Discuss and Rate the Last Film You Watched

Is this the first poll?


  • Total voters
    45

Old_Hunter_77

Elite Member
Dec 29, 2021
1,576
1,429
118
Country
United States
Talk To Me

One of the recent darling indy horror films, this was my choice for our Saturday night almost-Halloween movie night. A bunch of dick-ish Australian teens get their hands on a.. well, a hand... that lets them commune with and host the spirits of cursed, malevolent spirits. They treat is like a drug fad. The best of these modern horror films are like "what is up with the youngs" and this is the best of these I've seen a while.
It's also just really really sad as the main character is this girl who ultimately is just lonely and looking for connection and makes some dumb decisions along the way as teens do. It's also pretty graphic.

I liked it.
 

hanselthecaretaker2

Flask restoration in progress
Jun 11, 2023
1,652
1,243
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
The Exorcist: Believer: Waste of time / Great

A couple of girls go missing, and are later found to be in medical distress which is even later found to be demonic possession.

Never in my 43 years (yes, I'm being hyperbolic) have I seen such a waste of film. It does absolutely nothing to set itself apart as a paranormal exploration, much less add anything to the "universe" of the iconic Exorcist name. And the shameless double-callback at the end felt so ham-fisted, it almost made me angry that they even tried.

To put my disappointment in perspective (I had absolutely no expectations going in, so the fact that it disappointed should be telling,) I re-watched The Exorcist right after, and realized that it isn't even that great a film. Blaire acts her ass off, but the rest of the film feels like a footnote insofar as how substantive it is.

Watch the trailer for the best bits of the whole movie and spare yourself the near two hours it tries to drag you along. A horror movie should make you wonder what happens next, not wonder how much longer it's going to take.
The whole franchise is some of the most overrated slop in general. Back then the original was considered shocking, but besides a couple good performances that’s all it ever really had going for it. The Evil Dead series at least showed how this kinda thing could be done well. I even enjoyed The Exorcism of Emily Rose more, and more recently The Pope’s Exorcist, but that’s mostly because Russell Crowe carried it.


On a similar note, just saw The Nun 2 last night. Yet more phoned in cheap horror at work here, which is a shame because you get the sense they tried doing something different here with the setting. It’s just that it ultimately doesn’t matter since it falls into the same generic tropes of the genre.

The whole conjuring universe is actually becoming as played out as the 80’s slasher franchises. They found a new niche and exploited it to the point it’s barely watchable anymore.
 
Last edited:

Old_Hunter_77

Elite Member
Dec 29, 2021
1,576
1,429
118
Country
United States
The whole franchise is some of the most overrated slop in general. Back then the original was considered shocking, but besides a couple good performances that’s all it ever really had going for it. The Evil Dead series at least showed how this kinda thing could be done well. I even enjoyed The Exorcism of Emily Rose more, and more recently The Pope’s Exorcist, but that’s mostly because Russell Crowe carried it.


On a similar note, just saw The Nun 2 last night. Yet more phoned in cheap horror at work here, which is a shame because you get the sense they tried doing something different here with the setting. It’s just that it ultimately doesn’t matter since it falls into the same generic tropes of the genre.

The whole conjuring universe is actually becoming as played out as the 80’s slasher franchises. They found a new niche and exploited it to the point it’s barely watchable anymore.
I mean I just refuse to remember that there are more than one Exorcist movies. Like Jaws and Psycho- the original was awesome for its time, and they are perfect as their own movies, why would anyone possibly want to watch more?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

hanselthecaretaker2

Flask restoration in progress
Jun 11, 2023
1,652
1,243
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
I mean I just refuse to remember that there are more than one Exorcist movies. Like Jaws and Psycho- the original was awesome for its time, and they are perfect as their own movies, why would anyone possibly want to watch more?
Oh I’m pretty $ure we all know why! The biggest challenge of sequels is making them compelling enough to stave off the law of diminishing returns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,569
2,273
118
Country
Ireland
I mean I just refuse to remember that there are more than one Exorcist movies. Like Jaws and Psycho- the original was awesome for its time, and they are perfect as their own movies, why would anyone possibly want to watch more?
The Exorcist 3 is actually a little underrated I find. It's a bit of a mess and doesn't compare to the original obviously but it's definitely a bit of a flawed gem. Actually being based on a book by the original author helps. Most of the sequels are like a 3-5 out of 10 but 3 is like a solid 7. Definitely worth a watch.

