I just finished Noroi. My God my heart is still racing. It's a found footage horror film from Japan that's unlike a lot of horror from that country. It truly realises found footage's potential. Just glimpses of something far, far more terrifying than what can be seen. One of my favourite horrors, I think.

^Even though the literal tinfoil hat dude cracked me up, the slowburn tension building gets fucking insane. My favorite found footage film, and that "second" found footage near the end...unforgettable.

That is another of my all-time favorites. I watch it pretty much every October. The characters are great, so you really feel for their dreadful situation, the movie has a great air of mystery to it, and it throws you plenty of wild scenes and surprises.

If you like American Werewolf in London, I'd suggest the Masters of Horror episode, Deer Woman as well. It's also from John Landis, and is actually references American Werewolf. As far as I'm concerned, it's the best Masters of Horror episode.

I would not suggest American Werewolf in Paris, however, as it was a shitty cash-grab from the 90's with one of the first, and one of the worst, CG werewolves.

Yeah AAWIL is great. I think it might have been more effective as a horror movie if it had traded some of the goofiness for more tension and dread, but I think the fact that it shifts tones so often is one of its greatest strengths since life itself is a rotating carnival of horrors and laughs. I also think it's one of the few genuine contenders to The Thing in terms of horrific practical gore effects. Overall yeah it's just a ton of fun. I haven't watched it in probably six years or so now but it's very good and I should definitely watch it again.

As usual, I'm behind the times, but I finally saw It at the cinema. What crap. Don't waste your time.

Oh yeah, there are quite a few unintentionally funny moments in the movie, but that makes it all the more realistic IMHO.

"PIGEONS!!"

For the latest in some Halloween fun for my son, I showed him Frailty.

Bill Paxton's directorial debut, and an overall brilliant slow-burn horror-thriller. It's one of those movies so well done that I can completely forgive the religious aspects of the plot, because it delivers such a strong story overall. Great pace, great characters, engrossing atmosphere and story, and the cinematography is outstanding.

The Babysitter - A Netflix original directed by McG? Not a promising pitch, but I watched it because I thought the trailer was amusing. The movie was better than I expected. It's the best McG film I've seen, which means I liked it more than Terminator 4 or Charlie's Angels 2.


47 Meters Down - Largely for the purpose of spiting her ex-boyfriend Stuart, Mandy Moore visits Mexico with her sister. They decide it would be fun to have a boat lower them into the water, surrounded by a metal cage, so they can be within arm's length of a hungry shark or two. Naturally there's a malfunction and their cage falls roughly 51.4 yards to the ocean floor.

I'm right on the fence with this movie. I want to recommend it, because it definitely works on a basic level: I was really rooting for both sisters to survive. However, the writer / director did something in the second half I found too cheap and manipulative and it's still not sitting right with me. Also, every time you think the script is done with the Stuart references, they go several minutes, then mention Stuart again. STOP TALKING ABOUT STUART ALREADY

I don't know. Watch this if you like shark movies, or underwater movies I guess.

Just the opposite. Do NOT if you like them.

As my son and I had Friday off, we had a full weekend of Halloween films, a couple of which I noted already, but here was the full rundown of rad stuff he got to see:

Invasion of the Body Snatchers 1978
Creepshow
Frailty
House (1985, the one with Richard Moll)
Army of Darkness
A couple more episodes of Monsters, a TV series from the 80's I only recently discovered. From the producers of Tales From the Darkside.

He liked all of them, but I think Frailty had the biggest overall impact.

Frailty does that to people. It's a more serious film than many of its kind. Anything like that, with a parent basically exploiting their kids, is dark and harrowing as fuck when done right. I remember renting that movie blindly at Blockbuster and it's stuck with me ever since.

And it's just so deliberately and perfectly assembled. It carefully toys with the audience so that you aren't sure what to believe, and in the end, not only does it have a great pay-off, but you realize that it led you there the whole time. When Dad walks in and claims God spoke to him, all of the scenes of that could have been misinterpreted as anything else. When the fucking pipe is shown as a holy weapon, you think, "what the fuck is going on here?"

Even as a skeptic and an atheist, I have to admit this film does everything correctly, even if it doesn't match my views. Indeed, it works in a variety of new ways because of my views.

