Brainbugs Top 50 Best Horror movies of all time - Baumer's top 50 starts on page 18

[Brainbug]

Stir of Echoes ive never heard of. Sounds very interesting though, i will check that out for sure.

[baumer]

I'll be adding a few more in about 15 minutes.

[baumer]

46) IT (2017)

US

Box office:  700 million on a budget of 35 million

Person of interest:  Stephen King

Memorable quote:  Derry is not like any town I've been in before. They did a study once and, it turns out, people die or disappear at six times the national average. And that's just grown ups. Kids are worse. Way, way worse.

 

 

In the summer of 1989, 7 kids band together and form a group called the Losers.  They have been bullied by other kids, abused by their parents, or suffered the indignation of being different in some way.  And to top it all off, kids their age have been disappearing or getting killed and no one, none of the adults at least, seem to notice or care that there is a pattern to all of it.  It's up to them to stop Pennywise the clown.  

 

I first read Stephen King's IT when I was 15.  By this time I was a massive Stephen King fan and had read most of his novels.  The Shining, Salem's Lot and Cujo were my favourite works from him.  But nothing could prepare me for a trip to Derry in 1958.  The book is vivid, descriptive and it gave me characters I could relate to.  I felt like I knew the Losers.  I had a fat friend like Ben.  I knew a kid who stuttered.  I had a crush on a girl like Bev and the we all knew a class clown like Richie.  This is one of the reasons I fell in love with the book.  The other was the horrific elements to it.  Stephen King might be the best writer in history when it comes to knowing how to get inside you and what makes you tick.  He's desecrated a boy's love for his dog, for his new car, he's attacked religion, our cat and other supernatural elements like werewolves and vampires.  But nothing was as good as IT.  When the TV movie came out, I refused to see it.  I just couldn't picture John Boy as stuttering Bill or Jack Tripper as Ben or Judge Harry as Richie Tozier.  I had them in my mind, I knew what they looked and sounded like.  Finally, after a few years, I capitulated and saw the tv movie and it was good.  But far from great.  IT was a book that I just didn't think they could ever film.  There was too much to cover and some really controversial stuff that would just never make it past the censors.  

 

Finally, after 27 years, someone was finally ready to take it on as a film.  They secured a good horror director and got a cast of unknown young actors to play the Losers and they got a creepy performance out of the Clown.  The first part of two parts was something that people called very "Stranger Things like."  Stranger Things of course is the hit Netflix TV show that deals with kids in 80's and their plight as they go through puberty, discover the opposite sex and oh yea, live in a town that has a secret government facility that does experiments.  The also have one of those experiments as their best friend.  And as much as I'd like to dispute that IT didn't benefit from Stranger Things, I can't.  But, the thing to remember here is that Stranger Things used IT as inspiration, not the other way around.

 

What makes IT the movie, so special is that it takes it's time.  We get to know each of the seven kids and we are allowed to spy on them as they fall in love with each other, grieve over the death of a brother, struggle with their religion and find ways to stand up to their overbearing parents.  All of this goes on while the terror continues.  And the kids, mostly Ben, put the clues together and realize that there is a malevolence in the small town they are living in.  There's an evil that has been here for centuries and IT has been killing kids in a cycle of 27 years and now it is up to them to do something about it.  No one is going to help them because IT not kills kids to feed, but IT has managed to put a curse on the entire town, IT has managed to turn the adults against the kids.  It's such a layered story filled with so many moving parts that it's a miracle that it was as good as it was.  I always thought and felt that you simply could not make a good movie out of the book and they almost didn't.  The original screenwriter wanted to fuck it all up by changing things that we all knew and loved about the characters.  But cooler heads prevailed when the director knew and understood that there is a massive and loyal fan base to this book and to undermine them would be hurting the film in the pocket book.  And so they left it all in, well, as much as they could and the result was one of the biggest R-rated movies in film history and the highest grossing horror movie of all time.     

 

 

 

YOU'LL FLOAT TOO.

