Nocturnal Movies

Overheal

yeahhhhhh **** the film forum. this is where the lings hang out.

Anyone heard anything about this? Just popped a TV spot on it. Im intrigued.

Peter Jackson eh. LOTR Peter Jackson, or King Kong Peter Jackson....hmm..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZnpzfcMheA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjihaK7HfGs

But im a complete Mechaphile either way. Im totally in.

Doctor DooM

Threads mergificated.

Overheal

Mergificated...

Cant watch Pans Labirynth. Stupid memory with an ex has tainted the whole thing for me.

chopperbyrne

trowelled wrote: »

This is one of my all time favourite movies

The only thing I liked about Leaving Cert English.

"They were at peace for two hundred years and do you know what they made Holly? The cuckoo clock!"


Can't believe nobody has mentioned The Machinist yet. It's about a guy who can't sleep for feck sake!

Zwillinge

Here it is kids:

Alice in Burtonland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiPR6kA4_iU

Aisling(",)

Zwillinge wrote: »

Here it is kids:

Alice in Burtonland

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiPR6kA4_iU

yay:)
i cant wait to see that.

Handsome Bob

Ha ha I like the play on words Zwillinge because there is a good chance that it really will be Alice in Burtonland. :pac:

And Overheal, I saw the trailer for District 9 with Public Enemies, it looks absolutely mental.

Galvasean

Oh wow, it looks like every other film Tim Burton has made and features Johnny Depp playing a 'quirky' person. And look Helena bonham carter is in there too! :rolleyes:

Anyone else think Burton needs to grow a pair and do something slightly different? I mean his next movie after Alice is a remake of one of his own films. The last time he made a movie in a different style was Mars Attacks and that was 1996!

Karl Hungus

Ignore Burton so, watch something else.

I just watched this on Bluray, it was absolutely spectacular:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SukNDHx4Qs8

Delirium

Saw this recently and figured some Nocts might like it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHFCZBKfugg

Zwillinge

Based on the vampire saga, Darren Shan, by...well, Darren Shan :P

Should be a nice, nocturnal, full of whimsical vampiric madness film

Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wg8IC0AG2A

grames_bond

what could be more nocturnal and dark than killing nazies!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxw-eT-sr3w

Handsome Bob

Anyone see how the cast is looking for Robert Rodriguez's Grindhouse sequel Machete?

Robert De Niro
Lindsay Lohan
Jessica Alba
Ray Liotta
Cheech Marin
Michelle Rodriguez
Danny Trejo
Steven Seagal
Jeff Fahey
Jonah Hill (rumoured)
Rose McGowan

That is pretty impressive, I didn't think in my wildest dreams that Rodriguez could the likes of De Niro, Liotta, Lohan, and Alba to sign up for this.

Galvasean

ZOMG, is that Jon Bon Jovi!? :eek:

Galvasean

LZ5by5 wrote: »

That is pretty impressive, I didn't think in my wildest dreams that Rodriguez could the likes of De Niro, Liotta, Lohan, and Alba to sign up for this.

De Niro has been a sell out doing crap films for years now. Lohan has been having trouble getting work since I Know Who Killed Me. Alba will do any old crap.
The big surprise for me is Seagal. Apparently he turned down the Expendables becase he taught it was silly. Wonder if he saw the original Machete trailer...

Galvasean

Galvasean wrote: »

De Niro has been a sell out doing crap films for years now. Lohan has been having trouble getting work since I Know Who Killed Me. Alba will do any old crap.
The big surprise for me is Seagal. Apparently he turned down the Expendables becase he taught it was silly. Wonder if he saw the original Machete trailer...

De Niro is all about the money these days. My friends brother works with De Niro in the restaurants, he said that De Niro is more concerned about the menu than he is good scripts these days and looking at De Niro's CV the past decade I'd well believe it.

Zwillinge

Films with creepy-ass kids:

The Omen

The Ring (For both kids involved!!)

Orphan

Children of the Corn

Village of the Damned

The Children

Them

Who Can Kill A Child?

The Good Son

Zwillinge

Mega Shark Vs Giant Octupus

(So bad, it's awesome ) It's even got cinema releases in the UK for this trailer sparking so much interest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fa7ck5mcd1o

And something else I thought was more intersting than anything, a Japanese Horror has been banned for being too much the thing!