I see it more of a story about a father corrupting and scaremongering his children into supporting his sick delusions than a religious story really. I don't think it matters if you believe or not - Frailty is at heart a story of a father with deep mental issues exploiting and abusing his children. It's fantastical and bizarre in ways but the core message, as with any horror film, remains.

Damn - now I need to find the old copy of it I have. Been a few years since I saw it.

My review of All Hallows Eve, a movie that is one of the top 5 scariest I ever saw and is so fucked up I am unsure if I really "like" it at all, is now on my blog if anyone cares.

I’m kinda surprised to see so much love for Frailty here. It’s a fun and decent enough flick (with very good acting), but it’s pretty corny/silly IMO. My wife (who had previously never seen it) and I watched it a few months ago and we both agreed that it was fairly mediocre. I had seen it before though it had been a long time. Our eye-rolling came primarily from the religious aspects that other folks here mentioned, though due to different reasons. Both of us being devout Christians, the “theology” or whatever you want to call it was quite ridiculous and obviously not written by anyone who has the slightest understanding of biblical teachings. So I think that affected our suspension of belief and ability to truly get absorbed into the story. I think it could have been much more effective if a) Paxton’s character was involved in some sort of cult or something made up in which the theology could be created specifically for the movie, or b) significant tweaks to the plot to fit better within actual teachings of Christianity. It’s still a good movie but I think it could’ve been a great movie had there been some changes to it.

The entire point of the movie is that the father is insane and thinks God wants him to kill people. I doubt theology matters much when you're that far gone.

Valid, but...

Uh, no? The entire point of the movie is that demons exist and the father is justified in his murders. It's often billed as "the only Christian horror film" for good reason. It's pretty clear-cut, there's really very little room for interpretation.

I really disliked it.

Yeah, the demons are real, but just the way the whole thing plays out is so creepy from the children's POV watching this all happen that I found it extremely effective, the way he manipulates and torments them and the way it plays out. Maybe it was subtext not originally intended. I dunno - it worked for me. Not perfect and I'd probably like it better if he was just insane. But ah well.

Oh, right, I completely forgot about the twist. To be completely honest, I only remember bits and pieces from the movie, as I only saw it once, late at night, back in high school, and I was drifting in and out of sleep all the while

Regardless, I think both a more fantastical and a more mundane take on the same premise could work. "This murderous psycho put his kids through hell because of his delusions" and "demons are real and the murderous psycho was right to kill those people all along" are both completely valid and terrifying concepts. I should rewatch it soon and see how it stacks up.

They don't actually say anything pertaining to Christianity. Jesus is never once mentioned. They do use some popular Christian mythological elements, such as how the angel looks (Roman garb and all), it's a very generic version of "god".

As I noted right above this post, it's not a Christian film. A very generic "god" is mentioned, and there is reference to Abraham being ordered to murder Isaac, but that's about it. Jesus and Christianity are not a part of it. In many ways, it is simply a tale building on a mythology the way a Krampus film would.

I think branching Paxton into a cult would have been completely ridiculous. Cult films are dime-a-dozen and for the most part, they aren't scary or thrilling, they're just super tropey. Crazed cults belong in a good Lovecraft fiction, and while modern religious cults exist, that would have spoiled what this film was going for, which is a mysterious task being imparted onto a person from a divine entity.

This film had nothing at all to do with theology or any specific religion, and adding one would have just muddied everything.

This is a personal film, the way religion is supposed to be personal. It is a basic story of man vs evil. It is beautifully crafted.

Yes it was. I get why you claim it is not but it is an American film, which makes it a Christian film by default. I realize not everyone in America is Christian but it would be thoroughly dishonest to claim as fact that the number of religious people in America was not overwhelmingly Christian.True but how is an Abrahamic religion not part of Abrahamic faith? You do realize that Christianity, Judaism and Islam are just contradictory interpretations of the same compilation of stories, right?
- While Judaism is several hundred years older, the origin of what religious Americans view as Demons today started in Christianity. Neither modern Judaism or Islam are heavy on demonic possession.Which is a very interesting topic, one that was a bit too heavy handed on the obvious Christian theology, as stated by everyone but you here. It is better when the angle is left more ambiguous, a good example of which is the 2009 film Uninvited or its Korean counterpart Tale of Two Sisters.Nothing to do with theology? How so? That is the only subject that has anything to do with theism, be it deism, Hard and Soft polytheism, Henotheism, Kathenotheism, Monolatrism, Pantheism, Panentheism, Eutheism, Dystheism, Misotheism.
It was not even close to a basic story. Are you sure you are watching the same film?

