. I had never seen this before, had no idea what to expect.

Well, I liked it. A lot. I think it's a far better sequel to Ring than Hideo Nakata's own Ring 2. It has a very different feel and pace to Ring, and I liked that. It's a Cronenbergian meditation on fear and disease, the story being concerned with matters epidemiological rather than Ring 2's rather clumsy "energy transference" schtick with the water and blotting paper and such.

I also far preferred the depiction of Sadako as a lucid and coherent sexual being keen to seduce and be reborn, rather than the almost disposal zombie, bogey figure she was in Ring 2.

Ring 2 flows more naturally from Ring due to the similarities in style, but I think Spiral has the better story, feels more "grown up", and is the better film.

For some reason my abiding memory of that film is the awful score, like an old tv movie done on a cheap keyboard or something. Maybe I just haven't seen enough cheapo modern horror :crazy: . . .

agreed. have you read the books?? still cant "like" btw...wassup with dat?

Are you using Internet Explorer? I seem to have the same problem at work.

I can 'like' at home as I use Firefox.

aye, tis aw they have in the library. grrrr! no way round it i suppose?

and while im here, watched Contagion...good enough "virus" movie. felt like an old disaster movie in places!

and 50/50...never again will i watch a "based on a true story" film, oscar shoo-in methinks, Seth Rogen's range is more limited than i thought...and that's nae saying much...:laugh:

I'll ask Stefan as it could be to do with the recent forum changes.

ta, appreciated!;)

Watched Martin.Very very good, one of Romero's best

Miss the heady days of VHS? the washed out, artifacted, barely watchable pictures? Then visit Poundland - I've just attempted to watch their Shadow of the Vampire DVD - it's hellish, spend your quid on a giant toblerone instead and watch one of your blu rays.
As for the movie, from what I can make out, it's pretty poor with Eddie Izzard's overacting a particular lowlight.

Aww it's better than that (I think) - that said, don't think I've rewatched since I bought the dvd when it first came out :shocked: - I remember the ending was pretty cool at least . . .

For me this movie is awful. A classic case of good ingredients (idea, cast, director) producing a completely inedible meal. Dafoe is just a bag of facial tics, Udo Keir seems half dead, Malkovich never convinces, the pace is non existent, there's some terrible expository dialogue, no pathos, scares, laughs or indeed interest of any sort. I hated it. Feel free to disagree!

watched Life In A Day, an interesting idea that at the end of the day boils down to it being a 90 minute youtube playlist, Some of it was great and some of it was exceptionally dull, not worth spending money on but if it's on TV give it a go.

Decided to watch a few films i'd not seen in a while, so sat down with my brother and watched Snatch, which for me is Guy Ritchie's best film, Brad Pitt is awesome as mickey and it's an early film for both Jason statham and Stephen Graham. Has some quality quotable line too.

Then we watched True Romance, i ****ing love this film, not only is it Tarantino's best script but it's Tony Scott's best film. Christian Slater effortlessly delivers Tarantino's dialogue and the two stand out scenes that really do make the film are Hopper/Walken scene and the Arquette/Gandolfini scene. Just a brilliant film which i had to buy on blu after watching the dvd.

I haven't, but I will be seeking them out very soon.

I watched the very same flick today, but I couldn't disagree more. It's by no means a bad movie - I have to state that in advance. But there are quite a few "buts"...

I really wanted to see this flick after after hearing (or reading) so many people here wax lyrical about it. Some scenes are really good - one of them being the first part of the Arquette/Gandolfini scene (the psycho part - the violence afterwards is over-the-top and seems very autotelic). Gandolfini is a very fine and charismatic actor, which leads me to the core problem of True Romance: its cast. (All of my statements are highly subjective, so please don't be offended - if you love this movie, its fine by me. :))
- Christian Slater is a very mediocre actor. Apart from a very stupid infantile smile, there's nothing that I remember about his character.
- Patricia Arquette is cute, but that's it. Her acting is pretty close to involuntary overacting.
- Dennis Hopper, Brad Pitt, and James Gandolfini are highly talented actors - but their itty-bitty roles in this flick are far to small. The actor with the best performance (Gandolfini) is on screen for only a quarter of an hour? Sorry, but that's a real waste of talent, especially with overchallenged actors like Slater in the lead. :crazy:
- Christopher Walken comes in for a great little scene, and leaves without any further explanation - a big hole in Tarantino's script, if you ask me!

But you know what I disliked most? The ending. I watched the alternate ending (with Tarantino's commentary switched on), and I think Tarantino is wrong. His ending is far better than Scott's requested happy ending, and would have given this inconsistent flick a more serious (and sinister) touch. Do you want to know why this was such a huge let-down for me? Well, now I become very subjective again, so feel free to disagree! Spoiler alert, too!

