Prophecy (1979) coming from Scream Factory

[RalphoR]

Originally Posted by JMDiaz718

That is truly disturbing and disappointing. I’ll still buy it, as it was 40 years ago, and the AHA saved the raccoon. Wanna see animal torture?, watch those Italian cannibal movies! I’ve read reviews and I refuse to watch those.

There's no way I could watch those...no matter how many naked Italian women are running around in it.

[oilers73]

Originally Posted by blackadder213

Under "other versions".

They for real poisoned a racoon so that they could film its writhing death throes.

That totally goes against the whole message of the movie! Sheesh.

[snipemonkey]

Originally Posted by JMDiaz718

That is truly disturbing and disappointing. I’ll still buy it, as it was 40 years ago, and the AHA saved the raccoon. Wanna see animal torture?, watch those Italian cannibal movies! I’ve read reviews and I refuse to watch those.

Yeah, you cannot unsee Cannibal Holocaust. And I've watched it probably 4 or 5 times because it gets so much praise from so many people but is one of those movies I hated so much that I keep having to revisit it to see if maybe there's something I'm missing. It would be easier to let go of if it was simply vile, stupid and incompetent like Cannibal Ferox but it's vile, stupid and incredibly well made and intriguing. I keep forgetting how much I dislike it and get compelled to watch it yet again.

Is that weird?

[RalphoR]

Originally Posted by snipemonkey

Yeah, you cannot unsee Cannibal Holocaust. And I've watched it probably 4 or 5 times because it gets so much praise from so many people but is one of those movies I hated so much that I keep having to revisit it to see if maybe there's something I'm missing. It would be easier to let go of if it was simply vile, stupid and incompetent like Cannibal Ferox but it's vile, stupid and incredibly well made and intriguing. I keep forgetting how much I dislike it and get compelled to watch it yet again.

Is that weird?

Yes

[gobad2003]

Originally Posted by snipemonkey

Is that weird?

No

[snipemonkey]

I'm glad we could clear that up.

[bonehica]

Originally Posted by RalphoR

Yes

Originally Posted by gobad2003

No

Originally Posted by snipemonkey

I'm glad we could clear that up.

[Wtdk]

Originally Posted by ditcin

From what I remember the ending of the novel is much better. Something about - a description of the forest and hills, then a hill moves... suggesting that there's another mutant... something very large.

Books are sooo much better.

They are...different. It's the difference between you making the film and seeing someone else make it. You're interpretation is going to be quite different. What works in a book often times doesn't work in a movie either.

Seltzer wrote his novelization AFTER the script was written as I recall. It has the advantage also of putting visuals in your head that there's no way that Frankenheimer could have achieved at the time. Add in that JF was on the downward spiral with his drinking problem, etc. and you've got a film that doesn't benefit from the full talent of any of the people. Oh, and Seltzer also wrote the script (again) so you would think that he would write an effective screenplay as well but he was dependent on JF's skills as well.

It's just a bad movie poorly served by all of the talent behind the screen.

I can think of plenty of well made films that do a great job (and improve on the novel--"Jaws" for example or the adaptation of Richard Matheson's short story "Duel" which the film bests as well in its own way)with the material but, even in the ways that they improve on the source, the source does offer something that the movie can't and thus shouldn't.

[George Hargensen]

Why is SF listing 98 minutes as the BD running time? Original theatrical RT was definitely 102 min, as was the (godawful) Paramount DVD release. I hope it's just a pre-release mistake, and not a certain TV version that aired some ten years ago, leaving out a whole scene when Foxworth and Shire are arriving at the paper mill area (and that happened to last a few minutes,which keeps me wondering).

[JMDiaz718]

Originally Posted by Wtdk

They are...different. It's the difference between you making the film and seeing someone else make it. You're interpretation is going to be quite different. What works in a book often times doesn't work in a movie either.

Seltzer wrote his novelization AFTER the script was written as I recall. It has the advantage also of putting visuals in your head that there's no way that Frankenheimer could have achieved at the time. Add in that JF was on the downward spiral with his drinking problem, etc. and you've got a film that doesn't benefit from the full talent of any of the people. Oh, and Seltzer also wrote the script (again) so you would think that he would write an effective screenplay as well but he was dependent on JF's skills as well.

It's just a bad movie poorly served by all of the talent behind the screen.

