Author Topic: RossRoy's Random Viewings  (Read 172174 times)

Offline addicted2dvd

  • Forum Inventory
  • ********
  • Posts: 17528
  • Country: us
    • View Profile
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #180 on: October 17, 2008, 10:05:43 AM »
Glad you enjoyed the Wolf Man as much as you did... And I agree... Creature from the Black Lagoon is good... but not as good as the other classics.
Pete

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #181 on: October 18, 2008, 07:05:03 PM »
The Invisible Man
 
Original Title: The Invisible Man
Year: 1933
Country: United States
Director: James Whale
Rating: NR
Length: 386 Min.
Video: Full Frame 1.33:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital Stereo, Commentary: Dolby Digital Stereo
Subtitles: French, Spanish

What they say
Renowned acting legend Claude Rains made a remarkable screen debut in The Invisible Man, based on H.G. Well's acclaimed novel. Rains, a mysterious doctor, creates a serum that makes him invisible. But the miraculous potion also has the power to drive him mad, as he discovers when he is forced to commit horrific acts of terror. Directed by the master of the macabre, James Whale, The Invisible Man set the standard for dazzling special effects with ingenious techniques that are still imitated today.

My Thoughts
Another day, another entry in the Classic "Monster" revisit.

Amazing. Not the film, the special effects. This is 1933. They didn't have green screen with CGI.  The feat they pulled of here is mervelous. I was completely taken aback by the special effects the first time The Invisible Man removes his bandages. I don't know what I was expecting, but certainly not for him to actually be invisible (ok ok yes, there are some anomalies that give it away, but shhhh!) Big thumbs up to the special effects team!

As for the film itself, well I'm puzzled. Why was it made part of the Classic Monster Legacy Collection? He's not a monster per-se. There's no reanimating the dead (Frankenstein, Dracula), he's not a long lost living creature (Gill-man), or even a man with a best inside (Wolf Man).. He's simply a scientist who discovered how make himself invisible, and got mad in the process. Nothing monstruous there. Ah well, probably explains why The Invisible Man wasn't in Monster Squad to begin with.

Other than that, it's a decent Mad scientist story. All the elements are there: power hungry, found a special technology/formula to allow him to gain power by questionable means, and he's mad, as well as madly in love (even though this angle is not played too much)!

The movie thrives on the special effects. And they work, really well.




Najemikon

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #182 on: October 18, 2008, 07:14:57 PM »
As for the film itself, well I'm puzzled. Why was it made part of the Classic Monster Legacy Collection? He's not a monster per-se. There's no reanimating the dead (Frankenstein, Dracula), he's not a long lost living creature (Gill-man), or even a man with a best inside (Wolf Man).. He's simply a scientist who discovered how make himself invisible, and got mad in the process. Nothing monstruous there. Ah well, probably explains why The Invisible Man wasn't in Monster Squad to begin with.

Oooh, I have to strongly and passionately disagree! The Invisible Man is a monster, both in himself and what he becomes. He is monstrous in the same way that Frankenstein is the real monster, not his creation. He is messing with nature and though I'm not religious, considering the age of the story, he is also an affront to God. His madness is kind of a payoff; that such a monstrous act cannot be allowed to succeed.

And then on a more basic level, he is the ultimate boogie man (I don't mean he dances well!). He has a vulgar amount of power in his invisible state.

A monster by definition is an impossible freak of nature. He's that and deserves his place.

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #183 on: October 18, 2008, 07:19:22 PM »
You know, I hadn't considered that angle, at all. I saw him with my modern, technical mind: He got mad because of the stuff he created, and is a scientist experimenting with new things. Nothing more, nothing less.

But now that you mention it... Yeah, you are totally right. He had to have a reason to actually want to become invisible. And then, while he is invisible, he strives for power and actually wants to kill people to achieve it.

You are entirely right. Sorry, my bad!

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #184 on: October 19, 2008, 06:33:43 PM »
Frankenstein
 
Original Title: Frankenstein
Year: 1931
Country: United States
Director: James Whale
Rating: NR
Length: 384 Min.
Video: Full Frame 1.33:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital Mono, Spanish: Dolby Digital Mono
Subtitles: French, Spanish

What they say
Boris Karloff stars as the screen's most memorable monster in what many consider to be the greatest horror film ever made. Dr. Frankenstein (Colin Clive) dares to tamper with life and death be creating a human monster (Karloff) out of lifeless body parts. It's director James Whale's adaptation of the Mary Shelley novel blended with Karloff's compassionate performance of a creature groping for identity that makes Frankenstein a masterpiece not only of the genre, but for all time. 70 min.

My Thoughts
And thus, my Classic Monster revisit comes to an end. An end which was entirely planned to be on a high note. Ending with my favorite monster of the six: Frankenstein.

I guess to me, this is the whole "magic" Jon keeps referring to when talking about what makes a movie work. I can't really put a name or point a finger that what makes me like this movie so much, I just do. It just clicks in place, takes me in its atmosphere with the creepy castle, and never lets me go, right until the very end. Boris Karloff gives a great performance as Frankenstein's monster. Yet, in pretty much the same way Gene Wilder does in Young Frankenstein, I think Colin Clive steals the show as the demented Dr Henry Frankenstein. His delivery of the now classic line "It's Alive!" over and over always gives me shivers (don't ask why, I have no idea, it just does). This is a great movie!

