2

Author Topic: What was the last movie you watched?  (Read 1512524 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Jesse412

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
  • Liked: 68
  • Old Curmudgeon
    • My deviantART Gallery
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17550 on: October 22, 2017, 09:49:33 AM »
John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017)



I liked this better than the original and am glad to see there will be another sequel.
"It is wrong to assume that art needs the spectator in order to be. The film runs on without any eyes. The spectator cannot exist without it. It ensures his existence." -- James Douglas Morrison


Offline Johnny Unusual

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 25854
  • Liked: 4928
  • Mr. Robot
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17551 on: October 22, 2017, 10:43:32 AM »
Rewatched The Tenant.  A weird, often darkly humourous Kafka-style horror thriller.  Polanski directs and stars as a guy who gets an apartment, only to accidentally finding himself bugging his neighbors.  But soon, the tenant starts to suspect that not only is everyone in the building against him, but they are trying to turn him into the last tenant, a young woman who committed suicide.  Is it all in his head.  The movie sort of suggests it (the audience is shown both the reality and what the main character sees), but it is also unclear at times just what, if anything, is happening, such as the tooth in the wall and people standing in the bathroom for hours at a time.  The ending is still pretty chilling, though the movie is also darkly humourous, since a lot of what happens to the main character is done by himself (with some conclusion jumping included).

Very good, strange thriller.  And also has the unfortunate tagline "Nobody does it to you like Polanksi."  So much ew.


Offline Darth Geek

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 27698
  • Liked: 5576
  • I am boring and destined to die alone!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17552 on: October 22, 2017, 05:03:47 PM »
Nightworld (2017) - That was disappointing. It's a very slow movie, but they were building up tension really well. The acting was good, cinematography was nice and stylish. Robert Englund was cool as the old blind caretaker. But in the end it was just a couple of... what are essentially just zombies. And they don't even really do anything. It's implied that there are other older creatures that could be coming through the gate. The artwork implies there could be Cthulhu style Lovecraftian monsters. But there's nothing like that in the movie.
I wouldn't recommend it.



Offline Darth Geek

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 27698
  • Liked: 5576
  • I am boring and destined to die alone!
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17553 on: October 22, 2017, 06:43:33 PM »
Dave Made A Maze
This movie was AMAZING! One of the most creative and unique things I have ever seen. It defies description. It is funny and charming throughout.
I highly recommend everyone see this.
EDIT: Ok, so apparently the Bill Watterson that directed this is NOT the cartoonist of Calvin & Hobbes.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2017, 05:54:12 AM by Darth Geek »



Offline stethacantus

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 687
  • Liked: 59
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17554 on: October 22, 2017, 10:56:08 PM »
Bridge of Spies ( 2015 )
This was another one of the historic dramas directed by Spielberg. It was also the first and so far only time Spielberg directed a script written by the Coen Brothers. And it was the 8th film directed by Steven Spielberg to get a nomination for an academy award for best picture, the others being E.T. The Extra-Terestrial, The Color Purple, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Munich, War Horse and Lincoln. Taking place during the early years of the Cold War, the CIA has captured soviet spy Rudolph Abel and want him tried for espionage. Insurance attorney James Donovan ( Tom Hanks ) is asked by the governmen to defend Abel so they can show the world that the United States has a reasonable justice system. However, the trial is anything but reasonable as Abel is railroaded by the judge. Donovan is able to convince the judge to give Abel 30 years instead of the death penalty in case they some day need to exchange Abel for an American prisoner. Because of his defense of the spy, Donovan ends up becoming a pariah in his community, and even at the law firm that had asked him to defend Abel in the first place.  In 1960 a U2 spy plane is shot down over the Soviet Union, and pilot Gary Powers, who was suppose to destroy the plane and kill himself should it be shot down, ends up captured. ( not shown in the film; America denied the existence of the spy planes until the Soviet Union not only produced Powers, but also the wreckage of the U2 which was suppose to have been blown to bits by Powers. For decades the United States would continue to deny they sent Powers or the U2 to take surveillance pictures of the U.S.S.R. ) The KGB reches out to the CIA for an exchange between Powers and Abel, mostly out of mutual fear that either agent will crack and give away their country's secrets. But neither country can publicly admit that their own men are spies. The CIA asks Donovan to go to Berlin to negotiate for the exchange, as he is not connected to the American government. To make matters more complicated, East Berlin has just arrested an American student named Frederic Pryor under suspicion of espionage and demand that the U.S. exchange Abel for Pryor instead. Of course, Donovan wants to try to get both men in the exchange.