Both Slater's and Arquette's characters are totally trivial and boring. Clarence gets his eye shot out? Well, that's his problem, innit? He's a loser and a criminal, and f*cked with the wrong people - he had it coming. Alabama gets her face smashed in? I don't care, as she's the stupid broad who teamed up with a cretin. And please don't mention Michael Rapaport - the fact that this idiot called "Dick" (an aptonym indeed!) doesn't get killed in the final shootout really made me angry! :doh:

Beatty and Dunaway in Bonnie and Clyde are criminals, too - but I can (at least partly) identify with them, especially as both actors are extremely charismatic. That's what True Romance is missing.

What's left? A few good dialogues, a beautiful car, great performances by Hopper, Pitt, and Gandolfini, and two (very short!) classy scenes:
1) The phone booth scene (with Big Bopper's Chantilly Lace) and
2) a nice scene involving coke and a Porsche.
Both scenes are hilarious and will stick in your mind forever! :smokin:

Just my two cents - feel free to disagree. :nod:

Greetings!

Watched Maniac cop 1 and 2 this morning watching Maniac Cop 3 right now. The first 2 are better in my opinion still good all the same.

True Romance, to me, belongs to that breed of films that make you go "Wow!" when you first see them, but do not stand up to repeated viewing and proper scrutiny*, so I guess I agree with Prince here.

It is fun, and it is well put together, but it is massively over-rated and it is still a Tony Scott film (too much fatuous action crammed in, diluting the substance) and it does have a puerile adolescent boy wish fulfilment script.

As Prince says, the good bits are odd scenes. It is a collection of sketches rather than a coherent film.

But it IS Tony Scott's best film and it is fun for the most part. And I did buy it on Laserdisc a couple of years ago just because I always wanted the LD.


* see also: Pulp Fiction, From Dusk Till Dawn, Terminator 2 Judgement Day, Aliens...

I suppose that comes with age and changing taste in films - about 10 years ago I probably would've included it in my top 50 favourite films list (same with those other titles you mentioned). Now I just see it as a rather smug and annoying riff on Badlands - no desire to see it again . . .

I watched a low budget horror/thriller/(comedy) called The Signal last night and wow what a film. I bought it (sceptically)on DVD in poundland but I had heard good things about it from a few people so I went in with an open mind. What I didn't expect was to watch an extremely well crafted piece of filmmaking. Acting, action, setting, music score, sound, everything so spot on.

Without spoiling the plot I'll basically say it's about a signal that makes people go mad and in case you are unaware, it was created, produced and directed by three different people. Each director got to create a third of the film each and I must say I loved all three segments.

First part was a horror that was incredibly tense and genuinely scared me a few times, it put me right on edge. :fear:

Second part became a comedy/horror which was actually really funny. Still tense and creepy but with added satire humour which worked really well. :lol:

The third went back to a more creepy style that lent to more "thriller" territory. :pop2:

I don't know if it was because I had a glass of wine before watching it, then had a couple more during the film, but I just loved every second of it.
The PQ was rather shoddy on the DVD release and I just assumed it was because it was a cheaply made film with cheap bad cameras but I've just looked up to see if it's on Blu-ray and there is actually a release and the screenshots look nice and clear so I cannot wait to soak it all up again in HD. Bring it on! :rockon:
I can safely (:pray:) say it's one of the best horrors I've seen (:hand: :mob:), that could be that I've either not seen enough horror films and you're all going to laugh at me for saying something so ridiculous or it's generally just that good. You decide, rent the Blu-ray.

EDIT: Just found a review from someone who seems to have the same mindset, giving it 9 out of 10 http://www.sci-fi-online.com/00_revs...signal-blu.htm

I got that one from Poundland too... only I thought it was a bit rubbish :lol: . . .

And also watched Wampyr,the Italian cut.Well with the Goblin music and the Italian dub it has a Giallo feel but the editing makes the plot more confusing

Agreed. Quite a poor job on the re-edit. Biggest mistake was chopping out all the stuff between Martin and cousin Christina - kind of the heart of the film . . .

Indeed:nod:

If you thought that was rubbish then I'd be intrigued to know what low budget horror you think is great ;)

Night of the Living Dead, Carnival of Souls, Texas Chainsaw, Evil Dead... :tongue1:

A more recent one that sticks in my mind is the infection flick Mulberry St., unfortunately retitled Zombie Virus on Mulberry Street for the UK. Splinter was pretty decent too. LOVE Pontypool . . .

Loved Mulberry Street, Splinter and Pontypool was good too!