« Last Edit: March 16, 2009, 09:49:46 PM by RossRoy »

Najemikon

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #185 on: October 19, 2008, 07:14:31 PM »
I love Frankenstien too. Way ahead of its time, perhaps even now. I doubt they'd have the guts to do the lake scene with the same stark approach. I've heard Guillermo del Toro has a version planned, which should be good, and I trust him to come up with a version for this generation, but the original can't be improved upon. Somehow I expect del Toro won't try and will instead produce a tribute act, like An American Werewolf in London is a homage to the original wolfman.

I still haven't seen Bride of Frankenstein. Have you?

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #186 on: October 19, 2008, 08:20:52 PM »
I still haven't seen Bride of Frankenstein. Have you?

I have seen it, but it's been a while. I remember liking it very much, it is a very worthy sequel.

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #187 on: October 20, 2008, 04:46:27 AM »
Bad Taste
 
Original Title: Bad Taste
Year: 1987
Country: New Zealand
Director: Peter Jackson
Rating: NR
Length: 92 Min.
Video: Anamorphic Widescreen 1.66:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital Surround EX, English: DTS ES (Discrete), English: Dolby Digital Surround
Subtitles:

What they say
When an army of evil aliens invades earth with the intention of selling mankind as intergalactic hamburger meat, the New Zealand government calls in an elite team of psychotic assassins. But are these boys brutal enough to tackle the vilest villains in the universe? Get ready for the ultimate battle of flying guts, splattering brains, exploding sheep and guzzling vomit. This is more than just one of the greatest - and most disgusting - horror comedies ever made. This is 'BAD TASTE'!

You have never seen anything like 'BAD TASTE'! This legendary low-budget debut from producer/director/co-writer/star 'Peter Jackson' is packed with all the outrageous action, senseless violence and sick humor that has made it one of the most radical cult classics of all time. Restored and newly transferred from original vault materials, 'BAD TASTE' is now presented 'completely uncut, uncensored and unrated' in all its gory glory!

My Thoughts
Another example that shows you don't need a multi million dollar budget to make an entertaining film. All you need is imagination, a vision, some time and the will to make it a reality. In this case, over the top gore, mixed in with a well balanced dose of humour and a good basic premise all come together to form a good movie, and a very entertaining one.

Peter Jackson is simply sick ... and I love it!


RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #188 on: October 20, 2008, 06:32:11 AM »
Dead Alive
 
Original Title: Braindead
Year: 1992
Country: New Zealand
Director: Peter Jackson
Rating: NR
Length: 97 Min.
Video: Anamorphic Widescreen 1.85:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital Surround
Subtitles: French, Spanish

What they say
Throw out all your preconceptions about the limits of horror! A new standard has been set with Dead Alive - The Mother of All Horror Films.

On a quiet street, in a small town, pure evil has come to stay. Lionel, an innocent young man, is forced to care for his domineering mother and finds the task a whole lot more demanding after she's bitten by the cursed Sumatran rat monkey. Passing the point of death, Lionel's mother sucks friends and family into her gruesome existence among the living dead and Lionel is sent spiraling into a goulish nightmare.

Now a crazed zombie, she soon infects enough people to make it difficult for Lionel, still the faithful son, to keep the neighbors from suspecting that something is terribly wrong.

Dead Alive is dripping with state-of-the-art special effects that feature mutilations, rock 'n roll dismemberments and household appliances, combining into the most bizarre ending ever filmed. 

My Thoughts
Hahaha! I love that film! What's not to like? It's sick, it's gory, it's all fun! So many memorable scenes: the park scene, the priest kick ass, both meal scenes, obviously the final zombie mow down, even the bizarre freudian ending!

There's even one liners: "Party's Over!", "I kick ass for the Lord!", etc.

And if all that is not enough to keep you coming back, there's also the always beautiful Paquita!



So, if you like your comedy horror gory, bloody and zombie filled, this is a must see!


Offline Achim

  • Mega Heavy Poster
  • *******
  • Posts: 7171
  • Country: 00
    • View Profile
    • ya_shin's site
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #189 on: October 20, 2008, 07:08:56 AM »
I had the chance to watch Braindead (a.k.a. Dead Alive) in a cinema! Together with hundreds of horror loving freaks. What a fun we had with this third film by Peter Jackson; which I enjoy all three, by the way. Gore, romance and comedy had never been mixed better before and since.

Bad Taste is great fun too, but shows its low budget a lot more. Gore is less but when it's there it's total gross out (that guy eating with a spoon in the opening sequence :laugh:)

It's still surprising to me how Jackson went on to make stuff like The Frighteners and then the LOTR Trilogy... Not that those are bad films, just not what you'd expect after the first three. Unfortunately he's probably to spoiled now to return to those roots and make another gore classic. :shrug:

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #190 on: October 20, 2008, 03:45:55 PM »
Unfortunately he's probably to spoiled now to return to those roots and make another gore classic. :shrug:

I'm not sure I want to imagine Bad Taste and Braindead made with a budget to look real.. I don't think they'd be as good.


