Poltergeist - I Was Cheering for the Evil Spirits
- Thread starter Marter
- Start date
I feel like this remake could have been a deconstruction on the original Poltergeist... I mean, if I learned anything from Cinema Sins, it's that despite the poltergeist's clever plan, the parents are really dicks to their kids with that clown doll being the most obvious offender next to the girl really being too close to the TVs in the house... And, that's not even adding the fact that the whole reason the house was even there in the first alongside being the only house in that area being effected by the poltergeist at around the time the family had plans of moving, if I'm remembering the original movie correctly...
But, no... They took the "safe" route and suffered in more way than one... *sighs*
But, no... They took the "safe" route and suffered in more way than one... *sighs*
To be honest I found The Conjuring to be incredibly dull and too bland in both a technical and story sense to invoke any kind of reaction. I dread to think of how bad Annabelle is. I also dread to think how terrible this film is if The Conjuring is invoked as a positive reference.
I liked the remake, not as good as the original but good enough to keep me entertained for the running time.
I did watch the Cinema Sins episode covering the 1982 version, what a crock of shit that was. The only real sin that I saw was concerning the remote control war. The rest was nitpicking at best and downright stupid at worst. Apparently ordering Pizza Hut is a sin. If that is the kind of quality I can expect from Cinema Sins then I don't think I will be subscribing to their channel.
I did watch the Cinema Sins episode covering the 1982 version, what a crock of shit that was. The only real sin that I saw was concerning the remote control war. The rest was nitpicking at best and downright stupid at worst. Apparently ordering Pizza Hut is a sin. If that is the kind of quality I can expect from Cinema Sins then I don't think I will be subscribing to their channel.
I'm sad to hear this movie turned out to be a shitter. I really enjoyed the original. Does it at least have the face peeling skin from the original? That's a scene that still pops up in my mind from time to time all these years later. I think it scarred me to a degree the first time I saw that scene.
Would you explain that, please?tippy2k2 said:
I ask because Mad Max: Fury Road isn't a remake, it's a sequel directed by George Miller, the same director & one of the writers as the previous two (let us never mention Thunder Dome). In addition to that it has an actual actor in the eponymous role, with an actress who's at least capable as the female protagonist, as well as numerous other cast who have been in the previous films. Then of course there's the matter of the budget which, while I rarely criticise a film for a low budget since acting, script, direction, cinematography, & editing aren't particularly reliant on money, in the case of a two hour stock car themed punch-up firework display, it is most certainly a good thing; Fury Road had, after allowing for inflation, about sixty times the budget of Mad Max, & about twenty-five times that of Road Warrior.
If you'd said that about a remake of Rollerball, Robocop, John Carpenter's remake of The Thing (van Heijningen's is a remake of Carpenter's, despite what the studio claims) then I'd agree, & you'd have been completely right, they're utter insults to the audience & everyone involved in the creation of the originals. But Fury Road? I honestly don't understand why you'd have thought it was a remake, let alone why it wouldn't be as good as the first two.
The reasoning isn't terribly complicated; when I saw the trailer, I assumed it was a remake/reboot. In keeping with Hollywood tradition (see...well...Robocop, The Thing, etc.), I thereby concluded that it was probably going to be awful.catalyst8 said:
Keep in mind that I said in my post I thought that it looked like a terrible remake when I saw the trailer, not that it was a terrible remake. In fact, I freaking loved Fury Road [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.875819-tippy2k2-tells-you-what-to-think-Mad-Max-Fury-Road] once I saw it.
OK, thanks for explaining. I was confused because I never expect something to be a remake unless it specifically says it is, & then try to avoid it for as long as possible until someone inflicts it on me. I only know of four good remakes anyway, & two of those are really homages by Terry Gilliam & John Carpenter rather than actual remakes.tippy2k2 said:
On topic:
It's much appreciated to have Escapist film reviews which maturely analyse the subject without condescending to the reader, or getting caught up in so-called 'nerd rage' for that matter. Bravo, Mr. Parkinson! Your efforts are appreciated.
I remember being blown away by the original and I swear, I saw it for the first time in 2004, right in the middle of high school, I remember watching it and I thought "HOLY SHIT!, how come I never saw this before!?, it's friggin' awesome!".
It's a shame that not only this remake, but most horror films rely on cheap jump scares, wich aren't bad by themselves, but it's been done pretty poorly lately. Gladly subtle and creepy horror films are slowly coming back, but we're still a long way from them becoming the norm.
It's a shame that not only this remake, but most horror films rely on cheap jump scares, wich aren't bad by themselves, but it's been done pretty poorly lately. Gladly subtle and creepy horror films are slowly coming back, but we're still a long way from them becoming the norm.
Agreed. It's a welcome change in tone and subject matter, butI'm still trying to not read his reviews in Bob's voice, but many of them have links to Bob's earlier reviews.catalyst8 said: