What are you watching?

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Arminius said:
The Hobbit just started bad and got worse and worse. (I should say, in spite of Martin Freeman being perfectly cast.)I wonder if a different edit—official or not—could redeem it.
Click to expand...


I saw a fan edit of the Hobbit that cut the 3 fims into 2 & tried to get it closer to the original story - it was....passable, but still failed to capture the magic of the book in any way. And I agree, Martin Freeman was perfect casting.

It's a shame we never got Del Toro's Hobbit.
 
Silverlion said:
I felt a tiny bit meh about Hellraiser. Honestly my problem is that frankly I wanted a horror film. It wasn't a horror film, but a monster movie.
Click to expand...


I get what you mean, but I feel that way about the entire franchise - Hellraiser has never been scary to me, just visually interesting with some cool lore. II came the closest, with the one scene that is the most disturbing in the entire franchie and nothing's really topped - when Chanard brings that mental patient home that is hallucinating that bugs are crawling all over his body, hands him a straight razor, and says "cut them off". More disturbing than scare-inducing but definitely was hard for me to watch as a kid.

The director of the new film's previous film, The Night House (which incidentally was originally pitched as a Hellraiser sequel, and knowing that you can kinda see how it would fit in) is a more traditional scary film, and I do recommend it even if you didn't care for his Hellraiser.
 
CRKrueger said:
I wasn’t a fan of the whole “solve the box without this pop-up blade cutting you, and you get to choose who goes to hell next by cutting them” mechanic.

I guess to paraphrase Pinhead, in my opinion, “It is not blood that calls us but Desire.” By taking out the whole hedonistic-seeker-of-sensation-and-experience Slaaneshi BDSM aspect of the whole thing, you lose the point of what Hellraiser is about.
Click to expand...

I've heard people online saying this new one is closer to the original novella and I'm like "way to out yourself as to never having read the original novella". The deeper meanings/metaphors of the original film and story definitely are not present, it's more of a popcorn flick. It's definitely Hellraiser without the sex" despite the "sex scene" introducing our "protagonist"(which I swear has got to be one of the most boring sex scene ever filmed, but really, I was not interested in seeing that lead actress naked at all, so I was OK with that).

So, yeah, don;t disagree with that criticism at all, but it didn't ruin the film for me. Hellraiser hasn't been THAT since 1987 - even my favourite, Hellbound, dropped all the sex out of it, though it did at least acknowledge that the Cenobites were there to perform a function based on the desire of the summoner.

But I can rationalize the change of the new one in my head though, especially considering the expanded lore of the Epic comics - Leviathan has many different methods of enticing supplicants to his realm. In this case, the Cenobites we are dealing with are not the Order of the Gash, but a different Order, one who plays their own game.



CRKrueger said:
Also, the Cenobytes were both more specifically detailed in makeup and costume and yet less gory somehow.
Click to expand...

I thought they should be wetter...as it is, the skin looks too much like a suit and latexy.


CRKrueger said:
The different configurations idea was cool, but went nowhere. The same person working through different configurations based on what they are seeking and enduring the results of previous unlocking would have been more compelling then “line up X people to sacrifice to the box until you get to the end and summon Leviathan to choose a reward”.

This seemed like one of these standard Corporate Reboots that are worse than the original in every way, completely missing the essence of the work, and making a muddled mess with incoherent worldbuilding to stuff into a Fandom Wiki.
Click to expand...

Overall, I still really enjoyed it, but I've got plenty of criticisms, dozens more than anyone here has even voiced. I made the entire journey through 11 films as they were released though, so I went in with low standards and no expectations. It was still heads above 3-10.
 
(spoiler for the ending of the new Hellraiser and, uh, Hellraiser III)

307317103_170957118929842_2228361108266749757_n.jpg
 
CRKrueger said:
I guess to paraphrase Pinhead, in my opinion, “It is not blood that calls us but Desire.” By taking out the whole hedonistic-seeker-of-sensation-and-experience Slaaneshi BDSM aspect of the whole thing, you lose the point of what Hellraiser is about.
Click to expand...