[baumer]

45) Scanners (1981)

Canada

Box office:  14.2 million

Person of interest:  David Cronenberg

Memorable quote:  All right. We're gonna do this the scanner way. I'm gonna suck your brain dry!

 

 

Darryl Revok is the most powerful of all the scanners, and is the head of the underground scanner movement for world domination. Scanners have great psychic power, strong enough to control minds; they can inflict enormous pain/damage on their victims. Doctor Paul Ruth finds a scanner that Revok hasn't, and converts him to their cause - to destroy the underground movement.

 

If all you know about Scanners is the head exploding GIF, then you don't know much about Scanners.  Directed by Canadian horror auteur David Cronenberg, Scanners sees telekinetic vagrant Cameron Vale (Stephen Lack) inducted into a top secret programme designed to develop the powers of such gifted people (known colloquially as Scanners) for use as weapons.

After learning to control his special abilities—with a little help from scientist Dr. Paul Ruth (Patrick McGoohan) and a scanner suppressant drug called Ephemorol—Vale agrees to infiltrate an underground group of scanners, led by the powerful and deadly Darryl Revok (the always impressive Michael Ironside), who is intent on building a new world order.

With the mother of all exploding head scenes, several bloody shotgun shootouts, and a gory final battle between good and evil that results in bulging veins and bursting eyeballs, Scanners is naturally a firm favourite amongst those who love their splatter; however, this being a Cronenberg film, it is also an intelligent and gripping tale that combines the director's recurring theme of engineered physiological changes in the human body with more traditional thriller elements such as industrial espionage, car chases, and conspiracies.

David Cronenberg, the Baron of Blood, the King of Venereal Horror... whatever you choose to call him, you can't claim that he's not in some way fascinating. His movies are grotesque and disturbing, and mostly filled with gore and violence, which he always pushes directly to - and often over - the line.   I think the story itself is great, and the plot of the film is good, though portions of it are overly predictable. The pacing is good too, the film rarely stands still, but constantly pushes the characters into situations, and the audience is brought along for the ride. Cronenberg understands pacing quite well, since it leaves just enough room for the audience to absorb all of the information told, while almost constantly throwing the characters into intense situations.  The characters are well-written and credible. The film manages to avoid being predictable and keeps the cliché-count very low. The violence is immensely disturbing, and will without a doubt freak just about anyone out. I can't imagine anyone being hardened enough to not be just a little disturbed by it. The film is thoroughly entertaining and interesting, and it moves very quickly. It's almost over before you know it.  One minute, there's yet another exciting and well done scene, the other, the film is over. Apart from that, the film is very well done, though.

 

And yet, one can't talk about Scanners without mentioning the famous head-exploding sequence.  It's not overrated. Not at all. It's really well done, the special effect is excellent(as the effects are in the rest of the film).   Legendary makeup artist Dick Smith worked on the film and helped Stephen Dupuis (who later won an Oscar for The Fly) accomplish the effect by creating a latex head of the actor and filled it with dog food, leftover lunch, animal guts and fake blood. He then shot it from behind using a 12 gauge shotgun. The result looked like one of the Scanners (Ironside) had willed his head to explode. It was a terrific way to get the audience into the movie and set the tone for the film.

 

 

 

[baumer]

44) Grotesque (2009)

Japan

Box office:  unknown

Person of interest:  Koji Shiraishi 

Memorable quotes:  None that I can recall 

 

 

A "doctor" kidnaps two young lovers on their first date.  He tortures them in horrible and gruesome ways.

