Creepshow is not to all tastes. It seems very aware of being the kind of movie you watch on a dirty old VHS tape at 2 AM. Some of the segments are just great, if you're in the right mood; one or two of them are not very good, which drags the whole enterprise down just a bit. But that's always the way with…

Take that to Mrs. Skin. I assume there's such a thing.

I wanted to read that as cutely self-deprecating, but given the next sentence I'm not sure that it was.

Did indeed. It's become annual Halloween viewing for us… it might actually be the best horror anthology ever, edging out "Creepshow" by a nose. Kind of sad that it couldn't get a real release or find an audience when it was originally made. I guess the horror audience only turns out for a few well-defined sorts of…

I'll take that over

It kinda doesn't, but they came pretty close. The effects in the sequels are far more scutinizable and far more embarrassing. For most of this movie, that hideous little thing basically works.

I didn't even know it existed. Direct to DVD schlock, I take it?

De Palma probably would have killed his own mother to get music from a famous Hitchcock collaborator.

That post might be 30% longer than yours above it. C'mon now. Anyway, my main point isn't whether it worked for you or not - if it didn't, it didn't. That's fine. The problem I have is that you keep saying that the movie "cheated" or broke some established set of rules (or about-to-be-established, anyway), which…

I agree with this so much. That bit is still effective in "The Ring" because it's just a great idea, but they needed to copy the "Ringu" version as much as possible because it was just perfectly realized, and their attempts to one-up it just fell a little flat. Otherwise though, I think the remake is superior in most…

So you'll allow for a special case and be fine with it, but not allow that any other zombie anywhere can use tools in even a rudimentary way..? Hmm.

I feel obligated to post in here since it's about Slayer, but I really have nothing to say.

That is a dumb reason to overlook the excellent filming, editing, and sound, which are the things that really make the scene - not a pedantic ex post facto analysis from the point of view of someone who has seen a dozen post-"Night" zombie movies.

The really clever thing about it - and this is seldom commented on for whatever reason - is the specific way that it is so hopeless. Lots of horror movies end on down notes; some even end with all of humanity being doomed by the monsters/evil/Satan/whatever. The ending of "Night" is different because after all that…

Shit, I WISH it was only ten minutes. I really think that rape sequence last for like half an hour. The entire first half of the movie, basically, is a little bit of setup and then the very prolonged torment and rape stuff - she gets raped or attacked, she runs away, they catch up with her and do more, she runs away…

I love that movie, though I don't know about it being the scariest ever made. Those are some great scenes though, especially the ball. And you didn't even mention the wheelchair… shiver.

I felt the same way when I first watched it, back in college. Somehow I've managed to rewatch it two or three times since then. Now that the shock and horror has worn off just a bit, I can appreciate its artistry and admire it as the greatest example of a style of horror that I generally don't care for. Basically,…

I would agree. I find his movies beautiful and well-designed, but also emotionally uninvolving for some reason. "Pan's Labyrinth" was the closest I've come to loving something he directed.

He just didn't want you seeing those sweet tittays.

I was there too! I love you, "Rifftrax."