the descent

[sleepygrlgreen]

not sure if a thread has been made about this or not, but how bad ass does this movie look? if i were to randomly read about the plot online, i'd think "wow, super gay movie" but the trailers look amazing. any thoughts?

[preppyak]

it's been released in Europe already...etc. There was a thread a little while back. It's decent...good for the genre, probalby one of the better I've seen in a while

[wessa]

seeing that i am not a fan of horror (aka a pussy) i will not be seeing this movie, the whole situation just freaks me out. I did hear though that they changed the ending from the british version. My guess would be that in the original version, the last person alive has her light run out, and you hear her die and the movie ends, and they probably changed it to make somebody survive. That is just a wild guess though.

[basementsong]

seeing that i am not a fan of horror (aka a pussy) i will not be seeing this movie, the whole situation just freaks me out. I did hear though that they changed the ending from the british version. My guess would be that in the original version, the last person alive has her light run out, and you hear her die and the movie ends, and they probably changed it to make somebody survive. That is just a wild guess though.

not quite. the us version just cuts off like seconds before the uk one but it implies a whole different thing or something. and haha it isn't even scary. I wasn't bothered by it at all anyway.

[bruce campbell]

it's scarier than anything that's come out in recent years
it's really good

[Freud]

i liked it. i wanna know the difference between the US ending and the original one, as i havent seen the US one.

[vandalsandquinn]

the commercial scared the shit out of me

[Chemical Love]

Its not that good.

[skibagirl]

it looks pretty dumb. i'm gonna pass.

[AshesAshes]

I just saw it and really enjoyed it but I wanna know the difference in endings.

[LostSymphonies]

i really enjoyed it, it had a very Aliens vibe to it..the claustrophobia and the monsters that can jump out at any time, i will definitely be buying this when it comes out

[moises_naruto]

well... after downloadin and watchin the dvd.... i gotta say this is a piece of shit... don't trust the adds... don't trust the reviews.... wtf.... Girls on a cave expedition....plus some smeagoll like monsters....+ a dark set.. = a fuckin joke.... if you want to see a horror movie watch saw... and avoid this movie .... did u know that this movie was gona be sent straight to DVD on the US... but they decided to have it on theatres to earn some money... and by the peoples respones.. i guess people so stupid to pay to watch this...

[cahrishurr]

well... after downloadin and watchin the dvd.... i gotta say this is a piece of shit... don't trust the adds... don't trust the reviews.... wtf.... Girls on a cave expedition....plus some smeagoll like monsters....+ a dark set.. = a fuckin joke.... if you want to see a horror movie watch saw... and avoid this movie .... did u know that this movie was gona be sent straight to DVD on the US... but they decided to have it on theatres to earn some money... and by the peoples respones.. i guess people so stupid to pay to watch this...


Stupid to watch this? Please dude, this is more original than a thousand more remakes of classic horror movies or another black cop white cop team up to take down a druglord movie.

Saw was good, but that is not a horror movie I would suggest over this. There are a tons of great horror films, and you say watch Saw......

[preppyak]

well... after downloadin and watchin the dvd.... i gotta say this is a piece of shit... don't trust the adds... don't trust the reviews.... wtf.... Girls on a cave expedition....plus some smeagoll like monsters....+ a dark set.. = a fuckin joke.... if you want to see a horror movie watch saw... and avoid this movie .... did u know that this movie was gona be sent straight to DVD on the US... but they decided to have it on theatres to earn some money... and by the peoples respones.. i guess people so stupid to pay to watch this...
No...I mean, if you want unorginal ways to make exploitation cool...without a logical buildup or finishing explanation that is satisfying, sure...but, then why not just watch Hostel...you get shit either way.

Then again, after seeing the style of your post, without punctuation, etc, can't say I expected much

Stupid to watch this? Please dude, this is more original than a thousand more remakes of classic horror movies or another black cop white cop team up to take down a druglord movie.

Saw was good, but that is not a horror movie I would suggest over this. There are a tons of great horror films, and you say watch Saw......
Exactly...Saw is very weak in the genre...and only because people want to see someone get fucked up in a different way do they even see it.

The Descent actually utilizes real notions of horror...whoever said Aliens, that is a good comparison, that sort of lurking, brooding threat is exactly what I thought.

The fact that the Descent managed to get a B+ overall from critics shows it has some validity as a horror film to me...in taht the critics truly seem to hate horror anymore (Saw got a B-, Saw II a C), and so it has to be very well done to get a notice.

[LostSymphonies]

Stupid to watch this? Please dude, this is more original than a thousand more remakes of classic horror movies or another black cop white cop team up to take down a druglord movie.

Saw was good, but that is not a horror movie I would suggest over this. There are a tons of great horror films, and you say watch Saw......