EDIT: Also any movie is immediately improved with the addition of Brad Dourif.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,569
2,273
118
Country
Ireland
Talk To Me

One of the recent darling indy horror films, this was my choice for our Saturday night almost-Halloween movie night. A bunch of dick-ish Australian teens get their hands on a.. well, a hand... that lets them commune with and host the spirits of cursed, malevolent spirits. They treat is like a drug fad. The best of these modern horror films are like "what is up with the youngs" and this is the best of these I've seen a while.
It's also just really really sad as the main character is this girl who ultimately is just lonely and looking for connection and makes some dumb decisions along the way as teens do. It's also pretty graphic.

I liked it.
I was really pleasantly surprised by this one. A lot of parts felt more like a modern Evil Dead than the most recent Evil Dead (which I did enjoy but that franchise will never be as good without Ash).

It really freaked me out at points which is more than I can say for a lot of modern horror movies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
26,345
11,066
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
The original is always best, and another Detroit classic about a film that takes place in Detroit. Nearly all of the sequels are shit. City of Angels was and still is butchered by the executives, the third film is okay, but any else is skippable and not worth remembering nor watching. The TV series remake of the first film is great though!
 
  • Like
Reactions: gorfias

thebobmaster

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
1,917
1,961
118
Country
United States
If you are into hard rock/metal, there's also great Ice Nine Kills song about The Crow titled A Grave Mistake.

 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
18,407
2,950
118
Starman

Lovely movie by John Carpenter. While he made Christine in between, this almost feels like an answer to the whole E.T. vs. The Thing fiasco. In 1982 audiences responded more to the family friendly boy-meets-alien movie than to the hopeless nightmare-fuel monster movie Carpenter made. Cut to 1984, Carpenter makes yet another body snatcher movie, though this time the alien replicating human DNA is benevolent and just wants to study us. He assumes the likeness of a dead man (Jeff Bridges) and goes on a road trip with his widow (Karen Allen); it's as much about the bonding between the two as it is about the woman fulfilling the cycle of grief. It's kind of a silly premise but the relationship is 100% believable through every stage thanks to solid writing and great performances from Bridges and Allen. It's Carpenter's most emotional movie and one of the rare instances where he doesn't do the score. I liked it a lot and looked up who did it - Jack Nitzche, who scored... The Exorcist?! Holy bejesus.

Hollow Man 2

Because it can't all be good movies, here's my take on 2006's direct-to-video sequel to Paul Verhoeven's Hollow Man. It's a dumb cop movie about a hardboiled detective and a scientist lady on the run from a killer invisible man and the feds who're trying to cover up the whole thing. The cop is overacting horribly and the lady isn't even trying. Christian Slater voices the invisible man, easy paycheck. The movie can't decide whether the invisible man is the Napoleon of Crime or he's just a psycho on a spree. He corners a dude on his own who's JUST made a drunken embarrassment of himself at a party and instead of killing him in any number of inconspicuous ways that would be handwaved by a coronoer as an accident he breaks open his cellphone and slashes his throat with it. In another scene he has to infiltrate Johnny Sack's house but for some reason detours into a neighboring house to spy on two Friday the 13th rejects. Doesn't kill the dude, doesn't rape the lady (see: the original Hollow Man). He just... breaks into the house, and spooks them by walking back and forth in front of their camcorder (yes, the invisible man shows up on your shitty camcorder if you set it to nightvision. How nifty).
 

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
May 13, 2009
7,064
1,836
118
Country
USA
Freevee? Amazon Prime free with ads. 2012's "Stuck in Love".

Passable wildly to the extreme "blue pill" mess of a movie. And then, and then, and then story telling with quick resolutions to large issues.

Divorced dad can't get over mom who at 50ish left him for a young hard bodied man. He is primary for his 2 kids (promiscuous [not my description and it matters to the plot] college daughter, nerdy high school son) and they're all going to be successful, wealthy writers. Was there that much more sex and work for writers back then in 2012? Today writers are on strike and there's supposedly a loneliness epidemic. (I met my wife at work. How are young people that WFH working out?)

Cusp of new technology: back then the boy plays some music from smart phone over blue tooth onto his car radio.

Guess this made a huge splash with critics back then. I'd never heard of it before my kid wanted to watch it. I sat down thinking it a newer film and saw the daughter from the Blind Side which came out a million years ago and realized it was an older movie. It sometimes, it felt like observing a time capsule.

