The Last House on the Left (1972)

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by JB Lions

I watched this last night on Netflix streaming. Probably one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Everything, directing, acting (or lack of it) the music (seemed like comedy music) no atmosphere whatsoever.

Don't show this man the films of Jim Van Bebber!

Society is funny. No film should be controversial. Everything put on film should be explored and show humanity, in the good, bad, and weird. To have a "perfect" society by trying to hide things is crazy. Nothing will be perfect in a world where your afraid of human nature and exploration. Anything and everything is an artform. Something doesn't have to be snobby to be art. This film is art if you like it or not. Just because a film like Godfather was a success, doesn't make it better because Hollywood violence is okay in society but no one should talk about things like rape. The "if you don't talk about it, it will go away" type of crap. That is also why racism is still around. People need to be free with ideas.

[The Blufather]

Somebody didn't real all the comments A little over analyzing there.

"No film should be controversial."

Addressed that in the following replies.

"This film is art if you like it or not."

You know the kind of art where the artist paints everything one color like - http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedai...07/06/art1.jpg

And people stare at it and call it art. I call that 3 panels painted all white If you like it and think it's art, great.

Side note, a comment you made in another thread:

"Do we really need to list stuff they "waste" releases on? Because I can. Salo isn't one though."

Now, if I asked you list the movies you feel they waste releases on, you'll probably have some people come in and disagree with you. You didn't like them for whatever reason, that's fine. Also, I have Salo on dvd. See we agreed on something.

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by JB Lions

"Do we really need to list stuff they "waste" releases on? Because I can. Salo isn't one though."

Now, if I asked you list the movies you feel they waste releases on, you'll probably have some people come in and disagree with you. You didn't like them for whatever reason, that's fine. Also, I have Salo on dvd. See we agreed on something.

I said that because once again someone flames a movie over it's subject matter. 2 different things there between that and you saying a movie sucks based on production value.

Oh and just so you know, the first sentence I put was for you. Films of Van Bebber, Paul Morrissey, Tinto Brass, José Mojica Marins, Lucio Fulci, etc are all art to me. That paragraph was a true statement not of you, but about alot of people. So feel free to breathe now, as I was not talking towards you. I wouldn't dare to compare taste on a blu-ray forum as I have found out already. We would end up fighting the Godfather trilogy vs Paul Morrissey's Flesh, Trash, Heat trilogy and I would stand my ground.

[The Blufather]

Originally Posted by SpiderBaby

I said that because once again someone flames a movie over it's subject matter. 2 different things there between that and you saying a movie sucks based on production value.

Oh and just so you know, the first sentence I put was for you. Films of Van Bebber, Paul Morrissey, Tinto Brass, José Mojica Marins, Lucio Fulci, etc are all art to me. That paragraph was a true statement not of you, but about alot of people. So feel free to breathe now, as I was not talking towards you. I wouldn't dare to compare taste on a blu-ray forum as I have found out already. We would end up fighting the Godfather trilogy vs Paul Morrissey's Flesh, Trash, Heat trilogy and I would stand my ground.

Ok, I gotcha. Agree with all that minus the Godfather stuff

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by JB Lions

Ok, I gotcha. Agree with all that minus the Godfather stuff

[robertc88]

I warned yesterday on the BB exclusives thread that the quality of this BD wasn't very good at all. A co-worker who had bought it early, watched it, and lent it to me last night.

It has mono sound for the audio. That is the way it is suppose to be and always was. The PQ is rather pathetic regardless of director intent being true to form and that it is the best version available. I understand the way the film was shot and it will probably never look any better. Anyhoo, he offered to sell it to me if I wanted it when he lent it to me. He'll be getting it back!

[goodluckchuck]

I bought it yesterday at BB and enjoyed it a lot. Just the fact of seeing it in widescreen is real good. I was used to a 14x3 DVD. It had a lot of grain, yet I did not feel it as disturbing as I felt it with the BD of Overboard. I am very happy it was released in BD so unexpectedly and that it had the special features ported. I am not a fan of special features, but when its a film I enjoy then its alwsys nice to know they are available.