I agree that this was a original movie, this is another reason i loved Lady in the Water even though alot of people hated it. It's something refreshing and I have never felt more claustrophobic since Aliens, i loved this movie

PS. I love the whole Saw series and i think III is going to be a nice bring back to the first

[Andy]

well... after downloadin and watchin the dvd.... i gotta say this is a piece of shit... don't trust the adds... don't trust the reviews.... wtf.... Girls on a cave expedition....plus some smeagoll like monsters....+ a dark set.. = a fuckin joke.... if you want to see a horror movie watch saw... and avoid this movie .... did u know that this movie was gona be sent straight to DVD on the US... but they decided to have it on theatres to earn some money... and by the peoples respones.. i guess people so stupid to pay to watch this...

hey pal, suck my dick why dont you

[buysoap]

Stupid to watch this? Please dude, this is more original than a thousand more remakes of classic horror movies or another black cop white cop team up to take down a druglord movie.

Saw was good, but that is not a horror movie I would suggest over this. There are a tons of great horror films, and you say watch Saw......

you think the descent is ORIGINAL???????

dude. the descent is the same as THE CAVE except a different monster and all women!

[preppyak]

My favorite line from the Sun Times review of The Descent...I think it nails it on the head:

"Finally, a scary movie with teeth, not just blood and entrails -- a savage and gripping piece of work that jangles your nerves without leaving your brain hanging. And so, for a change, you emerge feeling energized and exhilarated rather than enervated, or merely queasy."

[FondestMemory]

you think the descent is ORIGINAL???????

dude. the descent is the same as THE CAVE except a different monster and all women!

considering the descent was made before the cave, yes, it's original.

[preppyak]

you think the descent is ORIGINAL???????

dude. the descent is the same as THE CAVE except a different monster and all women!

Originality doesn't always lie in the premise...otherwise horror as a genre would be fucked. It's different in terms of how shots are taken, how it's paced, how the movie feels in general.

I think "refreshing" is a better term than "original," but either way, it shits on The Cave.

[Andy]

you think the descent is ORIGINAL???????

dude. the descent is the same as THE CAVE except a different monster and all women!

It came before the Cave, genius

[buysoap]

considering the descent was made before the cave, yes, it's original.

nono, they were made at the same time. they were both just released at different dates. i highly doubt the people who made the cave were like, "wow... the descent... lets re-make that with a different monster and less women". both films were made in 2005 and the descent was just finished and released first. now, when i saw the first Saw in 2004, attached with the movie was a trailer for The Cave, and this was before The Descent was released.... so... there you go. the cave was delayed a long time... probably because it sucked the first tiem around and they were trying desperately to figure out how to save that shitty shitty movie.

also, look at this:

plot of the descent, according to imdb: A caving expedition goes horribly wrong, as the explorers become trapped and ultimately pursued by a strange breed of predators.

plot of the the cave, according to imdb: Bloodthirsty creatures await a pack of divers who become trapped in an underwater cave network.

two movies made at the same time with the same plot. original my ass. it's compared to alien... why? because it's the same basic principle.

this is not to say that the descent is a bad movie. i haven't see it. i'll probably see it so i can see the saw 3 trailer... however, original? no way.

[FondestMemory]

wow. what a fucking douche.

let's argue about a movie you haven't even seen yet.

fucking awesome.

[buysoap]

wow. what a fucking douche.

let's argue about a movie you haven't even seen yet.

fucking awesome.


did i ever make a comment about the quality of the movie? no. i just said it's far from original.

[FondestMemory]

did i ever make a comment about the quality of the movie? no. i just said it's far from original.

you still can't fucking make that judgement by reading one sentence on imdb.

the descent is one of the better made, more creative, more original horror movies i've seen in a while.

[marrost]

did i ever make a comment about the quality of the movie? no. i just said it's far from original.Plot isn't the only thing that can make a movie original.

Stop talking.

[preppyak]

did i ever make a comment about the quality of the movie? no. i just said it's far from original.
Except that originality in a film does mean "oh, it has a similiar plot...it's not original". Originality isn't a blanket term to describe just the plot...it describes acting, cinematography, everything...

To say its not "original" is a stupid fucking thing to say when you haven't even seen the movie.
Plot isn't the only thing that can make a movie original.

Stop talking.
Haha...my point exactly

For example, the general premise of horror films is "person goes into creepy place/meets creepy person, finds evil, confronts it...". Within that notion, no horror film since the 1920's has been original, which would be a terrible mistake to say.

But, I haven't seen the movie in a few months...and I just downloaded it, so I am off to watch it again

[buysoap]

fine, i won't give you my opinions on the film. but how about several reviews? and before you give me shit, yes, i KNOW the descent has good reviews. that's not the point. i'm just trying to show that i'm not the only one who thinks this is unoriginal. again, you all get on my ass about it, but i never said this was a bad movie. personally, yeah, i think i won't like it, but i haven't seen it, so i'm not talking about that. i'm merely saying it's not original. so look:

"Essentially a more grave, and less unintentionally hilarious, version of The Cave." Nick Schager

"The Descent is simply a shock-'em, shake-'em genre piece with scare scenes that, however effective, suggest cheap-shop versions of a lot we've seen before." Michael Wilmington

