 |
| author |
topic: Zombie primer: Braaaiiinns... |
Cinenaut
|
|
post #61
on October 25, 2005 - 10:32 AM PDT
|
|
I was really disappointed with Carnival of Souls. I think my expectations were too high after all the praise it received.
Maybe I need to watch it again.
In the night...
In the dark... |
|
underdog
|
|
post #62
on October 25, 2005 - 10:36 AM PDT
|
|
Yup, we won't forget Carnival of Souls, even if our zombie writer did! ;-) (I think she probably just never saw it and we neglected to insert it later.) I have to agree with Cinenaut, though, I was kind of disappointed in it, too, although it's important to remember how low its budget was (and expectations originally). Still has some good creepy moments, but... it's kind of cheap.
Yeah, the first Cat People does have a cat person in it, but relies more on atmospherics and lets the transformations happen behind the scenes, as I recall... |
|
Eoliano
|
|
post #63
on October 25, 2005 - 12:31 PM PDT
|
|
> I was really disappointed with Carnival of Souls. I think my expectations were too high after all the praise it received.
> I have to agree with Cinenaut, though, I was kind of disappointed in it, too, although it's important to remember how low its budget was (and expectations originally). Still has some good creepy moments, but... it's kind of cheap.
A slight film to be sure, I have to say however, that it's very crisply shot. Sure, some of it is cheesy, and in this respect, is akin to a Ed Wood production though not as perverse or cheesy (well almost not). Keep in mind that that the director made it on a shoestring using his considerable experience as an educational filmmaker, and while the whole enterprise must have been a lark, it amounts to decent piece of low-budget filmmaking.
Anyhow, having recently watched the film, I thought it was a haunting little film and has some very startling moments, though admittedly, the ghouls are not the least bit frightening.
If you decide to watch it again, be sure that you rent the director's cut since it contains some interesting supplements which includes a commentary by the director.
> Yup, we won't forget Carnival of Souls, even if our zombie writer did! ;-) (I think she probably just never saw it and we neglected to insert it later.)
Still, as someone who knows damn little about zombie flicks and isn't inclined to watch horror movies (some classics excepted), I thought it a glaring omission, so shame on her and the editors for not noticing! ^_^
> Yeah, the first Cat People does have a cat person in it, but relies more on atmospherics and lets the transformations happen behind the scenes, as I recall...
I don't remember seeing a "catperson." |
|
DLeonard
|
|
post #64
on October 25, 2005 - 1:17 PM PDT
|
|
I would have to say that Carnival of Souls is not a zombie movie.
Caution, there may be spoilers ahead for those who have never seen it
The ghouls are not actual reanimated corpses walking among the living as any good zombie movie, even most Haitian voodoo zombie movies, involve. They are simply ghosts. They have the look, granted, but they ain't zombies in my book.
Oh, and put me on the side that calls it a little known gem. Those images of dancing ghouls in that derelict pavilion stay with you. Had the good fortune to catch it in a theatre a few years back which may have helped. |
|
Eoliano
|
|
post #65
on October 25, 2005 - 2:48 PM PDT
|
|
> I would have to say that Carnival of Souls is not a zombie movie... They are simply ghosts. They have the look, granted, but they ain't zombies in my book.
Egad DL, don't get so technical. Any way you look at it, a ghoul is a ghoul. ^_^
> Oh, and put me on the side that calls it a little known gem. Those images of dancing ghouls in that derelict pavilion stay with you. Had the good fortune to catch it in a theatre a few years back which may have helped.
Redeemed. |
|
artifex
|
|
post #66
on October 29, 2005 - 12:48 AM PDT
|
|
> On October 18, 2005 - 11:14 AM PDT underdog wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> Hm. I just thought maybe because he's a zombie, his back falls off at some point. Hah hah. That would be brilliant. Not really.
It's in your hay-id, in your hay-ayah-id...
ObTopic: I think it's interesting how Val Lewton and William Castle take entirely different approaches. Suspense vs. comedy.
|
|
artifex
|
|
post #67
on October 29, 2005 - 1:02 AM PDT
|
|
> On October 25, 2005 - 2:48 PM PDT Eoliano wrote:
> Egad DL, don't get so technical. Any way you look at it, a ghoul is a ghoul. ^_^
What about girls who are boys, who like boys to be ghouls,
who do boys like they're girls, who do ghouls like they're boys? |
|
artifex
|
|
post #68
on November 3, 2005 - 4:34 PM PST
|
|
> On October 29, 2005 - 1:02 AM PDT artifex wrote:
> > Egad DL, don't get so technical. Any way you look at it, a ghoul is a ghoul. ^_^
> What about girls who are boys, who like boys to be ghouls,
> who do boys like they're girls, who do ghouls like they're boys?