 

I'm going to be brief on this one because I realize films like this are not for everyone, in fact, they are not for most people.  If you compare a film like Grotesque to something like Hereditary or A Quiet Place, you'll wonder how they can both be considered horror, they are night and day different.  Director Koji Shiraishi has directed more than 20 films and many of them are of the blood splattered kind.  He has done some truly tense and frightening films (Noroi:  The Curse) and some really weird and off beat films  (A slit Mouthed Woman). I've seen some of his other work but nothing could prepare me for what he did in this film.  This is Hostel...on steroids.  There are some really violent Asian movies (Men Behind the Sun comes to mind, so does Audition, which Brainbug covered), but this one is violence for the same of violence.  Arms are cut off, nipples and tongues as well.  So why does a film about extreme violence and not much else, make my list of 50 best horror films?  Well, to answer that, you'd have to know me a bit better on the outside of the forums.  This movie has a lot of similarities to an event that takes place in countries like Pakistan and other middle eastern locations.  In these places, there's a sport called bear baiting and during it, a bear is forced to fight for its life against rabid dogs.  The "sultans" who run this sport take bets on everything from how the bear will die, how long it will last and anything in between.  Once the bear is beaten down and suffering, they stop the fight and then tend to the bears wounds, feed it and give it water.  This is only done to prolong the fight. Pretty sick and twisted shit and this is the story that inspired me to write my Novel:  Terrified and Defenseless, I even have a picture of a bear on the cover.  So what does this have to do with Grotesque?

 

It's the exact same thing the sadomasochistic doctor does in this movie.  He tortures the two victims until they are near death.  Then he stops, tends to their wounds, heals them, treats them like human beings again and once they are feeling better, he does it all over again.  And this fascinated me.  It's an indictment of the human existence.  There are good people out there and there are fucked up people out there who do horrible things to other people and other living things.  The violence in this film is so visceral and so grotesque and so senseless that I just couldn't turn away.  It's like a car accident, you are horrified but you slow down because you want to see the blood, the body parts and the carnage.  People think movies aren't real, but sometimes they are.  Grotesque is not real, it's not based off of any true story per say, but it is real because people like the doctor do exist.  And that is what makes a movie like this scary.  It's more real than most films out there.  There really are sick and twisted sadists who can do these kinds of things.  

 

Do I recommend you watch this movie?  Yes and no.  Yes, because it's a fascinating look at the depravity that exists in our world that most of us are denial of, and No, because ignorance is bliss.   

 

 

 

[baumer]

43) The Amityville Horror (1979)

US

Box office:  86 million

Person of interest:  James Brolin and Margot Kidder

Memorable quote: GET OUT!

 

 

For George and Kathy Lutz, the Long Island colonial house on the river's edge seemed ideal: quaint, spacious and amazingly affordable. Of course, six brutal murders have taken place there just a year before, but houses don't have memories... or do they? Soon their dream house becomes a hellish nightmare, as walls begin to drip blood and satanic forces threaten to destroy them. Now after 28 days, the Lutz family must attempt to escape from the demonic inhabitants... or forfeit their lives.

 

James Brolin was hesitant when first offered the role of George Lutz.  At the time of his casting, the script was unfinished, so Brolin obtained a copy of Anson's novel to read. Brolin started the book and read until two o'clock in the morning. He had hung up a pair of his pants in the room earlier and during an especially tense passage of the book, the pants fell to the floor. Brolin jumped from his chair in fright. It was then that Brolin decided to do the film, convinced that the material would make an effective film.  This is a similar story to one that Spielberg experienced while viewing Paranormal Activity before it was released to the public.  

 

Margot Kidder was cast in the role of Kathy Lutz after her breakthrough performance as Lois Lane in Superman the year prior.

 

The Amityville Horror is one of the films that caused my absolute and eternal hate of critics when reviewing horror films.  Amityville Horror was ripped to shreds back in the day by most critics, but two very prominent ones were also two of the most vocal.  Roger Ebert and Leonard Maltin hated it.  They called it dull and dreary and depressing.  It also has a 29% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.  And yet, it scared the shit out of millions of viewers, myself included.  Directed by Stuart Rosenberg, the film manages to get inside you.  That sounds like a cliche and perhaps it is for some films, but not this one.  Amityville Horror affected me.  It made my skin cold, the hair stand up and sent shivers through me from time to time.  A movie like The Exorcist came off as silly and comical, to me.  And yet this film got to me.  They have similar themes, one is about the Devil possessing a young girl, the other about EVIL dwelling in a house.  Sometimes you can't explain why something works for you and others don't.  