"The movie devolves into a conventional man-versus-nature pursuit, further marred by performances just this side of a high-toned porno and the frequently irrational behavior of its characters." Scott Foundas

"Aside from its high concept -- instead of Snakes on a Plane, it's Chicks in a Cave (with monsters!) -- place-setting is almost all Marshall does." Ian Grey

"The Descent only works marginally better than last August's similar creature feature, The Cave." Chuck O' Leary

again, I'M NOT SAYING THE DESCENT IS A BAD MOVIE. i'm saying it's NOT original. acting, cinematography, blah blah blah... this is all coming off very tried and true in a genre that's failing. i mean, for christs sake, hollywood is trying to pull every japanese pop movie they can and turn it american these days because they're running out of ideas.

originality is failing. i don't even think saw was that original, and i loved it. so again, i'm not debating the goodness factor of this movie... but original?

[Scott Weber]

i'll never see this but it's getting fucking amazing reviews for its genre...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1153567-the_descent/

[FondestMemory]

fine, i won't give you my opinions on the film. but how about several reviews? and before you give me shit, yes, i KNOW the descent has good reviews. that's not the point. i'm just trying to show that i'm not the only one who thinks this is unoriginal. again, you all get on my ass about it, but i never said this was a bad movie. personally, yeah, i think i won't like it, but i haven't seen it, so i'm not talking about that. i'm merely saying it's not original. so look:

"Essentially a more grave, and less unintentionally hilarious, version of The Cave." Nick Schager

"The Descent is simply a shock-'em, shake-'em genre piece with scare scenes that, however effective, suggest cheap-shop versions of a lot we've seen before." Michael Wilmington

"The movie devolves into a conventional man-versus-nature pursuit, further marred by performances just this side of a high-toned porno and the frequently irrational behavior of its characters." Scott Foundas

"Aside from its high concept -- instead of Snakes on a Plane, it's Chicks in a Cave (with monsters!) -- place-setting is almost all Marshall does." Ian Grey

"The Descent only works marginally better than last August's similar creature feature, The Cave." Chuck O' Leary

again, I'M NOT SAYING THE DESCENT IS A BAD MOVIE. i'm saying it's NOT original. acting, cinematography, blah blah blah... this is all coming off very tried and true in a genre that's failing. i mean, for christs sake, hollywood is trying to pull every japanese pop movie they can and turn it american these days because they're running out of ideas.

originality is failing. i don't even think saw was that original, and i loved it. so again, i'm not debating the goodness factor of this movie... but original?

we're not saying you said it was a bad movie. we're just saying we don't give a shit what you have to say about it since you haven't seen it.

[marrost]

Why the fuck does this guy keep bringing up Saw?

[die.emperor.die]

This movie could have been infinitely better without the monsters. Deliverance in a cave type thing.

[Andy]

fine, i won't give you my opinions on the film. but how about several reviews? and before you give me shit, yes, i KNOW the descent has good reviews. that's not the point. i'm just trying to show that i'm not the only one who thinks this is unoriginal. again, you all get on my ass about it, but i never said this was a bad movie. personally, yeah, i think i won't like it, but i haven't seen it, so i'm not talking about that. i'm merely saying it's not original. so look:

"Essentially a more grave, and less unintentionally hilarious, version of The Cave." Nick Schager

"The Descent is simply a shock-'em, shake-'em genre piece with scare scenes that, however effective, suggest cheap-shop versions of a lot we've seen before." Michael Wilmington

"The movie devolves into a conventional man-versus-nature pursuit, further marred by performances just this side of a high-toned porno and the frequently irrational behavior of its characters." Scott Foundas

"Aside from its high concept -- instead of Snakes on a Plane, it's Chicks in a Cave (with monsters!) -- place-setting is almost all Marshall does." Ian Grey

"The Descent only works marginally better than last August's similar creature feature, The Cave." Chuck O' Leary

again, I'M NOT SAYING THE DESCENT IS A BAD MOVIE. i'm saying it's NOT original. acting, cinematography, blah blah blah... this is all coming off very tried and true in a genre that's failing. i mean, for christs sake, hollywood is trying to pull every japanese pop movie they can and turn it american these days because they're running out of ideas.

originality is failing. i don't even think saw was that original, and i loved it. so again, i'm not debating the goodness factor of this movie... but original?
So, are we supposed to quote the other reviews on Rotten now? The positive ones?

[IAmNietzche]

So, are we supposed to quote the other reviews on Rotten now? The positive ones?
I think he made it pretty clear that the reviews he quoted show its unoriginality not that its a bad movie. If you can find positive reviews (or negative) that say "this is nothing like the Cave" or "an excercise in originality" then by all means post those.

I'm not defending the dude especially since he busted out the term "goodness factor", but he did present a good argument. The movie isn't original by any means.

