HorrorMovieFans.com

Luckily 99% of the jump scenes are real scenes, no fake cat-jump shit.

fake outs before a scare have always been a part of horror, and i didn't think that's what they were talking about? but more like the loud sound to draw attention to something when it's not really necessary. but i haven't seen it, so don't know for sure.

zombie wrote:fake outs before a scare have always been a part of horror, and i didn't think that's what they were talking about? but more like the loud sound to draw attention to something when it's not really necessary. but i haven't seen it, so don't know for sure.

Nope, they're complaining about sound existing in scare scenes. Not fake ones. Though I'm struggling to remember any fake scare scenes anyway. They're just being little bitches that act tough and talk shit on horror. Like oh my god, they used sound to help a general audience jump when something intense suddenly happens. I can't think of one scare scene where the sound doesn't intensify. Post the silent film era. Too loud? Welcome to a movie theatre little bitches, they don't operate with shitty computer speakers. Sound is supposed to engulf you there.

And when you said "not really necessary" I still lumped that with fake outs

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:And when you said "not really necessary" I still lumped that with fake outs

i didn't mean it that way. fake outs like a cat, or a friendly character, or something before the killer / monster pops up. that kind of thing is cool in my book.

so they're talking like the scene where myers surprises bob or like the shower scene in psycho? music and loud sounds can really be effective in drawing you into a scene and helping with the tension. i've even heard from somewhere that carpenter showed halloween to someone without the score and they thought it stunk, but then with the score it really turned them around. i don't remember who it was that it was shown to, but yeah. those guys kind of suck.

The jump scares I like are the ones you are absolutely not ready for. The rock hitting the window in It Follows is the perfect example.

Jigsaw wrote:

Monster wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Monster wrote:They got that part right about Ben. He was a loner who spent a lot of time in the library. Mike's history lessons came from his father. A very likeable character I was sad to see was left out.

Wouldn't have worked in this context then, given that his father died in a fire early on in his life, and his grandfather was visibly a bit of a sadistic twat.

It is a valid criticism, but only in the context of how true to the source material it was. Definitely didn't strike me as something you have to critique in the film context itself.

I don't fault the movie for changing things up like that. To do mike's dad justice they would've had to go into his back story. Movie would've lost its flow. A long, rich book like that is going to lose a lot in any adaptation. Unavoidable. Mike's dad, the smoke hole and the coming of IT were all things things from the book I'd like to see, but understand why they were left out.

Chud was apparently left out not due to disrupting the flow, but due to budget constraints, according to what I've read. Shame, as this movie really could have used it.

As I said, I enjoyed this movie quite a bit, and more then the 1990 mini-series, but it still needed an extra hour and a half. Plus the orgy.

What about the Patrick and Henry jerk off scene?

zombie wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:And when you said "not really necessary" I still lumped that with fake outs

i didn't mean it that way. fake outs like a cat, or a friendly character, or something before the killer / monster pops up. that kind of thing is cool in my book.

so they're talking like the scene where myers surprises bob or like the shower scene in psycho? music and loud sounds can really be effective in drawing you into a scene and helping with the tension. i've even heard from somewhere that carpenter showed halloween to someone without the score and they thought it stunk, but then with the score it really turned them around. i don't remember who it was that it was shown to, but yeah. those guys kind of suck.

Yep. The Entity ghost rape scenes also came to mind of a horror movie noted for loud sound during intense scenes. The scenes they reference are scenes where there's actually threat.

The closest to a fake-out, which still isn't a fake-out, that I can think involves luring Bill. And since it's still threatening, I can't think of it as fake either, lol.

These guys must be fun at Halloween parties.

Monster wrote:

Jigsaw wrote:

Monster wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Monster wrote:They got that part right about Ben. He was a loner who spent a lot of time in the library. Mike's history lessons came from his father. A very likeable character I was sad to see was left out.

Wouldn't have worked in this context then, given that his father died in a fire early on in his life, and his grandfather was visibly a bit of a sadistic twat.

It is a valid criticism, but only in the context of how true to the source material it was. Definitely didn't strike me as something you have to critique in the film context itself.

I don't fault the movie for changing things up like that. To do mike's dad justice they would've had to go into his back story. Movie would've lost its flow. A long, rich book like that is going to lose a lot in any adaptation. Unavoidable. Mike's dad, the smoke hole and the coming of IT were all things things from the book I'd like to see, but understand why they were left out.

Chud was apparently left out not due to disrupting the flow, but due to budget constraints, according to what I've read. Shame, as this movie really could have used it.

As I said, I enjoyed this movie quite a bit, and more then the 1990 mini-series, but it still needed an extra hour and a half. Plus the orgy.

What about the Patrick and Henry jerk off scene?

lol, why not? If you're gonna have the 6 boys run a train on Bev in a sewer, why can't Henry and Patrick jerk off in a junk yard, and Patrick wanting to take it further and Henry goes all homophobe

I keed, but I still like that they added that gay twist to Patrick by him very visibly licking his lips at Richie in the hallway.

The Entity totally set up that loud rape scene by keeping a quiet tone throughout the movie up until that point. lol. Worked beautifully. The best things in horror are the shit you don't see coming. Clearly something was going to happen in that bedroom scene, but I'll be god damned if I predicted that. :p

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Monster wrote:

Jigsaw wrote:

Monster wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Monster wrote:They got that part right about Ben. He was a loner who spent a lot of time in the library. Mike's history lessons came from his father. A very likeable character I was sad to see was left out.

Wouldn't have worked in this context then, given that his father died in a fire early on in his life, and his grandfather was visibly a bit of a sadistic twat.

It is a valid criticism, but only in the context of how true to the source material it was. Definitely didn't strike me as something you have to critique in the film context itself.