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Showbiz-News/Japanese-Horror-Film-Grotesque-Banned-By-British-Censors-For-Extreme-Torture-With-Little-Narrative/Article/200908315365324?lpos=Showbiz_News_News_Your_Way_Region_8&lid=NewsYourWay_ARTICLE_15365324_Japanese_Horror_Film_Grotesque_Banned_By_British_Censors_For_Extreme_Torture_With_Little_Narrative

Galvasean

Trailer for the new Wolfman trailer (shamelessly stolen from LZ's thread in the film forum):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6N2lZwOQdMI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eboards%2Eie%2Fvbulletin%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Fp%3D61791977%26posted%3D1%23post61791977&feature=player_embedded

Handsome Bob

LZ5by5 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw2-ZMhxTUs

Yes, Francis Ford Coppola took quite a few liberties with this adaptation, yet, it is still in a way the most faithful homage to Bram Stoker's novel to date. It is certainly worth a watch for Gary Oldman's performance alone. Of course, it is also deliciously shot, I can't stress that enough. It's a real attack on the senses.

So I read Bram Stoker's Dracula for the first time in years and I've gotta say, it has left me with a diminished respect for Coppola's film. Dracula is not a tragic figure. He is a cold, ruthless, remoresless, evil bastard.

Also, I'm not happy that Seward, Quincey, Holmwood, Harker and Van Helsing were portrayed by Coppola as either buffoons or as quite simply unlikeable. Anyone who has read the book can acknowledge that these guys are absolute heroes, not the "bad guys" who get in the way of true love. I find extremely annoying that Coppola perhaps thought he had the "perfect emotional ending" with

Mina releasing Dracula from his condemned life. Hey Coppola, you already had the "perfect emotional ending" with Dracula getting what he deserves aswell as Quincey dying to protect those he loved!

Even Mina, who is portrayed as a strong and heroic woman in the book, is reduced by Coppola to a mere love interest in a love triangle. Even silly perhaps.

Even my opinion that Coppola was faithful to chronological order of the book has been damaged.

Never mind the Vlad the Impaler introduction, what about Coppola adding in an entire sequence where Mina establishes a relationship with Dracula before she goes to see her husband in Romania?

So yeah, it's still a good film, but the definitive adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel? No chance.

DigiGal

Karl Hungus wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbPNJqZTjmI

I lkove this film, can't seem to find it anywhere though

ronano

best film ever

LZ5by5

LZ5by5 wrote: »

So I read Bram Stoker's Dracula for the first time in years and I've gotta say, it has left me with a diminished respect for Coppola's film. Dracula is not a tragic figure. He is a cold, ruthless, remoresless, evil bastard.

Also, I'm not happy that Seward, Quincey, Holmwood, Harker and Van Helsing were portrayed by Coppola as either buffoons or as quite simply unlikeable. Anyone who has read the book can acknowledge that these guys are absolute heroes, not the "bad guys" who get in the way of true love. I find extremely annoying that Coppola perhaps thought he had the "perfect emotional ending" with

Mina releasing Dracula from his condemned life. Hey Coppola, you already had the "perfect emotional ending" with Dracula getting what he deserves aswell as Quincey dying to protect those he loved!

Even Mina, who is portrayed as a strong and heroic woman in the book, is reduced by Coppola to a mere love interest in a love triangle. Even silly perhaps.

Even my opinion that Coppola was faithful to chronological order of the book has been damaged.

Never mind the Vlad the Impaler introduction, what about Coppola adding in an entire sequence where Mina establishes a relationship with Dracula before she goes to see her husband in Romania?

So yeah, it's still a good film, but the definitive adaptation of Bram Stoker's novel? No chance.

Ah yet another deluded individual who believes Coppola added so much to Stroker's tale.

The Dracula whom we are all familiar with is the work of the great Dan Curtis. Curtis and Richard Matheson adapted the novel for a TV film in 1973 adding in the addition materiel including the love story and connection between Dracula and Mina before they even meet.

Pretty much every adaptation since has been more of an adaptation of Curtis's Dracula than Strokers, the irony being that large portions of his Dracula he took from his own show Dark Shadows.

It's sad that so few people recognise the name Dan Curtis for were it not for him film and tv would be very different today. The most iconic sholw of the past 3 decades would never have been made and much of our horror films would be very different.

