Horror Movie Discussion

**Roxy** · 07-16-2010, 04:17 PM

Title is self explanatory, but talk about random horror movies, reviews, news tidbits, how great Angela Baker is and everything else horror related in here (that includes Eli Roth and his gloriously gory mind for the horror genre). Just want to say thanks a lot to Necro for giving this idea a nod as well.

So to get the discussion going, we have more torture porn to look forward to:

Hostel 3 heading to Vegas

So if what happens in Vegas really stays in Vegas, then I would be very happy if that meant we'd never had to see another Hostel movie hit theaters, but alas Bloody-Disgusting reports that Hostel 3, which is moving the torture from Europe to neon lit Las Vegas, is gearing up to start production in August with Scott Spiegel directing from a screenplay by Michael Weiss. Of course Eli Roth is still producing the sequel which will see a bachelor party goes horribly wrong, not to mention a horror franchise, go terribly wrong. I really don't see why we need another one of these that isn't straight-to-DVD, although this probably won't hit theaters.

Source: More Torture Porn on the Way with Hostel 3 Heading to Vegas

Not sure how I feel about it being shot in Vegas. Interesting concept, and I won't judge before seeing it, but the ominously creepy sounding foreign guys in the previous films were partly what made Hostel I & II so good. It's more or less deterred me from ever visiting Eastern Europe. American accents don't have that same effect. Regardless, the notion for the series is leaps and bounds above the pit hole that the Saw franchise has now descended into, and Roth being apart of the production is always a positive plus.

**Pickle Mikk** · 07-16-2010, 04:22 PM

Not a fan of the Hostel movies, i often wonder how warped the producers are to come up with such sick and twisted things to put into movies.

Personally, i like my sci fi horror like The Thing, Critters & Aliens.

**King Steventon** · 07-16-2010, 04:25 PM

Hostel sucks dick. Hollywood torture porn gets no love from me.

Recently bought Pulse, Trick 'r Treat and the original Black Christmas. And Zombieland.

I will say the Human Centipede is one of the most horrifying films I've seen in a long time. To get a taste of it, here is the trailer:

It's some fucked up shit.

**Big Papa** · 07-16-2010, 04:28 PM

I can't deny I've watched the likes of Hostel, Hostel II, Touristas, etc. But I end up feeling like the whole torture porn horror sub-genre is just lazy horror film-making.

**Pickle Mikk** · 07-16-2010, 04:29 PM

I like at the end that says "100% medically accurate"

That looks messed up too and was not what i was expecting at all.

**Jim** · 07-16-2010, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by King Steventon

Recently bought Pulse, Trick 'r Treat and the original Black Christmas. And Zombieland.

With the exception of Pulse (If it's the Kristin Bell version), you picked up some great horror movies.

I don't mind the torture porn sub-genre of horror. Originally, it was a throwback to the gritty horror movies of the 70's. After the bubblegum horror fad that Scream started up, horror desperately needed it's edge back. Like any fad, it caught on and became too popular. It no longer feels so extreme when every other horror movie is trying to sicken you with how much violence they show.

Hostel was such a great idea at first. It wasn't just a showcase of some extreme kills, but instead gave a glimpse into the psychotic mind of those who commit the heinous crimes. Hostel 2 on the other hand, was just a complete failure for a third movie by Eli Roth. It was almost a parody of the first Hostel with Roth just trying to top his previous effort. You could say the same exact thing about The Ring 2. Zero life and a poor imitation of what it should have been.

**Roxy** · 07-16-2010, 07:04 PM

Torture porn is great when done creatively. When gore is used for the sake of gore, I have a problem, but even in that case it just comes across as unintentional black comedy and I'm a sucker for that. Torture flicks aren't anything unfamiliar or new either, it's just that the effects have become more sophisticated and prominent over the years, and movies like Saw have bought the sub-genre to mainstream audiences, and if you look at what you see, the notion of it seems remarkably realistic because the idea that "this could happen to me" is notably existent (to some viewers at least). That's were the thrills and chills come in. There's nothing wrong with stepping out of the real world and indulging yourself into a blood bath of gore, it's fun and provides the entertainment for those who have the bloodshed carnage need.

