Anyone seen the movie "Them"

[Cemetery Attendant]

If so, what did you think?

It's a foreign horror flick. I think it's Italian. Anyway, I saw it a week or so ago after reading the great reviews on its front cover.

Let's just say that the movie didn't life up to the reviews.

[La Chat Noire]

It's French. And most people here would agree it's a terrific horror movie, very much worthy of its good reviews.

[Elvis_Christ]

Still haven't got round to grabbing this one. What sucked about it?

[Despare]

No way could you have watched it and thought it was Italian. You either watched it with the sound down, are completely ignorant, or are another "toon". Great flick by the way.

[Elvis_Christ]

What's a toon?

[Despare]

What's a toon?

An alternate account/character. Could be this is just an ignorant person though who couldn't tell Russian from Chinese. Watch the movie, it's very suspenseful and has great atmosphere.

[Roderick Usher]

I found it overwrought and overrated. A simple concept executed simply - which is fine and dandy, a nice little film, but hardly anything I'd call "great"

[Despare]

I found it overwrought and overrated. A simple concept executed simply - which is fine and dandy, a nice little film, but hardly anything I'd call "great"

A concept executed simply without bells and whistles that other films need to try and trick your mind into thinking you're watching a better movie. In the horror genre, especially within the past five years, I'd put it up there as great. Not perfect by any means, but yeah... great.

[Ferox13]

i thought the Giant Ant models looked pretty good.

[Cemetery Attendant]

For one, it's called intelligent, but I fail to see anything intelligent about it. The concept was extremely simple, there was little to no character depth and over 3/4ths or so of the movie consisted of a chase.

The plot is something you could come up with half awake.

[newb]

i thought the Giant Ant models looked pretty good.

lol....thats what I first thought this thread was about.


must be my age

[ChronoGrl]

For one, it's called intelligent, but I fail to see anything intelligent about it. The concept was extremely simple, there was little to no character depth and over 3/4ths or so of the movie consisted of a chase.

The plot is something you could come up with half awake.

Simplicity makes the best slasher films. Think about the iconic Halloween. Just a single big bad terrorizing a neighborhood.

It's when writers and directors attempt to add motivation or turgid story and dialogue that slashers fall short. Ils was delightfully simple and focused on pure suspense. When you're doing a study in suspense, you don't necessarily need character depth. Quite frankly, when exploring fear and raw emotion, character depth is incredibly overrated. The point of not focusing on the characters is so that they are seen as the everyman (or everymen here). Most people can empathize and share the fear of Home Invasion, Isolation, Helplessness, Unknown Threats. In the movie, the characters are purposefully not the focus - The focus is the fear that they feel and making them more anonymous allows the viewer to put themselves in the place of the characters.

Quite frankly, I could care less what the couple's life is like - I find that, oftentimes when superfluous time is spent on character building, unless there is good acting to back it up I completely root for the characters to die. The pure thought of someone breaking into my house and rending me and my boyfriend helpless... Is absolutely horrifying and I think that Ils truly embodied that fear.

The reason why the movie is "intelligent" is that simplicity comes OUT of intelligence. The direction was meticulous, purposeful, and well-done. There was no pandering dialogue for people who feel as though they need to CONNECT with the PERSONALITY of the characters - That's the intelligence of it. The clever purposeful decisions that were made to keep it simple and horrifying.

[urgeok2]

For one, it's called intelligent, but I fail to see anything intelligent about it. The concept was extremely simple, there was little to no character depth and over 3/4ths or so of the movie consisted of a chase.

The plot is something you could come up with half awake.

it was based on a true story.

it was a plot someone came up with reading the news.


for the record i thought it was a well made film. very straightforward - its about a cat and mouse home invasion.

i understand people not liking it - but when you go to a horror forum and complain about plot it makes me wonder what other horror films you've seen.


halloween - one of the best horror films ever - want to tell me about the plot of that one ?


whoops - didnt even see that Chrono mentioned halloween already.

great minds ...

[neverending]

I'm not going to comment on ils, because I haven't seen it, but on the notion that if someone's a horror fan they shouldn't expect much in the way of plot- or character development.

This is, IMO, why so many modern horror films are crap, or not all they could be, anyway. I know from talking to many young horror fans in my work that indeed all they want to see is people dying in "interesting" ways.

I want more, and if a film doesn't give it to me, I don't enjoy it as much. Halloween HAS character development, and that's why you care if Laurie makes it out alive or not. I liked House of 1,000 Corpses more than Devil's Rejects because there was more of a plot to keep me interested. I thought Candyman was 100 times better than Midnight Meat Train because it had both compelling characters and an interesting plot- both of which were missing from Midnight Meat Train.

IMO, if you're a horror fan who happens to enjoy films that give you more than the simple thrill of seeing people in peril, it's perfectly legitimate to complain if you don't get it.

