Opening movie for a cult horror movie night
 

Hi everybody!

I know I haven't been around in a while but I'm hoping you guys can help with a few ideas.

I'm staging a monthly cult horror movie night at a local bar that has a 12x8 ft screen and seating for around 40. I'm dressing the room with lots of Halloween props that my wife's event company uses for staging Halloween parties i.e. full size toe-pincher coffins, apothecary jars containing body parts, various limbs, blood-stained props.

I'm going to target horror fans, as they will be loyal but would also like to fill all the seats. I'm thinking anything from 1910 - 1990. Not too obscure but probably the first and only time people will see these movies on a big screen. I want to create a buzz on opening night and I'm considering either:

EVIL DEAD 2 or TCM



Thanks for your help:)[/B]

When is this happening? Evil Dead 2 would be better if you're doing this closer to the release of the Evil Dead remake while the success (financially at least) of Texas Chainsaw 3D might draw some interest to the original if you're doing this soon. Just my thoughts.

Three weeks from tonight. I know what you're thinking, too soon for proper execution but the opportunity just landed in my lap.

I'd love to start with Re-Animator or Return of the Living Dead or Demons but I want to ease people in gently.

I would reccomend The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) because it is a more mainstream classic. Do they consider it a cult classic? It did do pretty well in 1974, earning something like thirty million dollars. It is interesting, though because I have actually never seen Evil Dead 2. I own about 320 horror movies and have seen probably somewhere around 370, including The Return of the Living Dead (1985) and Reanimator (1985), which by the way I also own (I have not seen Demons, although it sounds familiar).

I was actually thinking the first evil dead. But TCM does sound good because of the new release of it. Pick a movie that will be make people drinking want to kinda interact with each other. drunk person "that's fucked up! AWESOME!"

Yeah, I suppose it is mainstream. I want to maintain integrity with horror fans and I'm slightly worried the target market won't find TCM interesting enough.

On Demons, you have to see this. It's a great movie especially for an 80's child like myself. I have a signed pic by Geretta Geretta in my collection. Because I love the movie and because she travelled in Northern Ireland during the 'Troubles' and taught acting in youth and community schemes.

I would probably go with The Evil Dead but the first one. Like Despare said it would coincide with the release of the remake.

Reanimator would be a fun movie with people drinking.

Evil Dead I. Cannibal Holocaust as a back-up.

Evil dead would be my choice. I have never really liked Tcm always found it a bit dull. It's a great idea to have a horror night at a pub hope it all goes well

I have always loved The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974). The film was very well directed and I thought the Leatherface of that film was scarier in terms of appearance than all future variations of him in the future. Additionally, some of the performances may have been forgettable, except for Marilyn Burns and definitely the entire Sawyer family. It almost seemed as if they were filming a real homicidal family in Texas. Also, I thought the opening scene taking photographs of those skeltons was particularly original and even creepy. Plus, I also thought it was interesting that the film had the title it did, but yet there was no sex and most of the violence was implied, there was even very little (fake) blood. In my opinion, the film has held up very well and I particularly enjoy it. On the other hand, Cannibal Holocaust (1980) is a different story. I rented that film from Netflix and it was one of the only horror movies that I nearly could not finish (although I forced myself to finish it). Don't get me wrong I have been sickened by a number of other horror films and have avoided ones I thought would be just too distrbing (suchh as the Human Centipede), but this is the first and only that I started and actually considered stopping. To this today that movies still haunts me. It may have created the "found footage" film and had interesting questions on "civilization", but it is one horror movie I will never watch again.

Fair point about Tcm but its just not for me. I have never seen Cannibal Holocaust. I read something about a turtle being gutted and it was real not special effects which put me off ever seeing it. Not sure if its true but still put me off

Yeah, it is true and there is actually a warning before the film about the graphic imagery in the film. It is one of the most savge films in the entire genre. That is not a compliment. The film is severely on overload in regards to violence and sexual content. It definitely lacks moral compass. Honsetly, the film is on the very edge between horror and pornography. In regards to the TCM, that is fine, we all have our own preferences in horror (among us who like it).