Sometimes it will come off as a lethargic and mediocre (at best) ploy, but other times it'll work like a charm, and I believe that's why Hostel was so successful. Saw, originally, wasn't torture porn, at least in my eyes, it was only after the first film it turned into a torture porn franchise. And within horror films (not Saw, but in general) it's come to a point where every death has to be gorier than the last, to which I have no issue (if anything it's becoming a horror cliché). I'd even argue that it's an escapism, and has proven to be a very flourishing one within the horror genre - and I'd also like to point out that the first half of Hostel didn't contain much (if any - it's been a while since I watched it) blood, guts, and gore. It was mainly Paxton and his buddies travelling and going to brothels/strip clubs.

Finally, and while a lot of people won't agree with this, torture porn allows a director to become indentified within the film industry. While it's a cheap ploy to make a name for yourself, once you capture the attention with guts, decapitation and over the top blood scenes, you can move on to bigger and better things. It gets people talking, and the gore has to be exaggerated in film otherwise people are going to go to the big screen and think "well I can just see that on television". To each their own though, torture porn's popularity has heightened over the years, but I guarantee it's just a wave, the horror genre frequently has them. I can't say I mind the flicks, but hey, different strokes for different folks. Certain directors (like Eli Roth) can hit the notes perfectly, and pictures like Hostel and Wolf Creek deserve merit for pulling off the sub-genre so perfectly.

-----------------------------------------

As for Pulse, I saw the trailer and it looked great. Then I saw the actual movie, and it sucked.

**Jim** · 07-16-2010, 08:48 PM

Originally Posted by Roxy

As for Pulse, I saw the trailer and it looked great. Then I saw the actual movie, and it sucked.

I don't know why, but I enjoy the movie. It's complete rubbish, but it's still a guilty pleasure.

Speaking of Saw, the Cube series really got the short end of the stick. Cube does all of the work in setting up a movie full of traps, but then a decade later, Saw comes along and garners all of the hype for doing the same thing.

**Big Papa** · 07-16-2010, 09:22 PM

I guess I shouldn't have said the whole genre. That's not true. Its when the film doesn't really seem to have a point otherwise - whether the gore is the whole payoff. Hostel doesn't really fit that. Hostel II does, as does Touristas. I think the first Saw went beyond that and was quite good, but the rest have slowly fallen off. I still watch and enjoy the series, but it seems like they are struggling for justification with the story moreso than telling the story they want/need to.

I'm with you, Jim - Pulse was bad but enjoyed. Recently rewatched the sequels... Ouch... Still never seen the Japanese original...

Cube is another one that fell off. The first one was awesome, but I remember the second one as being a real disappointment. I also don't remember is being as graphic or gory... Going to have to rewatch that. But what Cube did in the first one that Saw definitely seemed to cop was the situational focus. There wasn't really much focus on understanding why this was happening to these people - although they clearly wanted to know - but simply that it was and this is how they were dealing...

**Jim** · 07-16-2010, 09:26 PM

Originally Posted by Big Papa

I'm with you, Jim - Pulse was bad but enjoyed. Recently rewatched the sequels... Ouch... Still never seen the Japanese original...

I've yet to dare to watch the sequels. Without even seeing them, I know they're going to be horrible.

Cube is another one that fell off. The first one was awesome, but I remember the second one as being a real disappointment. I also don't remember is being as graphic or gory... Going to have to rewatch that. But what Cube did in the first one that Saw definitely seemed to cop was the situational focus. There wasn't really much focus on understanding why this was happening to these people - although they clearly wanted to know - but simply that it was and this is how they were dealing...

Have you seen Hypercube: Cube 3? It's a huge step forward from the second.

**Big Papa** · 07-16-2010, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by Jim

I've yet to dare to watch the sequels. Without even seeing them, I know they're going to be horrible.

Have you seen Hypercube: Cube 3? It's a huge step forward from the second.

I wouldn't call them horrible. They aren't really unwatchable in the sense of being atrocious. Just really quite poor, even compared to the first one. They are a little bit different takes on things...

I honestly couldn't say if I saw the third Cube... I know I downloaded it at some point but I am utterly uncertain if I actually ever watched it. I'll have to see if I still have it stashed away somewhere on the external HD.

