Don't watch alone...

[Wayne]

More top labelling from Ralph. As for the 'Horror Express' comparison, i simply don't believe you.
Glad you liked it, anyway.

[MacNimon]

Ghost Ship (2002)

What an odd little movie this one was!

A complete mixed bag of styles...right from the opening titles and the opening ballroom dancing scene on a cruise liner at sea 40 years ago... the ballroom song being played over the opening titles gives this an old-fashioned feel, which is totally at odds with the bloody end of this opening scene just a minute or two later....An unexpected gorefest which is over in an instant. It was obvious that something was going to happen, but this I didn't expect. It was the look of shock and surprise in the characters faces which made this scene work so well for me...it's certainly the most memorable scene from the film.

But despite this, the film isn't a gorefest by any means. 40 years later a salvage team (led by Gabriel Byrne) turns up at the ship, and after a few spooky happenings manage to get trapped on the ship with no way of getting off. The film gradually builds the atmosphere and cranks up the tension in an excellent manner, it's very atmospheric and spooky from the instant they step onto the ship. Even when the characters start getting bumped off one at a time, it's done well, with a genuine feeling of building towards something big. But this is also the film's undoing...such a good build-up makes such an anti-climax all the more disappointing.

And the final scene with the ghosts of the dead salvage crew...that just felt tagged on to give us a "surprise" ending...the story as it was would have worked better without this scene, imo. The ending just wasn't at all satisfactory...a major disappointment, it just lost it's way after an excellent first half of the film.

The final 15 minutes or so cost it 2 or 3 points, I'd have rated it 7 or 8/10 after the first hour or so. But as it is, it gets a disappointing 5/10 from me.

[Matthew T]

I've got Ghost Ship...need to see it again but I think I quite enjoyed it. The opening scene sticks in the mind, certainly quite startling.

[Jeff]

Watched a few horror flicks over the weekend. Some abbreviated thoughts:

The Fog (2005) was okay for generic horror fare, but had some really stupid logic errors. Like the one guy who was safe in the freezer because the fog couldn't get in, except that the fog had just demonstrated the ability to throw people through the air and move objects, so there is really no reason why it couldn't have opened the door. More frustrating was the aspect of the ending (I won't spoil it) that is pretty much a non-sensical rip off of The Shining (the version with Jack Nicholson). I'm sure you know what I'm talking about if you've seen them both. Definitely one you have to switch the brain off for, but still one I'd rather see than say a teen slasher like I Still Freakin Know What You Did 10 Summers Ago...

The Exorcism of Emily Rose was probably the film I enjoyed most over the weekend. Very creepy. I have to wonder how many people awoke at exactly 3 AM and crapped their pants after seeing this. Very creepy mostly because of the 'based on a true story' aspect, and the fact that it was more of psychological horror than gore-fest. You can read about the true events the movie was based on HERE

Slither was pretty good as a comic celebration of the B-movie aspects of horror alien invasion films. It is well made and is always tongue-in-cheek and perfectly walks the line between not taking itself too seriously but also not being too stupid. Definitely worth a watch for anyone who is a longtime horror fan. Lots of gore and gross outs and plenty of laughs, though not very scary.

Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist was an interesting film to me, because I remember following it's production especially when news broke that Paul Schrader's version (this one) was originally scrapped for not being violent enough, and Renny Harlin was hired and re-shot 90% of the movie on a re-worked script which eventually became Exorcist: The Beginning. I saw Exorcist: The Beginning a couple of years ago after it was released on DVD. After it's theatrical release the fans had been crying for the Schrader version deeming that it had to be many times better than the Harlin version. Personally, I didn't think the 'The Beginning' was all that bad. It was an entertaining enough if forgettable horror flick. So I watched this film wondering if it would be as vastly superior as others assumed it would be, and found that it really wasn't. Nothing wrong with this version either, but like 'The Beginning', Dominion is an entertaining enough, though ultimately forgettable horror flick. It has a bit more psychology and a bit more theological philosophy, but some of the special effects were very poor, and some of the script feels like it could have been handled better, mostly the interatcion between The Demon and Father Merrin.

[Wayne]

Interesting comments, Jeff. (& thanks for the link)
I really need to get back to this thread soon, I've got several films to catch up on. I should be starting back as it were, tomorrow night.

[Matthew T]

I posted a long (for me!) view on the remake of "The Fog" on the old PS. Basically I thought it was fine, up until the end, which is totally different to the original film, and which I thought was awful.

Slither is good gross fun.

