Last Seen 70s/80s Movie

[Elvis_Christ]

Night Stalker & Gacy:

Both pretty decent flicks. Neither were as good as Ted Bundy or the Manson Family. I don't really like these sort of films when there done from the investigators perspective which was Night Stalker's case, good to see Gacy didn't follow this tired path.

American Splendor:

This film is amazing and has definatley become one of my favorites. If you haven't seen it check it out its got some great moments.

The Card Player:

Pretty average thriller that I wouldn't have bothered with but because Argento directed it I thought I'd give it a go. Lacking his trademark gore and surreal imagery I found this dissapointing. Not bad but far from great... like I said average.

The Driver:

Walter Hill's noir influenced crime/chase flick was amazing as usual. A great film I'll never tire off.

[noctuary]

Aeon Flux

This is the first time I feel compelled to give a film two separate ratings. The visuals were amazing. The design of the futuristic city was very, very cool. However, the plot was a muddled mess. As we were watching this, I became convinced that a few scenes were cut out, probably to get that all important PG-13 rating. Therefore, the movie was very choppy. It's not the absolute disaster that I was led to believe, however. Overall: 8/10 (visuals), 3/10 (story.)

[urgeok]

Originally posted by Elvis_Christ
The Driver:

Walter Hill's noir influenced crime/chase flick was amazing as usual. A great film I'll never tire off.

there's some old school right there :)
i'm the only person i know who actually saw it in the theatre.
I thought it was pretty badass when i was a kid and recently picked up a copy for nostalgia sake :)

[Nyarlathotep]

mais ne nous délivrez pas du mal


and some mondo nonsence

[The_Return]

The Amityville Horror [2005]


Have you ever seen a movie and hated it, then a few months later you decide it can't be as bad as you thought, so you decide to check it out again? Naturally it's as bad as ever, and now you're twice as mad because you've now you've wasted 3 hours of your life instead of only an hour and a half? For me, this is just that kind of movie. I saw it in theatres and thought it was garbage, but I recently bought it cheap, thinking/hoping that it would be better than I remembered it. Of course, it wasn't. First off, it had a lot to live up to; the original Amityville is one of the greatest horror films of all time. Most remakes are at least a bit disappointing, but this really takes the cake. First off, we have Ryan Reynolds in the James Brolin role. Reyolds should stick to stupid teen comedies, because this film proves that he's unintentionally hilarious even when he's trying not to be. The face he makes during a scene near the end had me in hysterics. Also, he's about as far from sympathetic as you can get. You really felt sorry for what Brolin had to go through, but you couldn't care less about this guy. Melissa George wasn't great either, her lines had no feeling to them. It's sad to think that what was likely the best actor involved also starred in the abysmal "Fear of the Dark". Speaking of that kid, how out of place was the whole deal with the babysitter? That whole scene was nothing more than pointless eye candy, and she wasn't even all that good looking. It shares this next flaw with a lot of modern horror movies: it takes the audience for idiots. The original hardly explained anything, it left the audience to think. It also never showed us the ghosts. Of course, this has to be the polar opposite. A really out of place scene was added near the end to explain every little occurrence, and we were treated to crappy looking CGI ghosts every couple minutes. I wont even start on how moronic the ending is, just so I don't spoil it for the poor souls who still want to see this drivel. One last complaint: the priest. He was one of the best parts of the original, but in this he only appears for a brief scene near the end, which is a shame as he seemed like a decent actor. The one thing this film had going for it was atmosphere. As pointless as they are, the scenes in the basement near the end visually look pretty awesome. Despite this small visual treat, I say avoid it at all costs. You wont be missing much, rent the original instead. On another note, I doubt that anyone who actually enjoyed this would like the original, but thats a rant for another day.

3.5/10

[joshaube]

I am one of those people who enjoyed the remake a whole lot more then the original movie. I've voiced my opinion on this matter before, but I'll do it again.

My problems with the original were, mainly, it was boring. There were good scenes, yes, but the entire movie really had no pay-off. I was expecting a lot, as I had heard good things about it, and it was leading up fairly well at the end. But no, it just ended with an overlayed message explaining how the couple never returned for their posessions. I know this is how the actual story goes, but it could have been better tied up beforehand. I suppose it's a matter of taste. The effects were kind of silly as well, but good for the time - I can say that. The face appearing from nowhere, overlayed badly? That could have been removed, or done slightly better. Even for it's time, that single effect seemed poorly executed. As well, I have heard that the movie is unfaithful to the original novel - the original story.

