Serpent and the Rainbow [Archive] - Horror.com Forums

Vodstok

11-15-2004, 05:41 AM

I just saw this last week for the first time, and i must say, so far, it is my favorite wes craven movie. I thinkit was cool that he actually went into the details fo making a real zombie. they really did their research for it. And the viallain was fucking freaky. i almost cried when Bill Pullman got hisw scrotum pierced....

AND, i thought BillPullman was great in it. i had no idea he had done it. And after seeing the Grudge this weekend, it was refreshing to see that he was once in a good horror movie.....

tachii

11-15-2004, 06:19 AM

great show, most accurate zombie flic i've ever seen; nice break from all that rotting flesh and cannabolism crap (although i like that too!) but still a nice break and supposed based on a true story...haven't read the book yet.

zwoti

11-15-2004, 08:29 AM

one of craven's better films

EXTR3MIST

11-15-2004, 11:06 AM

The front cover of the video was always appealing - a horrible face about to be sealed inside a coffin pleading to deaf ears, "Don't bury me! I'm not dead!".

Though like all the good old covers, the latest re-release is probably just a boring big font on the front.

movieman64

11-16-2004, 05:45 AM

Serp and the RB and Brain Dead are 2 of my favorite Bill Pullman films.

urgeok

11-16-2004, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by movieman64
Serp and the RB and Brain Dead are 2 of my favorite Bill Pullman films.

brain dead ???

movieman64

11-16-2004, 05:50 AM

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099173/

urgeok

11-16-2004, 06:02 AM

thats weird ..

I've seen the cover but i dont have that movie .. great cast from the look of it..

I like Zero Effect - low key but engaging performance by Pullman

zwoti

11-16-2004, 07:05 AM

Originally posted by urgeok
brain dead ???

the reason why peter jackson's braindead got renamed dead alive for the us market.

urgeok

11-16-2004, 07:07 AM

Originally posted by zwoti
the reason why peter jackson's braindead got renamed dead alive for the us market.

yeah, thats what i was wondering about the name ..

ShankS

11-16-2004, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by zwoti
the reason why peter jackson's braindead got renamed dead alive for the us market.

the Yanks had trouble coping with two films, that shared the same title :D ;)

and backon topic.... will deffo be looking for this film.

Vodstok

11-16-2004, 08:06 AM

Wow! Braindead had Bill Pullman AND Bill PAxton? Cool.... that is like the "Cain/Hackman" theory from PCU.

The two of them get mistaken for eachother all the time based on the similarity of their names. Paxton apparently thinks it's funny, while Pullman is a tad resentful. (Because he had to work so hard to make aname for himself, i guess)

urgeok

11-16-2004, 08:09 AM

paxton is far more talented though .. way more fun to watch...
made better films too.

Vodstok

11-16-2004, 08:14 AM

Hudson is one of the single greatest movie characters ever filmed.

urgeok

11-16-2004, 08:26 AM

who was Hudson ?

Vodstok

11-16-2004, 08:34 AM

Bill Paxton's whiny but in the end brave space marine in Aliens:
http://scaredyet.net/pics/hudson1_.jpg

urgeok

11-16-2004, 08:37 AM

ohhh ok ..

what about him in The Vagrant, or The Dark BAckward, or Near Dark ..
great stuff

KRUGERKID13

11-16-2004, 10:18 AM

love both paxton and pullman

back on topic gotta agree with zwoti definetly one of cravens best

tachii

11-17-2004, 09:18 AM

what about scream?

EXTR3MIST

11-18-2004, 06:48 AM

what about scream?

Utter post-modern shit of the highest order, and responsible for a wave of diabolical smug and knowing films that have brought us to where we are today in this sea of current big-budget fanboy rubbish referred to as "horror".