 

Amityville Horror is based on a supposed true story.  Many call bullshit on this and personally I don't care if it's true or not.  I will say that although I struggle with religion, I do believe in the presence of evil.  Haunted houses are usually haunted because of evil spirits and those spirits exist because evil took place there.  It's the chicken and the egg scenario.  I'm sure that's why Amityville Horror struck a chord with me.  Haunted houses are terrifying.  And when done right, the movies can make you feel true fear.  

By now, most people know the legend about that house in Amityville, New York, the Dutch Colonial on 112 Ocean Avenue. The movie begins in 1974, when Ronnie DeFeo Jr. murdered his family in the house at 3:15 am, shooting them all in their sleep. A year later, George and Kathy Lutz bought the house and moved in with their three children and their dog, Harry. Aware of the tragedy that occurred in the home, George and his wife planned to fix it up and start a new life after their recent marriage. After all, "houses don't have memories." But then, things went wrong. Horribly wrong. And after 28 days, the family left the house and fled Amityville, never turning back.

Of course, Jay Anson's novel was a bestseller. I've personally read it myself, and it's written well. But there are several different variations on what happened during those 28 days, even with George and Kathy Lutz. So, for those of you who know the story before you watch the movie, it's hard to distinguish what is and isn't true. Some of you may not believe it at all. However, I am one of those people that believe in this account of a suburban haunted house, after watching rather truthful and intelligent interviews with the Lutzes and other paranormal investigators. But aside from that, what matters most about "The Amityville Horror" is how it works as a movie.

First of all, the setting means everything. Filmed in New Jersey, and not actually filmed in Amityville, the house is a particularly creepy abode to look at, especially during night scenes. Those two windows become a character all their own. They stare out into the night, and give the viewer the horrible feeling that they're being watched.

Also, there is definitely enough paranormal activity going on to keep you interested. However, the ghostly phenomenon doesn't start right away. In fact, it builds sporadically, creating a wonderful sense of dread. If you can appreciate a good build-up without much special effects(until the dynamite ending), then you will probably like the movie.

James Brolin and Margot Kidder are a joy to watch as George and Kathy Lutz.  There are great things to see here between Brolin and Kidder, they have some serious chemistry.  They have sincere moments together as husband and wife. Other times when things get frightening, their shock and fear comes off naturally. Then we are scared for George and Kathy. 

We also have Rod Steiger's performance as Father Delaney to judge. Sandor Stern's script has limited this character, and therefore, Steiger is not in the movie too much, but he makes the most with the screen time he has. In fact, he makes the role larger, and we're not just scared for the Lutz family, but for him also.

Obviously, some events in "The Amityville Horror" are slightly exaggerated when you compare them with the book's events or the perspectives of others who have experienced the haunting. But that doesn't make the movie any less entertaining. I look past its flaws, and embrace it for what it is: a cult classic that has gotten some damn good attention over the years. And yet, as good as this one is, it's not the best one in the series.  

 

 

An interesting side to this is that James Brolin took a fraction of his salary to appear in the movie and instead took a 10% backend deal.  No one thought it would become the smash hit that it did and Brolin eventually earned more than 17 million dollars for the film.  

[baumer]

I'll get to more in about two hours.

[The Stingray]

The Lords of Salem is great.

[baumer]

42) Inside (2007)

France

Box office:  unknown

Person of interest:  Alexandre Bustillo, Julien Maury

Memorable quotes:  None that I can recall

 

 

 

 

Four months after the death of her husband, a woman on the brink of motherhood is tormented in her home by a strange woman who wants her unborn baby.

 

 

A few years back, when the words 'Japanese' and 'Horror' were said in the same sentence, ears would rise and interest would immediately peak. Now, replace 'Japanese' with 'French' and the reaction will still be the same. A l'interieur (aka Inside) is co-directed by first timers Alexandre Bustillo and Julien Maury (who would later go on to direct the latest Leatherface film). It is hard to believe that these two men could create a debut that is this good, this intense, this...ferociously insane bloodbath. Think of Alexandre Aja's 2003 horror 'Haute Tension' (which was also a brutal but excellent slasher) mixed with Halloween and toss in Dario Argento's style (particularly from 'Tenebrae') and you have Inside.