I will say I am glad we don't usually get that cliche ending where the "good guy" actually killed his mother and it's revealed as a twist - I feel like I saw that shit a lot back in the 00s. Frailty is a better movie than most that used it, but it's still a weak ass twist.

What kind of backwards logic is this? That bolded part in particular is complete nonsense. Does this mean that every film ever made in the USA counts as a Christian movie? Gee, I never knew First fucking Blood was about the trials and tribulations of God-fearing men. Thanks for pointing it out.

That means The Witch is a Christian film.

Yeah maybe the "cult" thing would've been silly, I agree. I guess the point I was trying to get at was that the religious aspects of the film (which were totally central to its core) were so corny and far off from any actual teachings that the suspension of belief was soiled, thus preventing the viewer(s) from actually getting absorbed into the film's world and feeling that fear/dread that it was trying to convey. I think it would've been more effective had it gone fully to one side or the other (i.e. within the realms of orthodox Christianity or totally ambiguous/not trying at all to latch onto an actual religion). Instead it stayed in a sort of middle ground which I think is lazy and detracts from the movie. But if I'm understanding you correctly, you might be arguing that it was ambiguous enough? I guess that's where we disagree. I'd argue that the intended assumption for the viewer is that the "god"/"demons" in the plot are those of Christianity.

On another note, my wife and I watched the documentary of John Carpenter's The Thing last night. I had seen it once before years ago. It's really great and especially fascinating when it gets to how they did all the special effects. I'm so used to seeing the pompous/arrogant/ugly side of Hollywood from the news and facebook posts and whatnot so it was particularly refreshing seeing all these pretty normal and well-adjusted seeming dudes talking about how much fun they had working on The Thing.

I think he was trying to say that any religious-themed or theological film would be automatically interpreted through a Christian lens by an American audience. If not, then I have no idea what he was saying.

Despite your sarcastic sneer to my point above - cowardly not quoting me in doing so as well - yes, by the point I presented above, the witch would be. Yes, one could try to argue for the film to be religiously ambiguous, but when you present the mythology of your world as overwhelmingly towards one religion, it is hard to separate from all that you also know of said religion.

Maybe if Frailty or - more to your sarcastic point - the Witch were based on Zoroastrianism or Confucianism, it would not be seen as a typical Hollywood production heavily influenced by the American (see: Christian) culture that it was made in.

Even then, the Witch is a period piece, taking place in 17th Century New England. A time and place where Puritans were influencing culture heavily with their Christian theology. Not Buddhism, not Judaism, not Daoism.

So while I should have pointed out in my post - one you responded to but did not bother quoting - that I meant only religious films, that was omitted since I assumed it was obvious within that context. So fine... If I have to be more clear, if a religious film is made in America, by an American company, influenced by American culture or even about a specific American legend/period/event, it is going to be based on Christian theology by default. To put it another way, just like hot dogs are made with mostly pork unless otherwise noted, American supernatural films are Christian based unless otherwise noted.

Calm down. I don't always quote things. It doesn't mean anything at all.

I just thought your point about all American films being Christian was bizarre. Now that you explained it it makes more sense though I wouldn't say that always has to be true either. Christianity is a dominant religion here so yeah, it'll have more films about it here, but that hardly seems like any big revelation and doesn't mean all that much.

The Witch was just the most Satanic and anti Christian film I could think of offhand.

I don't think this is true or even a fair statement to make.

Seconded. The fact that many American horror movies feature Christian imagery and concepts does not mean that they are actually Christian movies. God's Not Dead is a Christian movie. Something like The Exorcist is a horror movie which merely uses Christian ideas as tools and plot devices. It would probably be almost the same if you replaced the demon with some sort of unknowable entity a la Lovecraft.

Maybe we could discuss the christian subtexts in the later "Saw" films?