Firstly, thanks for all the feedback on the opening movie. I'm pretty sure we're going with Evil Dead II. The movie night is going to be for 'fans' of the genre and I personally think fans would prefer this one. Also, because of the Three Stooges element I believe it makes the movie a lot more rewatchable. Frankly, horror people are probably tiring of TCM, if that isn't blasphemous.

In terms of CH, I think you're being incredibly harsh on a landmark, innovative horror movie that knows very much where it's moral compass is pointed. Here are it's big pros;

- It delivered the original found footage storyline thus inspiring countless others i.e. BWP
- It inspired a new generous of horror directors like Eli Roth, hence the Ruggero Deodato cameo in Hostel II.
- Some of the post production marketing/promoting was so effective it landed the director in jail.
- It served to diminish censorship and desensitise people.
- Finally, given the production year, it was politically the right time to send out an anti colonial/empire message, if you were inclined so to do!

Desensitization is a good thing?

Good choice on the movie. I would agree that it has much more rewatch abillaty.
My only problem the CH it the harm of animals for the amusement for people.

I mean in the context of where we were in the early eighties to where we are now. Maybe it helped to break down government and BBFC control of what was and wasn't good for us to see.

The censorship in the UK back then was too iron-curtainy!

You are probably right it did help brake down censorship. As I say I don't want to see it because of the animal cruelty

There are versions that leave out the worst bits. I have the Vipco edition and I think it's one of the tamer versions.

You listed in your pros section that it desinsitized people.

Diminishing censorship and desensitizing the audience are two separate things. I'm not asking anything about the censorship. My question was simply "Desensitization is a good thing?"

I think a case could be made that the steady desensitization of the audience is a major factor why horror movies are so crappy these days, as filmmakers continually strive to push the envelope farther and farther in shocks and gore, at the expense of good storytelling, effective pacing and competent acting.

I am familiar with the film, I did a great deal of research on the film before I actually watched it. I have multiple books on horror movies and have read virtually all of them and the film came reccomended, but I personally am not a fan of that level of torture, gore, and explicit sex or even torture of any kind. I believe that direction of horror movies was misguided and I am glad to see it seems to have passed. Also, the animal mutilation scenes were the most terrible things I have seen on film. I will retract my statement on lacking a moral compass. I see it now that you mention it. I realize it contained a message on civilization (I pointed it out in my comment). I just could not handle the film. As I mentioned, I personally loved The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), I did not even realize people still knew the original. I am unable to make a statement on Evil Dead II because I have not seen it, but i'm sure it will be a good film. I do agree with some of the other comments that The Evil Dead (1981) would have been a better film, but that was not an option. You're welcome for the feedback.

Personally, between Evil Dead II & Texas Chainsaw Massacre, I would rather go see Evil Dead II.

My reasons why is a lot less about film quality or horror significance as it is if I'm having a few drinks enjoying a movie I'd rather have some comedic elements at this point rather than hearing a woman scream for what feels like FOREVER. It just doesn't sound like fun to me anymore. The original is far to serious to watch in that kind of environment for me. I haven't watched the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre in probably 10 years now. I still like to watch 2 and 3 and even 4, but the original just doesn't have the re-watchability for me because it is so serious.

http://horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62413

Maybe...maybe....maybe....

Follow up your opening night with a genuine cult classic- The Beast In Heat (1977)

Here's the trailer:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9nRnI0A48o

The people of Belfast probably aren't ready for that level of obscurity. My bro wants to go with Reanimator next. We definitely need to include Return of the Living Dead and Demons (two favourites).

Hopefully number will grow and when we have a regular fanbase the movie selection will be user driven to a certain extent. Perhaps host a poll to see what the next movie is. Have movie selection as a competition prize.

I am saving up all your suggestions so feel free to keep them coming. If we weren't restricted to horror I'd include The Warriors, Rolling Thunder and maybe The Wanderers.

I think desensitising people who were, relatively speaking, overly sensitive was good in terms of increasing acceptance of what we know now isn't remotely offensive. This in turn brought the Thatcherite nanny state's censorship laws under greater pressure to relax which they ultimately did. So yeah, in the context of the early '80s, it was a good thing and CH probably played a tiny part.