Bustillo does not bother with a story that is in-depth or very large for that matter. In fact, it is rather simple: Sarah (Alysson Paradis) is a young photographer who recently lost her husband in a car crash and she is still grieving over her loss. It is now Christmas and she is alone and expecting a baby the next day. On Christmas Eve she is visited by a Woman in Black (Béatrice Dalle) who wants to get inside the house for reasons unknown. However, soon enough, she is in the house and her goal becomes crystal clear. She is after Sarah's baby and she will do anything to get it...absolutely anything.

There are many techniques that make this film as good as it is. First and foremost, the setting. The majority of the film is set in Sarah's house, furthermore, most of this is in her bathroom. This makes for some extremely intense moments and real feelings of claustrophobia. Also, the two leading ladies give such powerful performances which really assists in getting us to feel what they feel and think what they think. Sarah's determination to survive and fight back is realistic and gives the movie a powerful vibe and theme of a mother's love for her unborn child. La femme (the Woman in Black) is comparable to The Shape (Michael Myers) from Carpenter's 1978 classic 'Halloween.' For the first 20 minutes she appears as a silhouette, not speaking, just standing and watching. Creepy and chilling are just two words which describe her in the first part of the movie.

Now onto the parts of the movie discussed the most...the copious amounts of blood. And let me tell you, once the blood starts to flow it never stops. From the moment we see our first drop the movie moves at such a breakneck pace it is hard to keep up. I was literally on the edge of my seat while watching these parts, that is how intense they were. Not only that, but the gore was so realistic and brutal at times I found myself wondering how they accomplished the affect.  Blood sprays, crotches are stabbed, throats are slashed, faces are burnt and heads explode. The finale is soaked in blood and features one of the most depressing, disturbing and gruesome endings I have seen. No one will be able to leave the movie feeling well...I felt emotionally drained and ill. Movies rarely do that to me.

Ignoring some lapses in logic and a fairly bland revelation (not really a twist), Bustillo and Maury have created a refreshingly brilliant horror movie that proves that: horror is a great place for auteurs with a fresh voice and that the French are now producing some of the truly innovative horror movies.

 

 

[baumer]

31 minutes ago, The Stingray said:

The Lords of Salem is great.

 

I'm glad you feel that way.  I don't know many who like the film.  

[baumer]

I can safely say that pretty much every film remaining on this list are films that people have heard of and have probably seen.  I'm going to say that there are maybe 1 or possibly 2 films that the majority haven't heard of.  So if you have been reading this list and aren't really identifying with films like Inside or Grotesque or Ils, relief is on the way.

[Brainbug]

I bet The Emoji Movie is in your list. Pure horror. Every second of it is physical abuse. Truly a terror movie.

[baumer]

41) Rosemary's Baby (1968)

US

Box office:  34 million

Person of interest:  Roman Polanski

Memorable quote:  He chose you, honey! From all the women in the world to be the mother of his only living son!

 

 

After moving into a creepy apartment in Manhattan with her husband Guy, Rosemary Woodhouse begins to experience odd, unpleasant things happening to her. Guy becomes enchanted with their eccentric neighbors, Roman and Minnie Castevet, after the elderly couple's ward commits suicide. Then Rosemary becomes pregnant. A caring Minnie keeps giving her some weird concoction for the pregnancy and Rosemary does not feel at all well. As the tagline says, the only solution is to pray for Rosemary's baby.

What distinguishes this film immediately, the element that truly makes it terrifying is its theme: this film is about true horror brought to life, this film is about the terror of a mother fearing the loss of her baby before it is even born. Now from that incredibly harrowing idea, Polanski builds up a film void of any clichés or any horror tropes: there aren't jump scares, there aren't actually any scares at all; this is a film about paranoia, about madness and stress, about your life being taken away from you and that is exactly what drives your mind crazy in watching it.  This is the film, imo, that inspired Hereditary, but it did it so much better.  