[preppyak]

fine, i won't give you my opinions on the film. but how about several reviews? and before you give me shit, yes, i KNOW the descent has good reviews. that's not the point. i'm just trying to show that i'm not the only one who thinks this is unoriginal. again, you all get on my ass about it, but i never said this was a bad movie. personally, yeah, i think i won't like it, but i haven't seen it, so i'm not talking about that. i'm merely saying it's not original. so look:

"Essentially a more grave, and less unintentionally hilarious, version of The Cave." Nick Schager

"The Descent is simply a shock-'em, shake-'em genre piece with scare scenes that, however effective, suggest cheap-shop versions of a lot we've seen before." Michael Wilmington

"The movie devolves into a conventional man-versus-nature pursuit, further marred by performances just this side of a high-toned porno and the frequently irrational behavior of its characters." Scott Foundas

"Aside from its high concept -- instead of Snakes on a Plane, it's Chicks in a Cave (with monsters!) -- place-setting is almost all Marshall does." Ian Grey

"The Descent only works marginally better than last August's similar creature feature, The Cave." Chuck O' Leary

again, I'M NOT SAYING THE DESCENT IS A BAD MOVIE. i'm saying it's NOT original. acting, cinematography, blah blah blah... this is all coming off very tried and true in a genre that's failing. i mean, for christs sake, hollywood is trying to pull every japanese pop movie they can and turn it american these days because they're running out of ideas.

originality is failing. i don't even think saw was that original, and i loved it. so again, i'm not debating the goodness factor of this movie... but original?
Where do I point out that beside Michael Wilmington, those are a bunch of no name reviewers with dick credibility...and I give them less because they reference Snakes on a Plane for "coolness" factor in their review.

I'm re-watching it now, and I want to mention two things.

1. It's unrelenting, more so than most horror films. At 50 minutes into a 90 minute movie, there hasn;t been more than 3 minutes of peace for both mind and heart. The combination of setting (Cave, neccesitating darkness) and sound (the sound editing is fucking amazing so far...I had forgotten that) always keeps the sort of erie feeling alive, even when they haven't seen the creatures yet, and only been in the cave for all of 10-15 minutes.

And to add to the darkness, they do not cheat with lighting. So far, they have gone almost entirely naturally lit, via flashlights and flares. It makes the scenes darker, and you see less, but it is exactly how a cave would be.

2. The fact that it is all women actually makes sense to me now...since this movie isn't taking a physical approach to it's fright. It forces the audience to focus on the mental side of it. The Cave failed in it's premise because, with men, the audience feels they naturally have a person who is there to fight the evil, with the men as a sort of protectorate. When it's all women, normally, there isn't a constant physical force to combat the evil. It's working well so far, since no one woman has really taken charge...

Spoiler warning:

I'm at the part where Holly breaks her leg, they've only now seen the creatures for the first time, but at the moment, they assume it's Sarah going crazy. It's the best horror film I've seen all year, and it's reminding me of why. It relies on a few cliches, but so far, it hasn't cheated in creating it's fright. Sure, it's only a person behind them in their group, or a series of bats, but they aren't thrown in randomly, it's fairly rationally places so far.

I'll add in more once I am done, because the creatures aren't believable entirely, but I want to watch again and still be sure that it doesn't matter

[FondestMemory]

I think he made it pretty clear that the reviews he quoted show its unoriginality not that its a bad movie. If you can find positive reviews (or negative) that say "this is nothing like the Cave" or "an excercise in originality" then by all means post those.

I'm not defending the dude especially since he busted out the term "goodness factor", but he did present a good argument. The movie isn't original by any means.

no, his argument was shit because he admitted he hadn't seen it. he was basing it off of a one sentence blurb on imdb for the most part.

i don't care what all else he pulled out, he hadn't seen it, so his opinion means dick.

[preppyak]

I think he made it pretty clear that the reviews he quoted show its unoriginality not that its a bad movie. If you can find positive reviews (or negative) that say "this is nothing like the Cave" or "an excercise in originality" then by all means post those.

I'm not defending the dude especially since he busted out the term "goodness factor", but he did present a good argument. The movie isn't original by any means.

Except his point is one taht has been played out a million times and shown that it's irrelevant. In terms of plot device, no horror movie has been truly original in a long time.

This movie is original in a few ways, both in lighting and sound editing. It also adds in the tight form of cinematography that someone referenced earlier in Aliens.

Of course, these forms of originality are lost on a person who has yet to see the movie...

And again, original still isn't the best term. Refreshing, or creative are...nothing is truly "original" in the movie, but in the way it combines the element, it's fairly inventive

[preppyak]

Two things, and then I am going back to wathcing it.


1. In calling it not original, you infer "cliche" to it. Thus, he would be calling the movie cliche. Call any movie or band cliche and see if someone doesn't flip out on you for it. It is an insult, and immediately refers back to the "goodness factor" of a film. A cliche film can only be so good, since it's immediately placed below the movie that it stole it's ideas from before.

2. How can you call it unoriginal if you haven't seen it...it's disingenous

Now I'm putting my dictionary away and going back to the film...another update in less than an hour probably

[preppyak]

And to add to it...yes, the "creatures" do take away from the movie a bit...but it's still pretty solid.

