Horror Movies Thread

[viking_wizard_eyes]

It does not look good. There is not any amount of "well aktually" you can do to make the design look good.

Well aktually, it does look good. It might look different than what you want or expect, and therefor not to your taste, but it's a far cry from bad.

Also, I'm not really sure what people were expecting with this? His Invisible Man is a huge, huge departure from the original in essentially every single way, so I don't quite get why people are so caught off guard that his Wolf Man would be another deconstruction.

I personally can't wait to see it. I love Leigh and I think reorienting these monster archetypes for contemporary times is an extremely cool project, especially because they're taking a more grounded approach instead of trying to turn them into some kinda overwrought spectacle, which is definitely in keeping with the spirit of the original UCM films, which were all relatively low-budget B-movies, anyway.

 

[Lucky Planet]

Mike Flanagan Scares Up Another With Stephen King: ‘Carrie’ As An 8-Ep Amazon Series: The Dish

Mike Flanagan Scares Up Another One With Stephen King: Turning 'Carrie' Into a TV Series

deadline.com

yawn..

 

[Blysthon]

 

[jseal777]

Well aktually, it does look good. It might look different than what you want or expect, and therefor not to your taste, but it's a far cry from bad.

Also, I'm not really sure what people were expecting with this? His Invisible Man is a huge, huge departure from the original in essentially every single way, so I don't quite get why people are so caught off guard that his Wolf Man would be another deconstruction.

I personally can't wait to see it. I love Leigh and I think reorienting these monster archetypes for contemporary times is an extremely cool project, especially because they're taking a more grounded approach instead of trying to turn them into some kinda overwrought spectacle, which is definitely in keeping with the spirit of the original UCM films, which were all relatively low-budget B-movies, anyway.

Art is subjective and such. But he looks like somebody's grandpa is going on a bath salts induced crash out.

 

[Clive]

Not to continue beating a dead horse, but here's the creature that afflicts the first Wolfman in the 2010 remake... so... can we all just take a beat, please?

 

[belloq87]

Also, I'm not really sure what people were expecting with this? His Invisible Man is a huge, huge departure from the original in essentially every single way, so I don't quite get why people are so caught off guard that his Wolf Man would be another deconstruction.

I don't think the situations are quite the same, for a few reasons:

1. Both the original INVISIBLE MAN story and Whannell's are fundamentally the same hook: scientist named Griffin discovers a process to turn invisible, goes mad, and torments people.
2. THE INVISIBLE MAN is an existing property (based on a novel) allowing for new adaptations and interpretations of the source material. THE WOLF MAN was an internal Universal creation.
3. The classic INVISIBLE MAN films all focus on new characters in each installment, so there's precedent for changing-up the formula, whereas the Wolf Man has always been Larry Talbot.

Not to continue beating a dead horse, but here's the creature that afflicts the first Wolfman in the 2010 remake... so... can we all just take a beat, please?

View attachment 23859

I don't think even fans of this movie (and I am one) would ever hold this up as one of its better creative decisions, though.

 

[Clive]

I don't think the situations are quite the same, for a few reasons:

1. Both the original INVISIBLE MAN story and Whannell's are fundamentally the same hook: scientist named Griffin discovers a process to turn invisible, goes mad, and torments people.
2. THE INVISIBLE MAN is an existing property (based on a novel) allowing for new adaptations and interpretations of the source material. THE WOLF MAN was an internal Universal creation.
3. The classic INVISIBLE MAN films all focus on new characters in each installment, so there's precedent for changing-up the formula, whereas the Wolf Man has always been Larry Talbot.



I don't think even fans of this movie (and I am one) would ever hold this up as one of its better creative decisions, though.

I think you're going to need to accept that this is just not gonna be a gothic Larry Talbot story. Not saying if it'll be bad or good, but this clearly isn't that, and I don't think it's fair to dismiss or discount the film on those grounds. As far as the property being internally created, I think one starts to split hairs here. The bottom line is they're both adaptations of an existing idea that take radical departures from the original tone and substance of the film, if not the spirit.

We see very little of the Invisible Man's madness in Leigh Whannell's film, for example. In fact, it seems very apparent he was already a cruel, manipulative, and exacting psychopath far before he invented his cloaking technology -- a major departure from the original material and film. Whannell's version is built around the POV of the Invisible Man's ex-partner, not the Invisible Man himself. In many ways, it has more in common with something like the Hollow Man -- which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but you have to accept at some point that it's a different beast.

I was not aware there were people who were upset by the beast boy who appears in the film for something like 15 seconds max. Most people remember the titular Wolfman (or arguably Wolfmen), who looked great. My point is that the creature seen clearly isn't the Wolfman, and based on precedent, we shouldn't assume our main character will look the same when he finally transforms.

