sam2304 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Paranormal Activity 2 Best horror movie I have seen I would say, dont know if it just because I saw it at the cinema instead of watching it at home but I thought this was a great follow up to the first one, one of the scariest movies Ive seen I think was brilliant well worth checking out. 9.5/10 everyone i know who has seen it said it was shit, might be worth a look though 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans_Husband Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 The Social Network Didn't know what to expect with this one but it was great. Compelling story (although a lot of the 'realities' of it are up for debate), well directed (apart from the Henley Regatta bit) and very good performances from the cast. Yes, including Justin Timberlake. The two hours seemed to fly by. A very worthy 8/10 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 everyone i know who has seen it said it was shit, might be worth a look though The first one was the worst cinematically released horror I've ever seen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gall09 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Kick Ass - 7/10 Although i didn't find it as particularly funny as others seem to, i thought it was very good. Was quite surprised by some of the violence involved. Nicholas Cage's best performance for ages. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Easy A - Outstanding. 8/10 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 In preparation for Saw 3D on Samhuinn, Saw VI - 8/10 Better than I remember it being. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Brightside Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 The first one was the worst cinematically released horror I've ever seen. Says the man who likes the Saw franchise... Paranormal Activity 2 -Whatever I gave the first one plus one, probably a 9 out of 10. Really good actually, really effective at making you jump, I'd recommend you see. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Says the man who likes the Saw franchise... Paranormal Activity 2 -Whatever I gave the first one plus one, probably a 9 out of 10. Really good actually, really effective at making you jump, I'd recommend you see. The first one had NO jumps in it, had shit acting, no plot and f**k all happened. If I could give it 0/10, I would have. Saw is the the most consistently good horror franchise of all time, the others have peaks at the beginning but the troughs can be quite poor at times, such as Halloween 4, Hellraiser 3, Friday the 13th Part 3, House 4, Diary of the Dead and Nightmare on Elm Street 5. Only Phantasm could boast a consistency like this (only not as high a level). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forehead7 Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 Kick Ass - 7/10 Although i didn't find it as particularly funny as others seem to, i thought it was very good. Was quite surprised by some of the violence involved. Nicholas Cage's best performance for ages. Kick Ass was shite. Stupid Hollywood pish: No need to change the flamethrower to the jetpack machine guns when they take out the mob at the end. Changing the ending so that it's a "guy gets the girl in the end" type of crap. Nicholas Cage trying to be Adam West batman. The costume was also changed from the comic to make it look more like batman. 4/10 -2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Brightside Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 The first one had NO jumps in it, had shit acting, no plot and f**k all happened. If I could give it 0/10, I would have. Saw is the the most consistently good horror franchise of all time, the others have peaks at the beginning but the troughs can be quite poor at times, such as Halloween 4, Hellraiser 3, Friday the 13th Part 3, House 4, Diary of the Dead and Nightmare on Elm Street 5. Only Phantasm could boast a consistency like this (only not as high a level). The acting was shit because it was meant to be as if they weren't acting. How did fuck all happen? Have you seen the film? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomDom Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 I'm also confused by the "f**k all happened" stuff. Unless he was wearing a blindfold. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yabass Posted October 27, 2010 Share Posted October 27, 2010 (edited) The first one was the worst cinematically released horror I've ever seen. I wouldn't go that far, but it was pretty shite. The "scares" were all predicated; each time we are given a view from the set up camera, the time on the camera speeds through the night until it slows down, and suddenly the viewers focus is on the bedroom. And, surprise surprise, after a few seconds, there's a sound or something moves or the girl starts acting peculiar, and its supposed to be terrifying. The scares are all set up and manufactured, there was very little original about the whole thing. Also, the film's 'found footage' genre implies there should be some degree of realism, especially considering the extent of the characterisation and the nature of the films intent (to be frightening through subtlety). However, the characters actions are consistently absurd (even by horror film standards): their choice to remain in the house, not bothering to expose the footage, the boyfriend was contradiction personified, the demonologist was pointless etc etc I might benefit from a second viewing, but i really struggled with this film the first time round. 4/10 - face-slappingly unspectacular, bordering on ridiculous. Saw, however, (discounting sequels) is an inventive and original horror film, with a delightfully sinister tone. The scene where the photographer navigates his pitch black apartment with the flash on his camera is genuinely menacing. Edited October 27, 2010 by yabass 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 (edited) The acting was shit because it was meant to be as if they weren't acting. How did fuck all happen? Have you seen the film? Trying to be as vague as possible to minimise the spoilers... Nothing happened, they sat about bitching about the noises for a while, they set up a personal camcorder... aye fucking right! She got dragged off and something happened off camera, then she does something to her partner off camera, then she dies off camera The acting was shit because they looked like they were acting, the 'fear' they showed was pathetic! Oh, and of course I've seen the film, I'd go as far as to say I probably saw it before any of you as I saw it before it was released in America. Bear in mind there was at least three versions, we don't know which one we all saw. Edited October 28, 2010 by SaltyTON -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jambo-rocker Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Rambo 2 53% 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StewartyMac Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 How on earth you can type something like that and mean it is beyond me. I agree with him, for consistency over a high number of films, in the horror genre at least, it's pretty hard to beat. Each film on its own isn't a 'great film' per se, but if you actually pay attention throughout the series, you can go back to previous films and find bits that you maybe didn't quite get the meaning of first time round. They are cleverly interwoven, and it stops it from just being pointless remakes of the first one, a la Friday 13th, and Nightmare on Elm Street, which is a road they could have easily gone down. Not seen VI yet, but I'd like to see it soon, as I want to see VII in 3D before it stops being shown (I may be too late already though) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 I agree with him, for consistency over a high number of films, in the horror genre at least, it's pretty hard to beat. Each film on its own isn't a 'great film' per se, but if you actually pay attention throughout the series, you can go back to previous films and find bits that you maybe didn't quite get the meaning of first time round. They are cleverly interwoven, and it stops it from just being pointless remakes of the first one, a la Friday 13th, and Nightmare on Elm Street, which is a road they could have easily gone down. Not seen VI yet, but I'd like to see it soon, as I want to see VII in 3D before it stops being shown (I may be too late already though) Saw 3D only came out today mate, I've got tickets for Sunday. If you download Vuze (small file) you'll get a DVD rip on there in a few hours. I got mine from there and it's very good quality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forehead7 Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 The "Of The Dead" series are better, granted I've not seen "Diary" but the others are of such high quality that it doens't matter how bad it is, they are still better than the Saws 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomDom Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Are we counting Night of the Living Dead in that series ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forehead7 Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 Are we counting Night of the Living Dead in that series ? Yeah, Night of the Living, Dawn, Day, Land and their remakes. Although I'd be tempted to just include the original Night/Dawn/Day series. But I also believe that the others stand up to Saws. Quick check of his imdb, I've also not seen Survival of the Dead. Although that was a straight to dvd so I'm not surprised 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StewartyMac Posted October 28, 2010 Share Posted October 28, 2010 The "Of The Dead" series are better, granted I've not seen "Diary" but the others are of such high quality that it doens't matter how bad it is, they are still better than the Saws Dawn of the Dead (the 1978 one, aka the best damn horror film ever made) and Day of the Dead are head and shoulders above every other one though, and there's little continuity in any of them. So, on that basis, Saw still wins, although none of the Saw films are, on their own, as good as the two films mentioned above. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.