I don't fault the movie for changing things up like that. To do mike's dad justice they would've had to go into his back story. Movie would've lost its flow. A long, rich book like that is going to lose a lot in any adaptation. Unavoidable. Mike's dad, the smoke hole and the coming of IT were all things things from the book I'd like to see, but understand why they were left out.

Chud was apparently left out not due to disrupting the flow, but due to budget constraints, according to what I've read. Shame, as this movie really could have used it.

As I said, I enjoyed this movie quite a bit, and more then the 1990 mini-series, but it still needed an extra hour and a half. Plus the orgy.

What about the Patrick and Henry jerk off scene?

lol, why not? If you're gonna have the 6 boys run a train on Bev in a sewer, why can't Henry and Patrick jerk off in a junk yard, and Patrick wanting to take it further and Henry goes all homophobe

I keed, but I still like that they added that gay twist to Patrick by him very visibly licking his lips at Richie in the hallway.

Did he? I missed that. I'm hoping the video release will show exactly how Patrick got all bloody there in the tunnel. Deleted scenes or (fingers crossed) an extended cut.

Monster wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Monster wrote:

Jigsaw wrote:

Monster wrote:

showa58taro wrote:

Monster wrote:They got that part right about Ben. He was a loner who spent a lot of time in the library. Mike's history lessons came from his father. A very likeable character I was sad to see was left out.

Wouldn't have worked in this context then, given that his father died in a fire early on in his life, and his grandfather was visibly a bit of a sadistic twat.

It is a valid criticism, but only in the context of how true to the source material it was. Definitely didn't strike me as something you have to critique in the film context itself.

I don't fault the movie for changing things up like that. To do mike's dad justice they would've had to go into his back story. Movie would've lost its flow. A long, rich book like that is going to lose a lot in any adaptation. Unavoidable. Mike's dad, the smoke hole and the coming of IT were all things things from the book I'd like to see, but understand why they were left out.

Chud was apparently left out not due to disrupting the flow, but due to budget constraints, according to what I've read. Shame, as this movie really could have used it.

As I said, I enjoyed this movie quite a bit, and more then the 1990 mini-series, but it still needed an extra hour and a half. Plus the orgy.

What about the Patrick and Henry jerk off scene?

lol, why not? If you're gonna have the 6 boys run a train on Bev in a sewer, why can't Henry and Patrick jerk off in a junk yard, and Patrick wanting to take it further and Henry goes all homophobe

I keed, but I still like that they added that gay twist to Patrick by him very visibly licking his lips at Richie in the hallway.

Did he? I missed that. I'm hoping the video release will show exactly how Patrick got all bloody there in the tunnel. Deleted scenes or (fingers crossed) an extended cut.

Yep, noticed it the first time and immediately went, "yep, that's Patrick" lol

I think that there has to be some element of "Jump scares" and in this case they were few and far between in the sense of pure "BOO" style jump scares. There was enough unsettling creepiness leading up to the scares that it actually was an emotional reward at the end of a longer set-up, in almost every case.
What the scares all tend to get, therefore, is a payoff, but also a legitimate build-up and accompanying tension. The fact that there is an element of a loud sound to go with the obviously loud bit of the scene does become formulaic, but it's a formula that works. There's only really one scare that was Jason's favourite of "WTF" in a normal scene.

Monster wrote:http://movieweb.com/it-movie-2017-penny ... y-krueger/

I know it was brought up (well, Freddy and other 80's horror icons) because it was set in the 80's and no longer 50's (in the book, he transforms into Frankensteins Monster, The Wolfman, and Rodan, among other pre 60's monsters).

I'm glad they didn't though, it would've been distracting.

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Monster wrote:http://movieweb.com/it-movie-2017-penny ... y-krueger/

I know it was brought up (well, Freddy and other 80's horror icons) because it was set in the 80's and no longer 50's (in the book, he transforms into Frankensteins Monster, The Wolfman, and Rodan, among other pre 60's monsters).

I'm glad they didn't though, it would've been distracting.

Agreed. Even if they'd had the rights (which New Line do) it would've felt like it was trying to be funny rather than creepy. It would technically work, but it would feel wrong.

Plus, I think Pennywise has a few too many parallels with Freddy at the minute, a direct lift would just further expose that to some extent.

It's a cool idea, but I agree it would've gone off the rails a little.

Sweet

http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1703139 ... ly-include

I was wondering if there was going to be one. Sweet.

So I'm back. Let me first talk of the experience. I checked the movie times on Wednesday and then asked the folks I was going with to confirm todays, and one of the airhead chicks said yeah, I checked on my phone and it's all the same and good. We show up and get in the theater, it's blackened and the opening names and shit are already going. I stop my group in their tracks saying what the fuck is this shit, why is the movie already going? Airhead and others going "it's probably just the previews"... No dickfaces, that's Bill building the boat with Georgie and shit, assholes! The fucking time changed. Airhead made sure to sit away from me because the Stink-Eye was deafening. Gan and the Turtle must have been looking out, because we were there right before the Georgie scene, so I didn't have to kill them all.

Now thoughts on movie. I liked it a lot. It did not live up to my expectations, and I know the hype had to do with that, but still liked it a lot. First off, the kids were fantastic. And I think the more kid-centric shiz, whether it's the more "Stand By Me" stuff, to especially the dialogue was great. The Pennnywise scenes, nothing got me there. It could be my own mindset that nothing is gonna live up to Curry, a legendary actor, and outside of the drooling when wanting to feed (nice touch!), I didn't get whole a lot out of this Pennywise, but I can dig it. In general, I can dig it and that it had way more to do with the book and the King-verse in general.