|
|
Post by Mista-Bones on Dec 9, 2011 1:35:16 GMT -6
which is your favorite? i think i liked 2 the most but like all 3
|
|
|
|
Post by bodyboy on Dec 9, 2011 4:11:44 GMT -6
I consider the 1992 original to be the very best horror film of the 1990s.
|
|
|
|
Post by No Personality on Dec 9, 2011 15:14:04 GMT -6
I've only seen the first one.
Scream definitely dwarfs Candyman in my eyes. But, yeah, it's one of the best horror films of that decade.
|
|
|
|
Post by bodyboy on Dec 9, 2011 23:04:18 GMT -6
Scream is far too overpraised in my eyes. I'll stick with Hallucinogenic Helen ftw.
|
|
|
|
Post by No Personality on Dec 10, 2011 3:05:42 GMT -6
Scream has so many layers, that it can be praised for different reasons. Too many people assume that anyone who likes it must be liking it because it makes them feel clever for being in on some kind of joke. That may be true for some but the movie is still far better than that. Other than having extremely strong character writing, highly intelligent dialogue, and sharp and downright brilliant ideas all around, thanks to Craven's input- it also has a subversive angle to it that skewers panderingly liberal views of people crying foul at movie violence of the 90's and the moral majority types who tried to condemn the likes of A Nightmare on Elm Street and The Last House on the Left by labeling them a bad influence on viewers. AND it even makes time to say something about horror fans. Not a lot of people picked up on this, but the scenes with Sidney commenting on horror movies being stupid or people not being able to tell the difference between a movie and reality were not actually trying to make her look right.
Seriously- this thing is walking the rope of masterpiece so tightly, I'm still wondering what the sole flaw is. Although, to be fair, I feel the same way about Candyman.
However, I can come closer to finding a flaw for Candyman- the pacing. It's paced and edited like no other movie I've ever seen before. It's sort of soft as it cuts (again, I'm talking about the editing). Makes the movie feel like it takes place in a room with pillow walls. There are a great deal of scenes where even though you know the movie's cut to the exterior or high angle of the next scene and it feels like you're still in the last one. I would guess the movie's trying to hypnotize us (into reacting a certain way- which I could respect) but instead I feel like it's trying to sedate us (not a state I find helpful for watching a horror film). Which doesn't help get us into the reality of the otherwise disturbing aftermath of the killing / death scenes. I'm not trying to dictate what the movie should and shouldn't do but I think it's a very odd choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by spaulding069 on Dec 14, 2011 17:13:49 GMT -6
Part 1 is for sure my favorite man!! Stills scares me to this day watching it.
|
|
|
|
Post by I'm Blake on Dec 15, 2011 16:09:06 GMT -6
I like the first one too! I watched an 80's movie last night with Virginia Madsen in it called "Modern Girls". Now that a time capsule of 80's awesomeness.
|
|
