General Movies Thread

[Deathhappens]

Plus that was basically a comedy, so different rules apply.

[Escavalien]

That and in the first movie, Professor Knowby in the tapes explains the main thing that he noticed to work on possessed subjects was dismemberment. That's pretty much where the gimmick comes from.

[LegalLoliLover]

Ironically, in Evil Dead, that only works when the plot needs it to. We have some Deadites who stop moving as soon as they are beheaded, while others are straight up disembodied hands.

[Skull]

Had the day off and with nothing else to do, I put on Sam Raimi's "Drag Me to Hell" to see what the man's fateful return to the horror genre was like.

...How could you do this to me Sam Raimi? That was not only a bad horror film, I'd go as far as to say it was one of the worst films I've seen in general for a long time.

[Skull]

Needed to wash down the bad taste with a better movie so I stuck on "Wolf Guy: Enraged Lycanthrope", featuring the legendary Sonny Chiba and a host of familiar Toei actors from the 70's. It is very loosely based on the manga by Kazumasa Hirai - likely because Toho had already adapted it into a film a couple of years prior and so Toei opted to change the setting completely whilst keeping familiar elements. Thus instead of high school, Inugami is now an investigate journalist who gets involved with a young singer who is suspected of murdering a gangster who raped her, a blood transfusion between Inugami and another man goes horribly wrong, plus a shady government organisation is keeping tabs on Inugami.

What surprised me the most is that I wouldn't really call this a "horror" film. The first half is much more of a crime thriller with only the initial ambiguity of whether Miki's revenge killings are really supernatural or not and Inugami solves all his problems with his karate chops courtesy of Sonny Chiba. Presumably because of the budget but Inugami does not actually turn into a werewolf either, he certainly gets powers based on the lunar cycle but the more common western tropes of a werewolf are very much absent and given the (implied) Matagi hunters who killed Inugami's tribe and the way the tribe are presented as spiritual mountain folk it instead has more of a Japanese mysticism vibe.

My criticisms would be that trying to cram all three plot-lines into just 90 minutes means that the final act does get a little bit crowded and tying up the loose ends happens a bit quicker for each one then I would have liked - this is most evident with Inugami's relationships with the other characters where only his partner Arai got the most emotion out of me since they had both the required chemistry and screentime, whereas Inugami's tragic romance with the femme fatale Katie didn't do anything as they only shared a handful of scenes together and even that only tended to be sex or furthering the plot. Another criticism would be the special effects used to translate Inugami's powers, they're not terrible but they certainly are showing their age. Lastly, the graphic depictions of sexual violence will be off-putting to people although the only stomach-churning thing to me was how incestuous Inugami's romance with Taka was because he even acknowledges his attraction to her is because she looks exactly like his dead mother complete with flashbacks between the two.

Overall, it was a pretty solid flick to pass the afternoon to. Very 80's, very cool.

[SpoonyViking]

Hey, I'm always on the lookout for more werewolf works, so thanks for the rec! Is it streaming somewhere, or did you sail the seven seas to find it?

[Skull]

Neither, I just bought the Blu-Ray on Amazon.

[SpoonyViking]

Darn. I'll see if I can't find it in some treasure chest somewhere.
Thanks again! :-)

[Skull]

"Hello, my name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father, prepare to die."

Yeah, I finally decided to earn my nerd credentials by watching "The Princess Bride" today. No word of a lie, there are so many memes about Inigo and Vizzini that I was so confused going in that the protagonist's name was actually Westley and Vizzini died a little before the halfway mark. I also had actually seen a clip of the Battle of Wits a long time ago but because of Westley's outfit I always assumed that it was a scene from a Zorro movie. With all that preamble out of the way, I really enjoyed the film. I always dig a good framing device and centering the narrative around a grandfather (played by Peter Falk no less!) reading a book to his sick grandson always pulls on the heartstrings. The plot may not have been super deep or anything, but it was full of heart and very entertaining nonetheless. The cast all acted their parts well no matter how minor, the action scenes were well shot (with particular mention going to the iconic fencing duel between Westley and Inigo) and the soundtrack was great. The only real criticism I would have is the constant references to the real world got a bit much, I get that the original novel and thus the film by extension are a playful spoof of the "Ruritanian Romance" genre but stuff like Vizzini talking about Australia being a penal colony a couple centuries before it actually happened took me out of the film briefly.

Otherwise yeah, a good film overall and a recommend to the two whole people who haven't seen it yet. A shame to hear about Goldman wanting to write a sequel but not managing it before his death.

[SpoonyViking]

Spoiler:

"I want my father back, you son of a bitch!"

Wonderful movie, glad you could watch it!

[Skull]

^ In addition I was watching the 2 hours worth of behind-the-scenes special features and the cast all seem like such lovely fellows, from Elwes and Patinkin goofing around during the fencing duel to André talking about his childhood and how since his parents couldn't afford a car the next door neighbour who would drive André to school turned out to be none other than Samuel Beckett.

Plus, the weeb cannot be contained and I was curious how the scene went in JPN and lo and behold...

[WorldForgot]

Samuel Beckett?! That's nuts, I never knew that haha. Great trivia.

[Skull]

Beggar: *points at domesticated elephants* "Are these silent monsters at peace with us? It is but a truce they keep with Man. But I, who have seen their tusks stained with blood, I could tell you a tale of the silent ones...for a few coppers eh? A bowl of rice?"
Female Tourist: *whips out camera*
Beggar: *covers face* "What would you do with my image, memsahib?"
Female Tourist: "I would keep it, for a memory of India."
Beggar: *lowers hands* "Verily, you would have all India in your picture - Nay! You would have the book of the jungle to read in my eyes..."