C-

 
Last edited:

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,705
764
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Pain Hustlers - 6.5/10

Starring Emily Blunt and Chris Evans where they sell a specific type of fentanyl for cancer patients. Based on a true story about how the drug ended up being used off-label for other types of pain ("Pain is pain") with obvious bad consequences. It's rather run-of-the-mill for these types of films but the actors are entertaining enough to pull you through the movie without it getting boring.
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,170
4,447
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Devil: Decent / Great

Five strangers get trapped in an elevator, and while those on the outside struggle to get them out, tensions rise inside the elevator as each of the strangers being to grate on one another and suspect the others of treachery.

Never heard of this movies, so a couple things surprised me: 1.) it released in 2010; I'd never even heard of it, and 2.) it was written by M. Night Shyamalan. Typically, anything with his name attached generates some buzz; I don't know how it managed to go under my radar for 13 years. Anyway, Amazon Prime's teaser blurb somewhat ruined the "twist," but the movie still manages some decent anxiety, fear, and confusion. The way some of the primary characters resolve "what needs to be done" felt a bit ham-fisted and corny, but not enough to sour the overall experience.

The Crucifixion: Decent / Great

A priest and several nuns in Romania are arrested for murder when a botched and unsanctioned exorcism results in the death of a nun they believed to have been possessed by a demon. A young American journalist flies to Romania to investigate and determine what happened, and being a nonbeliever, she expects her cynicism to be validated, until her digging around reveals that forces greater than negligence might be at work...

"Inspired by true events," so take that for what it's worth. Genuinely freaky at times. Lots of jump scares, but not so many as to be obnoxious or dilute their effectiveness. BUT, as is my complaint with a lot of horror films, I spent half the runtime disagreeing with the protagonist's decisions and general lack of common sense. Basically, this movie would have been about 4 minutes long if someone of my character was the lead; the first door to mysteriously fly open, my ass would be on the next plane home!
 

LegoDnD

Regular Member
Jan 10, 2023
51
20
13
Country
United States of America
Hollow Man 2

Because it can't all be good movies, here's my take on 2006's direct-to-video sequel to Paul Verhoeven's Hollow Man. It's a dumb cop movie about a hardboiled detective and a scientist lady on the run from a killer invisible man and the feds who're trying to cover up the whole thing. The cop is overacting horribly and the lady isn't even trying. Christian Slater voices the invisible man, easy paycheck. The movie can't decide whether the invisible man is the Napoleon of Crime or he's just a psycho on a spree. He corners a dude on his own who's JUST made a drunken embarrassment of himself at a party and instead of killing him in any number of inconspicuous ways that would be handwaved by a coronoer as an accident he breaks open his cellphone and slashes his throat with it. In another scene he has to infiltrate Johnny Sack's house but for some reason detours into a neighboring house to spy on two Friday the 13th rejects. Doesn't kill the dude, doesn't rape the lady (see: the original Hollow Man). He just... breaks into the house, and spooks them by walking back and forth in front of their camcorder (yes, the invisible man shows up on your shitty camcorder if you set it to nightvision. How nifty).
Then when he finally does enter Johnny Sack's house, his method of killing the woman detective is to lift a huge weighty lamp WHILE IT'S LIT and smash it over her head when he could have grabbed her by her gun-toting hands and force her to shoot herself. A big part of what makes this moment so outlandishly stupid is that it had to be done in green-screen to hide the lamp's influence on the room's lighting. Gee, it's almost like it would be easier to film and make a lot more sense if he used literally any other object in the house.

Then while they're running through the streets, Hallow needlessly exposes himself by crudely knocking random people to the ground when he could just tip-toe around the crowd to get in close before they have a reason to run. If it's so important to establish he's giving chase, all that takes is close-ups of the ground with the sound of footsteps. They catch sight of a puddle splashing without clear cause and THEN they run.

I would feel less bad about this movie if the only blu-ray I ever found of Hallow Man 1 didn't include this on the same disk. I wanted 2001 to be my worst movie, no such luck.
 

hanselthecaretaker2

Flask restoration in progress
Jun 11, 2023
1,652
1,243
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Devil: Decent / Great

Five strangers get trapped in an elevator, and while those on the outside struggle to get them out, tensions rise inside the elevator as each of the strangers being to grate on one another and suspect the others of treachery.

Never heard of this movies, so a couple things surprised me: 1.) it released in 2010; I'd never even heard of it, and 2.) it was written by M. Night Shyamalan. Typically, anything with his name attached generates some buzz; I don't know how it managed to go under my radar for 13 years. Anyway, Amazon Prime's teaser blurb somewhat ruined the "twist," but the movie still manages some decent anxiety, fear, and confusion. The way some of the primary characters resolve "what needs to be done" felt a bit ham-fisted and corny, but not enough to sour the overall experience.
I first watched that when it released after getting pretty baked and yeah, that definitely helped sell the horror experience a bit lol. Because the next time I rewatched a few years later it was kinda meh.
 