I finally sat down and watched the new movie. It was as bad as I thought it would be. They really just skipped over the whole point to the original idea and just turned it into a big "monster demon curse" type of movie.

For me, the originally novella, the first two movies, and certain storylines in the Epic series are the only "real" Hellraiser stories. Everything else has been crap put out by people who really didn't understand the point of it all, or just didn't care. I'm very into Hellraiser in general. I have an entire display cabinet at home of high-end Hellraiser box reproductions, signed Barker and cenobite actor merchandise, an original picture Clive Barker drew for me (while I sat with him), etc. I just don't like the way the franchise ended up going, and this new "interpretation," though different, was not any better.
 
carpocratian said:
I just don't like the way the franchise ended up going, and this new "interpretation," though different, was not any better.
Click to expand...

While I'm not going to argue that you should like the new film in any way, I will categorically argue that the new one "was not any better" than the ones that came before (and I'm not talking about acting/directing or cinematography). III onwards, most of the films fundamentally violated the core concepts of the lore established in Hellraiser I & II. The new film reevaluates the info preseted in the first two films, but does not contradict it.

To explain: I & II established, among other things:

1) the shedding of blood opes the bridge between Leviathan's dimension and ours (this is shown in Larry's blood opening a doorway for Frank, and the mental patient's blood opening a doorway for Julia). Yes, in th novelette, it's Larry's blood mixing with Frank's dried semen that allows him passage, in a sort of weird brther to brother incest baby sorta thing that's best not to think about too hard....but that element was excuded from the film. One could say in both cases, the blood was shed where that person died (in the attic or on the mattress), but either way the blood is proscriptive.

Hence the new film's shedding of blood "marking" a sacrifice does make sense, as an expansion of the lore, not a contradiction of it.

2) note the word I used there...."sacrifice". The victims of the Box in the new film are just that...sacrifices. At it's most basic as a concept, a person sacrifices somethig to acquire something they want. This is, in effect, the motivation of desire through a different lens. Now the first objection to this is obviously that the film's protagonist did not desire anything when she opened the box. But her desire is not the driving narrative force in the film - it's that of Voight. Every event in the film is predicated upon Voight's desires. But just like the Cenobites being more than willing to take Kirsty regardless of her intentions when she opened the puzzlebox, the Cenobites in this film are prepared to take the girl opening the box, if not someone else. The willingness of the Cenobites to take one victim as a trade for another is equally established in the original - they are willing to take Frank (another person who opened the Puzzlebox) over Kirsty. So, "if not you then someone else". This forces the choice of the person who opened the box to a) let the cenobites take them or b) sacrifice someone else for their sake (ie their own selfish desires). That the first two people taken by the box were blooded while it was in the posession of our protaganist are "accidental" n her part is besides the point to the Cenobites. It's no different, metaphorically, to a perso who steps over someone else, puts them out, ruins their life to achieve their own ends - it's still sacrifices they are responsible for, whether they intended or wanted them to happen (or even knew about them). They are, at every point they choose not to sacrifice themselves, letting others take their place to satisfy their selfishness.

3) So the big stickler we have in this is Pinhead's declaration in Hellraiser to that "It is Desire that calls us, not hands". But this situation is unique for two reasons - Pinhead is contradicting himself, in the original film, it's Kirsty opening the box, not her desire that summons them, and it's the trade, not her ignorance, that staves them off, and additionally, in that case, Channard is being guided by Julia who was sent back by Leviathan. She was working Leviathan's will, just as the Cenobites (one can also interpret what happens with Channard was Leviathan literally using a puppet to dispatch The Order of the Gash because they are not executing it's will to it's complete satisfaction, it's not a coincidence this immediately proceeds Pinhead doubting his convictions when Kirsty forces him to recall his former identity). Moreover, we know that Pinhead lies. He lies to Kirsty about her father. He breaks the deal he made with Kirsty. It is a perfectly reasonable interpretation of the scene with Tiffany that that was a deliberate trap for Channard, rather than an expression of a self-imposed restriction that, we as the audience, allready know is not true.

