The Conjuring 2 - I thought the first movie was overrated, so my expectations for the sequel weren't very high. But I think I liked this one better. By far the best thing about this movie was (spoilers because I can't remember if this was given away in the trailers and TV ads)

Good performance by the main child actress too.

I have to say there was some strange use of music in this, however. Oh well. It'll be interesting to see if James Wan keeps his box office hit streak alive with the Aquaman movie.

The new rule seems to be: if you want to make a scary movie, set it in the 70s. It's almost like cheating.

The Girl On The Train - Like the book, this was slightly Lifetime/soap-opera-ish, but the murder mystery and intrigue, and the level of complexity in the writing of these characters, elevated it above that. Really excellent performances and thrilling, dark stuff. The directing was vibrant and thrilling and eye-catching, and the plot moved around with a dreamlike, hazy pacing that made it interesting rather than confusing as it would be in less capable hands. It was two hours but felt like an hour and a half, with how fast it was. I liked it.

The Hollow - Pretty awful, really. I heard this compared to the new wave of 'indie' horror, but really it was more like some awful shit from 2004 or something, just a dumb movie about people running away from a big monster. Way too many jump scares and pretty shitty acting, and nothing in the plot got even a passing explanation or even tried to make sense. Incredibly boring, frustrating watch.

Meh, the thing CD spoilered was really only the redeeming thing about Conjuring 2, other than that it was a pretty bog-standard evil spirit romp with paper-thin characters and some hilariously dumb attempts at levity.

Well it would make no sense to set the Conjuring movies in any other time since they're based on events which occurred in the 70s. The production design on these things is never very convincing though, they always fail to convey the overwhelming orange/brown décor that was literally everywhere in that decade

I'm glad someone liked it....

Did you not? Why?

While the attribution of that line to The Conjuring is a little off the mark since the story does take place back then, I'm with Rainbow on it. Far too many horror movies are coming out set in the '70s, and I think it's due to both the lack of technology to ease communication and that the '70s are seen as the apex of American horror (which is something I can agree with). It's an attempt to recapture that aesthetic after decades of subversion, and the easiest way to do that is to just set the movie in that time period because why bother coming up with an explanation for your cell phone not working?

Probably more to do with the 70s being the apex of horror than anything to do with cellphones. That can be easily circumvented by setting the film in an isolated environment, or if it's in a populated area just find a way for the phone to get smashed or for using it to not be an option (Don't Breathe being a recent good example of that). I hate the way cellphones are often portrayed in movies so marginalising their reliability/usefulness is always a good idea.

I didn't hate it, but I didn't really get engaged in the movie. I wasn't given the opportunity to care about any of the characters. I didn't enjoy the random sex scenes. The pacing was okay but the ending was unfulfilling because:



I haven't read the book but I wasn't too fond of the movie. But that's just me.

I can see that, though I don't think you needed to read the book to get it any more. It's probably a bit of a polarizing story. I thought the way the movie did the characters was really artful and eye-catching and it got me invested right away. The juxtapositions between them and the parallels in their stories was even clearer and easier to see on screen than in the book, actually, as the book was only from their first-person POVs.

What's It Follows like?

Really good and atmospheric, but with an ending that leaves you asking "that's it?" in mild frustration.

It's one of my favorite new horror films. Not one of the scariest perhaps, compared to some other films, but one of the best written, most layered films out there.

I thought it was pretty damn scary.

Eh, I'm into horror movies more for the sake of atmosphere. Suspense and a satisfying climax only comes second in importance. So I think I'll enjoy it, thanks

Speaking of which, I'm halfway through Good Night, Mommy and while I wouldn't consider it horror at the point I left it off with, the lighting, background and props are pretty much masterfully laid out. The sterile, detached atmosphere they conjure up definitely make for an interesting watch, as well as the similarily dispassionate acting.

I really, really liked It Follows. Fantastic movie, one of the better recent horror movies for sure. Probably that and The Witch are my favorite recent ones.

It is, but on subsequent views after the first, I tended to be more struck by its story and allegorical implication rather than how scary it was. I also just really like how the characters come up with all these plans and shit to do to figure out the mystery of what's happening - that's refreshing after years of movies where the characters just have to react and run away from the scary things.

I just bought The Witch the other day. Planning to make that my Halloween night movie pending that I have nothing else to do that night.

why you no dress up and go trick or treating? are you on a diet?

Good Night, Mommy was pretty good but not great IMO. It started out so fantastic and got quite intense... but then the twist-ending was SO cliche and quite a letdown I thought.



I've been wanting to watch The Witch for a while but haven't had the opportunity and very few friends who'd also be interested in it... :/ It Follows though I thought was very good and I agree: definitely one of the better horror flicks of recent times. I know it's cool to hate on the indie-horror like it and The Babadook (another stellar recent indie-horror movie IMO) but haters gonna hate... There's been some really creative and original horror movies coming out in recent years which is so refreshing but you have to sift through all the remakes, sequels, and rehashes of the same old crap...

The Babadook is a fucking bone-chilling, horrifying film. I forgot how insane and scary it really was before I rewatched it recently. The sense of a closed-in, claustrophobic perspective and the descent into madness are masterfully done.

I've said it before but I thought The Babadook was massively overrated. Not a bad movie at all, just kind of there I thought. Not much really exciting about it I didn't think and kind of left me scratching my head about where all of the erections come from.