[Jeff]

Alien Vs. Predator

I've still never seen this, but you're the only person i know that's seen it that has a good word for it!

I also enjoyed AVP. The thing you have to bear in mind is that it is not a direct horror adaptation from the two series of movies. Rather it is a PG-13 (think 13 and up instead of 17 and up if you aren't familiar with our ratings system) movie that is adapted from the Alien Vs. Predator series of comic books. If you view it as a comic book/action/horror movie that was made with the intent of being inclusive to teenagers then I think it is more enjoyable. It's one of those films that I think gets a bad rap because people are expecting something else, rather than because it is poor...

Another thing to bear in mind is that by its nature this sort of movie isn't going to be scary. It's not about caring about some humans that are being hunted by the supernatural and being frightened by their plight, but rather it is more about cheering on your favorite monster to win the fight instead.

[Matthew T]

All true, thankfully AvP 2 is going to be R rated apparantly, so I've got high hopes.

[Jeff]

I've got several films to catch up on. I should be starting back as it were, tomorrow night.

I haven't had online rentals in a couple of years, so I haven't seen many of the movies from the past two years.

A coupld of weeks ago I upgraded our satellite system to a DVR reciever and as part of the two year contract you have to agree to I get one month free of all the premium channels like HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, etc.. As such I am doing my best to record all of the movies of interest to me on the DVR which only holds 100 hours. I've got a ton of horror movies saved up (probably close to half of the movies I record are horror), and I'll be watching movies as fast as I can to clear out space because I will probably have over 100 hours of movies I want to see. So I should now hopefully be able to be a regular poster to this thread for awhile. Just don't expect to see too much longer reviews than what I posted above, as breaking things down into detailed reviews isn't my forte.

[Matthew T]

Your reviews will still be better than mine. I forget most of the things I want to comment on by the time I come to post.

[Jeff]

I saw the discussion of Ghost Ship up above, and have to mention that I loved that movie. A very memorable beginning, and decent flick all the way through...


I browsed and skimmed thru the thread yesterday and noticed some lists of top 10 scary movies. I don't have a proper list of my own, but I have some mentionables. The US version of The Grudge unnerved me more than any other film I've ever seen. I don't know why. It was mostly at the beginning... The suspense really had me on the edge of my seat and stuff.

Another mentionable my wife and I will bothe agree on is Thir13en Ghosts, the 2001 remake of 13 Ghosts (1960). While it wasn't a great movie (though it wasn't really bad as far as most horror movies go) for some reasong the beginning was freaky enough that, I'm embarassed to admit, my wife and I stopped it that night and waited till the next day when the sun was shining to finish the movie.

Speaking of Miranda, I would be remiss if I didn't menter her all time most scary movie, Jeepers Creepers. While most people were a bit let down by the second half of this movie, Miranda wasn't because the first half left her crying and she sat next to me in the theater with her eyes shut for the entire second half of the film (I wasn't aware of the fact until she told me after the movie). It's been years and she still gets mad if you bring up the movie and gets freaked out if you sing a bit of the song.

[Jeff]

Your reviews will still be better than mine. I forget most of the things I want to comment on by the time I come to post.

Well, I won't try to make it a competition...

One other thing I should mention is I tend to skip reviews of movies I've never seen or heard of, which will be most of the older movies especially of British origin. Also I absolutely avoid spoilers with a vengeance, so I definitely skip any reviews of movies I still have on my list. So rather than read the thread properly, I will probably be doing searches after I have seen a movie and reading the reviews then.. Probably not the only one who does that, but I felt like saying it anyway.

[Matthew T]

I LOVE Thir13en Ghosts. So corny and cheesy but it still made me jump quite a lot, and the different ghosts are very well done, as is the house itself, with all the moving glass panals.

[Jeff]

Plus it has Mathew Lillard, who is awesome.

[Ralph]

Thanks to MacNimon lending me his copy of the Shining tv series I watched the first episode last night.

Not a bad start - I'm curious to see how this longer pacing is going to work out.

[Ralph]

One other thing I should mention is I tend to skip reviews of movies I've never seen or heard of, which will be most of the older movies especially of British origin.

Ah..there's no accounting for taste...

[MacNimon]

Thanks to MacNimon lending me his copy of the Shining tv series I watched the first episode last night.

Not a bad start - I'm curious to see how this longer pacing is going to work out.