Does this make the bladed Puzzlebox a "good" plot element? No, that's up too individual taste. I was fine with it being different, just as one of my favourite stories in the Epic comics line was Gaiman & McKean's tale about a crossword being the puzzle that opens the doorway). But unlike the majority of sequels, it isn't an inherent contradiction of what's established lore, so I think it's unfair to say "it's no better", especially when compared to, say, Hellraiser: Judgement, a film that takes a big steaming dump all over the lore.
 
I've been watching the new Jeepers Creepers movie. Honestly kind of boring. I found the Syfy one better to be honest.

Since I'm working on a story set around the same time period, I'm checking out the show Copper.
 
I didnt know there was a new Jeepers Crreepers. It's not the same director of the old ones is it? I figured he was in prison.
 
TristramEvans said:
I didnt know there was a new Jeepers Crreepers. It's not the same director of the old ones is it? I figured he was in prison.
Click to expand...
No, it's directed by the guy who did the Iron Sky movies. It's in theaters right now, but IMDB gives it one star
 
urbwar said:
No, it's directed by the guy who did the Iron Sky movies. It's in theaters right now, but IMDB gives it one star
Click to expand...

lol, "At least it's not as bad as Rob Zombie's The Munsters" should be it's tagline
 
EmperorNorton said:
It's funny to me because I like the LotR movies more than the books (blasphemy I know), but damn the Hobbit book is SO MUCH better than the movies.
Click to expand...
While comic books aren’t movies, they can share a lot of the style/idiom, which is my lead into saying, if you haven’t read the graphic novel by David Wenzel, do yourself a favor.
 
TristramEvans said:
Does this make the bladed Puzzlebox a "good" plot element? No, that's up too individual taste. I was fine with it being different, just as one of my favourite stories in the Epic comics line was Gaiman & McKean's tale about a crossword being the puzzle that opens the doorway). But unlike the majority of sequels, it isn't an inherent contradiction of what's established lore, so I think it's unfair to say "it's no better", especially when compared to, say, Hellraiser: Judgement, a film that takes a big steaming dump all over the lore.
Click to expand...

It is "no better," for me, because it still doesn't get back to what made the original novella, the first movie, parts of the second movie, and some of the Epic comics stories compelling.

Ultimately, for me, the most important theme the various Hellraiser media is the one that Clive Barker was focusing on in the original novella and the first film. It all revolves around desire and sensation, the lengths to which some people are willing to go to attain those desires, different interpretations of the idea of "sensation," the difference between thinking you know what you want and actually getting it, and related issues. The Cenobites were deliberately difficult to summon, to make sure that those who asked for their "help" were actually serious (to the point of them essentially saying "Are you sure?" to Frank in the original novella). Frank got what he asked for, but then realized that it was more than he was prepared to experience, partially because the Cenobites had a somewhat alien way of looking at things, and partially because he didn't pay attention to what he was actually being offered. In the end, it wasn't all about pain or pleasure. It was specifically about sensation, as he had been told, but he thought of that purely in terms of specific types of pleasure.

The willingness of the Cenobites to take Kirsty instead never really made sense to me, to be honest. That was never really a very interesting part of it all. It could be argued that she had demonstrated a desire to call the Cenobites, and that there was more at work under the surface (of her desire) than we have seen, but in the end that was just a little plot point to push the story forward, since the cenobites had to be called to enter our world, and Frank wasn't going to do it again.