If that overly long intro didn't give it away, I spent the evening watching "The Jungle Book" (1942). I had seen the film as a wee child and the final scene of Mowgli (played by the iconic Sabu) riding back into the jungle on an elephant has been seared into my mind ever since. Despite the title, the film takes more scenes from the sequel book rather than the original Jungle Book, apparently this was because the technology of the time wouldn't allow them to bring the animals to live quite like the books and so the film uses mostly the human focused stories instead. Baloo is hit hardest by this as he is barely in the film, only appearing at the start and ending. Interestingly, as this film predates the Disney one, Kaa is correctly depicted as Mowgli's ally and not an enemy. Changes it did make include: Nathoo and Mowgli are explicitly the same person now, the battle with Shere Khan and his death happen completely differently and several human characters are inserted into the village to flesh it out such as Mahala, Buldeo's daughter who has a crush on Mowgli.

Overall it was a charming movie and just as fun as I remember. The cast gave a wonderful performance with special mentions to Sabu and Calleia as Mowgli and Buldeo respectively. There were a lot of cool camera tricks to blend the actors and the live animals together, and when they did have to resort to using puppets it wasn't too distracting. The only real criticism I have is that being the film is adapted from an anthology of short stories, the result meant that the pacing gets a little wonky in places. Humorously, because of the accents in the film, every time the characters brought up the subject of Nathoo, I simply could not unhear it as them saying the Pokémon Natu. Definitely a recommend at any rate~

[Mattias]

1942? Was it a talkie? I can never remember when movies got actual sound.

Edit: Wait Casablanca was also '42, so it must have been.

Edit^2: Wait, Wizard of Oz was '39 and that had sound and colour.

[Skull]

^ The first “Talkie” was The Jazz Singer in 1927.

[SpoonyViking]

[...] the battle with Shere Khan and his death happen completely differently [...]

Really? How does it happen?

The only real criticism I have is that being the film is adapted from an anthology of short stories, the result meant that the pacing gets a little wonky in places.

It is an interesting exercise, though - thinking about how one would adapt the separate stories into a single one. I think if most of the Kaa tale (I'd keep just Baloo and his lessons) and all of the ones from the Second Jungle Book were skipped, the first and final stories can make for a single story tied by Shere Khan's enmity of Mowgli.

[Skull]

Really? How does it happen?

I won’t give too much away, but it involves Mowgli luring Shere Khan into an ambush where he and Kaa can jump the tiger.

It is an interesting exercise, though - thinking about how one would adapt the separate stories into a single one. I think if most of the Kaa tale (I'd keep just Baloo and his lessons) and all of the ones from the Second Jungle Book were skipped, the first and final stories can make for a single story tied by Shere Khan's enmity of Mowgli.

Off the top of my head, the stories it adapts are “Mowgli’s Brothers”, “Tiger, Tiger”, “Letting in the Jungle” and “The King’s Ankus” roughly in that order. I forgot to mention but in reference to the anthologist nature of the original book, the film uses a framing device of an old beggar telling the story of Mowgli to an English tourist (hence the quote I had in my original post) and every time one short story concludes, it cuts back to the modern day where the pair give commentary before moving to the next story. I did get a chuckle out of the ending with the beggar practically winking at the camera when the tourist questioned what became of Mowgli after the story had concluded.

[Mattias]

I went and saw Glass Onion last night. It's a very different movie from Knives Out, but really enjoyable. It focuses far more on Daniel Craig, since we know from the last film that he's actually a good detective, rather than an Inspector Clouseau. The movie still lays the plot out to you in the open from the start, but the fun comes from trying to figure out what it actually means. The movie is a two hour attack on tech bros with the central character being Elon Musk with the numbers filed off. probably some others too, but Musk is the one that comes first to mind with the current events. I think it's also the first movie I've seen that actually acknowledged that there was a Pandemic.

If you liked the first movie, I'd recommend going out and seeing it. Or I would if yesterday wasn't the last day of the one week theatrical release so that it come to Netflix by the holidays. So stream it, I guess?

[WorldForgot]

Oh man I loved the cameo when everyone arrives and gets their 'COVID' shot in Glass Onion. I liked how ridiculous it was, and how much larger in scope than the first flick.

Other movies I can think of that addressed the pandemic outright are Ambulance and Kimi.

[Skull]

Continuing on in my journey through the classics I missed growing up, this time I watched "Candyman" (1992). Loosely based on the short story "The Forbidden" by Clive Barker (of Hellraiser fame), the biggest departure obviously being the setting change from England to Chicago and thus muh themes of classism had to be converted into racism.

I must say, I was not expecting this type of plot going in. I presumed it would be something like "a bunch of kids in a cabin summon Candyman and he kills them one by one". So I was not at all ready for Candyman tormenting Helen in a psychological manner by killing other people and framing her for the murders to wreck her life. The fact that Candyman runs on belief for sustenance and the ambiguity of whether "Daniel Robitaille" ever really existed at all or was willed into reality by the people of Cabrini-Green to explain the serial killings felt very Nasu-esque. That ending is certainly not your typical fare for a horror film and I definitely dig it. Tony Todd really sells it as the villain - this half murderous ghost, half preacher man who goes around dressed like a pimp as he tears people apart with his hook hand. Also worth mentioning is the cameo of Ted Raimi (brother of Sam Raimi) who shows up in the prologue to see his girlfriend get murdered. The score by Philip Glass is incredible in its effective yet minimalist style.

I hear that the sequels dropped the psychological angle and just went with generic slasher flicks that I originally expected the film to be, so I'll probably give them a pass. But this one at least is a definite recommend.