Please try not to see this as dismissive of your beliefs, but I think all religious beliefs are equally corny, and I don't think it matters what "actual" teachings are. Even when you look at Christianity, to float the old "thousands of sects" argument. Then you have things like Scientology and Mormonism, which are so recent, you can look up the point of their deliberate invention. I think the film works for a broad audience precisely because it doesn't play with specifics, and the meat of it is the struggle between what is real and what isn't until it builds to conclusion.

This goes back to my argument from a page or two ago about the internal consistency of a film as opposed to various real-world elements. Frailty is internally consistent. It sets out to tell a story carefully, and the focus is on a question of real vs unreal, is sanity slipping, or what's going on? Is the youngest child simply going along with his father, or not?

To that point, there is a brilliant moment in the film where the younger brother, Adam, brings his dad "another list of demons," and it's blatantly a list of kids that were mean to him at school. This scene continues to confuse the viewer (upon first seeing it), as it further toys with the idea that it's delusion. Adam claimed he saw the demons when Dad touched them, but he also made up a fake list with personal reasoning. Watching it again as my son and I did last weekend, I really paid attention to it (something I've been trying to do more of--phone down, laptop closed, no chatting, just watch the movie), and I'm still impressed with how well crafted the entire experience is.

I deleted the other part of your post, but by all means, watch The Thing again. It's how I'm going to round off this October for my son. It is another expertly crafted film that just gets better the more you watch it.

I've got one that straddles a horrifying middle ground for you: Starship Troopers 3: Marauder.

That is not a joke. The film is bad, yes, it's almost indescribably bad. It introduces a whole bunch of characters 3/4 of the way into the film.

BUT, the film has another giant glaring issue, and that is constant, heavy dialog throughout dealing with religion, God, and atheism, where one character is literally preaching to another for large chunks. Oh, and the "non-believer" is Jolene Blalock. Yes, as in from Star Trek: Enterprise. If you want a hefty helping of cheese that'll make you rub your temples in sheer bewilderment, it's this "gem".

If you want to know just how religious it gets, see the spoiler:

That sounds absolutely horrendous I wasn't even aware that any Starship Troopers sequels existed. Now I can see why.

Well, to post once more, and not wanting to muddy my other points, I watched one helluva wacky film last night.

Evil Ed.

This could not be more tongue in cheek in any capacity. Ed is a friendly, sorta innocent, nice fella who is given the job to recut a bunch of ultra-violent horror films for a European release. In the process, he ends up seeing tons and tons of horror content, and he gradually goes insane and starts attacking people around him. This has one of the best lines of dialog I've ever heard in a movie, taken completely out of context:

"Where the fuck is my beaver rape scene?"

Fun movie, ha ha!

Starship Troopers 2 is a straight horror film, which actually isn't bad. It trades the over-the-top action of the first film for a more slower-paced, gore-centric survival setting. If you loved the first movie, and are a connoisseur of horror, it's worth a watch.

The third one, though, was clearly the franchise circling the drain, and it even dragged poor Casper Van Dien back from obscurity for another go--playing the same character as in the first film. It's a staggering mess of a film.

Okay, yeah, second one doesn't sound too bad. I might give that one a watch before the end of the month. I'll stay as far away as possible from the third one though.

Gotcha. Fair enough. Something important to take into account is how everyone is coming into the movie from different backgrounds and beliefs. The new It movie might be really scary for folks who have a predisposition of fear towards clowns and not as scary for those who don’t, etc. Due to personal experiences, I generally find movies with [more “orthodox”] demonic themes more frightening than, say, ghosts or monsters.

Anyways, that’s fun that you’re watching all these classics with your kid. I remember watching The Thing, American Werewolf In London, Halloween, etc. with my dad and it was always a good time.

Since my wife and I just watched The Thing a week or so ago, we probably won’t watch it again in the immediate future, but we both really enjoyed the documentary in the special features.



RE “Please try not to see this as dismissive of your beliefs, but I think all religious beliefs are equally corny,” no worries. I realize I risk bombardment of disagreements any time I mention faith here, but thanks for disagreeing respectfully.

Watched a pretty crap art-relationshippy type of movie called "Attraction" last night. Just as the early 1990's was an extension of the late 80's, so too was the early 2000's an extension of the late 90's - the whole thing felt like it could have been a Sneaker Pimps ripoff band's music video.