To me, the second movie was a lot less interesting, mainly because it turned things more into an pseudo-hell sort of story, rather than sticking to the main themes as heavily. It didn't really need to be made, but there are enough parts of it that touch on the main themes that I still enjoy it. The same goes for the Epic series, where some of the stories were very obviously most heavily influenced by the ideas in "The Hellbound Heart." As an anthology series, it was a real mixed bag, but the best of it was really good.

No other Hellraiser-oriented media - including the new movie - really touch enough on the pleasure-pain-sensation-desire stuff to interest me. I don't really care about the lore of Leviathan and the other dimension. I'm much more interested in the core themes, particularly since I am into BDSM, and have attended a lot of the same types of parties and events that influenced Barker's original story. A lot of the themes that I have indicated above are common discussions and musings among BDSM practitioners, so it has always been interesting to see them expanded and interpreted in a fantastic/horrific setting.
 
urbwar said:
I've been watching the new Jeepers Creepers movie. Honestly kind of boring. I found the Syfy one better to be honest.

Since I'm working on a story set around the same time period, I'm checking out the show Copper.
Click to expand...
Copper went nuts before the end, but Tom Weston-Jones was good in it, and I like the time period. He’s also good as a cop in Warrior.
 
TubiTV
Dark Tales is horrid filmmaking.
Five interminable minutes of absolutely strained acting that led to a predictable conclusion. Should have been a 30 second scene tops. When they tried to stretch the conclusion out another 30 plus seconds, I turned it off.

Someone else might have more tolerance for this shoddy work.
 
TristramEvans said:
lol, "At least it's not as bad as Rob Zombie's The Munsters" should be it's tagline
Click to expand...
At least with Munsters, I knew to avoid it. I didn't bother to look for reviews on Jeepers. Given I had liked all the previous films, I foolishly went into it with optimism.
 
CRKrueger said:
Copper went nuts before the end, but Tom Weston-Jones was good in it, and I like the time period. He’s also good as a cop in Warrior.
Click to expand...
I'm only 2 episodes in to it currently. I'm liking it so far.
 
carpocratian said:
It is "no better," for me, because it still doesn't get back to what made the original novella, the first movie, parts of the second movie, and some of the Epic comics stories compelling.

Ultimately, for me, the most important theme the various Hellraiser media is the one that Clive Barker was focusing on in the original novella and the first film. It all revolves around desire and sensation, the lengths to which some people are willing to go to attain those desires, different interpretations of the idea of "sensation," the difference between thinking you know what you want and actually getting it, and related issues. The Cenobites were deliberately difficult to summon, to make sure that those who asked for their "help" were actually serious (to the point of them essentially saying "Are you sure?" to Frank in the original novella). Frank got what he asked for, but then realized that it was more than he was prepared to experience, partially because the Cenobites had a somewhat alien way of looking at things, and partially because he didn't pay attention to what he was actually being offered. In the end, it wasn't all about pain or pleasure. It was specifically about sensation, as he had been told, but he thought of that purely in terms of specific types of pleasure.

The willingness of the Cenobites to take Kirsty instead never really made sense to me, to be honest. That was never really a very interesting part of it all. It could be argued that she had demonstrated a desire to call the Cenobites, and that there was more at work under the surface (of her desire) than we have seen, but in the end that was just a little plot point to push the story forward, since the cenobites had to be called to enter our world, and Frank wasn't going to do it again.

To me, the second movie was a lot less interesting, mainly because it turned things more into an pseudo-hell sort of story, rather than sticking to the main themes as heavily. It didn't really need to be made, but there are enough parts of it that touch on the main themes that I still enjoy it. The same goes for the Epic series, where some of the stories were very obviously most heavily influenced by the ideas in "The Hellbound Heart." As an anthology series, it was a real mixed bag, but the best of it was really good.

No other Hellraiser-oriented media - including the new movie - really touch enough on the pleasure-pain-sensation-desire stuff to interest me. I don't really care about the lore of Leviathan and the other dimension. I'm much more interested in the core themes, particularly since I am into BDSM, and have attended a lot of the same types of parties and events that influenced Barker's original story. A lot of the themes that I have indicated above are common discussions and musings among BDSM practitioners, so it has always been interesting to see them expanded and interpreted in a fantastic/horrific setting.
Click to expand...