I think the violence was in context and appropriate for the message of the movie and just because film makers can get away with a whole lot more now isn't a bad thing. Sure some directors go for 'route one' gore but equally it hasn't reduced the quality of horrors. It just means there's a broader spectrum to that element of the genre. If you want to make 'sick' for 'sicks' sake you can.

I watched The Skin I Live In last night and it made me feel a lot more uneasy than any gornography movie. It's probably more Thriller than Horror but it goreless, clever and well told. Irreversible is just as good but does call on the 'sick' to enhance the movie.

I think it's unfair to say todays movies are 'crappy' it's probably just that we have movies that are crappy because they are so one dimensional - a dimension that didn't exist until the '90s - gore/torture/sick.

ps, I've just acquired Eden Lake and Three...Extremes. Which should I watch tonight?

my vote goes to
 

Well I know I've said it before, but in my opinion the best cult horror movie ever is Prince of Darkness. You have your devil, your quantum physics, your zombies, your Alice Cooper. I mean, it's all happening right there, John Carpenter at his best.

That's a good shout! I'm compiling a list of movies to select our screenings from. Here are the titles under consideration: Angel Heart,
Re-animator, Scanners, Hellraiser, In the Mouth Of Madness, Evil Dead II, An American Werewolf in London, Suspiria
Zombie Flesh Eaters I & II, Return Of The Living Dead, Demons, Dawn of the Dead, Shaun of the Dead, The Devils, Braindead, Videodrome, They Live, Monster Squad, Near Dark, The brood, Phantasm, Dead of Night, Bad Taste, From Beyond, Society, Combat Shock, The last house on the left, To the Devil a Daughter, Fade to Black, Driller Killer, Leprechaun.

Let Me Know Your Suggestions, Please!!!

These are good ones especially the ones I put in bold which are ones I'd pay to see if they were ever shown at a cinema near me.

Great! Thanks for the feedback. Do you think Devils would create some unwanted attention? People still go crazy about it.

Also, where would I get the most 'complete' version?

That would be better being your call. It depends if you think the audience you invite would be too sensitive and get offended.

Unfortunately we still haven't got the true uncut version as released yet. There was a recent release after the director died which is probably the best one. I'll post a link once I remember which version it was.

That'd be great, if only for adding to my own collection.

In terms of offending people, Ireland has quite a colourful/violent past in relation to peoples attitude towards religion. Whereas there is a very rich history of radical liberal forward thinking there are also a lot of 'nut-jobs'.

One badly placed promotional poster and I'd have every devout RC who can hold a placard standing outside on movie night. Actually, come to think of it, what is it they say about all publicity?

The most complete version is the 2004 Uncut restoration version-
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Devils-Speci...8781054&sr=1-4

sadly it's currently unavailable at amazon and out of print :(

You have to take risks with events like this if you want to draw in the crowds. I'm sure it's available if you have a quick look elsewhere ;)

This info is gratefully received! I could really launch the most complete version with a lot of fanfair in the local press...

I finally watched Evil Dead II yesterday. I thought it was a really good movie, although quite different from the original. I was a little confused though. Was the film a comdeic remake of the original or an actual sequel? I will say that I thought the original was better, but again the two films were quite different. The first being a dark film with little to no humor and this film being dark, but far more comedic.

It was a sequel-at the time I believe Sam Raimi lost the rights to the original film so those flashback scenes at the beginning had to be re-filmed he couldn't use actual scenes from the original.

Why didn't Ash seem to remember anything that happened in the first one? Or was it simply a continuation of the first one?

It was supposed to be continuing straight after the first film. In those flashback scenes things were different than in the first film as he re-filmed them. I don't know why Raimi made it seem like it was just Ash and his fiancee in the cabin and left out the fact there were other people there too.

I always thought that they were given a wad of cash to remake the first on the strength of the ability demonstrated in the first part. Is it not roughly a re-telling?

I asked the same question on here a couple of years ago but people told me what I said in the previous posts. I assumed the people on here who told me would have looked into this already and not have relied on guesswork.

Found it-Posts #29, #30, #32 and #33 here and on the following page:-

http://www.horror.com/forum/showthre...t=58228&page=3