I hope you enjoy it Ralph...I did! I just felt that it had so much more depth and atmosphere than the Kubrick film, and it made me jump several times as well, which the film didn't. A completely different ending as well. I'll say no more for the moment, other than the fact that I'd rate this up there along with the original Salem's Lot as one of the best adaptations I've seen of Stephen King's work. 9/10.

[Wayne]

Mac's "Shining" is in my queue as well, but i've got others to catch up on first. I'm starting tonight with a re-viewing after 25yrs of 'Exorcist 2: The Heretic', & possibly another one depending on what time i get started.

Still for me to watch/Coming up soon on this thread:

Exorcist 2: The Heretic
Exorcist: The Beginning
Dominion: A Prequel to The Exorcist
Wes Craven's "Dracula 2: The Acension"
Ginger Snaps (+possible sequels)
Stephen King's: "The Stand"
The Howling
Amityville Horror (re-make)
The Shining
Frankenstein Unbound
Red Eye

I also notice also there's a couple of horror's on tv next week:
'Wrong Turn' - Saturday on Film 4, which could be worth checking out just for Eliza Dushku.
Also, 'Godsend' - Monday on BBC1, starring Robert Deniro. Don't know either film, but i think i'll give 'em a go, if i remember.

[Nathan]

The Exorcism of Emily Rose was probably the film I enjoyed most over the weekend. Very creepy. I have to wonder how many people awoke at exactly 3 AM and crapped their pants after seeing this. Very creepy mostly because of the 'based on a true story' aspect, and the fact that it was more of psychological horror than gore-fest. You can read about the true events the movie was based on HERE

Ah, so it wasn't the same story as Audrey Rose then.

If you haven't seen that I remember it being very spooky. Not seen it myself for a long time though.

Cheap at Play!

[Wayne]

Thanks Nathan. I've ordered it. But from DVDCO.UK for 3.95.

It rings bells from years back, but i don't think i've seen the film. I did however read the book, which was very good!

[Matthew T]

Give Wrong Turn a go Wayne, it's brilliant!

[Wayne]

Give Wrong Turn a go Wayne, it's brilliant!

Ok!

[Wayne]

Wes Craven's "Dracula 2: The Acension"

A couple of months before this thread started, i commented briefly on the 'Worshipping' thread about Wes Craven's: 'Dracula 2001', which i'd seen on Film 4, & enjoyed it enough to buy it on dvd. I was aware of the sequel, but i only really bought it because it was going cheap on Amazon, & i needed something to make up to free postage price on something else i'd bought.
Anyway, It's not really a bad film, but not really anything special either. There's not really much continuity with 'Dracula 2001', & Dracula himself is played by a different actor, & they've gone to no trouble whatsoever to make them look similar in any way! In the original film, Dracula has quite long flowing dark hair, & here he has short, slightly punky blonde hair, not dis-similar to Spike from 'Buffy:The Vampire Slayer'.
It's an interesting take on the vampire mythos, in the sense that the main characters are medical types who are involved in trying to isolate the properties in Dracula's blood that give a vampire his regenerative/immortal abilities, led by a Doctor with an incurable palsy condition who wants to have a 'normal' (or beyond normal) physical body.
What lets the film down is that for of most the film Dracula himself has been captured & incarcerated by the group who are using science to replicate the vampire vulnerabilities, chiefly keeping him incapacitated by the use of ultra-violet light which burns him like sunlight. The upshot is that he's not really able to do very much apart from try to use his hypnotic abilities on anyone who gets close enough.
At the end he escapes, only to be confronted by the long haired exorcist priest, come vampire hunter who seems to have wandered in from a martial arts movie, & they have a Matrix style showdown.
It's a watchable film, but ultimately not one that i decided to add to my collection, & it's currently residing on eBay.
5.5/10


