It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Thank you for the compliment, sir!
As for 5 and 6, I guess they are generally considered the weakest instalments in the series. THE DREAM CHILD has its moments; it's a good-enough sequel to my (guilty pleasure) favourite, THE DREAM MASTER, which I rate much higher than the (slightly overrated, in my opinion) THE DREAM WARRIORS. The problem with Hopkins' fifth film is that they were looking for something "of the times"--times in which straight-up horror with bloody violence and loads of sex had a difficult time passing the ridiculously rigid demands imposed by the MPAA in the USA and she-devil Mary Whitehouse's Video Nasty Gestapo in the UK. Hence, the filmmakers tried to resort to "conceptual" horror, going off the rails in many regards, but still keeping Freddy's dreamscapes and nightmares somewhat intact. The "pregnancy" arc has been the subject of enormous criticism, but to be honest, it has some potential for good Freddy terror. Still, the film is never truly scary nor intelligent, but neither is it the trainwreck it's often considered to be. While the moral terrorists were breathing down his neck, Hopkins managed to bring characters from the previous film back and close a few nice story arcs. I don't hate this film, not at all, in fact.
But FREDDY'S DEAD is the worst. This exploration of "Twin Peaks Freddy" was supposed to be veteran crew member Rachel Talalay's loving contribution to the series; instead, she spat a big loogie in Freddy's soup. Once again forced to severely hold back on the visceral horror, Talalay opted for "mystery" and "mood"--which is fine, except that she turned Freddy into a prankster. Powerglove Freddy... Wicked Witch Freddy... I feel insulted time and again. The leftovers from when the film turned '3D' cripple this film even more than the same stupid gimmicks had done in Friday 13th 3D and Jaws 3D. The only redeeming element in FREDDY'S DEAD is the small exploration of Freddy's backstory we get too little of, and far too late. The film practically invites a cynical meta-reading of the title: not so much Freddy himself, but the entire series was dead. Or so it seems.
Thank Satan for NEW NIGHTMARE and FREDDY VS JASON, two films that worked hard to wash away the bitter aftertaste of FREDDY'S DEAD. I will concede this much: the moral panic had simmered down a bit and "mainstream" films could once again cut off limbs without British policemen invading houses and raiding video collections--UK fascism at work. (I cannot stress my hatred for Whitehouse and her lunatic followers enough!) So in that way, NEW NIGHTMARE and FREDDY VS JASON had an easier time re-exploring the juicier flavours of the slasher genre. But they were also better in almost every other possible way.
Mary Whitehous was a puritanical old biddy, with far too much time on her hands. So much time spend "protecting" us, and not once did it occur to her, what happens when you tell someone that they can't have something. They will want it more. Her time would have been better spent down the local Darby & Joan club with her husband. I mean she spent around a decade of her life, going after Doctor Who. I know that the acid bath scene in Vengeance On Varos chapped her ass. But how was that any different to people being zapped by the Daleks back in the 1960's?
https://bloody-disgusting.com/movie/3718926/ghostface-takes-manhattan-scream-6-will-take-place-in-new-york-city/
Part of why I think the movie is so scary is that the actor playing Jesse sells the character's anxiety so well.
I will!
What's funny is that the actor himself is gay. He may have put a lot of himself into the performance--instructed or not--and thus helped build the extra layer. From watching the bonus material, I get the sense that everybody kinda "knew it" but no one ever really talked about it. They probably knew what they were making, even if it wasn't explicitly stated in the script. But if, indeed, no one ever brought it up on or off set, I'm baffled. Jesse's early morning screams, his undie dance, the shower scenes with Grady and Coach, the gay bar scene with Bob Shaye in black leather, all the talk about what's going on "inside me", Jesse discussing his feelings with Grady in the latter's bedroom instead of with Lisa, Freddy's unsubtle remarks and hints, ... It's all there.
To be frank, once it had dawned on me what the film is about, I started enjoying it so much more as a project that was, intentionally or not, ahead of its time. Forget your average on-the-nose coming-of-age teen drama on Netflix, Freddy's Revenge can be seen as a film that directly addresses the horror of leading a closeted life as a teen boy who's expected to make it with the cute girl but discovers that his sexual tastes and urges don't align with the "norm". The issue isn't resolved by having an open talk about it; rather, we are witness to a completely internalized struggle, with Freddy as the personification of all the conflicts, fears, insecurities and pains that come with being not quite what everyone else seems to expect.
Either Freddy's Revenge was a carefully constructed attempt at raising awareness of the serious struggles that young, gay people face when growing up, or it accidentally hit all the right notes to make it a, dare I say, "visionary masterpiece" that deserves a modern re-appraisal. I'm not a gay man myself, but teaching youngsters, I have seen several of them trying to cope with what they won't accept at first, let alone talk about. I'm not saying this film may inspire them to come out, I'm saying that those who choose to ignore or downplay the struggles should watch the film, at least if they can decypher the message.