The anxiety levels that are built up through the long takes used throughout the whole film are off charts. You feel as though weight is being put on your body and the more you go on the more pressure you feel as you struggle to shrug it off of yourself, but you just don't manage, the film keeps going on, keeps building, it even has a double climax which tricks you into thinking you are safe when in fact the whole stress and adrenaline you have built up for two hours is brought back to you in the final sequence which is as tense as I have ever been watching a film, as horrifying as anything you could experience and as surprising as you could believe.

All of that is not just coincidence, the craft put into this film is stunning, what Polanski managed is unrepeatable and it is the mark of a great director in his prime state. He uses long wide takes to capture everything going on in Rosemery's life, for two hours you witness her growing paranoia in brilliant little ways. Polanski plays with audience expectations and messes around with traditional film making efforts to make the audience grow paranoid at the same pace of Rosemary. There is just one sequence in the whole film that could be considered horror, the rest of it is just apartment life, or is it? The attention to detail here is what make the difference, the little ways the actors move, the gargantuan and brilliant performance by Ruth Gordon who drives you crazy, the little information packages that are slowly delivered to you, the incredible sound design that shows how simple horror can be and how the fear of the unknown is what drives humans mad.

The screenplay too is something to be studied.  Apparently the book lent itself easily to an adaptation.  The dialogue is absolutely incredible and every single line is layered with more than what meets the ear. Moreover, the character work is pitch perfect and does not lend itself to half of a dull moment, every person in the picture is on screen for the right time and function, you manage to digest the perfect amount of information for you to understand further developments and never too much for the whole ordeal to collapse.

I have nothing but admiration for this film. 

 

 

[L Silverman]

35 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

I bet The Emoji Movie is in your list. Pure horror. Every second of it is physical abuse. Truly a terror movie.

 

It's torture porn without the porn.

[baumer]

40) Near Dark (1987)

US

Box office:  3.4 million

Person of interest:  The cast from Aliens

Memorable quotes:  I might have taught him all that he knows, but I didn't teach him all that I know.

 

 

Pray for daylight.  They may kill you once but they'll haunt you forever.

 

1987 had two vampire movies. One was the excellent Joel Schumacher film The Lost Boys and the other was directed by James Cameron’s wife Kathryn Bigelow. In this film, three members of the Aliens (1986) cast star as sort of cowboy vampires. While both Lance Henriksen and Jeannette Goldstein are fantastic in their roles, it is Bill Paxton that everyone talks about. He is the younger vampire to Henriksen who is the avuncular or even father figure to the rowdy bunch of hooligans. But it is Paxton that oozes charisma in this film. He is a vampire that has taken his invincibility and run with it in the most evil way possible. If you have seen the film, you know about the infamous bar scene. If you haven’t, you should, just for the bar scene. Also notable, it is Paxton’s gory and revolting image you see on the poster. He really rules the film in every way.  But beyond Paxton, the film really is a classic in so many ways.

 

A classic that frequented the sort of top 100 polls that read: ‘The Best Films To Rent You’ve Never Heard Of’, the film originally struggled to find its audience, certainly on a large scale, mainly due to a limited cinematic run and lack of publicity, and by the end of the year the general cinema-going public had to digest such horror treats as Evil Dead II, Hellraiser, John Carpenter’s Prince Of Darkness, Predator, and the film that stole some of Near Dark’s thunder, The Lost Boys. So as December came and went there was no room for director Kathryn Bigelow’s film in public consciousness.

Near Dark tells the story of Caleb (Adrian Pasdar) and Mae (Jenny Wright). After meeting one night, she tells him she needs a lift home so Caleb obliges, intrigued by the mystery of her character. They flirt, they kiss, but after a few moments she breaks away and leaves Caleb in his truck alone, Mae disappearing into the night. His hand searches for a pain in his neck, revealing blood – had he been bitten? Staggering home losing consciousness, the now shining sun baking his skin so that it begins to smoke, he realises a recreational vehicle is closing on his person. Unable to avoid the speeding truck, the door opens and he is dragged inside.