Okay, that's awkward. Something tells me that none of you have heard this song. :) |
|
Cugat
|
|
post #69
on November 3, 2005 - 8:54 PM PST
|
|
On November 3, 2005 - 4:34 PM PST artifex wrote:
> > On October 29, 2005 - 1:02 AM PDT artifex wrote:
> > > Egad DL, don't get so technical. Any way you look at it, a ghoul is a ghoul. ^_^
> > What about girls who are boys, who like boys to be ghouls,
> > who do boys like they're girls, who do ghouls like they're boys?
>
> Okay, that's awkward. Something tells me that none of you have heard this song. :)
Heard it, nearly corrected you on a bit where you didn't substitute an instance of girls with ghouls.
"...for little ghouls get bigger everyday." |
|
DLeonard
|
|
post #70
on November 4, 2005 - 5:00 PM PST
|
|
> On November 3, 2005 - 4:34 PM PST artifex wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> > On October 29, 2005 - 1:02 AM PDT artifex wrote:
> > > Egad DL, don't get so technical. Any way you look at it, a ghoul is a ghoul. ^_^
> > What about girls who are boys, who like boys to be ghouls,
> > who do boys like they're girls, who do ghouls like they're boys?
>
> Okay, that's awkward. Something tells me that none of you have heard this song. :)
> ---------------------------------
Ahhhh, Blur. Who could forget?
And, coincidently I danced to that very song on Halloween night. If you can call it dancing. |
|
pooja
|
|
post #71
on November 4, 2005 - 8:25 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 5:00 PM PST DLeonard wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> I danced to that very song on Halloween night. If you can call it dancing.
Sure... we'll call it dancing! Just don't sing "Mr. Tambourine Man" again, okay?
;-) |
|
woozy
|
|
post #72
on November 4, 2005 - 8:46 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 8:25 PM PST pooja wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> > On November 4, 2005 - 5:00 PM PST DLeonard wrote:
> > ---------------------------------
> > I danced to that very song on Halloween night. If you can call it dancing.
>
> Sure... we'll call it dancing! Just don't sing "Mr. Tambourine Man" again, okay?
> ;-)
> ---------------------------------
Ooh! Someone should make a B horror movie called "Mr. Tambourine Man"! That be awesome! Tagline "In the jingle-jagged morning he'll come following you" and .... eep! I just scared myself.
|
|
pooja
|
|
post #73
on November 4, 2005 - 9:13 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 8:46 PM PST woozy wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> eep! I just scared myself.
Would a woozy rust down there if he wets himself? |
|
woozy
|
|
post #74
on November 4, 2005 - 9:22 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 9:13 PM PST pooja wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> > On November 4, 2005 - 8:46 PM PST woozy wrote:
> > ---------------------------------
> > eep! I just scared myself.
>
> Would a woozy rust down there if he wets himself?
> ---------------------------------
Why would we? I suppose I ought to post a woozy FAQ. A woozy is not a robot, not a cat, and not ... well, much of anything else.
Actually, not much is written in the texts about woozy whiz but it *is* fairly corrusive.
|
|
pooja
|
|
post #75
on November 4, 2005 - 9:27 PM PST
|
|
| So you're denying that you're a bit rusty down there? Ever since you posted that picture of woozy humping a tree or something, I've been wondering. |
|
pooja
|
|
post #76
on November 4, 2005 - 9:29 PM PST
|
|
| Oops... we had better start talking about zombies or Lizzoqops will get mad at us... |
|
woozy
|
|
post #77
on November 4, 2005 - 9:38 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 9:29 PM PST pooja wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> Oops... we had better start talking about zombies or Lizzoqops will get mad at us...
> ---------------------------------
zombies, woozy humping a tree, what's the difference?
Okay, zombies... um, zombies are icky? Does that count as talking about zombies?
|
|
pooja
|
|
post #78
on November 4, 2005 - 9:41 PM PST
|
|
I was just trying to give you an out, in case you were embarrassed to admit anything about being rusty...
;-)
I'm feeling like a zombie myself... should I go to bed or brew up a cup of chai? I should probably try to get some sleep... |
|
woozy
|
|
post #79
on November 4, 2005 - 9:47 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 9:41 PM PST pooja wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> I was just trying to give you an out, in case you were embarrassed to admit anything about being rusty...
> ;-)
>
Well, it *has* been a while.... *sigh* |
|
artifex
|
|
post #80
on November 6, 2005 - 10:41 PM PST
|
|
> On November 4, 2005 - 5:00 PM PST DLeonard wrote:
> And, coincidently I danced to that very song on Halloween night. If you can call it dancing.
Ahh, the politics of dancing
the politics of mmmm feeling good.
|
|
|
Your cart
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®,
a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.