The more I see it, the better it gets, like It Follows. It's got a lot of very clever, deft character writing woven into the horror. With The Babadook, what I notice more and more is how the entire movie is skewed by the mother's perception, of how she sort of hates her kid and hates her life, and that colors everything that happens. I think it's brilliant. The slow build of the beginning, which seemed innocuous to me on first viewing, I can now see a lot of loathing and a lot of creepy little things going on in a very everyday, normal context - like when she makes him take pills just so he'll stop annoying her. That isn't a big scary moment, but it's so fucking dark and nasty and sets the tone for later. Everything that happens matters.

I don't usually get scared in movies... but while watching The Babadook, I started regretting doing so alone at night in my little cottage I lived in under the trees... I loved the ending too.

I forgot to mention: I watched The Lobster last night. It's about what you'd expect: dark, absurd, quirky, odd, slow but interesting/engaging, and gets you thinking about the pressures of relationships and singleness, how loneliness motivates us, modern social constructs, etc. It's a good rental but I wouldn't go out of my way to watch it again anytime soon.

That's where I stand on almost every "arthouse" horror film. The horror comes from her descent into madness, but that descent takes the form of scenes that are closer to an amateur play than legitimate terror. We've had this discussion before (it's back quite a few pages), but it always boils down to what scares you as a viewer.

Are you scared of the implications of sexual activity, be they pregnancy, disease, social stigma, etc.? It Follows is going to scare you. Are you more troubled by unending visceral torment? Try Baskin.

Huh, I saw that Baskin movie on Netflix but didn't think it looked very good - chalk that up to the dumbass description Netflix gave it. Maybe I'll try it soon.

It's no masterpiece, but it has more of a nightmarish tone than Babadook. It's like peak Fulci with better special effects.

Hated the Babadook. Loved It Follows.

Babadook was this bait and switch monster movie that ends up being something totally different - so I guess my beef is with the promotion. I like paranormal monster movies. I fucking LOATHE psychological 'person goes slowly crazier' movies. Just not scary to me.

But..... there is a monster in The Babadook. Even if it also stands as a metaphor for the film's main themes, the thing is still fucking there, menacing the protagonists. Did you actually watch the movie?

^ He likes James Wan movies - best not even try to debate and just accept that you'll never agree.

The Babadook is an extremely nightmareish, terrifying film to me, acid_bukkake, though I see what you mean if we're talking old school Argento or Fulci style. I'll check out Baskin sometime.

Seems like every few pages those two movies keep rearing their overrated heads. Honestly "The Invitation" has way more merit to be acclaimed than those two forgettable slogs.

Eh, I think all three are really good. Exactly the kind of stuff I like horror for and I hope there's plenty more like em.

I absolutely loved both The Babadook and It Follows. Only reason I don't own the former yet is because I haven't found it in a Best Buy or FYE around here yet. I have The Invitation on my computer, but I've yet to watch it. I'll do that either tomorrow night or Sunday.

James Rolfe did a Monster Madness on The Babadook this year, and he greatly misunderstood the point of the movie. As acid_bukkake said, the movie is about the mother going crazy, and the Babadook itself is the manifestation of her mental downward spiral. Rolfe took it entirely at face value by saying the monster had nothing to do with the story at all, and that it felt like a drama about motherhood and the monster was just thrown in as an afterthought so that they could call it a horror film. As much as I like Rolfe, have been a fan of his works for years, and greatly respect his horror knowledge and criticism, this is an instance where he is dead wrong.

Eh, he never struck me as very smart anyway even when I liked some of his stuff.

The Babadook is about child abuse. That's what makes it so terrifying to me. It's as real as a horror movie gets.

He's a big horror fan and I like his "best movies of the gold/silver age" videos, but his best stuff is video games. It's even worse when he's doing a crossover review with Doug (Nostalgia Critic) since it really shows the lack of depth that Rolfe puts into his movie reviews.

Yeah honestly, despite his persona as a "nerd", James Rolfe isn't really an intellectual. His interest in movies is more on the technical/practical end - effects, editing, lighting, that kind of thing - than plot analysis or characters or anything like that. It's why his movie kinda, well, blew chunks.

But I loved It Follows. So you're just as dumb as me. Congrats.

The best thing Doug Walker ever did with the Nostalgia Critic series was make those reviews more analytical and in-depth. James Rolfe is definitely more analytical now than he was when he started, but it's not on the level of what Doug has been doing for the past few years. I watch AVGN less for a real review of a game and way more for the actual character interacting with the game and all the weird stuff that happens. Doug's videos are much better as real reviews of why a movie is shitty, even if his videos are 1. Not as good as balancing absurd humor and real reviewing as Brad Jones, and 2. Surrounded by fluff with the two actors he has doing the skits in each video. That's why, as much as Nostalgia Critic has improved, I prefer Doug's editorials; they're just as funny while being much more like a real review.

Never said people were dumb for liking Wan movies, just that it's obviously a completely different set of opinions and values as to what is looked for in films.

Mutant Chronicles - I found out after watching this that it's based on an RPG, which helps explain the movie's sloppiness. It begins by explaining that long ago, humans defeated and buried an evil device that wants to turn us all into mutants. Skip to the year 2700-something, and the wars ravaging our dying planet have managed to re-awaken the mutant-maker. Time to fight it again, now with better weapons!

After throwing all that backstory at you, the movie becomes a search-and-destroy mission where our heroes travel downward fighting killer freaks, sort of like The Descent. Or maybe I only made that comparison because the main character from The Descent is in this, briefly. Either way, it's not very good. The special effects are spotty, with some of the most distracting blood spray I've ever seen. There are a few recognizable actors, but no really memorable characters so the death scenes have no impact. And John Malkovich is wasted.

Not recommended.