Jump to content

La Binoche

A24's HEREDITARY

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

weren't their a bunch of critics calling it one of the scariest movies they'd ever seen? just use that! that quote doesn't make me think about ghosts it just makes me think about my dad's hairline.

 

If you have an issue with their pull quotes, I recommend contacting them on Twitter at @A24.

  • Haha 2
  • Disbelief 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





32 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

weren't their a bunch of critics calling it one of the scariest movies they'd ever seen? just use that! that quote doesn't make me think about ghosts it just makes me think about my dad's hairline.

I didn't think Pink was that old.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





On 30.01.2018 at 9:13 PM, Poseidon said:

There you go. Your next "Creepiest Movie ever" by intellectual critics movie with a trailer, that won't impress the horror crowd. It Follows,  Babadook, The Witch, It comes at Night. They all came, they all tried and then they failed...

I really dislike this silly and untrue stereotype of all critics being stuffy intellectuals. FFs. Collider is basically joe average nerds. They are not even smart. There are a ton of plain dumb, non intellectual critics. 

 

Also "It Follows" made $14m $2m budget, "The Witch" did $25m on a $4m budget. Babadook did shit in the US but has done $10m WW on a $2m budget. So which one of them failed? All of them are both commercial as well as critical successes. You may not like them but don't try to repaint reality (like you tried with critics) to pretend people agree with you. Also I know you will hide behind "but people didn't like those movies" but "Babadook" is at 6.8 same for "The Witch", It Follows is at 6.9 on IMDB which is usually pretty hostile into non popcorn munching movies so that's not a bad result.

 

Also I have seen the movie (I'm not a critic) and 3 of my friends did. We are all different and even the guy who usually leaves the theater after 15 minutes into every movie that's more arty than "Conan" said it was the scariest movie he has seen. This is a good movie. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 19/02/2018 at 9:36 AM, norbar said:

I really dislike this silly and untrue stereotype of all critics being stuffy intellectuals. FFs. Collider is basically joe average nerds. They are not even smart. There are a ton of plain dumb, non intellectual critics. 

 

Also "It Follows" made $14m $2m budget, "The Witch" did $25m on a $4m budget. Babadook did shit in the US but has done $10m WW on a $2m budget. So which one of them failed? All of them are both commercial as well as critical successes. You may not like them but don't try to repaint reality (like you tried with critics) to pretend people agree with you. Also I know you will hide behind "but people didn't like those movies" but "Babadook" is at 6.8 same for "The Witch", It Follows is at 6.9 on IMDB which is usually pretty hostile into non popcorn munching movies so that's not a bad result.

 

Also I have seen the movie (I'm not a critic) and 3 of my friends did. We are all different and even the guy who usually leaves the theater after 15 minutes into every movie that's more arty than "Conan" said it was the scariest movie he has seen. This is a good movie. 

 

Not the point of them failing or not, the point is critics don't get horror and they never have,  There is a clear disconnect between what critics want in horror and what a paying audience wants.  That's the issue here.  Films like Babadook, The Witch were definitely more psychological films, not true horror.

 

So excuse those of us who are skeptical of horror films like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

Not the point of them failing or not, the point is critics don't get horror and they never have,  There is a clear disconnect between what critics want in horror and what a paying audience wants.  That's the issue here.  Films like Babadook, The Witch were definitely more psychological films, not true horror.

 

So excuse those of us who are skeptical of horror films like this.

Exactly. If it doesn't rely on jump scares, it's not true horror.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







1 hour ago, baumer said:

 

Not the point of them failing or not, the point is critics don't get horror and they never have,  There is a clear disconnect between what critics want in horror and what a paying audience wants.  That's the issue here.  Films like Babadook, The Witch were definitely more psychological films, not true horror.

 

So excuse those of us who are skeptical of horror films like this.

Considering that some year the correlation between metacritic and the box office is a negative one (if you do not correct by genre and budget) is it specially for horror ? See below

 

That said horror biggest success of all time

 

The Excorcist (86%on RT, 8/10 average)

Sixth sense (85% on RT, 7.6/10 average)

IT (85% on RT, 7.2/10 average)

Amityville Horror (29%, 4.4/10 average rating)

Alien (97%, 9/10 rating)

The Omen (86%, 7.2/10)

Blair Witch project (87%, 7.7/10)

 

Were not badly received by critics at all (could even say mostly critically acclaimed).

 

Conjuring, Paranormal Activites , Halloween and so on, long list of case audience/critics taste matches and like for everything else long list they didn't, it certainly exist some special taste type of aesthetic that critics and the audience that love it will not match.

 

Certain emotions are extremely easy to create if you are ready to do it, disgust being one of them (filming yourself putting cats in a microwave would work really well), jump scared being an other one, that yes if movie please a certain of people because they love those they cannot received any merit for just succeeding at that.