B+ is probably right, the ending is a little weaker than I had remembered, the build-up that is, and they cheat in a place or two (the camera mostly).

Solid movie overall though

[Andy]

When I saw it at the theater I had no idea there were monsters, I just thought they get caved in.

[AshesAshes]

Can someone please tell me the difference in endings :)

[Andy]

Can someone please tell me the difference in endings :)

sorry, havent seen the american version

[preppyak]

Can someone please tell me the difference in endings :)

it was in another of the Descent threads...I'm assuming the version I saw was the UK one...but, no idea since I ahven't seen the theatre version yet

[buysoap]

first, i wasn't judging the descent based on the line from imdb. i was using that in my example. i judged it based on the trailers and commercial spots for it.

second, i just got home from seeing the descent. so here's what i have to say now that i'm "credible for having seen it" or whatever: you know, i'll see pretty much anything. there was a time during winter break from school i'd go to the movies and see something every night because i love movies. if i pride myself on anything, it's my dvd collection. i've seen shit no one's heard of and i've seen shit everyone loves, so my knowledge of cinema and what has been done and blah blah blah is not a bad one. and i must say, while it's not a bad movie, i still stick to what i was saying.... that it is unoriginal. i don't think the plot was original, or the settings, or the camera angles, or the sound editing.... it was entertaining for what it was worth, but i still think it's by no means original. i've felt more claustrophobic in theaters before, and i've been more scared. i wasn't on the edge of my seat with anticipation for events or anything, and the monster.. things weren't even really scary. they looked like a cross between the gollum and the guy in the trailer for pulse (again, i reference a trailer, get mad at me why don't you?) so there you go. can we have a decent discussion about the movie now, or is that just not possible?

also, thank you IAmNietzche for actually reading what i was saying and looking past the fact i hadn't seen the movie.

[FondestMemory]

first, i wasn't judging the descent based on the line from imdb. i was using that in my example. i judged it based on the trailers and commercial spots for it.

second, i just got home from seeing the descent. so here's what i have to say now that i'm "credible for having seen it" or whatever: you know, i'll see pretty much anything. there was a time during winter break from school i'd go to the movies and see something every night because i love movies. if i pride myself on anything, it's my dvd collection. i've seen shit no one's heard of and i've seen shit everyone loves, so my knowledge of cinema and what has been done and blah blah blah is not a bad one. and i must say, while it's not a bad movie, i still stick to what i was saying.... that it is unoriginal. i don't think the plot was original, or the settings, or the camera angles, or the sound editing.... it was entertaining for what it was worth, but i still think it's by no means original. i've felt more claustrophobic in theaters before, and i've been more scared. i wasn't on the edge of my seat with anticipation for events or anything, and the monster.. things weren't even really scary. they looked like a cross between the gollum and the guy in the trailer for pulse (again, i reference a trailer, get mad at me why don't you?) so there you go. can we have a decent discussion about the movie now, or is that just not possible?

also, thank you IAmNietzche for actually reading what i was saying and looking past the fact i hadn't seen the movie.

alright, now you've seen it and your opinion is credible.

but i think all that leaves us to do now is agree to disagree.

the plot's been played out. the premise, the setting, the idea. yeah, all been seen before. but the way it was done was better than any of the other times i'd seen it done. it was creative enough that i'm not thinking 'i've seen this all before' through the whole thing.

[preppyak]

first, i wasn't judging the descent based on the line from imdb. i was using that in my example. i judged it based on the trailers and commercial spots for it.

second, i just got home from seeing the descent. so here's what i have to say now that i'm "credible for having seen it" or whatever: you know, i'll see pretty much anything. there was a time during winter break from school i'd go to the movies and see something every night because i love movies. if i pride myself on anything, it's my dvd collection. i've seen shit no one's heard of and i've seen shit everyone loves, so my knowledge of cinema and what has been done and blah blah blah is not a bad one. and i must say, while it's not a bad movie, i still stick to what i was saying.... that it is unoriginal. i don't think the plot was original, or the settings, or the camera angles, or the sound editing.... it was entertaining for what it was worth, but i still think it's by no means original. i've felt more claustrophobic in theaters before, and i've been more scared. i wasn't on the edge of my seat with anticipation for events or anything, and the monster.. things weren't even really scary. they looked like a cross between the gollum and the guy in the trailer for pulse (again, i reference a trailer, get mad at me why don't you?) so there you go. can we have a decent discussion about the movie now, or is that just not possible?


True...and I think they hurt the movie a little. It reminded me of Signs, where, when you didn't see them, it was scarier than when you did.

For example, and I want to see if you felt the same thing, the first 50 minutes, where you don't see them, was a better horror film than the last 40 where they are a major focus....with all the attacks, etc.

And, like I said earlier, the word "refreshing" is better...their were minor things that were really good, but not really "original" per say. I think the sound editing early on was fairly creative, and the way they shot them when they first entered the cave, when it was mostly just their headlamps being seen, was also fairly creative.