I take it you were joking, ja?

tachii

11-18-2004, 08:12 AM

hmmm, never thought about it that way
so you believe scream was the catalyst?
surley someone made something worse

Nachtmahr

11-18-2004, 08:50 AM

Oh, yeah, I loved that film! Probably the first zombie movie I ever saw.

taylorsmommy

11-18-2004, 08:54 AM

Excellent movie! First movie I ever saw Bill Pullman in.

jay o2 waster

11-18-2004, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Vodstok
I just saw this last week for the first time, and i must say, so far, it is my favorite wes craven movie. I thinkit was cool that he actually went into the details fo making a real zombie. they really did their research for it. And the viallain was fucking freaky. i almost cried when Bill Pullman got hisw scrotum pierced....

AND, i thought BillPullman was great in it. i had no idea he had done it. And after seeing the Grudge this weekend, it was refreshing to see that he was once in a good horror movie..... It is a very good movie

The STE

11-18-2004, 01:26 PM

good idea, but Bill Pullman is the most boring actor around right now, so that kinda hurt it a bit.

I liked the burying alive in The Vanishing better

knife_fight

11-19-2004, 02:11 AM

Paxton was also in The Last Supper, which is one of my favorite movies ever

EXTR3MIST

11-19-2004, 05:40 AM

so you believe scream was the catalyst?

In terms of dumbing down and cheapening the horror genre to appeal to a new, younger and more cynical audience... yes.

Of course, Scream fans are made to believe they are in on the joke by Craven/Williamson and therefore leave the theatre quite proud of themselves and their ability to understand all these tributes and in-jokes and tongue-in-cheek references to the classics... but are we any further forward in scary movies, or have we simply created a new pointless sub-genre in the hip, "knowing", party horror film? It seems at odds - surely the mystery and uncertainty of being scared is the whole point?

Perhaps we can take it all too seriously, but it is kinda alarming to see kids getting off on Craven's clever manipulation tactics instead of getting down to the far more important movies he is ripping off and poking fun at.

It would be fun to see teenage reactions to a double bill of his fun Scream and savageThe Last House on the Left.

Vodstok

11-19-2004, 06:17 AM

Scream itself was fine. i never saw the sequals, and quite frankly, havent been all thatyinterested in them. Youcant blame the movie for inspiring a bunch of undcreative knock-offs, that blame reasts on the shoulders of the mindless fucktards that insist on rehashing popular ideas rather than trying to actually work on making a new one (risky and not nearly as profitable).

Keep in mind, the scream sequals and IKWYDLS (shit, even as an acronym that title is too fucking long.....) were geared toward the "mainstream" audiences. They want little teeny-boppers who like Brittany because she is "so real", and like Jennifer love hewitt because she is "pretty and talented". On the same note, they want these little airheads' brothers to sort wood over Rose mcgowan and JLH when they bounce up and down in tight shirts.

Give the people what they want. Okay, not the people, but the lowest common denominator.

"Hmmm... get rid of the plot. it makes people think, and they want to be entertained. make it revenge, or something, no one will care. Who is popular on tv these days? okay, does he have abs and a cute butt? Cool, cast him. Does she have perky tits? Cute face? cool, cast her too. What, they cant act? Who cares, people will be so busy watching them run around in the rain or it tight clothes they wont notice. Hit them in their hormones."

tachii

11-19-2004, 08:58 AM

one may say the 'scary movie' franchise made matters worse
not only did it take the original title from scream but also came in a series of three

EXTR3MIST

11-22-2004, 07:38 AM

You can blame Craven for making his oh-so-clever fun horror franchise and pandering to the expectations of his smugly appreciative audience - this means he is a sell-out; this means he is telling us how he is so informed of the horror genre that he can package up all the elements of the classics he can find and flog us his idea that fans of horror have nothing better to do than sit around all day talking film-school shit and "knowing" all about the movies and their "codes".

There are some elements of Scream which really work - the cinematic, tense moments which are detached from the hip and referential nonsense the rest of the film relies on so badly - but the overall effect is bound to rub more than a few folk up the wrong way with its insufferable smugness and new found pomp of a once great horror director (pomp probably first glimpsed when he tried to "save" the Nightmare franchise by being clever...).

urgeok

11-22-2004, 08:57 AM

i can say that i can see both sides of this issue ..
I personally thought Scream was clever and didnt get smug until the second and third when what started as a homage/parody backfired.