Xprimentyl

Made you look...
Legacy
Aug 13, 2011
6,170
4,447
118
Plano, TX
Country
United States
Gender
Male
I first watched that when it released after getting pretty baked and yeah, that definitely helped sell the horror experience a bit lol. Because the next time I rewatched a few years later it was kinda meh.
Yeah, baked or otherwise, most films that have that element of shock and/or surprise the first time lose a lot of the appeal on subsequent watches. I thought it was a good enough for one watch, but not one I'm interested in seeing again.

My biggest complaint, Amazon Prime's teaser blurb: "Detective Bowden must save five people trapped in an elevator~but [he] must act fast, because one of them is the devil." I mean, c'mon. They still managed to pull off a decent twist, but knowing that going in removed half of the intrigue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hanselthecaretaker2

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
18,407
2,950
118
Rewatched Halloween (1978) and Halloween II (1981) last night.

Watching them back to back for the first time I really appreciated just how different they are from each other, and how much better the first movie is (even ignoring the infamous sibling twist).

Friday the 13th had come out in between, and just as that movie was copying Halloween, Halloween II now got to copy Friday the 13th. The sequel is notably bloodier. You barely see any blood in the first movie. At most it suddenly shows up as makeup on an actor. The sequel kicks off with blood bursting from a stab wound and a poor kid mumbling incoherently with a nasty razor lodged in his mouth. By the end so much blood is literally pooling on the floor characters are slipping in it. And the kills are more roundabout and vicious as well, Friday the 13th style. In the original Michael merely strangles two girls from behind and pins that guy to the wall. Here he uses a variety of different impromptu methods - claw hammer to the head, syringe to the eyeball, strap down and bleed someone to death with a tube, boil a chick's face off in a hot tub - with highly detailed, nasty results. We're also now doing car crashes and explosions too. Gotta up the ante.

I don't know what it is about bad directing that turns every character in a movie into an asshole or a smartass, but this movie definitely caught that virus. So everyone who isn't Laurie Strode in H2 is behaving like a complete douchebag: dismissive, short tempered, trying to one up the other person with dumb sarcasm all the time. Suddenly Haddonfield isn't the drowsy, peaceful, nondescript town from the first movie. It has 1980s grime and filth all over it, and is populated by nasty or ridiculous characters who belong exclusively to a horror movie.

Some final observations.

1. In the opening recap of H2, which mixes archive footage with new stuff, Loomis fires SEVEN shots instead of the six he clearly fired earlier (and which he keeps mentioning as well). That just grinds my gears.

2. The sister twist doesn't meld that well with Michael's actions in the first movie. If his sole purpose is to kill his "other" sister, why follow around Tommy in H1? Why bother killing the three other kids at the Wallace's house? Why steal Judith's gravestone and prop it by Annie's dead body, wouldn't he save the display for his actual sister?

3. Where are Laurie's parents? We see the dad drive away at the beginning of H1. In H2 the head nurse tells Laurie they can't reach her parents (ok, so she has a mom too) as they're not home nor at the party they were attending. By the end of H2 they're still missing.

4. Back to the sister twist... it doesn't add anything to the story, other than to explain why Michael is after Laurie. Frankly he kills so many people at the hospital it might as well just be a coincidence. Laurie has a dream about meeting a young Michael but makes nothing of it; by the end she's still unaware that Michael is his brother, just as she was still unaware by the end of H1 that "the bogeyman" she fought off was the infamous Michael Myers.

5. In the first two movies, which take over the course of a couple of days, he gets: stabbed in the neck with a knitting needle, stabbed in the eye with a clay hanger, stabbed in the chest with a butcher knife, shot 6 times in the chest with a revolver, falls form a second floor to the ground, boils his right hand in 140 degree water, gets shot another 5 times in the chest, gets shot another 2 times in the head (effectively blinding him as blood gushes from both eyes), is at the dead center of a gas explosion and eventually burns alive. He somehow survives all this and wakes up from a coma several years later like nothing happened.

(H2 introduces Samhain but it's not until the sixth movie that we finally establish Michael as a supernatural force.)

6. Loomis gets a bad rep as the guy somehow responsible for Michael breaking out and going on a killing spree. I blame Marion Chambers, who thinks it's a good idea to park your car by a herd of escaped crazies and roll down your window when one of them climbs on the top of your car. Later she shows up in H2 to recall Loomis, who is actively trying to stop the spree and kill Michael - which he achieves, basically, at least until H4 happened.