**King Steventon** · 07-16-2010, 09:42 PM

I got the original Pulse, I don't think I want to touch the remake.

**Jim** · 07-16-2010, 09:48 PM

I still haven't seen it. I should really get around to it. With how much I oddly enjoyed the remake, the original should be even better.

**The Natural** · 07-16-2010, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by Roxy

Torture porn is great when done creatively.

This is the difference between Hostel 1 and 2.

Originally Posted by Jim

I don't know why, but I enjoy the movie. It's complete rubbish, but it's still a guilty pleasure.

Speaking of Saw, the Cube series really got the short end of the stick. Cube does all of the work in setting up a movie full of traps, but then a decade later, Saw comes along and garners all of the hype for doing the same thing.

I really hate Saw 2 for this reason. It even had the "over-aggressive guy who needlessly endangers everyone to escape."

Cube 3 was nowhere near the first one but it was at least engaging and interesting. Think a Cube remake with some bigger stars would do well today? As long as they don't go crazy with the budget of a Hollywood version and remember the charm that made the first one so enjoyable, I wouldn't mind.

**Jim** · 07-16-2010, 11:41 PM

The time to remake Cube was back in 2006 or so. Especially with how Saw 6 did in the theaters, it's pretty clear that that sub-genre is dying off. It's similar to remaking a J-Horror movie. Yeah, it used to be all of the craze, but these days it's just lame.

**The Natural** · 07-16-2010, 11:54 PM

Originally Posted by Jim

The time to remake Cube was back in 2006 or so. Especially with how Saw 6 did in the theaters, it's pretty clear that that sub-genre is dying off. It's similar to remaking a J-Horror movie. Yeah, it used to be all of the craze, but these days it's just lame.

I'm not talking about remaking it to cash in on a fad. I'm talking about remaking it to give a solid film/script a wider audience and more revenue using well known actors. If anything it's even better that it's not during the "craze" so that it doesn't get associated with the market trend and has a chance to be judged on its own laurels. Otherwise it would have looked like "just another one of those movies." Now it has a chance to stand out.

**Jim** · 07-17-2010, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by The Natural

I'm not talking about remaking it to cash in on a fad. I'm talking about remaking it to give a solid film/script a wider audience and more revenue using well known actors. If anything it's even better that it's not during the "craze" so that it doesn't get associated with the market trend and has a chance to be judged on its own laurels. Otherwise it would have looked like "just another one of those movies." Now it has a chance to stand out.

The problem is doing it at the tail end of a trend will cause mover goers to not see it as much as they would have during a different time.

**Jimmy King** · 07-17-2010, 02:49 PM

I loved the first Hostel, the second....ehh not so much. Though it was funny when the girl chops the guy's pecker off, then feeds it to the dogs.

I will watch the third one just out of curiosity, I like the idea of it being in Vegas(where I just took a trip to recently).

The first Saw was great, second was too, third was okay. After they killed off Jigsaw it just kind of ruined it for me, he was such a great character.

As screwed up as it looks, I really want to see The Human Centipede. I just enjoy screwed up flicks like that, don't know why to be honest.

**Roxy** · 07-17-2010, 03:26 PM

The dilemma (or the one of the many) which caused the failure in Hostel II was the humanization of both Todd and Stuart, and while I liked the notion that money literally can buy you anything, we knew far too much about the killers and it detracted from the scare-factor. The less you know, the scarier it is. Here's hoping that Roth can redeem himself after that abomination with the third instalment though.

**Jim** · 07-17-2010, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by Roxy

The dilemma (or the one of the many) which caused the failure in Hostel II was the humanization of both Todd and Stuart, and while I liked the notion that money literally can buy you anything, we knew far too much about the killers and it detracted from the scare-factor. The less you know, the scarier it is.

I feel the opposite. The whole reason why I wanted to see the movie was because Roth had hyped it up to be a movie about just the killers. It would have made for a much more interesting movie. Would the scares be there? No, but it would be Henryesque in being a portrait of a killer.

You either go all the way with that or you don't bother at all. Roth decided to try splitting it in half which made us not care about the victims and we didn't get to see enough of the killers.