I can say more so that the attacks and fights were fairly normal, and actually got a little bland in a few points.

[FondestMemory]

it was in another of the Descent threads...I'm assuming the version I saw was the UK one...but, no idea since I ahven't seen the theatre version yet

yeah, i explained it another thread yesterday. don't feel like finding it or retyping it. but it's the thread title is something like 'is anybody else seeing the descent...'.

[preppyak]

yeah, i explained it another thread yesterday. don't feel like finding it or retyping it. but it's the thread title is something like 'is anybody else seeing the descent...'.

Yeah, I tried searching for it, but, the search function is down...so, maybe when it's back up

[FondestMemory]

True...and I think they hurt the movie a little. It reminded me of Signs, where, when you didn't see them, it was scarier than when you did.

For example, and I want to see if you felt the same thing, the first 50 minutes, where you don't see them, was a better horror film than the last 40 where they are a major focus....with all the attacks, etc.

And, like I said earlier, the word "refreshing" is better...their were minor things that were really good, but not really "original" per say

i compared it to from dusk til dawn. when i went and saw that in the theater, i took a friend who hadn't seen a preview and knew nothing about it. he really liked the first half when it was one kind of movie, but was really thrown off when it turned into a vampire movie.

the same could be said for this, as the first half of the movie before the monsters is still pretty tense and real good. however, how long can that premise go on and maintain interest? i liked the monsters because they were never really explained. it was made clear nobody'd come out of that cage alive before, so nobody knew they were there. that angle of it i thought was done real well. cause we're left trying to figure out what the fuck the things are at the same time they are.

what i liked most about it though was the human aspect. everybody had their flaws, some more than others. i thought the characters were done very well and you actually cared what happened. you miss that in a lot of the current horror genre.

[FondestMemory]

Yeah, I tried searching for it, but, the search function is down...so, maybe when it's back up

http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=159792 it's actually still on the front page.

[preppyak]

what i liked most about it though was the human aspect. everybody had their flaws, some more than others. i thought the characters were done very well and you actually cared what happened. you miss that in a lot of the current horror genre.
agreed...

and when she chops the bitch down at the end, I was thinking "fuck yeah"
http://www.absolutepunk.net/showthread.php?t=159792 it's actually still on the front page.

haha. skipped right over it. Yeah, if the American version ends that way, it cliches the hell out of it, because every movie, someone has to live...

[buysoap]

True...and I think they hurt the movie a little. It reminded me of Signs, where, when you didn't see them, it was scarier than when you did.

For example, and I want to see if you felt the same thing, the first 50 minutes, where you don't see them, was a better horror film than the last 40 where they are a major focus....with all the attacks, etc.

And, like I said earlier, the word "refreshing" is better...their were minor things that were really good, but not really "original" per say. I think the sound editing early on was fairly creative, and the way they shot them when they first entered the cave, when it was mostly just their headlamps being seen, was also fairly creative.

I can say more so that the attacks and fights were fairly normal, and actually got a little bland in a few points.

ugh... signs... that was such a dissapointment. i love sixth sense and unbreakable and lady in the water, the village wasn't half bad, but signs...

but i agree. the movie without the monsters was better. i think there should have been no monsters. it wouldn't have made me love the movie or anything, but it would have made it so much more interesting.

as for refreshing? i don't know if i'd go so far as to say that. i think horror is the best genre, so i'm willing to see almost anything just based on the fact that it is a "horror" film. but this really didn't stand out that much to me. i guess when i see a horror movie these days, i really need to be like... "oh my god!!!" to really feel for it because there are so many basic horror plots that are played out.

for example, i don't know if anyone has showtime, but the Masters of Horror series. some of those were PURE GEMS! Cigarette Burns? that's not a traditional horror by any standards, but i thought that was great. for those that haven't seen it, it's a movie about a movie so evil that it drives people to killing themselves, and the protagonist of the movie is hired to find the movie. also, Takashi Miike's addition to the Masters of Horror series that was banned in the US (but available on P2P networks), while it's not really.... original or anything, i cringed at some of the images in it. i think that's what i need in horror movies these days. to really be moved, even just a little bit. because it's getting old. it seems so often that you can always guess who the killer is, or the main character is a schizo, or it's just some really stupid monster thing.......

[AshesAshes]

agreed...

and when she chops the bitch down at the end, I was thinking "fuck yeah"


haha. skipped right over it. Yeah, if the American version ends that way, it cliches the hell out of it, because every movie, someone has to live...

I was pissed she killed the girl at the end!but I liked how they did it.