 

box-office-rating-1.png

 

 

Edited by Barnack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I saw this.  Collette is Oscar-worthy.  The movie is incredibly bleak and dark.  It's a draining experience, and I'm not even talking about the horror.  I don't think it will click with the general public.  The first half is a very grim family drama.  The second half has a lot of supernatural elements, but I dont know that a mainstream horror audience will be satisfied.  It does leave a lingering effect on the viewer, though. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



11 hours ago, La Binoche said:

I saw this.  Collette is Oscar-worthy.  The movie is incredibly bleak and dark.  It's a draining experience, and I'm not even talking about the horror.  I don't think it will click with the general public.  The first half is a very grim family drama.  The second half has a lot of supernatural elements, but I dont know that a mainstream horror audience will be satisfied.  It does leave a lingering effect on the viewer, though. 

 

We often disagree on film, but your assessment of it does make me excited for it.  Sounds like the first half is a lot of set up and then BLAMMM!!! it gets you.  So I'm looking forward to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 3/20/2018 at 2:09 AM, baumer said:

 

Not the point of them failing or not, the point is critics don't get horror and they never have,  There is a clear disconnect between what critics want in horror and what a paying audience wants.  That's the issue here.  Films like Babadook, The Witch were definitely more psychological films, not true horror.

 

So excuse those of us who are skeptical of horror films like this.

Sorry but that plain untrue. This again comes from the idea where you think all critics look and behave like Leonard Maltin. Ffs. Listen to one of the film podcasts and you will see critics are superfans. If you need more proof the writer of Sinister was a film critic all his life. The guys at bloody disguisting love horrors and they are critics too. Sites like Slashfilm, Collider or Filmschool rejects also are horror friendly. What is more I don't get how The Witch and Babadook not being horrors (in your opinions) is related to crititcs not getting horrors? Properly atributing genres (again acording to you) has nothing to do with the topic here. The topic is are critics biased against horror be it by their or your definition. 

 

Also sorry but no. There is no disconnect between what critics and paying viewers want. This is rare and a lie fanboys tell to themselves to justify what they like (hey you are free to like what you like, not all critics agree too). In most cases high imdb rating and high cinemascore is correlated with good reviews. Also commercial movies loved by the critics very often get very long legs. Just look at Wonder Woman vs BvS or Black Panther vs Avengers 2. This only shows me you are not here to track box office results or you don't follow them closely. Maybe it's time you read some reviews instead of just going on rotten tomatoes and raging on the % without understanding what it means. 

 

Finally I'm think you define horror very narrowly as a movie which focuses solely on scares and/or gore. Sometimes a movie is in between genres but uses horror directorial techniques and tropes to tell a story. That was the case of babadook where while the point of the movie was psychological it was still a movie about a monster haunting a family (so a common horror premise) and The Witch (the use of sound and music plus religious and satanic undertones plus you know a satanic goat and witches which are also common horror tropes). Using your logic Rosemary's Baby and The Shining are probably not horrors too. Same for Hunger or Possession. 

 

PS. Horror sites have critics too. They also love Hereditary. Unless you think Dread central is also biased against horror (that would be silly) http://www.dreadcentral.com/reviews/265376/hereditary-review-sundance-2018-grief-ghosts-make-monumental-terror/

Edited by norbar
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 3/20/2018 at 3:09 AM, baumer said:

 

In baumer's books, Babadook is not real horror.  It's barely a real movie. 

That's the problem. You think you are basically the only one who has anything to say in genre division.  As said above using your terms some classic horror pictures would not be classified as horrors by you. 

On 3/20/2018 at 5:20 AM, La Binoche said:

I saw this.  Collette is Oscar-worthy.  The movie is incredibly bleak and dark.  It's a draining experience, and I'm not even talking about the horror.  I don't think it will click with the general public.  The first half is a very grim family drama.  The second half has a lot of supernatural elements, but I dont know that a mainstream horror audience will be satisfied.  It does leave a lingering effect on the viewer, though. 

I agree though I think the second half becomes a very effective horror. It doesn't relly on jump scares but it overwhelms you with dread and the atmosphere is suffocating plus there are a few scenes that will burn into your eyes for a long time. The first part I agree though there is one event 30 minutes in that informs you the movie will not play nice. I'm not sure about US results but with good distributors in Europe the movie can sell well. I was worried like you it wasn't commercial but I saw this with 2 very jokish bro type people who's arthouse sensibility ends at Quentin Tarantino and they loved the movie too so I have more faith.

Edited by norbar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



21 minutes ago, norbar said:

 

I agree though I think the second half becomes a very effective horror. It doesn't relly on jump scares but it overwhelms you with dread and the atmosphere is suffocating plus there are a few scenes that will burn into your eyes for a long time. The first part I agree though there is one event 30 minutes in that informs you the movie will not play nice. I'm not sure about US results but with good distributors in Europe the movie can sell well. I was worried like you it wasn't commercial but I saw this with 2 very jokish bro type people who's arthouse sensibility ends at Quentin Tarantino and they loved the movie too so I have more faith.

6

The people I saw it with did not like it.  

 

And yes, "does not play nice" is the best way to put it. In a Conjuring universe movie, you more or less know what you're in for.  Here, you never know, and that's unnerving. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.