 

Caleb is met by a group of drifters, one of them is Mae, and they threaten to kill him before Mae reveals that he has ‘turned’. Caleb doesn’t know what is going on, he’s confused and disorientated, and they tell him he will have to feed like they do to survive. What they feed on he doesn’t know, but he begins to realise one thing – he now has an undeniable thirst for blood.

Director Kathryn Bigelow and co-writer Eric Red wanted to fuse a dark, ‘Dracula’ inspired story into a Western-like setting believing the amalgamation of the two genres would create an interesting and original hybrid. This is one of the most interesting things about the film, in that the conventions that are gleefully apparent in anything from For A Few Dollars More to Tombstone, sneakily register here. If anything, the film is happier as a western than a Vampire movie, as Bigelow and Red are content to subvert practically everything that The Lost Boys, Dracula, or Fright Night promoted in terms of mythology adherence, happily throwing in a bar room brawl, a shoot-out at a motel and continuing the theme of outlaws riding into town, only this time not on horseback but in a four-litre Diesel. Nowhere to be seen are a pair of fangs or a string of garlic, but while the sun does prove fatal this is seen as an ailment, a simple distraction from the incessant greed to survive. Like the outlaw staying one step ahead of the law, these neck-biters are trying to do the same and Bigelow wants us to view them not as fairytale foes but as the dark side of humanity, who just so happen to top the food chain.  In other words, the word vampire is never mentioned.

 

Drawn out terror, some of it implied, some of it explicit, the violence only relenting to heighten the tension, there’s a fire that’s just started and it’s only getting hotter. Paxton eats the screen finding more and more elaborate and bloody ways for his victims to succumb while Jenette Goldstein as Diamondback uses diversionary tactics – ‘There’s a fly on the ceiling’, she says as her target is shot in the back once…twice…three times… Jesse surveys the room like a school teacher stopping to collect blood in a pint glass while child actor, Joshua Miller as Homer, sees nothing out of the ordinary with his straight as an arrow face, blood and death all around him.

 

Surprisingly, this is Kathryn Bigelow’s debut as a solo director, but her efforts appear to be those of a veteran. Maintaining a gritty, mid-west feel, she steers clear of gothic clichés only hinting at the ideas behind her fantasy inspired central characters. There’s no heroic young virgin, or Priest throwing holy water every which way – Bigelow attempts to subvert the constraints put on her shoulders with tackling this genre. Her script doesn’t allow for any ease-the-pain humour, only cold, harsh quips and she keeps the mood downbeat and raw.

 

From the interesting, terrifically handled genre-mating, the themes and the Romeo and Juliet undercurrent, the performances and the tour de force bar scene, the film has everything I couldn’t have dreamed I wanted to see. Beautiful, intriguing, and masterful in its execution this isn’t just a contender for best Vampire movie ever made – it is.

 

 

[baumer]

And this brings us to the top 40.  I'll get to some more in about a hour.

 

Hints for the next few:

 

Forrest Gumps kid and Hereditary mom make a good team

Wolverine's creator encounters a strange corpse

A vegan's nightmare

[Brainbug]

Near Dark would be in my Top 75. I watched it only once though.

[The Stingray]

2 favorites of mine back-to-back. I actually rewatched Rosemary's Baby the other day, and was thinking about watching Near Dark tonight.

[baumer]

3 minutes ago, Brainbug said:

Near Dark would be in my Top 75. I watched it only once though.

 

You should try watching it again. The bar scene is just so damn epic!

[baumer]

1 minute ago, The Stingray said:

2 favorites of mine back-to-back. I actually rewatched Rosemary's Baby the other day, and was thinking about watching Near Dark tonight.

 

Hey barkeep, give me a shot of whatever donkey-piss you're shoving down these cocksucker's throats.