Once again Spielberg directs an outstanding ( if not 100% accurate ) historical drama. But it does have it's flaws. The scene where the CIA are trailing Abel has him leaving the Wall Street subway station. But the subway car Abel exits first went into service in the 90s. The subway cars the MTA used in the 1950s were the first metal cars that first went into service in the 1940s. Prior to that the MTA used wooden cars, mostly because the elevated lines most subway cars ran on were only built to support the weight of wooden cars. By the 1940s elevated lines were either decomissioned and torn down, or were gradually rebuilt with stronger beams that could support the weight of iron cars. The phase out of the wooden cars was due to them splintering when in wrecks or derailments, causing most of the casualties in those accidents. The iron cars that replaced them were painted black to keep them from rusting, and were so well built that they stayed in commission until the 1980s. The stainless steel cars used in Bridge of Spies only went into commission in the 1990s because they were suppose to be resistant to graffiti and easier to was spraypaint off of. Strangely enough, the proper era subway car is used in the final scene where Donovan is traveling over the elevated F line in Brooklyn. This may be a detail only someone living in New York City would notice. But another detail is more evident. The scene where Donovan walks up the front steps of the Supreme Court is actually filmed on the steps of New York's 60 Center Street in front of the State Supreme Court. Not only does this courthouse look nothing like the United States Supreme Court, which is shown on the news a lot, but is used on almost every episode of all the Law and Order shows, so is very recognizable as a New York location. Furthermore, as he walks up the courthouse steps, you can spot to the side of Hanks one of the yellow mechanical barrier gates used to prevent terrorists from driving down Pearl Street. Such devices did not exist anywhere until after 9-11.  Seeing stuff like that pop up in a period movie took me right out of that period.


Delta Force ( 1986 )
When I started collecting martial arts films, Dragon Dynasty, Tokyo Shock, BCI and Image were all releasing the classic Shaw Brothers films. Media Blasters got ahold of a bunch of other random old school martial arts films, some of which were classics from independent studios, all which were mastered from the actual widescreen release prints. Then Shout Factory! released a bunch of Golden Harvest films mastered from the film prints. The Tai Seng films from the mid 80s and 90s were not yet OOP. For a while there I was able to fill my film library with old school classics as well as the new wave classics. We are now in a period of a dry spell. Right now the only company releasing any martial arts films is Well Go, but currently only new releases from the past few years. So while I waited for more old school Asian martial arts films to be released, I began filling my library with the, ehhh, American martial arts films. I have been gradually adding the films of the Hollywood martial arts stars, the Seagals, the Van Dammes, the Kellys and this week a Norris. A lot of these guys you can no longer buy their films individually. If you want them on DVD or Blu-Ray, then the only way is to buy them as part of a set of movies. On the one hand, this saves a lot of money. Normally the cheapest movie is around $5, but a set has two to five of the same films for around $7. The Chuck Norris Blu-Ray set I got has three films. But the bad news is that to completely collect these guys, I may end up having to get a lot of sets with films I already own. That already happened with the Sonny Chiba sets, and with the $20 BCI releases. And these sets rarely come with extras. Not that any of these films had the budget to actually delete scenes, film alternative endings when the test audience did not like it, or even cut and reshoot when an actor flubbed a line or missed a cue. So I doubt any of these movies have any missing footage that would end up as an extra on any future disc. 