Gore is less but when it's there it's total gross out (that guy eating with a spoon in the opening sequence :laugh:)

Personally, it's the green stuff Robert regurgitate that they then all eat, including one of the human, who actually ends up liking the stuff!

Offline Achim

  • Mega Heavy Poster
  • *******
  • Posts: 7171
  • Country: 00
    • View Profile
    • ya_shin's site
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #191 on: October 20, 2008, 03:51:59 PM »
I'm not sure I want to imagine Bad Taste and Braindead made with a budget to look real.. I don't think they'd be as good.
Well, of course. Kind of what I meant. Even if he were to use a small budget just for the heck of it, not sure it would still work.


Personally, it's the green stuff Robert regurgitate that they then all eat, including one of the human, who actually ends up liking the stuff!
I rewatched both again tonight mainly inspired by your reviews here. I agree on Bad Taste and in Dead Alive it's the scene where Uncle Wes pulls out the priest's teeth which makes me cringe every time.


They are both great films, just having seen them again. While Bad Taste won't probably improve too much and is almost supported by all the grain and the not-so-perfect transfer I really wish I could own Braindead (I mention this title as Dead Alive is actually cut by approx. 7 minutes) on Blu-ray.

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #192 on: October 28, 2008, 05:17:04 AM »
The Frighteners
 
Original Title: The Frighteners
Year: 1996
Country: New Zealand
Director: Peter Jackson (1961)
Rating: R
Length: 123 Min.
Video: Anamorphic Widescreen 2.35:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital 5.1, Commentary: Dolby Digital Surround
Subtitles: English, French, Spanish

What they say
Michael J. Fox stars as Frank Bannister, a small-town "ghostbuster" in league with the very spirits he's supposed to be exorcising. The scam works well until a powerful spirit goes on a muderous rampage, forcing Frank to find a way to stop the diabolical ghoul in this special-effects-packed supernatural chiller that's so fiendishly entertaining, it's frightening!

My Thoughts
This movie is a complete blast! I loved every minute of it! From beginning to end! Everybody is just great in it, but I particularly liked Jeffrey Combs as the FBI agent. But it's no surprise. I mean, can this guy be bad in anything? Everything I've seen him in, he's great! And here is no exception!

Oh and, I think I'm in love : Trini Alvarado

 :drooling: :drooling: :drooling:

Another winner for Peter Jackson.  :thumbup:

To think that this movie led directly to Lord of the Rings. Peter Jackson says so in the introduction. Lord of the Rings started being conceived during post-production of this movie. He needed a project that would make use of all the computers he bought.

Rating:

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #193 on: November 01, 2008, 11:26:27 PM »
Well, 16 movies watched for the October marathon. A little short of my goal of 31, although I knew I'd never get there. Still, I'm glad to have made it to 16. After all, Chicken Chaser* is taking a lot of my time too!




* Fable II ;)

RossRoy

  • Guest
Re: My Random Viewings
« Reply #194 on: November 01, 2008, 11:40:21 PM »
Ocean's 11
 
Original Title: Ocean's 11
Year: 1960
Country: United States
Director: Lewis Milestone
Rating: NR
Length: 127 Min.
Video: Anamorphic Widescreen 2.35:1
Audio: English: Dolby Digital Mono, French: Dolby Digital Mono, Commentary: Dolby Digital Stereo
Subtitles: English, French, Spanish

What they say
New Year's Eve in Las Vegas. Roulette wheels spin, cards snap, slots chime, champagne fizzes, the shows go on…and the lights go out. It's the perfect time to steal a kiss or a $25 chip. But for Danny Ocean (Frank Sinatra) and his 10 partners in crime, it's the perfect moment to steal millions.

Sinatra and off-screen pals Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr., Peter Lawford, Joey Bishop and more play army buddies who devise a scheme to knock out power to the Vegas strip, electronically rig five big casino vaults and raid them all at the same instant. Packed with location-lensed glamour, sweaty suspense, swinging comedy and a stunning twist ending.

My Thoughts
I don't know what to think. I've seen the remake a while ago, and I remember enjoying it a lot, thinking it was entertaining and fun. So I thought the original would be pretty much the same. And in a sense, it is. You've got a bunch of stars having fun making a light hearted movie. Thing is, to me, the stars of the remake are much more Stars, than the Rat Pack. Oh sure, I know the members of the rat pack, but mostly for their music. Not much for their film work. And I think this might've dragged down my enjoyment of it a little. Ok, a lot.

The film, by itself, without the star power, is not really all that interesting to me. I mean, the movie starts with the heist already all planned out, so they're right smack in the middle of preparations, with gathering the gang together. The preparation of the heist itself is not that entertaining, nor suspenseful. The heist itself is pretty bland. I guess the high point is the ending, with that twist at the end. It's like the whole movie never found a rhythm, which is surprising, seeing as it is so star studded with famous singers of the swing era. ;)

Rating: