Scream Factory Blu-ray Discussion Thread

[jthefrank]

Watched The Fog and The Burning again last night (it had been several years). I had forgotten how fun both films are, especially The Burning. Just works at every level.

[cropsy]

Originally Posted by cine74

Romero's Dawn of the Dead is just a zombie movie to me. Others see it as a jab at consumerism and a whole bunch of other things - everything except a really good zombie movie. I always find it amusing when people engage in endless discussion and analysis about a film's subtext. Like commentary tracks, there's just not enough time to do anything but sit back and watch the movie without analyzing it.

Thats actually one of the ones where i think there is subtext and very well done subtext because it doesn't get in the way of the most kick ass zombie movie ever.

[franken_psycho1990]

Originally Posted by jthefrank

Watched The Fog and The Burning again last night (it had been several years). I had forgotten how fun both films are, especially The Burning. Just works at every level.

"A F#ckin' Big Mac... Over done! "Hahahaha

I love The Burning! Funny as Hell!

[franken_psycho1990]

Originally Posted by cropsy

I absolutley love that movie, its my favourite Universal monster movie, even more than "Bride of Frankenstein" and out of all the god awful remakes they have made that was the one i could imagine. Carpenter should have remade it in the 80s, it would have rocked - it would be terrible now,

I also love it. The Creature is overall the best Monster to me.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by franken_psycho1990

i also love it. The creature is overall the best monster to me.

+1

[demonknight]

Originally Posted by franken_psycho1990

I also love it. The Creature is overall the best Monster to me.

He has the best look, but Frankenstein's Monster will always be the one with the best movies.

I have had the Creature trilogy for three years now and have only sat through the first film. It just didn't grab me.

[franken_psycho1990]

Originally Posted by demonknight

He has the best look, but Frankenstein's Monster will always be the one with the best movies.

I have had the Creature trilogy for three years now and have only sat through the first film. It just didn't grab me.

Man, I can't imagine not being crazy about The Creature.
The sequels are top-notch too. IMO.
Creature Walks Among Us is amazing! Very different from the first movie, LOVE it!
After Bride Of Frankenstein, The Frankenstein movies just go downhill. I like them but not nearly as much as the first two. Son Of Frankenstein is the worst, Which is kinda funny considering that it still had Boris Karloff in the Monster role. The Ghost Of Frankenstein is great, So is House Of Frankenstein.

[demonknight]

Originally Posted by franken_psycho1990

Man, I can't imagine not being crazy about The Creature.
The sequels are top-notch too. IMO.
Creature Walks Among Us is amazing! Very different from the first movie, LOVE it!
After Bride Of Frankenstein, The Frankenstein movies just go downhill. I like them but not nearly as much as the first two. Son Of Frankenstein is the worst, Which is kinda funny considering that it still had Boris Karloff in the Monster role. The Ghost Of Frankenstein is great, So is House Of Frankenstein.

I'd rank them:
-Frankenstein
-House of Frankenstein (not quality Monster scenes, but good movie)
-Bride of Frankenstein
-Son of Frankenstein
-Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
-Ghost of Frankenstein
-House of Dracula
-Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (don't care what everyone else says, I hated it)

[franken_psycho1990]

Originally Posted by demonknight

I'd rank them:
-Frankenstein
-House of Frankenstein (not quality Monster scenes, but good movie)
-Bride of Frankenstein
-Son of Frankenstein
-Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
-Ghost of Frankenstein
-House of Dracula
-Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (don't care what everyone else says, I hated it)

Yeah, How could I forget Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman?! Great film.
I have heard a few people say they didn't care for Abbot & Costello Meet Frankenstein... But I personally LOVE it! Very funny. Everyone has different taste I guess. You know, I don't know how many people feel the same but I always liked The Mummy sequels better than the original. More action in the sequels.

[Terrorfirmer]

Originally Posted by franken_psycho1990

I was thinking of picking up The People Under The Stairs on BD from Arrow. The movie very good? I've never seen it.

Personally I think its a great movie, in the way Tremors is a great movie, nothing serious, just good fun, great characters and very entertaining, something you throw on on a lazy Sunday afternoon

[franken_psycho1990]

Originally Posted by Terrorfirmer

Personally I think its a great movie, in the way Tremors is a great movie, nothing serious, just good fun, great characters and very entertaining, something you throw on on a lazy Sunday afternoon

Sounds like my kinda movie. Horror & Science Fiction are the best to me.

[Terrorfirmer]

Originally Posted by demonknight

I'd rank them:
-Frankenstein
-House of Frankenstein (not quality Monster scenes, but good movie)
-Bride of Frankenstein
-Son of Frankenstein
-Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man
-Ghost of Frankenstein
-House of Dracula
-Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (don't care what everyone else says, I hated it)

I'm hoping we get another Universal Monsters set with sequels, that'd be sweet.

[franken_psycho1990]

Originally Posted by Terrorfirmer

I'm hoping we get another Universal Monsters set with sequels, that'd be sweet.

I hope so too. Most of the sequels are great.