So, anyway, Chuck Norris. Perhaps one of the most ridiculous of the American martial arts stars, as from almost the beginning of his career he was not interested in making martial arts films, but wanted to be a legitimate actor. Lets just forget that his acting at it's best was just barely good. But he kept making action movies where his character used a gun rather than martial arts. As if somehow action films with guns were more Academy Award worthy than action films with fighting. What Norris, and the entire Hollywood industry, failed to understand was that if an audience paid to see a martial arts movie, they they expected to see martial arts action. Asian films got that. You often got wall to wall fights in a Hong Kong martial arts film. American producers thought audiences would be satisfied with less than four minutes combined of fight scenes. The average Hollywood martial arts film had a bit of fighting in he beginning, usually just a quick Karate match, a bit of fighting in the middle of the film when the hero gets surrounded by bad guys, and the bulk of the fighting at the end of the film where the hero has the big fight with the film's villain. The rest of the movie, your standard car chases, shootouts, shoehorned in intercourse scene between the hero and the lead actress, and a hell of a lot of talking. Yet somehow a lot of these films were modest hits. Mostly via fans who were too racially bias to see a martial arts film made with an Asian cast, and had no idea what they were missing. Delta Force, the first movie in the set,  can not be called a martial arts film. It does have a brief scene at the end where Chuck has sort of a martial arts fight. Well, actually, more of a beat down of the film's main villain with Chuck using a few roundhouse kicks. I am sure the only reason the scene was even filmed that way rather than Chuck simply shooting the motherf&*ker was so that they would have some martial arts for the trailer.

Delta Force was made around the time Chuck's film career was at it's peak, and for Cannon, had an unusually impressive all star cast of notable Hollywood actors. That is, until you realize most of them have very little screen time, and all probably just showed up for a days worth of shooting. The film opens in 1980 during the failed hostage rescue in Iran. Yep, this is a Reagan era film, and Chuck was  pro Reagan. But since Golan Globus was a very cheap producer, we do not actually see the failed raid, but instead just a model of a helicopter exploding, then Norris and the rest of the Delta Force team running away from an actual burning helicopter. Some of the movie was filmed at an Iraeli airforce graveyard where decomissioned aircraft were left to rot, and Golan got permission to set fire to an abandoned helicopter while the cast ran into the back of another decomissioned aircraft. Once the Delta team is on their way back home, Chuck begins to complain that they knew the mission would be a failure because the commander in chief ( which would be Carter ) insisted on it being a night mission. Fed up with the incompetence of the white house, Chuck announces that he is resigning. BTW, later in the film the Delta team insist on their raids taking place at nightime. And the attempt to save the Iranian hostages did not fail because it took place at night time, which would make more sense, but because the team sent on the mission was not told they were heading into a sandstorm which was the actual cause of the helicopter crash, which in turn alerted the Iranians that they were in the area. The mission did not fail because of incompetence from command, nor because the plan was incompetent. But that is the version of the events Republicans loved to spin.

The movie cuts to six years later. So basically, the first five minutes of the film had nothing to do with the rest of the movie. A group of passengers are boarding an airliner, among them are George Kennedy, Joey Bishop, Shelley Winters, Martin Balsam, Lainie Kazan, Kim Delaney and Bo Svenson as the pilot. For a while you think there has been some sort of mistake and you are watching a early reel from a 70s disaster film. That is until the terrorists lead by actor Robert Forster hijack the jet. ( which is the cheapest jet Golan could get for the film, with only one aisle and about four seats wide. The airline is the fictitious ATW, suggesting that TWA or no other airline wanted anything to do with this film. ) Commander Robert Vaughn decides to call in Delta Force to rescue the passengers. The mission is delayed because Colonel Lee Marvin wants to wait because he is sure that Chuck will return from retirement to join the team. Cut to Chuck on his ranch, who sees the news coverage of the hijacking, and immediately drives his jeep to the hanger where Delta Force are leaving from. Allow an ex-major now civilian  to join the mission? No problem. Chuck is immediately given his old job back.

Well, forget about this movie being a 70s era disaster film, or even some sort of Airport sequel with Kennedy in the cast. The terrorist decide to separate the passengers. Almost all of the Hollywood actors are taken to a different location than the rest of the hostages. After only a couple of brief phone calls to Marvin, Robert Vaughn is out of the film. And because the terrorists decide to release all the women and children in trade of fuel, all the actresses make an early exit. Not much of he film takes place in the cockpit, so even Bo Svenson's scenes are limited. All of the scenes involving the named actors could have easily been shot in an entire afternoon. A days work for a quick paycheck and a free trip to Israel, which is why they did this film. ( Pretty much the same reason Shelley Winters and a lot of other well known actors did the Italian Jaws rip-off Tentacles. A day's work and free trip to Italy. ) Only the actors in the Delta Force, including Norris and Marvin, are in the entire film. That and all the uncredited actors who play the other hostages who are on screen most of the time.