And then, on the other hand, is Schreck, who has something different to contribute to the film. His backstory could have used a little more detail, but we get the idea: his lonely immortality is a curse. An itch he has been unable to scratch for so long that it has seeped into his being. He doesn't live, he endures life. The character, inhuman in appearance and gestures, also provides moments of comedy when he suddenly demonstrates relatable qualities, such as vanity ("I want some makeup"). I love how, in a certain scene, he clicks his nails when his conversation with Murnau comes to an end. (Such a gesture might have originated in the 1922 film; I don't know.) It strikes me as an expression of sudden clarity combined with frustration and impatience. The character's best, most interesting scene might be when he has a drink with the crew. This is literally an impromptu interview with a vampire.
Of the cast, I enjoyed seeing three eccentric actors working together: John Malkovich, Willem Dafoe and Udo Kier. At the halfway point, first-billed Cary Elwes finally shows up, at a time when I'd forgotten he was in the movie. He brings a very refreshing and more jovial touch. Catherine McCormack does something similar, through her expressive and impatient demeanor, compared to Murnau and Albin, who are relatively subdued and cerebral.
By modern standards, I'm hard-pressed to call this an horror film. It's more of a quirky, what-if drama. But it's definitely a worth a watch. The premise is ingenious, as is the execution.
---
Count Orlok was standing outside the theater. I watched him for a few moments, but decided not to speak to him.
https://deadline.com/2022/07/samara-weaving-tony-revolori-join-scream-6-1235064108/
And on a random yet on topic note, you guys should check out Caveat if you ever get the chance. It's a really scary, moody, tense horror film I had never heard of, put it on randomly a few weeks back and couldn't believe how effective and unnerving it was. It's thankfully not jam packed with cheap jump scares; there's only one I recall throughout that was super, super effective (but I watched the trailer after I saw the film and it sadly spoils it). Go in blind and enjoy yourself!
A question for the Hammer fans. Why the bloody hell are almost all men in the Dracula films called Paul? ;;)
Speaking of Hammer, is there a good starting point with those films? I'm a complete rookie when it comes to them but wanted to check out the Hammer Dracula collection at some point. I've been getting into more and more older/classic horror this year and while I've come across a lot of duds, some of them are really, really rewarding and atmospheric and fun.
My first exploration of the Hammer films let me down. I found them anything but scary, very repetitive and mostly cheap too in that they simply kept re-using sets, people, stories, ... But as I dived more into them, I also found good stuff, like great atmosphere (almost to the point of "cosy") and some magnificent performances of Cushing and Lee above all. The later Hammer output (> 1970) tends to be very sexy as well at times, not holding back on any nudity.
I also had to wait for some of my now personal favourites to appear on my radar, such as the very "boobalicious" Karnstein trilogy, the mysterious She, the Quatermass films and so on. It was really a matter of getting used to the typical Hammer menu and then appreciating that for what it is rather than criticising it for what it isn't. I basically browsed through several DVD boxes containing a wide variety of Hammer films, disliking several, but appreciating many more.
From there on, I started completing certain series, mostly the Draculas and Frankensteins. Personally, I think the Draculas are fine, but not great. The Frankensteins, though, thriving, for the most part, on Cushing's undeniable charisma, are my favourites. But I have come to understand that this is very different for different people. And that, @Creasy47, is why I can't tell you where to start. I know what my favourites are, but perhaps yours are totally different.
As for what order? I would suggest the order of release, begin with Horror Of Dracula, and enjoy how the series, in particular the Dracula films, evolved.
The 70's Dracula films, or rather, the last 3 in the series experiment with the formula. Though when I watch them, especially SATANIC RITES (which I am a big defender of), I always feel sad, seeing how frail and gaunt Peter Cushing looked. His wife hadn't long passed away, and understandably, he would have been overcome with grief, yet he was nothing short of a consummate professional.
Yes, sir, I'll absolutely be adding that to the list for educational purposes.
I remember being a bit baffled by that when I first saw them - wasn't it in three films in a row at one point?
Madeline Smith. Sigh. She was in a notorious advert in the '70s, where a couple of things made such a big impression that no one could remember what she was advertising...
I just finished watching CAVEAT. Man, I would love to know your take on the ending because I haven't at all figured it out yet. I do love the film, though. Clearly made on a very low budget, it nevertheless manages to provide some good thrills. The actor who plays Isaac does a pretty solid job of conveying his fear and confusion. I love a film with little money that makes the best of its limited resources and pulls off a suspensful film. I'm willing to give this one an A and I hope the director gets to do more very soon.
Definitely low budget but it utilizes its money very well, I thought. I'm glad you loved it! I just saw the ending as:
@Creasy47
which makes the horror more abstract for me. I see it all as a tale of guilt coming back to haunt us all and put us through bigger ordeals even when we have finally more or less gotten over it.
As for the girl, is she the voice of our own conscience? Is she our inner monologue, the source of all our confusing thoughts in darker times?
I may be reading too much into it myself. I don't know but something about Isaac's ordeal came off as familiar to me.
Or maybe the point of the film is that it is a Rorschag test and we’re all supposed to see different things in it. 😉
Oh I wouldn't presume that. 😉
Looks good!