Jump to content
đź”’ The Earwolf Forums are closed Read more... Ă—

Rotmonian

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    23

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rotmonian

  1. Posted

    I love this movie just like every other 80's kid, but in the Canon? No way.

     

    It's fun junk, and I love everyone involved. But it's a mess of a film and I don't personally believe in cultural impact arguments (just my opinion). Still, I loved the episode and I'm happy the Canon is back!

    • Like 3

  2. Posted

    Jeez, not a lot of love here for Blair Witch. In the world of horror cinema, this is considered one of the all-time greats. I go back to this film every five years or so, to give myself enough time to forget significant portions of it. Sure, it might be slightly diminished outside the context of 1999; its technique may also prove annoying to some extent. But for some to say it doesn't work, or they weren't affected--I just don't believe it. That's hipster nonsense. You may as well tell me what year you got into Arcade Fire or how many times you've had sex, because I'm more likely to believe that.

     

    That aside, it's one of the most important indie films ever made; it revolutionized film marketing, it was a cultural touchstone, and it's a genre staple. Canon-worthy shouldn't even be a question.

    • Like 1

  5. Posted

    It absolutely blows my mind that Troll 2 hasn't been done. When I first heard of this podcast and the concept, this is the first movie that came to my mind. Its ineptitude makes The Room look like pinnacle Truffaut. This movie is so bad it has an entire documentary made about it being so bad.

  6. Posted

    The "Rosemary's Baby vs. Replusion" and Lucio Fulci threads have really kept me thinking about a horror versus episode. It's not that those original threads aren't great ideas, because they are. However, I would really like to see two great horror movies from two different directors go head-to-head.

     

    And that could be anything. Suspiria vs. Ring.

    Dawn of the Dead vs. Shaun of the Dead.

    Psycho vs. Scream

    From Beyond vs. The Beyond

    Halloween vs. The Exorcist

     

    There are a million possibilities, but I just wanted to make a general vote for the format.

     

     

    EDIT: I just remembered that we already had a Fly vs. Thing episode, but that ruled; More points for the format.

    I agree with you (as the guy who started the Fulci thread). But after that Re-Animator episode and the very unfair things levied against it in the episode and in the forum, putting some of my favorite movies up for discussion makes me nervous. Though at the end of the day, I'd just be happy they were discussed.

  9. Posted

    The arguments for and against are all compelling. I really want to write a ten-page essay here about the value of certain genre films, as that is my main area of expertise as a cinephile, but I’m not narcissistic enough to assume anyone cares. This really boils down to one simple thought: Are we allowing genre films into the Canon (the answer is obviously yes), so why wouldn’t we include one of the best genre films out there?

     

    I get it. We already have Cannibal Holocaust, Evil Dead 2, The Thing, and now, possibly Re-Animator. The rub is, while all of those are indeed horror genre films, they’re all VERY DIFFERENT films. There was a conversation in the episode about whether or not we should let in more westerns, and the consensus seemed to be yes, we should—because you can make many different, many great kinds of westerns. How impossibly illogical is it to conclude the same cannot be said for horror and gore films?

     

    I truly wish not to sound condescending, but anyone who thinks Evil Dead 2 and Re-Animator are the same movie is bringing an insanely flawed perspective to the table. They’re both horror and gore films from the 1980s, but that’s about where the similarities end. That’s why it’s frustrating arguing with people about genre films who are new to it (what Devin was talking about with “ignorance”). No knowledgeable person of the genre would ever conflate the two.

     

    Now, if you’re going to be biased against including these types of films into the canon, fine. I totally get that. But if you’re on the fence and have no qualms with genre inclusion, make sure you recognize Re-Animator as one of the best of the bunch and vote accordingly.

    • Like 3

  12. Posted

    I swear I read or heard it in a John Carpenter interview that a lot of Piper's one-liners came from his own notebooks full of lines he planned to use in wrestling interviews.

    That's true. Carpenter and RRP discussed that in the DVD Commentary.