The rest of the movie is the Delta team attacking various terrorist strongholds and rescuing hostages. As I said, most of the movie is Chuck machine gunning enemies or even blowing them up with his rocket launching motorcycle. ( Since when are American soldiers issued rocket launching motorcycles? And since when do they abandon their equipment and vehicles after a mission for the enemy to find? ) For me the action scenes are just barely entertaining. Maybe that is because I was too use to the well staged action scenes from Hong Kong movies, the Indiana Jones and James Bond movies, the action films made in the silent era, and all the Hollywood action films made since the late 80s. You do get a lot of bullets, explosions and even car chases in Delta Force. But there is something lackluster about them.  Delta Force is both a cheap film and something more expensive than you would expect from Cannon Films. It has the appearance of a major studio film, which is betrayed by the sets, including a cramped hijacked airliner, and a hanger that doubles for both the hanger in America and all the hangers in the Mideast. ( Yep, it is too obvious that the hangers the Delta Force boards and departs their plane in are the same hanger, even though they are suppose to be in different countries. ) One of the most entertaining moments in the film came during the closing credits. A credit mentioning that Delta Force had a soundtrack album. What?! Okay, lets forget the fact that the Delta Force theme had been used by ABC Sports as the music bed for the Indianapolis 500 for many years, it is a short repetitive theme which does not change for the entirety of the film. This is not one of those films where the score gives every character his own theme. It is the same music every time an action scene happens or the credits roll. The same thirty second them repeated over and over again in a loop. That has to be one boring soundtrack album. Well, at least there was one thing in this movie that made me laugh.


Star Kid ( 1998 )
Another of the films on Wikipedia's list of American superhero films, this time a kids film. And it is an American film, despite a cast and crew who all have foreign sounding names. With exception to one actor in a minor role, I did not recognize anyone here. Turns out the lead was also one of the children in the first Jurassic Park films. Once again, the connection to superheroes is very thin. I knew the plot was about a boy finding a cyber suit from outer space that when worn gives him powers, and had hoped it would be something like Earthworm Jim which began with the same premise. But the cyber suit is basically a talking robot that the kid has to climb into. And although the film establishes the kid being a comic book geek, he never actually thinks of using the suit to become a superhero. The only time he even saves someone is when the suit ( which was designed to be a weapon ) opens fire at an amusement park, and the kid has to prevent the car of a ferris wheel he had just shot from crashing into the ground and killing the girls inside. Despite being an independent film from a direct to video company, the production value is impressive. Although it is obvious they deliberately limited things to keep the budget low. The movie opens on a planet of Ewok sized aliens in a battle with a race of invading monsters from another planet. Only one small section of that planet is shown, meaning they only built one small set. And from what I can tell, only one monster costume was made. When the monster invades Earth in the second half of the film, only one shows up. But there are a lot of impressive visual effects associated with the monster. It can pull parts of it's body off and have them transform into weapons, or even flying drones used to locate it's enemies.

On the verge of being beaten by the monsters, the dwarf sized aliens build the cyber suit as their ultimate weapon, but launch it into space when the monsters threaten to steal it. Cut to Earth where we meet the kid. In the very first scene he is being beaten up by the school bully. The very next scene establishes that he is in love with the prettiest girl in the school, but is too nervous to talk to her. Basically standard formula kids film stuff. While feeling sorry for himself in his bedroom at night, he notices light coming from outside, and looking out the window, sees a streak from the sky land in the local scrap metal yard. Of course, he is the only person in town to have seen this, so is the only one to go out and investigate. He finds the space ship which immediately opens up like a flower, revealing a small robot inside. The robot begins talking, telling the kid his name is Cy, and inviting the kid to climb inside of him, which the kid does. Now wearing a cyber suit that gives him superman like powers, the kid decides to go to the home of the school bully and torment him, claiming he is a brain eating alien from another planet. Once he is done terrorizing the bully, it is off to the amusement park to spy on the girl he has a crush on. But the cyber suit mistakes someone in a mascot costume as an enemy and begins shooting up the park before the kid can stop him, leading to the rescue of the girl. Then it is back to the Kids house where he tries to sneak back in and get a snack from the refrigerator, only to cause mass distruction to his home. At this point a monster arrives on Earth seeking to find the cyber suit, which eventually leads to a showdown. This is not a great film, but at least is nowhere as bad as many of the other kids films I have seen. It is just basically acceptable as entertainment. And the effects, while not impressive, are not cheap or fake looking. So basically, effects wise, the movie is just acceptable. The acting is very decent. So basically, this is a good but ultimately forgetable film. But I did have one big problem with it. There are a lot of scenes where the kid causes the cyber suit to do a lot of damage. When the bully is attacked he is sitting in a car in his father's auto shop. It is not the bully's car, so basically the cyber suit has vandalized someone else's property. Then there is the damage the suit does to the house which his father will need to pay for. Not to mention the damage done to his teacher's home, and to an amusement park. All of this is presented as being funny. But as this film was aimed at children, it is irresponsible to show the destruction of property as humorous, especially as the kid gets away with all of it. It comes off as mean spirited. Not that I am against films with destruction of property. I love it when it happens in a Laurel & Hardy film. It just seems wrong in a kids film.