[Ghost_of_Karloff]

Is anyone having problems with the features on Last House? I can only play some. Most of them when I hit enter it stops the disc. Same thing when I hit play.

Movie is fine and the features that work are fine, but only about 2 of them will actually play. The disc stops when I try an access the others

[28BlusLater]

I have people complaining about the quality and someone needs to post a review that will average out the person who gave 0.5's for everything on the User Reviews for this movie. It's not the best horror movie around, but it doesn't deserve a 0.5's across the board...

It's not meant to look like Transformers!!!!!! It's an OLD, LOW-BUDGET, HORROR FILM!! It never did look good and never will. The Blu-Ray is probably the best it's going to look. Same thing with 28 Days Later and other films alike to these two. When will people get that it's supposed to look gritty, grainy, etc.?

[robertc88]

Originally Posted by 28BlusLater

I have people complaining about the quality and someone needs to post a review that will average out the person who gave 0.5's for everything on the User Reviews for this movie. It's not the best horror movie around, but it doesn't deserve a 0.5's across the board...

It's not meant to look like Transformers!!!!!! It's an OLD, LOW-BUDGET, HORROR FILM!! It never did look good and never will. The Blu-Ray is probably the best it's going to look. Same thing with 28 Days Later and other films alike to these two. When will people get that it's supposed to look gritty, grainy, etc.?

Looking like it does considering the age AND the way it was filmed, it will never look much better more than likely. That DOESN'T mean it deserves a good score though! I'd give it a 3.0, MAYBE!

So what would the average be now if I posted that score?

[BigLuvJason]

Dont understand how anyone would want to see this more than once.....terrible acting and disturbing!

[Liquid_Swords]

Originally Posted by BigLuvJason

Dont understand how anyone would want to see this more than once.....terrible acting and disturbing!

Some people can't get enough

[goodluckchuck]

It's a classic, not any remake. Movies dont have to be acted and directed superbly to be deserving of multiple viewings. It's a matter of taste.

[BigLuvJason]

[FendersRule]

Despite what anyone says, "Last House on the Left" is a classic movie by Craven when he was strictly a low-ball amateur in filmmaking.

People who say that the acting, music, script, cinematography, etc are "campy," "crappy," or "poor" are simply not getting the point of the movie's exploitative nature. Of course it's poor, because it's one of Craven's first works — At-least it's not Michael Bay.

What makes "Last House on the Left" a classic of it's kind are these simple things:

• It has an independent feel, and ISN'T glamorized one bit. This movie is better than any of Michael Bay's horror movies.

• It's proof that the remake is a complete pile of dog crap, and a waste of time.

• It looks very intimately into humanity while they are doing absurd acts, and even shows humanity questioning itself in a certain scene (which definitely flew over some heads here). This is a very important point to realize, especially back when movies like this did not exist as often as they do now.

• The music is campy, but I also think the music is quite awesome and interesting, giving the movie a unique and soulful edge.

• It's short, which it should be (1.5 hours). The remake added 20+ minutes of dramatic bullcrap in every single scene, extending every possible activity and conversation out, and ruining the feel of the original, which give it to you straight in real-time. The original is depicted rape in the minimalistic amount, allowing the audience to build the horror themselves. The remake planted you in the rape scene for nearly 4 minutes, while you endured every breath of it. This stark contrast can be described by the superior conservative nature of allowing the audience to build it's own internal horror (by showing little, much like Carpenter's "Halloween," and allowing yourself to build the suspense by your own internal nature) rather then to show you brutal beatings which don't add to the suspense value (Zombie's depiction "Halloween" for example).

• And, with an old man revving up his chainsaw to go after the killers: it doesn't get any better. Remake doesn't contain this awesome aspect, which is another reason why it fails.

Calling this a crappy movie is being ignorant of horror film history. By telling us that it's an amateur film isn't telling anyone who likes the movie anything new. It's much the same like telling someone that the used car that they purchased contains a small scratch.

