The trailer doesn't look particularly promising, though there is one specific thing that might actually drag me into a theater: Sienna Guillory. 😁 Which essentially means... I’ll only go if nothing significantly better is playing at the same time.
Ahem... the fourth installment is set to hit theaters on October 26, 2007, and it’s officially confirmed. (Word is, the creative team behind the first three films has absolutely nothing to do with this sequel)
Personally, my favorite story was Takashi Miike's "Box"—it might have the slowest pacing of the bunch, but it’s easily the most beautifully crafted. "Cut" grabs you right from the start, whereas "Dumplings," while expertly made, occasionally feels more like an exercise in seeing how much of a "gross-out" effect they can force on the audience.
Even though Grudge 2 has been pretty much trashed by critics here in the United States, I still have every intention of watching it. People love to complain about how repetitive it feels, but let’s be honest—wasn't the first remake just as much of a loop?
I’ve watched this film twice now, and both times I ended up tearing up like a little kid (honestly, I think it would happen even if I were watching it right this second). That ending is just too devastating to be ignored by any "tough guy." 😁
The link you posted actually leads to the 1959 remake (though, in my opinion, it holds up just as well as the original).
I really hope CNN decides to air both versions again soon!
I don't think the core issue is actually how powerful the mutants are. The real matter is that this horror film, much like most others in its category, strictly adheres to established genre tropes. Furthermore, the sheer strength of these mutants serves to clearly differentiate them from ordinary people.
Another point worth considering—this movie, along with several recent horror titles (such as Descent), explores the degradation of the human psyche. It examines what happens when an individual is thrust into an extreme situation and is forced to become just as primitive and violent as their adversaries.
No matter how good it might be... apparently this one is supposed to be the most extreme yet. That doesn't inherently make it a good movie, though I suppose it will be a selling point for a lot of people.
Saw : Rated R for strong grisly violence and language
Saw II: Rated R for grisly violence and gore, terror, language and drug content.
Saw III: Rated R for strong grisly violence and gore, sequences of terror and torture, nudity and language.
When Round 2 😳 hit theaters, I made the mistake of catching the 6:00 PM showing. Clint was absolutely swarming with kids who felt the need to comment on every single scene. I was easily the oldest person in the entire theater. Should I really have to say how much I wanted to strangle them? Even though the movie itself didn't exactly blow me away, their incessant chatter completely killed whatever atmosphere was left. Ever since that disaster, I only attend the 8:30 PM screenings.
Horror movies aren't meant for children, whether it’s a PG-13 The Grudge or an R-rated Wrong Turn (the latter was particularly disturbing—seriously, what kind of parent takes a five or six-year-old to see a film like that?).
High Tension - the scene where the chainsaw hits the driver's abdomen is incredibly uncomfortable to watch.
Dawn of the Dead remake - a variation on that previous type of scene - a chainsaw falling onto a blonde woman. It’s nasty enough in the theatrical cut, but even more stomach-turning in the uncut version.
Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance - pretty much any scene involving violence here is quite disturbing... even if it isn't actually that explicit.
Everything from "The Beyond", "Evil Dead", and "Day of the Dead"...
It is great that IBM is finally releasing the manga edition of Battle Royale (even if it is six years behind the rest of the world, this is still a win) — there are 8 volumes, I believe, priced at $18 each. I picked up the first volume and I am quite pleased; the character development in the manga is much more thorough than what we saw in the movie, though then again, there are just too many characters to develop properly within a two-hour runtime. Oh, and one thing: the comic is significantly more violent than the film.
Since I found Creep to be a perfectly solid Horror, I will definitely be checking out Severance as well. The feedback from the test screenings has been excellent—most of the reviews on IMDb suggest it’s a significant step up from Creep, noting how the film manages to strike an ideal balance between Horror and comedy.
I realize this isn't Day of the Dead, but we are actually talking about 28 Weeks Later. The plot details have been released, along with information regarding the director, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo:
28 Weeks Later picks up six Months after the virus has decimated New York City. The US Army Has restored order and is repopulating The quarantined City , When a carrier of The rage virus enters New York and unknowingly re-ignites The spread of The deadly infection, wreaking havoc on the entire population.
darksurfer26 said:They’re already remaking movies that are ten years old. What’s next? Are they going to drop a remake of Hostel or 28 Days Later in a year?
It gets even more ridiculous... sequels for both films are slated for 2007—Hostel in January, followed by 28 Weeks Later in May.
I'm not kidding, here is the link for 28 weeks later.
crimsontinker17 said:Please. I have read through the responses here so far, and it seems most of you clearly haven't seen The Exorcism of Emily Rose. If movies like The Exorcist or The Omen are what you consider terrifying, then frankly I wouldn't recommend this one to you.
The Exorcism of Emily Rose is a decent film, but I wouldn't categorize it strictly as horror. It is certainly Atmospheric, but it isn't truly scary per se (though, I recall some of my college classmates being genuinely shaken after watching it, so as always, it remains entirely subjective).
Sandra Parker82 said:The Ring just started hitting theaters here. I honestly thought this was some brand-new release, but apparently, everyone saw it ages ago. I don't get it. 😢
The Ring originally hit theaters in the US back in October 2004—which means most people had already watched it on DVD over a year ago. I have no idea why they even bothered with a theatrical run when anyone interested had seen it by then. At the very least, I'm hoping an uncut version gets released on Blu-ray, similar to how they handled it in the States.
Phone isn't terrible, though it lacks a certain bite (and honestly, that subplot about the killer stalking the lead feels completely unnecessary). The Eye is decent enough, but it doesn't really function as a horror film; it plays out more like a drama (and the sequel is even less frightening).
Out of all those The Ring clones, I think the Thai film Shutter was far superior. Despite a plot that felt like a cliché mashup of "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and The Ring, the filmmakers managed to craft something genuinely excellent and terrifying. The Grudge isn't a total failure, but it’s essentially a carbon copy of the Japanese originals—specifically, the American version of The Grudge is just a compilation of scenes lifted from Ju-On (2000) and Ju-On: The Grudge (2003).
It's a good thing that the upcoming The Grudge 2 (releasing this October) features a completely different storyline than the Japanese sequels.