An i agree that it cant be blamed for the limp new wave of teenage slasher films.

I've said it before and i'll keep saying it until its on every relevant thread : blame the fucking audience !
Its people who support these films .. they are bankable because of all the people supporting these films.

If a movie isnt liked it's pooched after the first week.
If it makes money then there were millions of people who thought it was still a good movie.
How do you blame a filmmaker for making films the majority want to see ?

Just appreciate more the ones willing to take risks for the real fans of the genre. The guys who obviously care as much as we do.

TheOmen

11-22-2004, 12:22 PM

Well, being new, I should probably not admit this. But I like all 3 Scream movies for what they are. I don't think they are serious horror by any stretch, and I like the smugness. In fact, I'll go so far as to call Scream 1 genius. Using Halloween in the background was extremely clever on Cravens part. And yes, Scream created inferior clones ad-nauseum. But at the very least, it brought back horror as a bankable option which can only help us get more horror movies, good and bad. The bottom line is, many of these new horror movies, and even the better independant ones, would have never existed had Wes Craven not exploded the genre with Scream.

3.....2......1......prepare to be lambasted...

horror_master

11-23-2004, 10:55 AM

I think I have seen this movie before, but I'm not to sure:confused:

tachii

11-29-2004, 06:20 AM

only liked the first two

urgeok

11-29-2004, 06:47 AM

yeah the only good thing about scream 3 was the jay and silent bob cameo :)

movieman64

11-29-2004, 07:04 AM

The first few moments in the orginal were good. It contained a lot of the elements of a good Horror film, suspense, suprise, sympathy, participation, and loathing, with some gore. All of this with the lights on too. After that so-so.

EXTR3MIST

11-29-2004, 10:06 AM

How do you blame a filmmaker for making films the majority want to see ?

It's called "selling out"; those who want unpretentious, affecting horror are in the minority - and we appreciate the guys who can give us this. We don't like it when they sell out.

Scream "clever"?

How? For telling the audience how to celebrate horror films, by way of attempting to deconstruct scary movies and cheapen their effect with knowingness and parody?

Straight horror spoofs such as Saturday the 14th and Scary Movie are fine - they set out to poke fun at what we usually find tense and horrifying and do not pretend to be anything else; Scream on the other hand is asking us to admire its hipness and understanding of the horror movie... and as if this is not grating enough, discovering the director is Wes Craven (yes that Wes Craven of Last House, Nightmare, The Hills Have Eyes...) we then need to admire how good ole Wes has obviously become so experienced in and jaded of the genre he is qualified enough to pastiche it and show us what he "knows" we like. Wink wink. Throw in a few well crafted sequences, and the film is a roaring success with kids flocking to see and "get" it.

You could call Memento, Irreversible and Pulp Fiction clever for their unusual construction - but Scream?

Only smug - and responsible for the taming and safety of American horror which has increased since its ghastly release.

TheOmen

11-30-2004, 01:27 PM

Only smug - and responsible for the taming and safety of American horror which has increased since its ghastly release.

Don't blame the original. Blame the countless clones, that were inferior , I might add. Scream is a good movie. Blaming Scream for studio head honchos deciding to bring garbage horror to the screen is akin to blaming Halloween for the onslaught of crappy slasher films in the 80's. That shouldn't diminish the original. In fact, it should elevate it.

EXTR3MIST

12-01-2004, 01:58 AM

If you are seduced by Scream's informed cleverness enough to enjoy the experience more than hate the smug backbone running through it then that's fair enough.

But you must understand that since it undeniably brought the horror (particularly, teen-in-peril slasher) film back to a new generation of previously Summer Romantic Comedy Blockbuster-fed teens, it has opened the floodgates and the genre has been drenched in carefully marketed safe/ironic horror movies aimed at the same audience. True horror films have now been pushed even further underground. Challenging, uncompromising ideas are a rarity, and seen by these "new" horror fans as too harsh, nasty and pointless like those dreadful 70s/80s exploiters they saw clips of once.