I see, you're only interested in that one aspect of the first Hellraiser, fair enough.
 
Today I decided to double feature The Black Death, starring Sean Bean, and Season of the Witch, starring Nicholas Cage & Ron Perlman. Both movies have a similar premise, but the executions are different. I think Black Death was the better movie, as it's more claustrophobic and realistic. Season was ok, but definitely leans into the supernatural. I caught both of them via Plex, which has really upped their free content. Nowhere near as much as other services (and some overlap), but somethings in there I haven't seen elsewhere (like the old Canadian tv show The Collector, which I've been trying to track down for years after seeing part of the first season)

Now I'm getting ready to start Society, a Brian Yuzna film from the 90's. Had it in my Shudder watch list for a long time, and decided to finally watch it.
 
I just watched heavy metal 2000, aka FAKK 2.

It was not worthy of the name heavy metal. The soundtrack was nothing really, I can't remember a single track and I only saw it yesterday.

The animation was a bit above average, with some what was in 2000 excellent cgi slipped in. Nothing amazing and the cgi didn't age well.

Voice acting was fine. No complaints there.

Asides from a glowing green crystal and an Amazonian heroine in a outfit that featured an armored g string there was no connection to the original HM at all, this was a single story, a fairly generic sci fantasy film like what was common in the late 80's thru the 90's.

Not a bad movie per se' but not great and no connection to Heavy Metal which was and is a legend. When it Came out the dvd probably ended up in a lot of guys spank collections.

If you're into sci fantasy, animation, nudity , sex, violence, f bombs and action this movie won't disappoint. If you were looking for anything close to Heavy Metal, it will disappoint severely.
 
Agentdenton said:
I just watched heavy metal 2000, aka FAKK 2.

It was not worthy of the name heavy metal. The soundtrack was nothing really, I can't remember a single track and I only saw it yesterday.

The animation was a bit above average, with some what was in 2000 excellent cgi slipped in. Nothing amazing and the cgi didn't age well.

Voice acting was fine. No complaints there.

Asides from a glowing green crystal and an Amazonian heroine in a outfit that featured an armored g string there was no connection to the original HM at all, this was a single story, a fairly generic sci fantasy film like what was common in the late 80's thru the 90's.

Not a bad movie per se' but not great and no connection to Heavy Metal which was and is a legend. When it Came out the dvd probably ended up in a lot of guys spank collections.

If you're into sci fantasy, animation, nudity , sex, violence, f bombs and action this movie won't disappoint. If you were looking for anything close to Heavy Metal, it will disappoint severely.
Click to expand...
Heavy Metal 2000 was F.A.K.K. - F.A.K.K. 2 was the video game based on it.
 
urbwar said:
Today I decided to double feature The Black Death, starring Sean Bean, and Season of the Witch, starring Nicholas Cage & Ron Perlman. Both movies have a similar premise, but the executions are different. I think Black Death was the better movie, as it's more claustrophobic and realistic. Season was ok, but definitely leans into the supernatural. I caught both of them via Plex, which has really upped their free content. Nowhere near as much as other services (and some overlap), but somethings in there I haven't seen elsewhere (like the old Canadian tv show The Collector, which I've been trying to track down for years after seeing part of the first season)

Now I'm getting ready to start Society, a Brian Yuzna film from the 90's. Had it in my Shudder watch list for a long time, and decided to finally watch it.
Click to expand...

Black Death was the last pre-viewed DVD I purchased from the local Blockbuster before they all closed down. I really liked it, got a sort of subdued WFRP vibe from it
 
Watched Funny Pages, a very good, low-key yet somehow also grotesque cringe comedy about a recently graduated high school kid who wants to become a comic artist.