[FondestMemory]

for example, i don't know if anyone has showtime, but the Masters of Horror series. some of those were PURE GEMS! Cigarette Burns? that's not a traditional horror by any standards, but i thought that was great. for those that haven't seen it, it's a movie about a movie so evil that it drives people to killing themselves, and the protagonist of the movie is hired to find the movie. also, Takashi Miike's addition to the Masters of Horror series that was banned in the US (but available on P2P networks), while it's not really.... original or anything, i cringed at some of the images in it. i think that's what i need in horror movies these days. to really be moved, even just a little bit. because it's getting old. it seems so often that you can always guess who the killer is, or the main character is a schizo, or it's just some really stupid monster thing.......

cigarette burns was probably the best episode last season. i'm torn between that one and fair haired child. those two were great.

others were alright.

but the henry thomas one, chocolate i think, was fucking horrible. some of them were just down right bad.

[buysoap]

cigarette burns was probably the best episode last season. i'm torn between that one and fair haired child. those two were great.

others were alright.

but the henry thomas one, chocolate i think, was fucking horrible. some of them were just down right bad.

chocolate, homecoming, and sick girl were like comedys...

my favorites are imprint, pick me up, cigarette burns, and jenifer

[preppyak]

as for refreshing? i don't know if i'd go so far as to say that. i think horror is the best genre, so i'm willing to see almost anything just based on the fact that it is a "horror" film. but this really didn't stand out that much to me. i guess when i see a horror movie these days, i really need to be like... "oh my god!!!" to really feel for it because there are so many basic horror plots that are played out.
haha...that would be where we differ. I think horror has become one of the worst genres, only becuase things like plot and character development are lost in the desire for more gore.

In turn, I don't watch as many horror films, so when I see one that appeals to me, I probably make it out to be better than it is.

[FondestMemory]

chocolate, homecoming, and sick girl were like comedys...

my favorites are imprint, pick me up, cigarette burns, and jenifer

homecoming i liked just because it was dante. same with sick girl being by lucky. although i wish that one would have been better.

landis' deer woman was by far the funniest of the season though. and it wasn't just a flat out comedy, it was actually pretty good.

chocolate though was just such shit. i really really hated that one. dead can dance was pretty lame too.

and jenifer just creeped me the fuck out. it wasn't horrible, but i couldn't watch it more than once. banging that broad was gross. i cringed everytime it happened.

[buysoap]

homecoming i liked just because it was dante. same with sick girl being by lucky. although i wish that one would have been better.

landis' deer woman was by far the funniest of the season though. and it wasn't just a flat out comedy, it was actually pretty good.

chocolate though was just such shit. i really really hated that one. dead can dance was pretty lame too.

and jenifer just creeped me the fuck out. it wasn't horrible, but i couldn't watch it more than once. banging that broad was gross. i cringed everytime it happened.

i loved jenifer. i can't wait for that to come out on dvd.

and honestly... with a bag on her head, i'm sure i could forgive her for fucking up my life and eating my cat.

[buysoap]

haha...that would be where we differ. I think horror has become one of the worst genres, only becuase things like plot and character development are lost in the desire for more gore.

In turn, I don't watch as many horror films, so when I see one that appeals to me, I probably make it out to be better than it is.

oh, horror today is a terrible genre! the movies we get are absolute shit! there's this idea that when you did something right once, you can do it again over and over and over and make it great. but that's just not true. you do something right once, great, now try something else and hope it comes out well.

i think, these days, what makes a horror movie good is something you haven't seen before or something very clever. maybe it's just a really ingenious death scene, or maybe it's a really twisted plot, but something along those lines, these days, help make good horror. you know, i even thought that the last Final Destination wasn't bad because, yeah, it's just a dumb teen horror movie, you know that it's a dumb teen horror movie, and so does it. it doesn't try and be mindblowing, but the deaths in it are very creative and entertaining. you know how the movie is going to end, epsecially if you saw final destination 1, but the deaths are entertaining enough that you don't even really mind.

i'm really looking forward to the movie Hatchet, http://imdb.com/title/tt0422401/ it looks like it's not going to try and be the best thing you've ever seen, but just return to some traditional horror roots and work with that.

[FondestMemory]

i loved jenifer. i can't wait for that to come out on dvd.

and honestly... with a bag on her head, i'm sure i could forgive her for fucking up my life and eating my cat.

the chick that played her actually is damned hot. like, the body was still nice. but those teeth and the drool was what got me.

in real life though, i'd eat her kitty.

[FondestMemory]

oh, horror today is a terrible genre! the movies we get are absolute shit! there's this idea that when you did something right once, you can do it again over and over and over and make it great. but that's just not true. you do something right once, great, now try something else and hope it comes out well.

i think, these days, what makes a horror movie good is something you haven't seen before or something very clever. maybe it's just a really ingenious death scene, or maybe it's a really twisted plot, but something along those lines, these days, help make good horror. you know, i even thought that the last Final Destination wasn't bad because, yeah, it's just a dumb teen horror movie, you know that it's a dumb teen horror movie, and so does it. it doesn't try and be mindblowing, but the deaths in it are very creative and entertaining. you know how the movie is going to end, epsecially if you saw final destination 1, but the deaths are entertaining enough that you don't even really mind.

i'm really looking forward to the movie Hatchet, http://imdb.com/title/tt0422401/ it looks like it's not going to try and be the best thing you've ever seen, but just return to some traditional horror roots and work with that.