[urgeok2]

I'm not going to comment on ils, because I haven't seen it, but on the notion that if someone's a horror fan they shouldn't expect much in the way of plot- or character development.

This is, IMO, why so many modern horror films are crap, or not all they could be, anyway. I know from talking to many young horror fans in my work that indeed all they want to see is people dying in "interesting" ways.

I want more, and if a film doesn't give it to me, I don't enjoy it as much. Halloween HAS character development, and that's why you care if Laurie makes it out alive or not. I liked House of 1,000 Corpses more than Devil's Rejects because there was more of a plot to keep me interested. I thought Candyman was 100 times better than Midnight Meat Train because it had both compelling characters and an interesting plot- both of which were missing from Midnight Meat Train.

IMO, if you're a horror fan who happens to enjoy films that give you more than the simple thrill of seeing people in peril, it's perfectly legitimate to complain if you don't get it.


i agree with all of this ..

but i'll add that for me there are different films for different moods.
sometimes i can enjoy a lesser film for really cool effects.

others if there is a well built tension

As you said I'm going to enjoy a film more completely if all of the elements - especially character developement are present (i keep going back to session 9 as an example)

but that doesnt mean i wont find something to like about a film without a complex plot or character developement if the other aspects are present and well executed.


look at the most touted films on most horror forums ... the feddies, the jasons, the michaels ... People who pride themselves on being 'real horror fans' absolutely love them.

I'm not crazy about them myself - for all the reasons mentioned above... characters i could care less about ..etc...


but regarding Ils (or Them as it's called in the US) i found i did care about the characters even though there wasnt a back story - because i was them... I found that it was highly realistic - a day in the life of .. you immediately became one with them and experienced their confusion and terror because it was so realistic... one minute you're asleep, the next you're in a lot of trouble.
No subplots - nothing but survival.. just like it would be if it was real.


I think Chrono alluded to this - but often setting up the characters might make you feel for them in a disney sort of way - but it's usually done in a very contrived manner .. full of bullshit forshadowing and other devices that seperate you from the characters. you care for them - but you are seperate - watching them.

for me - Them made me experience what they were experiencing.
Something i found far more effective than just caring for the characters cause they're nice folks.

[neverending]

Good points. I've heard well reasoned opinions both pro and con about this film, and look forward to seeing it someday.

[mikeyjay88]

Yea i seen it good movie.



Is that better bub?

[The Mothman]

gee, how insightful.

[ChronoGrl]

but regarding Ils (or Them as it's called in the US) i found i did care about the characters even though there wasnt a back story - because i was them... I found that it was highly realistic - a day in the life of .. you immediately became one with them and experienced their confusion and terror because it was so realistic... one minute you're asleep, the next you're in a lot of trouble.
No subplots - nothing but survival.. just like it would be if it was real.


I think Chrono alluded to this - but often setting up the characters might make you feel for them in a disney sort of way - but it's usually done in a very contrived manner .. full of bullshit forshadowing and other devices that seperate you from the characters. you care for them - but you are seperate - watching them.

for me - Them made me experience what they were experiencing.
Something i found far more effective than just caring for the characters cause they're nice folks.

Yeah, that's absolutely the point that I was trying to make - I think that Urge articulated it a bit more clearly. It's not so much "just wanting to see characters in peril," its that, in some cases (though it depends on the film), having little character development turns the characters into an everyman that I can identify with more. In the case of Ils, it's essentially a believable young couple living in isolation, a theme which resonates with me particularly because, well, I'm a paranoid who who is convinced that someone is going to break in at any moment.

IMO, if you're a horror fan who happens to enjoy films that give you more than the simple thrill of seeing people in peril, it's perfectly legitimate to complain if you don't get it.

Yeah, I don't think that I articulated myself particularly well. It's not just simply "seeing people in peril" that makes simplistic movies like Ils affective to me. This is the distinction that I make between movies like Saw and Hostel (which I thought had absolutely no substance and wasn't intelligent at all; pure torture porn masquerading as "intelligent" low budget schlock) and movies like Ils and Halloween that focus on pure raw emotion (I'm always impressed with films that can draw emotion from me) without necessarily needing complex plot or character themes.

I think that movies can be successful with character development and plot, but I've also seen movies suffer from excess in characters and contrived plot devices. The same goes for movies that suffer from a complete lack of the aforementioned. I think that it's a matter of striking a balance - You can create substance in other ways.

NE - You should just go and watch Ils so you know what I mean. :p

[Despare]

movies like Saw and Hostel


Since you mentioned those films I was a big fan of the fact that Ils offered something so refreshingly different in an era of copycats and goreflicks. Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my gore but it was a nice change.

[Angra]

Is "The Strangers" a remake of this one?

[urgeok2]

nope................

[Angra]

Good........