I cannot recommend that you check out his work enough, some of it is very hard to come by as much has had no official release and more was never released on DVD. I have been collecting all Curtis's work and transferring lots of it from VHS to DVD.

Handsome Bob

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah yet another deluded individual who believes Coppola added so much to Stroker's tale.

The Dracula whom we are all familiar with is the work of the great Dan Curtis. Curtis and Richard Matheson adapted the novel for a TV film in 1973 adding in the addition materiel including the love story and connection between Dracula and Mina before they even meet.

Pretty much every adaptation since has been more of an adaptation of Curtis's Dracula than Strokers, the irony being that large portions of his Dracula he took from his own show Dark Shadows.

It's sad that so few people recognise the name Dan Curtis for were it not for him film and tv would be very different today. The most iconic sholw of the past 3 decades would never have been made and much of our horror films would be very different.

I cannot recommend that you check out his work enough, some of it is very hard to come by as much has had no official release and more was never released on DVD. I have been collecting all Curtis's work and transferring lots of it from VHS to DVD.

I am familiar with Dark Shadows and I am aware that Coppola got the idea of the love story from Dark Shadows. I just found it entirely unbelievable as one moment you have Dracula giving babies away to be eaten, the next he is a gent wooing Mina. Then he goes and damns Lucy to eternity feeding on living blood. I don't feel one bit sorry for Coppola's Dracula and indeed, once he gets his throat slit that is the best part of the movie.

LZ5by5

LZ5by5 wrote: »

I am familiar with Dark Shadows and I am aware that Coppola got the idea of the love story from Dark Shadows. I just found it entirely unbelievable as one moment you have Dracula giving babies away to be eaten, the next he is a gent wooing Mina. Then he goes and damns Lucy to eternity feeding on living blood. I don't feel one bit sorry for Coppola's Dracula and indeed, once he gets his throat slit that is the best part of the movie.

I know where you're coming from the character is supposed to be a romantic anti hero but is in fact a cold hearted and evil killer.

My points were more to do with people assuming Coppola was this great film maker who made the Dracula story so much more when in fact nearly everything was lifted directly from Curtis's Dracula. I had to listen to a lecture on how original the Coppola version was and how it redefined the mythos.

I brought up Dan Curtis and was meet with a chorus of "Who?"

Handsome Bob

Deleted User wrote: »

I know where you're coming from the character is supposed to be a romantic anti hero but is in fact a cold hearted and evil killer.

Yeah that's it in a nutshell. You know it's unfortunate, the movies of old got Dracula's true nature right but in terms of chronology they got it wrong. Coppola comes along and gets the chronology basically spot on, but gets Dracula all wrong! Maybe it wouldn't transfer to the big screen as a good movie but I'd love to see someone give it another go with the correct characterization and chronology.

My points were more to do with people assuming Coppola was this great film maker who made the Dracula story so much more when in fact nearly everything was lifted directly from Curtis's Dracula. I had to listen to a lecture on how original the Coppola version was and how it redefined the mythos.

I brought up Dan Curtis and was meet with a chorus of "Who?"

You got to study the film? That's awesome, bad lecturer or not. :pac:

My brother got to do a whole module of just reading the likes of Dracula, Frankenstein, and Interview with a Vampire as well as watching the film adaptations. The module was called Monstrous Speculation, and of course by the time I got to UCD the module was scrapped. :rolleyes:

Galvasean

I really want a PHD in Monstrous Speculation

My main gripe with Coppolla's version of Dracula is that he tacked on "Bram Stoker's" onto the title to make it look like he was going for a much truer take on the original novel, when in truth he wasdoing anything but.
I have to agree with LZ in saying that Dracula's characterization in the film was all over the place. In the opening scene he is portrayed as this tragic romantic hero, later he's a baby killing monster and then suddenly becomes a pitiful romantic again. I think they were trying to convey that his contact with Mina brought back his humanity, but it came across as being sloppy in the film.


Saw the trailer for the new Twighlight film (New Moon i think its called)... Did somebody say dodgy CGI wolves?????????? :cool:

LZ5by5

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Yeah that's it in a nutshell. You know it's unfortunate, the movies of old got Dracula's true nature right but in terms of chronology they got it wrong. Coppola comes along and gets the chronology basically spot on, but gets Dracula all wrong! Maybe it wouldn't transfer to the big screen as a good movie but I'd love to see someone give it another go with the correct characterization and chronology.