Now, the remake, I thought - was leaps and bounds better. Mainly due to the artistic nature of it which is hard pressed to find in most modern horrors. The scene in which the girl is on the roof, the babysitter in the closet, and much of the end - were just visually stunning. I can agree that Ryan didn't really act that well, but he did fit the part. And they used his body to attract viewers, a little too much. Now, the scene with the family escaping, the quiet setting - that's what I mean by "tie up". The story seems complete, and the following scene with Jodie was also both beautiful and well executed. I was dissatisfied with the priest scene, as while watching I was waiting a long time for it to occur. it was not that well done, at all. I would prefer the original scene in this case. This story was more faithful to the novel, except for maybe Jodie being a dead pig. I agree with their move - that would have been ridiculous.

[The_Return]

You up for a debate? There will be spoilers for both Amityville '05 and the original, so avert thine eyes.

Originally posted by joshaube
Let's just ride away with an overlayed message on screen about never returning

First off, the remake did the exact same thing. Both had them riding away, with a message saying they never came back. The thing that I prefer about the original's ending is the strength of the main character. In the original, Brolin's character fought off the temptation of evil, the power of the house. Reynolds, on the other hand, was simply beat over the head and he totally forgot about the grip the house had on him.

Originally posted by joshaube
Anf if my sources are correct, that movie was unfaithful to the story itself. The original novel.

Ive never read the book, and I dont plan to. Ive never read Dracula either, and that's my all-time favourite horror film...I couldnt care less how close it is to the source material, that doesnt affect the film itself.

Originally posted by joshaube
And that scene with the babysitter in the closet? Hauntingly beautiful

I was refering to the scenes leading up to the closet in my review. The original had a fairly unattractive girl come as the baby sitter, which made her seem real. This one had a Hollywood style beauty queen, which is about as realistic as having Brittney Spears show up at your door. Not that this kind of movie needs to be realistic, however it's always a good thing to have believeable characters. As for the closet scene itself, that was typical modern horror fare, nothing original or that we hadnt seen before. I did kind of like the religous reference, thouh I wish it would have been more subtle. In fact, thats a tip the whole movie could follow: subtlty. It came right ut with everything, it left nothing for the viewer to determine for themselves.

[The_Return]

Tsk tsk, editing your post while I replied:p


I dont see what you mean by story story being "more complete" in the remake. They both ended the same way, only the original had a little thing called continuity.

As for the scene with Jodie at the end, what kind of redeeming feature could you find in that? It was as much pointless eye candy as the babysitter was, albiet a different kind of eye candy. Once I again I bring up the subtlty of the original. It never came out ad showed the house as being alive, it was all a more human story. The Jodie scene was there simply to contradict that idea even further, and show us how powerful and alive the house was, blah blah blah. I much prefer the original especially for that concept of humanity versus evil, rather than a familly versus a house. They are completly different ideas, one leaves the audience with something to think about, and the other is simply there to make money, nothing more.

[Elvis_Christ]

Originally posted by urgeok
there's some old school right there :)
i'm the only person i know who actually saw it in the theatre.
I thought it was pretty badass when i was a kid and recently picked up a copy for nostalgia sake :)

They need to bring out a bunch of these old classics into the theatres again. I went to a film festival a few years back that screened heaps of great stuff like that which was really fuckin' cool.
Is your copy of The Driver just a bare bones edition like mine? R1 versions seem to have all the goodies :)

[joshaube]

The_Return, I guess I can see where your coming from. Both of them are two very different films.

As for the endings being the same, I didn't think so at all. The original is as I stated, sort of... just ends. It has continuity, sure, and I guess it has the cliffhanger and spook factor going for it - but the remake. It showed them escape, not just them exiting the same frame as the house. It showed the family, how they re-accepted him as their father again, and not as the monster.

I don't think he was just hit over the head anf forgot everything at all. The supernatural aura around the house was causing him to act wierd, as if he wasn't in control. Knocking him out was the same as it would be to knock anyone out. They are unconcious for a while. Being unconcious, they were able to REMOVE him from the house's general area. When he awoke, he was himself. He remembered the events, and he felt ashamed. But his family still accepted him, even the children who didn't before. I found this a much better ending.

As for the scenes being more eyecandy then anything, yeah - they were. But a film is much more then essentially just the story being told. It's about visuals, it's the same as a piece of art. Things look pretty, doesn't mean they are bad. It may not add to the experience overall, or to the story, but it does add to the atmosphere. At least I think so. The babysitter being attractive, I didn't really find she was that much of a knock-out. I thought it was rather comical. It's the typical attractive-babysitter watching a smug macho boy, not WANTING a babysitter. But when he sees her, things change. I thought that as more of a homage then a negative aspect.