Can't blame Scream for inferior imitators? So instead we stand back and admire Craven's audacity at telling us all about horror movies, then lap it up and dodge the fallout.

As I said earlier this is cheapening, insulting and insufferably pretentious from the (now much richer) Craven - I wonder if he can make another successful movie without resorting to the film-within-a-film stupidity of New Nightmare or the masterful glib ironies of Scream?

Doubt it - I'm off to watch Shocker again...

Vodstok

12-01-2004, 03:50 AM

Why blame Wes Craven for his "audacity"? Why not blame Kevin Williamson, the guy who wrote the damn things? He is more to blame than anyone. (Writers never get our due....)

What do you expect from a guy who looks like Michael McKean's boyfreind from Best in Show and wrote Dawson's Creek? Consider the source here. He doesnt write regular, good old fashioned "Twilight Zone" irony, he does self-observant, sarcastic, jaded irony. Its a reflection of the people it is written for.

Craven wanted to make another horror movie. A smart one that made fun of a genre he helped bring to the forefront came across his desk. It would have been stupid not too.

The problem is that producers didnt say "How cute and clever, where is the next idea?" They said "Wow! those stupid kids ate that shit up! Get the staff writers to make more of these!"

Go tomy site:
http://ScaredYet.Net

Let me know if you think i have what it takes to make good horror. I think i do, and want to make movies someday. I happen to like the classic "scare the shit out of you" approach, where the characters and not the script are smart asses, but that is just my approach.

Wait, wasnt this thread about a voodoo movies?

EXTR3MIST

12-01-2004, 04:43 AM

You're saying a thread hasn't stayed on track? Sweet Lord above.

If Martin Scorcese made a clever, self-referential film constantly winking and tipping the hat to his hard-as-nails gangster dramas so the audience "got him".... would he be smart to do so?

People would think he had gone all Tarantino - but at least QT started in this vein as he meant to go on with Reservoir Dogs right up to Kill Bill.

Perhaps horror film fans like smarty-pants posturing more than they used to... or perhaps Scream is what the genre has been waiting for, to show it up for the predictable nonsense that it really is?

But you're right, Williamson's creations are universally odious - Craven just abandoned his true horror abilities (if he had any left) in time to make some serious bucks by selling out to those who need to leave cinemas pandered to, satisfied, safe and untroubled.

Clever, Wes.

Bye, Wes.

slasherman

12-01-2004, 05:23 AM

I think Wes can do both....but i agree he have to make a serious horror movie soon or else...:confused:

TheOmen

12-01-2004, 09:10 AM

I think Cravens days of real horror are long gone. What and when was his last real horror movie? All those guys from the 70's are just about finished. We need some youngsters to pick up the slack.

About Serpent and the Rainbow-I always liked it , but haven't seen it in about a decade. I'll have to go buy the dvd.

Vodstok

12-01-2004, 09:56 AM

Originally posted by TheOmen
I think Cravens days of real horror are long gone. What and when was his last real horror movie? All those guys from the 70's are just about finished. We need some youngsters to pick up the slack. just like Chevy Chase. he was funny. now he is as funny as dried paste.

EXTR3MIST

12-03-2004, 06:28 AM

What and when was his last real horror movie?

His last half-decent one was The People Under the Stairs in 1991 - Shocker, The Serpent and the Rainbow and Deadly Friend before it weren't bad at all.

Perhaps Wes's next venture should be a film-within-a-film pastiche of Chevy Chase movies...

The STE

12-03-2004, 11:27 AM

I still say if Scream hadn't been Sequelized and/or endlessly ripped off it would be held in much higher regard than it is now

urgeok

12-03-2004, 12:14 PM

Originally posted by The STE
I still say if Scream hadn't been Sequelized and/or endlessly ripped off it would be held in much higher regard than it is now

i tend to agree with that ..

i really didnt see as smug but that is pretty open to personal perception. Its the way i feel about stephen kings writing but everyone else in the free world thinks he's the cats ass.

scream should have stopped at one..
by #3 it blew its credibility like an old tire.