It's kinda like giving someone a book to read with stained and creased pages, along with a page or two missing and some spelling errors. You can give the book back and complain that it's not up to your "professional standards," or you can choose to look at the message. One of them is being ignorant, while the other isn't. The message may not be for you even if you DID understand it, but that doesn't mean you can say that this movie "sucks" while getting away with it. This movie is definitely not a "amazing" or even an "excellent" film, but it's very solid with it's unique flaws, and carries a wealth of history of it. Especially being that it's an independent effort and one of Wes' better films.

[BigLuvJason]

Originally Posted by FendersRule

Despite what anyone says, "Last House on the Left" is a classic movie by Craven when he was strictly a low-ball amateur in filmmaking.

People who say that the acting, music, script, cinematography, etc are "campy" or "poor" are simply not getting the point of the movie's exploitative nature. Of course it's poor, because it's one of Craven's first works. At-least it's not Michael Bay.

What makes "Last House on the Left" a classic are these simple things:

• It has an independent feel, and ISN'T glamorized one bit. This movie is better than any of Michael Bay's horror movies.

• It's proof that the remake is a complete pile of dog crap, and a waste of time.

• It looks very intimately into humanity while they are doing absurd acts, and even shows humanity questioning itself in some scenes. This is very important to realize, especially back when movies like this did not exist as often as they do now.

• The music is terrible, but I also think the music is quite awesome and interesting, giving the movie a soulful edge.

• It's short, which it should be (1.5 hours). The remake added 20+ minutes of dramatic bullcrap in every single scene, extending every possible activity and conversation out, and ruining the feel of the original, which give it to you straight in realtime. The original is depicted rape in the minimalistic amount, allowing the audience to build the horror themselves. The remake planted you int he rape scene for nearly 4 minutes, while you endured every breath of it.

• And, with an old man revving up his chainsaw to go after the killers: it doesn't get any better. Remake doesn't contain this awesome aspect.

Calling this a crappy movie is being ignorant of horror film history. By telling us that it's an amateur film isn't telling anyone who likes the movie anything new. It's kinda like giving someone a book with stained and creased pages, along with a page or two missing, with some spelling errors. You can give the book back and complain that it's not up to your "professional standards," or you can choose to look at the message. ONe of them is being ignorant, while the other isn't. The message may not be for you, but that doesn't mean you can say that this movie "sucks" while getting away with it. This movie is definitely not a "classic" or even an "excellent" film, but it's very solid with it's unique flaws, and carries a wealth of history of it. Especially being that it's an independent effort and one of Wes' better films.

your opinion......I say the remake is way better!

[Trogdor2010]

Does this mean we can get The Virgin Springs on Blu Ray?

[Show spoiler]Sorry I couldn't resist.

[TeresofBlood]

Originally Posted by Ghost_of_Karloff

Is anyone having problems with the features on Last House? I can only play some. Most of them when I hit enter it stops the disc. Same thing when I hit play.

Movie is fine and the features that work are fine, but only about 2 of them will actually play. The disc stops when I try an access the others

I have the same problem. According to another user, everything works on ps3. I'm going to update my firmware tonight to see if that works.

[mayorofsmpleton]

Originally Posted by The Blufather

You know the kind of art where the artist paints everything one color like - http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedai...07/06/art1.jpg

And people stare at it and call it art. I call that 3 panels painted all white If you like it and think it's art, great.

Art is just self expression. Film, food, music, painting, writing, etc... Personally, I wouldn't buy 3 blank panels as a piece mostly because I look at it and it invokes "empty" "void" etc. and that displeases me. Another person might view that piece as inspiring -- Leaves a world of possibility open by not depicting anything at all, etc. The artist got your attention -- so I'd say he/she succeeded.

[mayorofsmpleton]

Originally Posted by TeresofBlood

I have the same problem. According to another user, everything works on ps3. I'm going to update my firmware tonight to see if that works.

Ya know I thought it was odd that this disc took the longest EVER to load. It clocked in at over a minute and 20 seconds. Nuts.

Perhaps there are issues with this particular title if so many people are having difficulties. I'm going to update my firmware too, that's a smart idea.