Exorcist 2: The Heretic

I decided to save the prequel/sequel stuff until tomorrow night, & go back the Exorcist's first sequel from 1977, which i haven't seen since about 1979/'80. I wasn't overly impressed with it back then, & watching it again has improved my opinion slightly, but not much.
It actually starts well i think, In fact it doesn't take as long to get going as the original movie. The first noteworthy scenes are when Richard Burton as the priest, & Louise Fletcher as the doctor, use a hypnotic device which allows them to be in contact with Regan's mind, as she undergoes regressive hypnosis back to the time of the original exorcism, in order for the priest to find out exactly how Father Merrin died at the end of the exorcism. I thought this scene worked quite well, as we see the possessed Regan reaching into Merrin's heart & squeezing it to cause a heart attack. Not very nice!
IMO, the film has a strong first half, including some great visual work during the scenes in Africa, where we see Merrin (in flashback) & later Richard Burton's character Father Lamont, first encountering the demon 'Pazzuzu', (a demon from ancient Mesopotamian legend) who later possesses Regan. The film has more of a mystical feel to it than i remember, which i quite liked, but unfortunately it does begin to drag a bit in the latter half, & the end confrontation between Father Lamont & Pazzuzu just doesn't come over all that convincing. It's hard to say exactlly why, but it's not very well shot, & Richard Burton, whilst a great actor, just seems to be going through the motions.
It suffers towards the end by being something of a far less effective re-tread of the original film. Something which the next sequel: 'Exorcist III', fortunately mananges to avoid. All in all then, a good first half which racks up a fair bit of tension, but ultimately it gradually falls away to a disappointing finale. Difficult to rate, but it does have some good content & atmosphere in parts, & a good performance from Louise Fletcher in , so i'll give it a lenient 6/10.

[Ralph]

Richard Burton, whilst a great actor, just seems to be going through the motions.

When I first saw this I was so disappointed because Richard Burton was such a fine actor, I thought whats he doing this film for and I just assumed he needed the money. But the fact that he looked so bored wrote off the film for me. I guess we all watch films for different reasons sometimes and when an actor you admire gives a crap performance then it can simply ruin the whole film as it did for me.

[Wayne]

Tonight i watched Exorcist: The Beginning, & Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist, which are basically 2 versions of the same film. I looked into this, & it seems that director Paul Schrader's "Dominion" film was disliked by the Warner Bros, & they hired Renny Harlin to make the film again with some plot & script changes, calling it: "Exorcist: The Beginning". After the film bombed with both critics & the public, They decided to release Schrader's original version, so we are in the bizarre position of having 2 versions of essentially the same film, but with some differences in plot, script, direction, & of course cast.
I decided to watch 'Exorcist: The Beginning' first, which definitely proved to be the weaker of the 2 films IMO, but to be honest, there's not that much between them in some ways. I feel rather cynical about these films, i'm afraid. They just come across as an attempt to get some more cash mileage out of the 'Exorcist' franchise. A back story has been written for Father Merrin, & the bulk of the story is set post WW2, with Merrin having lost his faith after having been forced by the nazis to single out 10 innocent members of his parish to be shot, in order to save the majority. This is seen flashback style at the beginning of both films, but it's longer & far more effective in the 'Dominion' film.
The narrative begins proper when an ancient church is excavated in West Africa, & Merrin an archeologist on the scene. Small strange events begin to occur, & eventually it transpires that a church was built over the top of an even more ancient shrine, which is depicted as the spot where Lucifer fell to Earth after being cast out from heaven.
This is where the 2 films start to differ. In the 'Beginning' film, we see a statue of Pazuzu (see 'Madonna' thread) in the shrine under the church, & there are other continuity references thrown in that deliberately try to link up to the other Exorcist films. IMO, this doesn't really work that well. The references seem shoehorned in, the re-use of certain bits of dialogue in a totally different context seems a bit corny.
In 'Dominion', there's much more emphasis on the ancient mythological battle that took place in heaven between God & his angels on one side, & Lucifer, (originally an angel himself) & his angels on the other. Whilst in 'Beginning', it's a female character who becomes possessed by Pazuzu, who is a much more minor demon than the devil himself, In 'Dominion', it's a male character who is possessed, & the enitity in possession of the man, in not Pazuzu apparently, but Lucifer himself, & is also referred to as 'Satan'.
Whilst neither of the possession scenes are that great, the 'Beginning' actually makes more sense in terms of being an Exorcist prequel, but 'Dominion' does have a slightly more hard hitting tone. The direction is better, & visually it looks superior to 'Beginning', IMO.
But at the end of the day, as pure entertainment, neither of these films are that great. IMO, neither are them are really scary at all, & whilst 'Dominion' is better paced & is a bit more atmospheric, they both come across as a bit contrived, & long winded, & there are no real surprises.
I'd rate Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist as the overall better of the two, scoring a watchable 5/10, whilst Exorcist: The Beginning limps behind with a 4/10. Rather average fayre, lacking the power of both the original & the previous sequels. Even 'Exorcist 2: The Heretic' is a better film than either of these.
Having said all that, being a such an Exorcist fan, i'm glad to've seen the films, even if they were ultimately disappointing.

Tomorrow night: 'Ginger Snaps', & if i've time for a double bill: 'The Amityville Horror'. (re-make)