The film is a tribute to underground comix and cleverly replicates in live action the absurdity and bizarre characters that define the form.
 
Well, I finished watching, and enjoyed, The Rings of Power. I have no idea why people are bad-mouthing it. It was good fantasy fare.

Currently watching Toy Boy, a Spanish drama about a man imprisoned for 7 years for something he didn't do, and trying to clear his name.

After that, House of Dragons.
 
Last edited:
TristramEvans said:
Black Death was the last pre-viewed DVD I purchased from the local Blockbuster before they all closed down. I really liked it, got a sort of subdued WFRP vibe from it
Click to expand...
Yeah, I can totally see that.

Today I finished an episode of NCIS: Hawaii I had started yesterday. I also watched a film called Fist of Fury: Soul. These mainland Chinese films are mildly entertaining, but their plots don't match up well to the old HK films. Still, it allowed me to kill a little over an hour at work, so I guess that's a good thing.

 
soltakss said:
Well, I finished watching, and enjoyed, The Rings of Power. I have no idea why people are bad-mouthing it. It was good fantasy fare.
Click to expand...


I don't mind McDonalds every now and again but if someone told me they got me Red Lobster and handed me a McFish sandwich, I'd be pissed off
 
On TubiTV:

Nightmare Cinema: a b-movie with a surprising number of higher profile actors. Mostly novel plots. Decent acting with Mickey Rourke as the weakest link. Choppy filmmaking overall. Still worth watching for idea mining.

Painkiller: A recreation of Death Wish all the way down to Bronson's wooden acting style. Completely uninspired. And yet, it survived the full playing time as background noise.

Hellblazers: a Tubi original walking the line between proper production and a budget film. Packed with yesteryear a- and b-listers. Some truly nonsensical character decisions. Plot justification nearly nonexistent, even though there's a feeble "meta" attempt in the credit sequence.
 
Babylon 5 the lost tales. 2007.

Meant to be a anthology series of stories JMS never got to do on tge series, only obe ep was made. As a standalone feature it was a beautiful and touching love letter to the show's fans, and I found it touching.
 
On Hulu:

The Cursed (2021) is quite good. Some false starts with poor editing. They left an opening for a sequel, but it doesn't need one. Great creature fx, purposeful (and very graphic) violence, decent suspense that wasn't overdone.
 
Started watching Andor on Disney+. Currently two episodes in.
 
Watched Five Elements Secret Arts, another one of this high fantasy Chinese films. Characters are pretty out there power wise. The story was kind of lame until later on in the film, when the hero learns the valuable lesson he needed to learn. Not enough to save the movie though
 
Watched Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama. Remember well the VHS cover/poster image and title but somehow never got around to watching it.

lf.jpeg

Wasn't expecting a masterpiece obviously but I'd say it still underwhelmed even by the relatively low standards of goofy 80s horror comedies with a dollop of softcore tease.



The nudity was more plentiful than usual for the subgenre which was welcome as these films tend to be more sizzle than steak but my recent viewings of Auntie Lee's Meat Pies and a few other 80s horror comedies that outperformed my low expectations has raised the bar for the bare minimum I expect from this kind of trashy fun.
 
Finished up Society on Shudder. The concept was interesting, but I felt the execution fell flat imho.

I'm currently watching the 3 part Law & Order crossover from the season premieres. In the first part, we get introduced to a new character for Law & Order (replacing Anthony Anderson, who chose not to return). So it turns out the actor in the role is Mechad Brooks, who played Jimmy Olsen on Supergirl. Except I didn't recognize him, because he bulked up. He was always in good shape, but he put on some more muscle mass. Plus he's rocking a mustache. I recognized the voice, but not the look. It's good to see him back on tv, and partnered with Jeffrey Donovan (another of my favorites).
 
Just went to see Black Adam. It was one of the best DCEU movies IMO. And they didn't water down Black Adam. And definitely stay for the post credits cut scene.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top