[balthazar_bee]

Originally Posted by cine74

Romero's Dawn of the Dead is just a zombie movie to me. Others see it as a jab at consumerism and a whole bunch of other things - everything except a really good zombie movie. I always find it amusing when people engage in endless discussion and analysis about a film's subtext. Like commentary tracks, there's just not enough time to watch a movie AND analyze it.

I'd recommend checking out John Kenneth Muir's excellent (and massive) Horror Films of the 1980s. Pricey, but fascinating. It does a marvelous job of (a) examining the cultural context out of which the films grew, (b) evaluating the films and (c) delving into some of the subtext in a meaningful way that feels completely removed from some of the bollocks you hear in Room 237.

He also has volumes covering the 70s and 90s, which are also great, but I particularly like the way the issues of the 80s bled into the horror of the day. Hard to put down, and it certainly doesn't feel like work (in response to the complaint, "Can't we just watch the movie?").

http://www.amazon.com/Horror-Films-1980s-John-Kenneth/dp/0786472987/

[returnofthemack]

Originally Posted by cine74

Romero's Dawn of the Dead is just a zombie movie to me. Others see it as a jab at consumerism and a whole bunch of other things - everything except a really good zombie movie. I always find it amusing when people engage in endless discussion and analysis about a film's subtext. Like commentary tracks, there's just not enough time to watch a movie AND analyze it.

I think dawn of the dead certainly takes more the just jabs at consumerism. He subtext isn't what makes dawn great. It helps but what makes it great is at it's a kick ass zombie movie first and foremost. It takes everything that was good about night and upped it. You ask me (and no one did) dawn isn't only one of the best zombie movies ever it's one of the best horror movies ever.

[dressedtokill]

Originally Posted by balthazar_bee

I'd recommend checking out John Kenneth Muir's excellent (and massive) Horror Films of the 1980s. Pricey, but fascinating. It does a marvelous job of (a) examining the cultural context out of which the films grew, (b) evaluating the films and (c) delving into some of the subtext in a meaningful way that feels completely removed from some of the bollocks you hear in Room 237.

He also has volumes covering the 70s and 90s, which are also great, but I particularly like the way the issues of the 80s bled into the horror of the day. Hard to put down, and it certainly doesn't feel like work (in response to the complaint, "Can't we just watch the movie?").

http://www.amazon.com/Horror-Films-1980s-John-Kenneth/dp/0786472987/

Will definitely check it out, thanks!

[demonknight]

I am still hoping they will announce a title yesterday.

[Mr. Thomsen]

Originally Posted by cropsy

I think its "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" where loads of film scholars have applied subtext and metaphors to it but the filmmakers have said its a load of bollocks and there is none, pretty certain its "TCM" certainly a classic like that. Alot of films, books whatever, have subtext but half the time its just pretention though clearly GS has it, in spades.

This is where it gets hairy, because the question then becomes what value does the author's (or director's) intention have for your reception/ understanding of a text (or movie)? And is the director's intention and understanding of his own work the only valid one?

The post-structuralists would say no - each movie holds an indefinite amount of possible readings. And the director's is just one out of many.

The thing is, that even though a movie of course is a conscious product of certain creative minds, it is also a product of it's time and culture. The technology, the aesthetic trends, the way people talk about things and what they talk about, industry regulations, what kind of stories are popular and how are the told etc. etc. is radically different when you, say, compare a movie from the 1930s to one from the 1970s, or one from the 1970s to a new one. All these elements have some influence on the finished product.

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre would have been unthinkable just a decade before because the technology to make it did not exist and censorship rules were quiet different etc. etc. So yes, one way to see it is as a straight-forward tale of terror about some random young kids who have a very bad day, or even as a dark comedy (as Hooper, Kim Henkel, and Daniel Pearl have all described it).

But on another level, TCM is very much a product of its time and place and says something about the cultural anxieties of that specific period - about the destruction of the nuclear family, about the hippie generation's loss of innocence, about the perception of the American South, and about "America without gas" - a country at that time in dire economic (and oil) crisis, disillusioned by war and the lack of believable authority figures.

[Mr. Thomsen]

Originally Posted by rrpmpstck

Watch the documentary Room 237. It is all about what people see in The Shining. I thought it would be a cool film about the movie but it is just a bunch of wackos seeing connections to Native American Spiritualism and various other "black helicopter" topics.

Ha! I actually found Room 237 quite interesting. I don't subscribe to any of the theories put forth in it at all, particularly not when you have read how a lot of details in The Shining really were up to pure chance. But Room 237 basically proves that you can read anything into anything, and in that way sort of becomes a love letter to film itself.

A small point, though: the people in Room 237 all base their theories on what they believe Kubrick deliberately intended to say with his film.

Subtext, however, is not limited to what the director or author of any given work of fiction intends, but also how the culture, technology etc. etc. of the period influences said work, directly and indirectly.

[rrpmpstck]

Wow this thread has gone from a casual relaxing read, to being something that you have to have an education in philosophy from a prestigious university to understand. I just like movies, and as far as reading, if it takes longer then the average poop I am not interested. But that's just me.