|cognitivedissonance - 2016-07-08 |
Oh hey, a remake of Hell House.
With some 13 Ghosts sprinkled in for good measure.
|Bort - 2016-07-08 |
If an unusual object or being
Happens to be near where you live
What is the agency you are best served by contacting?
supernatural apparitions do not provoke fear in me
|Monkey Napoleon - 2016-07-08 |
I saw this posted to a torrent tracker the other day, along with their other newest marketing co-opting movie "Sinister Squad".
Sinister Squad looks even more hilarious as instead of a team of comic book type heroes/villians, it's all public domain storybook characters like Alice, Big Bad Wolf, etc.
You know what? Fuck it. I'll download both of them and then we'll vote on which one we screen monday.
*gets out popsicle sticks, pictures of Seth Rogan and James Franco, wood glue, scissors, and the video camera*
I am prepared to live comment.
Asylum movies to me have always been one of those things where their mere existence is more entertaining than the thing itself.
They're painfully boring to sit down and watch.
John Holmes Motherfucker
Hey, did you guys ever get together for UNFRIENDED? I was surprised how much I liked it. It was a generic story, but the browser frame brought structure and context to the usual found footage nonsense. Found footage usually involves me going "What the fuck am I looking at" for five minutes, and then watching something else. With the desktop to feed me information, I was never lost. Also: DIALOGUE, BITCHES! People are talking and you can see them talking is a big advantage. Don't know how many Desktop movies the market will support, though.
The sensation I got from Unfriended was just the right level of suspense. I'm 58, and I'm already plenty scared of death. These days I like my horror movies to be exhilarating, not harrowing.
It made me stop keeping a blender next to my computer.
|The Mothership - 2016-07-09 |
I tracked you down just to explain the diamond filament joke thusly:
Farnsworth: Bender, be careful. That's the ships diamond filament tether. It's unbreakable.
Bender: Then why do I have to be careful?
Farnsworth: It belonged to my grandmother.
|Hooker - 2016-07-09 |
Part of the brilliance of Ghostbusters is that, previous to it, if you said a movie is about ghosts, you would have thought it would be this kind of horror schlock. Ghostbusters didn't rely on any of those expectations. It made an entirely new type of "ghost" movie. Afterwards, people didn't make that assumption.
Part of the lack of brilliance here is that it did what people thirty-three years ago assumed it would do.
Ghostbusters: the real horror is government regulation and the FDA.
I love Ghostbusters, but Reitman himself openly admitted (and was proud of) the fact that the whole thing was essentially a paean to Libertarianism draped over a Bowery Boys reboot.
A government bureaucrat is a plot point and secondary antagonist. It's not exactly fucking Atlas Shrugged.
The Ghost and Mr Chicken was horror shlock?
Potrod: No, there's a more Libertarianism to it than that.
Independent self-starters are able to start a cutting-edge business using nothing more than their own get-up-and-go and personal savings. What's more, this private industry turns out to be indispensable to society, which is only to be expected given Libertarian philosophy: ALL businesses are essential, otherwise society wouldn't bother to support them. And of course, the private sphere will spontaneously generate whatever businesses are necessary, because that's how you make money.
It syncs up surprisingly well when you think about it. The fact that everything goes belly-up when the government sticks its nose in is just the icing on the cake.
Also Ray's line: "Have you ever worked in the private sector? They expect RESULTS!"
At least, that was one of the pieces of evidence for Ghostbusters showing up on a "50 Conservative Movies" list some time ago.
And again, Reitman has explicitly pointed out everything mentioned above in interviews, it wasn't an accident.
Or even unusual, lots of classic 80s movies are very Libertarian. Which makes sense, since so many of the directors who made their names in that decade came out of the 60s and 70s counterculture, and the whole hippie thing had plenty of Libertarian undercurrents, too.
I was about to make a big post getting into this, and as I was tossing it around my head, I realised at some point I would have to type something to the effect of, "Now, ghostbusting is probably a public good and should be guaranteed by the government, so maybe this isn't the best example." Immediately after that realisation, I decided I shouldn't make the post. But if I were still in my 20s, I would have.
John Holmes Motherfucker
The brilliance of Ghostbusters is that it's overrated.
That EPA guy! "I'd like to inspect the nuclear powered storage facility that you're keeping in the basement of a 100 year old building in one of the most densely populated areas in the world. " Fuck him, am I right?
And then he just unplugs it. Would a real EPA inspector just shut down something called "storage facility"? Why does he do it? Because it's what the script requires.
Characters are always doing shit that makes no sense to human beings, but makes sense to walking movie cliches. After being booted from the University, why is Peter Venkman convinced that the franchise rights alone to ghostbusting will make them rich beyond their wildest dreams? After years of research, they've seen exactly one ghost, which they ran away from, and Spengler says he might be able to make a capture device. Is that really sufficient to mortgage Ray's house?
A real EPA inspector would have only been there to remind them their bribe hadn't come through.
We're talking the agency that knowingly poisoned Flint Michigan. What would have happened is the EPA would have said nothing, and then when all the ghosts escaped, there would have been a class action suit for 0 million that goes nowhere.
John Holmes Motherfucker
>>Part of the brilliance of Ghostbusters is that, previous to it, if you said a movie is about ghosts, you would have thought it would be this kind of horror schlock. Ghostbusters didn't rely on any of those expectations. It made an entirely new type of "ghost" movie. Afterwards, people didn't make that assumption.
I'm not sure that you were saying it was the first, but, it wasn't the first. Previous ghost comedies featured the ghosts as characters. See Cary Grant in Topper (1937), which was adapted into a TV series in the 50s. See also Rex Harisson in Blithe Spirit (1945), and the 1960s TV series "The Ghost and Mrs. Muir", which, now that I think of it, may also have been a movie starring Rex Harrison.
Still Ghostbusters did combine occult themes and science fiction themes in a way that, as far as I know, was original.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|