Seriously get your hands on a copy of Dan Curtis's version. I know it's hard to come by but it's well worth it. It's one of the best adaptations of the story and Jack Palance is fantastic as the Count.

I think the 3 hour TV film with Patrick Bergin is pretty faithful but it was cut to 90 minutes for DVD release over here and as such lost a lot. I've had it in a Box of Blood box set for years now and never watched it, perhaps it's time to do so.

LZ5by5 wrote: »

You got to study the film? That's awesome, bad lecturer or not. :pac:

My brother got to do a whole module of just reading the likes of Dracula, Frankenstein, and Interview with a Vampire as well as watching the film adaptations. The module was called Monstrous Speculation, and of course by the time I got to UCD the module was scrapped. :rolleyes:

Didn't study it, think it was a case of lecture thinking, "No lecture plan today, I know lets watch the first thing I can lay my hands on."

Galvasean wrote: »

I really want a PHD in Monstrous Speculation

My main gripe with Coppolla's version of Dracula is that he tacked on "Bram Stoker's" onto the title to make it look like he was going for a much truer take on the original novel, when in truth he wasdoing anything but.
I have to agree with LZ in saying that Dracula's characterization in the film was all over the place. In the opening scene he is portrayed as this tragic romantic hero, later he's a baby killing monster and then suddenly becomes a pitiful romantic again. I think they were trying to convey that his contact with Mina brought back his humanity, but it came across as being sloppy in the film.


Saw the trailer for the new Twighlight film (New Moon i think its called)... Did somebody say dodgy CGI wolves?????????? :cool:

Lets be honest here, Coppola's motivation in making the film was. "How many more vineyards can I buy with the profits." As much as i enjoy his films and he is responsiable for some of the greatest film ever made, his out put for the past 2 decades has been poor. He's living off the name he made in the 70s.

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

I really want a PHD in Monstrous Speculation

My main gripe with Coppolla's version of Dracula is that he tacked on "Bram Stoker's" onto the title to make it look like he was going for a much truer take on the original novel, when in truth he wasdoing anything but.
I have to agree with LZ in saying that Dracula's characterization in the film was all over the place. In the opening scene he is portrayed as this tragic romantic hero, later he's a baby killing monster and then suddenly becomes a pitiful romantic again. I think they were trying to convey that his contact with Mina brought back his humanity, but it came across as being sloppy in the film.

Yeah I think I heard somewhere that one of the things that pissed off fans so much about it is that running up to the release the marketing team actively pitched this film as the most faithful adaptation of Stoker's Novel.

I think you are right about what Coppola was trying to do, i.e. Mina bringing the best out in Dracula. However it's just an impossible concept as Dracula's misdeeds aren't mild, they are downright horrific.

Saw the trailer for the new Twighlight film (New Moon i think its called)... Did somebody say dodgy CGI wolves?????????? :cool:

It doesn't even look like a Wolf, it looks like a big fecking shaggy dog. :pac:

Deleted User wrote: »

Seriously get your hands on a copy of Dan Curtis's version. I know it's hard to come by but it's well worth it. It's one of the best adaptations of the story and Jack Palance is fantastic as the Count.

I think the 3 hour TV film with Patrick Bergin is pretty faithful but it was cut to 90 minutes for DVD release over here and as such lost a lot. I've had it in a Box of Blood box set for years now and never watched it, perhaps it's time to do so.

I hear that place just down the road from Forbidden Planet is meant to be good for obscure DVDs, I'll give that place a shot.

Lets be honest here, Coppola's motivation in making the film was. "How many more vineyards can I buy with the profits." As much as i enjoy his films and he is responsiable for some of the greatest film ever made, his out put for the past 2 decades has been poor. He's living off the name he made in the 70s.

Dracula apparently saved him from bankruptcy.

DigiGal

DigiGal wrote: »

I lkove this film, can't seem to find it anywhere though

It's widely available on DVD. HMV have it as do all the online stores.

ronano wrote: »

best film ever

It's funny how The Room is such a cult film these days and when I was recommending it years back everyone thought it was just pure crap.

The question one must ask while watching the film is simple, is Tommy Wiseau retarded or not?