I can think of plenty of well made films that do a great job (and improve on the novel--"Jaws" for example or the adaptation of Richard Matheson's short story "Duel" which the film bests as well in its own way)with the material but, even in the ways that they improve on the source, the source does offer something that the movie can't and thus shouldn't.

The book is much better and a lot more gruesome. The killing of the camping family is a lot scarier and graphic. The creature literally chews the daughter up! And I believe the mom is also on the trip, not just the dad.

Haven't read it in a log time, my memory is a little fuzzy.

Another great horror novel at the time, Incubus was a lot more disturbing and graphic, than it's film counterpart. Though I think The Incubus, works a little better than Prophecy.

[agooga]

Just watched it again last night on Prime (after a 40 years hiatus) and, guys, I gotta tell ya: this movie kind of blows. Also, what's funny is how "un-woke" it is in our modern "woke" world: Armand Assante as the leading Native American? Foxworth as the great white hope, mansplaining science to his shrinking wifey-poo. Ugh-- hot garbage. Sadly, I remembered the sleeping bag moment as being way cooler and scarier than it actually was, and the scares are few and far between the scenes of preaching and grandstanding. This dumpster fire is only good for laughing and vicious mockery, it did not fire up the nostalgia centers in me at all.

[RalphoR]

I watched Prophecy on Amazon Prime tonight. I've always has a soft spot for this movie. I can understand why some people think it's not very good but I really enjoy it to this day. So checking out the video it seemed just ok. Some parts looked DVD quality while others were pretty decent. I'm thinking the blu-ray will do it justice. I'm not sure if I'm imagining it but I thought 3 or 4 scenes had just a little bit of extended run and dialog. Maybe someone else can verify it.

[Rzzzz]

Originally Posted by agooga

Just watched it again last night on Prime (after a 40 years hiatus) and, guys, I gotta tell ya: this movie kind of blows. Also, what's funny is how "un-woke" it is in our modern "woke" world: Armand Assante as the leading Native American? Foxworth as the great white hope, mansplaining science to his shrinking wifey-poo. Ugh-- hot garbage. Sadly, I remembered the sleeping bag moment as being way cooler and scarier than it actually was, and the scares are few and far between the scenes of preaching and grandstanding. This dumpster fire is only good for laughing and vicious mockery, it did not fire up the nostalgia centers in me at all.

[filmo70]

[BarnDoor]

Final specs:

NEW All Of Our Sins – An Interview With Talia Shire
NEW Bearing Up – An Interview With Actor Robert Foxworth
NEW Bear And Grin It – An Interview With Writer David Seltzer
NEW Hard To Bear – An Interview With Special Make-up Effects Designer Tom Burman
NEW Prophecy Prodigy – An Interview With Special Make-up Effects Artist Allan Apone
NEW Beneath The Bear – An Interview With Mime Artist Tom McLoughlin
Theatrical Trailer
Radio Spots
Still Gallery

[Starman22]

Originally Posted by BarnDoor

Final specs:

I saw this on Scream Factory Facebook page earlier and I never seen it and I will check it out this one.

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by Starman22

I saw this on Scream Factory Facebook page earlier and I never seen it and I will check it out this one.

I'd watch it first (it's streaming for free on Amazon Prime). It's not "good" in any traditional sense.

[evilive]

I watched it on Prime video not too long ago and liked it. I thought the sleeping bag kill was hilarious haha. Some good ol' creature-feature goodness.

[darkness2918]

Originally Posted by evilive

I watched it on Prime video not too long ago and liked it. I thought the sleeping bag kill was hilarious haha. Some good ol' creature-feature goodness.

I also watched it on Prime a while back & liked it enough that ill be getting the BD.

[cakefactory]

My big problem with this movie was always that I really liked the handful of atmospheric, creepy mutant-bear-in-the-woods scenes. So, I'd get the urge to watch it, only remembering those, only to find out they're surrounded by about an hour and fifteen minutes of dreck. Blah!!!

This might sound random, but the Stephen King book "The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon" always reminded me of the picture I'd built up in my mind as a kid of the bear in this movie. If they'd surrounded the sleeping bag scene and some of the end siege stuff with a better plot, some atmosphere, and a higher budget, this really could have been something. As is, I'll always be hoping for some kind of union of this, Backcountry (2014), and Grizzly that combines the most effective parts of them all to make the ultimate killer bear horror movie. :P