 

[viking_wizard_eyes]

Art is subjective and such. But he looks like somebody's grandpa is going on a bath salts induced crash out.

Sounds like a good movie to me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don't think the situations are quite the same, for a few reasons:

1. Both the original INVISIBLE MAN story and Whannell's are fundamentally the same hook: scientist named Griffin discovers a process to turn invisible, goes mad, and torments people.
2. THE INVISIBLE MAN is an existing property (based on a novel) allowing for new adaptations and interpretations of the source material. THE WOLF MAN was an internal Universal creation.
3. The classic INVISIBLE MAN films all focus on new characters in each installment, so there's precedent for changing-up the formula, whereas the Wolf Man has always been Larry Talbot.

You're overthinking this.

Leigh's Invisible Man is pretty explicitly about a shitty guy who takes advantage of technology to be even more shitty. His Wolf Man appears to be a parable about a domestic violence situation. He's tracking some very specific themes and using the UCM archetypes -- not necessarily their novelistic precedence -- as his template. You can quibble with the project all you want, but everything is within bounds as far as adaptation goes. The absence of Larry Talbot makes no difference.

 

[belloq87]

Folks, my only expressed reservation about this new movie is NOT about Whannell's approach to lycanthropy, or whatever thematic story he's trying to tell.

It's entirely about the werewolf design, which -- based only on what we've seen so far -- is very underwhelming to me.

That's it. That's all. I haven't predetermined that I won't enjoy the movie.

My point is that the creature seen clearly isn't the Wolfman, and based on precedent, we shouldn't assume our main character will look the same when he finally transforms.

Well...

Spoiler

... people who have been to test screenings have reported that, yes, Abbott's character doesn't look exactly like the other character we saw represented at HHN, but it's very much still in that design wheelhouse.

Again, does that mean it will be a bad movie? No. Does it make me question why this is a Universal WOLF MAN movie instead of just a new spin on a werewolf story that is called something else? Yes.

 

[Jake S]

Again, does that mean it will be a bad movie? No. Does it make me question why this is a Universal WOLF MAN movie instead of just a new spin on a werewolf story that is called something else? Yes.

I assume it's to strike the balance between a studio that insists on using reliable, existing IP and a creator's desire to make something new and interesting.

 

[Michael S]

I assume it's to strike the balance between a studio that insists on using reliable, existing IP and a creator's desire to make something new and interesting.

Probably right on the money. Almost exactly like The Invisible Man movie.

 

[Viator]

Tom Holland to Star in Christopher Nolan’s Latest Film

Matt Damon is already on the call sheet for the top secret feature that Universal will open in 2026.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

We Heard a Great Rumor About Christopher Nolan's Latest Film

The Spider-Man actor joins Matt Damon in the latest mystery film from the Oppenheimer director.

gizmodo.com

Germain Lussier on Gizmodo is claiming that Nolan’s next major film is a period piece horror film based with Vampires.

 

[saint.piss]

We Heard a Great Rumor About Christopher Nolan's Latest Film

The Spider-Man actor joins Matt Damon in the latest mystery film from the Oppenheimer director.

gizmodo.com

Germain Lussier on Gizmodo is claiming that Nolan’s next major film is a period piece horror film based with Vampires.

 

[Blysthon]

Just saw smile 2, and it was amazing!

 

[rageofthegods]

Leigh often jokes about doing "Dracula on Tinder" but after using Invisible Man to remake Sleeping with the Enemy and The Wolfman to remake the Fly, I think the world is ready for my "As Good As It Gets with Dracula" pitch.

 

[Lucky Planet]

Leigh often jokes about doing "Dracula on Tinder" but after using Invisible Man to remake Sleeping with the Enemy and The Wolfman to remake the Fly, I think the world is ready for my "As Good As It Gets with Dracula" pitch.

we need him to use creature of the black lagoon and FREE WILLY

 

[rageofthegods]

we need him to use creature of the black lagoon and FREE WILLY

This is a joke but it's also a genuinely amazing pitch.

 

[belloq87]

CREATURE is crying out for a pure jungle adventure-horror movie.

 

[Legacy]

we need him to use creature of the black lagoon and FREE WILLY

This is a joke but it's also a genuinely amazing pitch.

That’s literally Shape of Water.

 

[rageofthegods]

That’s literally Shape of Water.

Okay but Shape of Water introduced... other elements to their relationship.

CREATURE is crying out for a pure jungle adventure-horror movie.

Hoping that's the direction the James Wan movie goes in.