I watched THE DEMON SEED today, inspired by whispy memories of seeing it when I was a kid (although I also saw it dead drunk a couple years ago, a complete black out). I thought it was wonderful. A macrocosm within a microcosm, the film dares to take on big themes like the nature of consciousness and the depths of human belonging whilst planting them firmly within the sci-fi / exploitation context of what is essentially a computer-rape scenario. Now, digital sex assault in a tawdry 70s sub-future may not be all that great but this film certainly is, and it's a testament to Don Cammell and his direction that his haunting work constantly evokes questions that loom larger than the events portrayed. An insistent eerieness runs through the proceedings (I often find this happens with a certain kind of film from the seventies) and I feel it would've played well alongside Cronenberg of this period, although some of its narrative moves are slightly more obvious. With its philosophy and nastiness, would surely be ripe for some kind of harsh contemporary J-horror update - be 'nice' to see Sato ('Naked Blood' etc) take it on.
Earlier in the week I sat down with THE HOUSE OF EXORCISM. I didn't dig it all that much. I haven't seen 'Lisa and the Devil' so don't feel able to denounce this as a butchered and flayed figment, although I'm aware of its history. Maybe it was my mood, maybe I'd primed myself for something more dream-like... but it didn't hook me, and I ended things thinking I'd prefer almost any other Bava, although, again, in this version it wasn't really his film. I should probably give it another go, but I actually think that if you're going to remix from borderline art-house to grindhouse, you might as well go overboard with the exploitative elements, which were only tepid here (and all ripped off, unsurprisingly, from 'The Exorcist'). What else have I seen recently? JULIE DARLING courtesy of Code Red. Basically a trashier take on 'Bad Seed' thematics, it drapes saggy raiments of evil-teen melodrama over an awkward frame of incest-fantasy. It's maybe worth watching as a slice of odd-film history and, despite its murkier undercurrents rarely surfacing all that explicitly, it retains an authentic 'exploitation' feeling atmospherically, although 'Bloody Birthday' remains a much more compelling take on kids killing a bunch of adults and generally being horrible a mon avis.

Ti Wests The House of the Devil.
I really enjoyed this film just finished watching it a few minutes ago. Its got a real slow build up but feels creepy all the way sort of unsettling when you have no idea whats going to happen. I didnt read anything about this movie before i seen it so everything was a surprise to me. I really like how it was shot to look like a 70s or 80s era horror movie. Its a really good watch all the way through.

Loved all those too to be honest :lol: although The Signal is definitely the best of that bunch :p

bleh. I just didn't think it brought anything new to the table, and the comedy middle section I found horribly misjudged - stuck out a mile from the two similar parts it was sandwiched between. The three parts by three directors thing sounded good on paper, but think it came across as quite confused in the finished film - like a half-assed anthology-but-not-really film :ohwell: . . .

Shame you saw it that way, although I know what you mean about the mid section and if it wasn't executed right then it wouldn't work but for me it did. As we all say though, each to their own. There's many a film I despise that people rave about ie. Two Lane Blacktop, now that was a messy excuse for talented filmmaking :) Uh Oh! :mob:

See, I know nothing about that film, but was thinking about blind-buying the steelbook - but I got burned doing that with Silent Running :ack: so maybe I'll rent it first . . .

It was just soooo poorly acted, unbelievable characters, no linear story and bad editing and use of music. It just seemed so messy and didn't gel at all.
I'd be willing to give the Blu a rent just to see if it was my frame of mind at the time though

It's great and not a little robot in sight.

just watched Killer Elite, not the Peckinpah film but the new Statham, DeNiro flick, enjoyed the hell out of it, i was expecting a full on action movie and while there are some great action set pieces, it has a great based on true events story. Highly recommended for actions fans and political thriller fans. Also some of this was shot about 10 minutes from my house.

Just watched Drive.
I dont see the love this flick.
It starts out good but then for the next 45 mins its quite bland and slow.
It gets better in last 45 min but its not that great, dont get me wrong its not a bad movie just not great. :)
Had some pretty good violence in it though and if they did not have such a long build up I might have thought it was much better.

Silent Night Deadly Night 1 & 2. The films are good but in part 2 the first half of the movie is just flash backs of the first film.

Don't pass on Lisa and the Devil, I love it and it delivers on the dream like front, definitely in my top 3 Bava with Kill Baby Kill and Black Sunday. Another one in the same vein is Malpertuis by Harry Kumel - the Barrel DVD is fantastic if you can track it down..

Stooges in Tokyo (1991)
My first introduction to James Wong Jim or uncle Jim!
Wong Jim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fun Cat III sex comedy which actually has a bit of a message. :thumb:

I'll never forget that a "naked hen" brings 3 years of bad luck! :lol:

Have you got the Elite R1 DVD? If so, listen to the commentary. It's the best commentary. Ever. Period.

Wishman is on there with her director of photography and every time he tries to say something she tells him to shut up and constantly blames him for all the stinkers she's made. Pure class. Be sure to listen to it. :lol:

Watched SUPERNOVA, starring James Spader and Angela Bassett. Despite all the behind the scenes shenanigans (Walter Hill having his name removed from the film, reshoots by Jack Sholder, editing by Francis Ford Coppolla, the film losing around $75 million), I've always found it an enjoyable film. And it's amazing to watch it and see James Spader today, and see how someone can change so much in 12 years. I think myself and Spader should become gym buddies!