That's it for filling out my collection with marginal superhero films for a while. Next week I begin with the first of two Zorro films which I almost included in my Spielberg marathon. Then after that, hopefully the price will come down on some of the recent releases of major comic book adaptions, otherwise I still got that Air Buddies superhero film and Sharkboy & Lavagirl and a couple of others I have been avoiding.


Offline Jesse412

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
  • Liked: 68
  • Old Curmudgeon
    • My deviantART Gallery
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17555 on: October 23, 2017, 01:04:57 AM »
Dracula: Prince of Darkness (1966)



The third film in the Terence Fisher Dracula trilogy and Christopher Lee's second appearance in the role is better than it has a right to be considering the title character has no dialogue.  It's largely carried by the supporting cast particularly Andrew Keir who plays Father Sandor and scream queen Barbara Shelley who is in quite a few entertaining horror movies from this era.  There's an effective use of mystery and suspense that builds to a sense of dread until the Kent family are confronted by their enigmatic undead host.  One of the best scenes in any Dracula movie ever is one of the character's blood being drained over Dracula's remains, his body gradually reforms, then mist fills the space and his hand reaches up making for a really cool visual.  The ending is quite good and I definitely rank this as one of the better Hammer Dracula sequels.
"It is wrong to assume that art needs the spectator in order to be. The film runs on without any eyes. The spectator cannot exist without it. It ensures his existence." -- James Douglas Morrison


Offline Jesse412

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
  • Liked: 68
  • Old Curmudgeon
    • My deviantART Gallery
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17556 on: October 23, 2017, 01:12:03 AM »
Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968)



Picking up a year after the events of the previous movie a priest accidentally resurrects Dracula and becomes his unwilling servant.  The supporting cast isn't as strong as in the previous sequel but there are still some decent performances plus the story is interesting and well paced.  I thought making the protagonist an atheist was kind of clever and I'm not sure if it  had been done in something like this before.  Another exciting ending in this film series with lots of gory imagery.
"It is wrong to assume that art needs the spectator in order to be. The film runs on without any eyes. The spectator cannot exist without it. It ensures his existence." -- James Douglas Morrison


Offline Jesse412

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
  • Liked: 68
  • Old Curmudgeon
    • My deviantART Gallery
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17557 on: October 23, 2017, 01:20:53 AM »
Eyes Without a Face (1960)



I've been meaning to see this for awhile and was glad to watch it late night on TCM Imports.  It's actually incredibly well made for the horror genre of that era.  The mask the main character wears to hide her disfigurement is absolutely haunting and you can see its influence on the look of Michael Myers in Halloween.  When she removes her mask to reveal her grotesque facial features it's definitely shocking.  There's also a scene where they actually show a doctor surgically removing a woman's face.  Not only is it one of the earlier depictions of gore on film but it's possibly the most graphic and disturbing use of special effects makeup at the time.  It genuinely made me cringe seeing how realistic it was.  I highly recommend this one!
"It is wrong to assume that art needs the spectator in order to be. The film runs on without any eyes. The spectator cannot exist without it. It ensures his existence." -- James Douglas Morrison


Offline Pastor of Muppets

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1023
  • Liked: 347
  • Now available in minty fresh flavor.
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17558 on: October 23, 2017, 03:41:36 AM »
I saw Happy Death Day on Saturday.  I'm no film cricket, so I can't give a detailed review, but I liked it.  She seemed a little casual about being murdered over and over.  And it didn't really make sense how the murderer was able to follow her anywhere.  The twist surprised me, although it really shouldn't have.  The murderer was the person I suspected from the beginning, but Tree didn't suspect at all.  Overall, I liked that it had a happy ending.  Horror movies usually don't.  They try to be "edgy" and let the bad guy win.
I'm not particularly religious, and I don't really like Muppets, but I do love word play.