  13. Posted

     

    It's definitely one of those movies for people who love movies — precisely because it exists in that area right between art film and bad film, like Devin pointed out. But existing in that space doesn't automatically mean it's a canon film, that just means it's easy to talk about and there are many possible interpretations of what are actually really dumb things. Just because you can write a term paper about it doesn't mean it's good. That just means it's intellectually interesting on some level. And believe me, I am saying all this as a fan of this movie. And frankly if you can't write an A+ term paper about literally any movie ever, then you never learned how to bullshit your way through college. :P

    This seems to be a debate about what the canon is and isn't and not so much on the film itself. I think we can all agree that Carpenter deserves to be in the canon. Through a 2016 retrospective lens, They Live is one of his most important films, alongside the The Thing and Halloween. It would be hard to argue those two films don't belong in the canon on influence alone, which in context, means They Live deserves the same consideration (regardless of quality). I don't think it's a film that exists between an art film and a bad film: it's an art film disguised as a bad film; the art has a lot to say about the process and presentation of the film. The crappy and goofy things people refer to are iterations of the very themes the film is trying to convey. Constrained by budget? Sure. But it used the budget to its benefit.

     

    I understand the argument against it. I just have a hard time believing one of the most important films of the 1980s wouldn't be in the canon.

    • Like 2

  15. Posted

    I love Fulci and totally want to see him in the canon. The Beyond and City of the Living Dead are my favorites by him.

    I'm one of those idiots who thinks House by the Cemetery is his most realized horror film in terms of storytelling and "characters." But The Beyond I think is his most canon-worthy: it's a masterpiece of tone and creativity, and its influence cannot be denied.

  16. Posted

    There's nothing I can say about They Live that hasn't been said before. It's a masterpiece from a guy who has a few masterpieces. Every scene and set piece is rich in detail and meaning: i.e., you could write a term paper on how the church is used. And ham-fisted, my ass. It's pulpy science fiction, not There Will Be Blood. It's allowed certain liberties in the presentation of themes. Also, if you're solely focusing on the message that's hitting you over the head, then you're missing ten things flying right past you that moment. This is a movie for people who love movies.

     

    Plus, it's just so goddamned awesome. YES.

  19. Posted

    I understand its historical significance as a social issue pic and Oscar winner, but I always look at the Canon as simply: when the aliens land, what movies would I show them as a complete representation of the art form? When looking at it that way, it's hard to rationalize letting the aliens see the 5th, 6th, or 7th best Wilder film the first go-around. Perhaps if the aliens enjoy human cinema after watching the entire Canon, and they want more, I could see this being a solid recommendation.

     

    The Lost Weekend is just too dated, the acting too uneven, and quite simply, just not among the top five Wilder movies I'd recommend to someone who was unfamiliar with him.

  21. Posted

    Ha, totally agree, though the actual episode was pretty great. Talking about Cannibal Holocaust is always infinitely more fun than watching Cannibal Holocaust.

     

    But after posting this, I kinda change my mind and would prefer an Argento giallo, like Deep Red or Suspiria. Or maybe even a Mario Bava giallo. We could really get into where the slasher genre started, and despite what we think of the genre in particular, any film that created it would probably be Canon-worthy. Could even have a Suspiria vs. Blood and Black Lace for best giallo.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    1. I think it would be fun to make Amy sit through another Italian exploitation film.

     

    2. I don't think there's a lock on any Fulci film, including Zombi 2 (which makes it fun). It would be a lot easier to do Dario Argento's films, like Deep Red or Suspiria, but I think we should recognize the second life film criticism has granted to Fulci, especially in regard to his influence on the likes of Tarantino and Rodriguez.

     

    3. There's a lot of Italian cinematic history that was skipped over in the Cannibal Holocaust episode, in regard to exploitation, horror, and giallo.

     

    I know it's a long shot, but I'm not the one who made the internet so goddamn democratic.

  23. Posted

    I couldn't find if this was discussed previously, so I'm sorry if it's already been answered, but are we getting another commentary track? March came and went without the sweet rejuvenation and rebirth of a new Canon Commentaries episode. I mean spring came, but who gives a shit?

    • Like 1
×