you're clearly hella into horror. so we have that in common.

what do you know about behind the mask? watch the trailer if you haven't heard of it. i'm actually very stoked about it, but have no clue what's going on with it. however, i haven't checked the site in a while, so it may have finally gotten distro.

www.behindthemaskthemovie.com (http://www.behindthemaskthemovie.com)

[buysoap]

you're clearly hella into horror. so we have that in common.

what do you know about behind the mask? watch the trailer if you haven't heard of it. i'm actually very stoked about it, but have no clue what's going on with it. however, i haven't checked the site in a while, so it may have finally gotten distro.

www.behindthemaskthemovie.com (http://www.behindthemaskthemovie.com)

that movie looks awesome!!! at first i thought you were referencing the movie coming out next year about hannibal (http://imdb.com/title/tt0367959/) but the trailer looks good. i'll see if tere's anyone to get this movie because it hasn't been released or anything.

another movie i heard about that looked good was Nine Dead. http://ninedead.com/ i have no idea whats going on with that though

[FondestMemory]

that movie looks awesome!!! at first i thought you were referencing the movie coming out next year about hannibal (http://imdb.com/title/tt0367959/) but the trailer looks good. i'll see if tere's anyone to get this movie because it hasn't been released or anything.

another movie i heard about that looked good was Nine Dead. http://ninedead.com/ i have no idea whats going on with that though

that's what sucks, is the market's so flooded with disposable garbage that the masses will eat up, that when something independent and actually unique comes along, nobody wants to take the time or money to distribute it.

[xvszero]

So this movie is actually decent? It looked so terrible.

Is there any real explanation for why a bunch of models go crawling around in caves?

[Bean]

Honestly, I went into the theatre thinking what xvszero is, and that it was just going to be another so-so horror film...but I felt more claustrophobic than I have when watching a horror film since I can remember. It was less scary and moreso just thrilling, though. The creatures did get a little old and less scary toward the end, especially once the bitches started kicking some tail, but I also kind of liked that part of it. Seeing the monsters some was cool, especially when the first one jumped at them and they all started freaking out and knew shit was goin' down. They just overdid it a bit as it went on. I liked that they were all girls though, like someone mentioned about having no "physical" force to combat the evil. It was just primal and got me excited when they started fighting back, but Sarah got a little too tough (especially hacking her friend like that) and a bit of the stuff the characters did wasn't 100% believable.

The ending didn't do it for me, though. I was still on the edge of my seat when she found the light and started running away, even expecting something to jump out when she was running in the woods, and I felt good when she actually made it out...but having that vision of the Asian bitch in the car or whatever (US version, I guess?) and then having it end just didn't do it for me.

Definitely worth seeing.

[FondestMemory]

So this movie is actually decent? It looked so terrible.

Is there any real explanation for why a bunch of models go crawling around in caves?

they're not models. they're just a group of women who take thrill-seeking adventures together.

[preppyak]

Honestly, I went into the theatre thinking what xvszero is, and that it was just going to be another so-so horror film...but I felt more claustrophobic than I have when watching a horror film since I can remember. It was less scary and moreso just thrilling, though. The creatures did get a little old and less scary toward the end, especially once the bitches started kicking some tail, but I also kind of liked that part of it. Seeing the monsters some was cool, especially when the first one jumped at them and they all started freaking out and knew shit was goin' down. They just overdid it a bit as it went on. I liked that they were all girls though, like someone mentioned about having no "physical" force to combat the evil. It was just primal and got me excited when they started fighting back, but Sarah got a little too tough (especially hacking her friend like that) and a bit of the stuff the characters did wasn't 100% believable.
Agreed on both...the first half was significantly better than the second half of the film, but overall it was still pretty good.


The ending didn't do it for me, though. I was still on the edge of my seat when she found the light and started running away, even expecting something to jump out when she was running in the woods, and I felt good when she actually made it out...but having that vision of the Asian bitch in the car or whatever (US version, I guess?) and then having it end just didn't do it for me.

Definitely worth seeing.

You caught the American ending then...that sucks...though it's an interesting little twist on her vision.

The UK version puts her back in the cave, with her getting out as a dream, and she is sitting there with her daughter who has the birthday cake again...it's an awesome sort of death realization moment

[KB3RG]

I just got back from seeing the movie. I enjoyed it. It had the gore that people want to see but not to the point where its going to have people all weak at the knees. Well exception to the bone ripping through the leg.. I jumped once. I give it a B+, I thought it was very original. well done

[preppyak]

I jumped twice...as in a noticeable shock that suprised me. There were several times where I was guessing that somethign was going to pop out, but my exact timing was a little off

I jumped when the monster came from the ceiling area, when they were lingering around that turn and looking around....and I jumped when Sarah's sort of nightmare in the cabin happened. I just wasn't expecting it, since the cabin had been paced slower...I thought that part was well done

[IcedOpethBlind]

just watched The Descent 2, pretty decent follow-up