Offline Johnny Unusual

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 25854
  • Liked: 4928
  • Mr. Robot
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17559 on: October 23, 2017, 08:01:23 AM »
Disturbia

I remembering hearing from a source that its a movie that's "better than you would think".  It's actually as bad as I worried it would be.  The idea of remaking Rear Window as a teen thriller isn't necessarily bad, but the main villain is disappointingly dull and the teens are pretty much all snoozes.  It's not particularly clever and you can sort of tell that in editing away some of the film's flab, they also lost a few key character bits, so now characters seem to be jumping to conclusions/making decisions that would require more context.  I think if the villain was more charming, then I would have been more engaged as the bad guy runs rings around the hero.  Frankly, you are better off watching Fright Night, which is the same, but with vampires and no Shia LeBeouf.


Offline Kete

  • Dragon Ryder
  • ***
  • Posts: 6552
  • Liked: 3535
  • All joking a salad.
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17560 on: October 23, 2017, 08:44:29 AM »
Dracula Has Risen from the Grave (1968)



Picking up a year after the events of the previous movie a priest accidentally resurrects Dracula and becomes his unwilling servant.  The supporting cast isn't as strong as in the previous sequel but there are still some decent performances plus the story is interesting and well paced.  I thought making the protagonist an atheist was kind of clever and I'm not sure if it  had been done in something like this before.  Another exciting ending in this film series with lots of gory imagery.

This poster seems very much before its time.


Offline Jesse412

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
  • Liked: 68
  • Old Curmudgeon
    • My deviantART Gallery
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17561 on: October 24, 2017, 01:58:59 AM »
The Curse of the Werewolf (1961)



Arguably the best werewolf movie of the '60s and I'm curious as to why Hammer Films never made another werewolf movie.  It's not as scary as some of the other Terence Fisher horror movies but it's still an interesting and tragic story.  Oliver Reed gives a great performance and may be the most endearing movie monster from this era.  The transformation scene is well done, the werewolf design is more menacing than its Universal predecessor and the ending is pretty exciting.
"It is wrong to assume that art needs the spectator in order to be. The film runs on without any eyes. The spectator cannot exist without it. It ensures his existence." -- James Douglas Morrison


Offline ManUnderMask

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1777
  • Liked: 151
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17562 on: October 24, 2017, 06:02:17 PM »
Star Kid ( 1998 )

I saw this in theaters. My God, I'm old.
I survived the San Diego Comic Con 2010 Hall H stabbing.


Offline Jesse412

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 456
  • Liked: 68
  • Old Curmudgeon
    • My deviantART Gallery
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17563 on: October 25, 2017, 01:04:49 AM »
Motel Hell (1980)



Rory Calhoun is pretty good in this satire of the genre that's both weird and humorous.  The premise itself is ridiculous but no less disturbing as a farmer kidnaps travelers, cuts out their voice boxes and buries them up to their necks, in order to harvest their body parts for delicious smoked sausages.  "It takes all kinds of critters to make Farmer Vincent's fritters!"  The ending is crazy gruesome mayhem as the zombie like victims get loose and the farmer wearing a dead pig mask duels one of the protagonists with a chainsaw in the slaughterhouse (years before the sequel to Texas Chainsaw Massacre would do something very similar).  I would not only recommend this for fans of splatter films but also for people who dislike the slasher genre because it's actually well done and despite the gore it's fun.
"It is wrong to assume that art needs the spectator in order to be. The film runs on without any eyes. The spectator cannot exist without it. It ensures his existence." -- James Douglas Morrison


Offline Johnny Unusual

  • The Efron
  • ****
  • Posts: 25854
  • Liked: 4928
  • Mr. Robot
Re: What was the last movie you watched?
« Reply #17564 on: October 25, 2017, 09:26:09 AM »

Rory Calhoun is pretty good in this satire of the genre that's both weird and humorous. 

How was his standing and walking?