lupitag-11852
Joined May 2015
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings6
lupitag-11852's rating
Reviews5
lupitag-11852's rating
Even though I enjoyed some aspects of MTV's new "Scream" series (minus the teen drama) and Ryan Murphy's "Scream Queens" on Fox was a guilty pleasure with more misses than hits, Chiller's first original series "Slasher" is everything they should have been. I'm not aware of who the creators are or what their horror pedigree is, but the first two episodes are the most "slasher-esque" out of any of the series previously mentioned. If the producers don't have a home shelf full of classic slasher titles, I'd never know, because "Slasher" feels like it was made by a fan, for fans.
The series, in classic slasher style, is set up to be a "whodunnit" (something its sister shows had in common), in which the audience will presumably discover the killer's identity in the season finale. But what makes the trip more bearable this time out is that, unlike MTV and Fox's offerings, we don't have to sit through a bunch of teenage angst and bad gags in between the mayhem. Whoever made the decision to have this story focus on adults (and I mean the house-owning kind, not the "I'm away at college" variety), the audience thanks you. Oh, the drama is there, but it's lacking the Dawson/Joey element.
As any effective slasher is only as good as its ability to create suspense, have a good amount of gore, and give us a menacing killer, the series pleasantly gets all of these crucial aspects right. We have ACTUAL suspense (P.S. young, pretty women in these things should never go out walking alone). The Executioner, the show's debut villain, is an imposing cross between the hook man in "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and Ghostface (he proves he can run).
Add in a nice machete kill that I was surprised made it past the censors, and there's your gore aspirations being met.
The cinematography is also worthy of mention, as it's even better than "Scream" or "Scream Queens." A Chiller TV series having better production values than a Ryan Murphy production on Fox? I almost didn't believe it myself.
Chiller scores a hit with its first original series, and the first two episodes breeze by leaving you wanting more (instead of checking your watch, something I did frequently during "Scream Queens" interminable two hour premiere). "Slasher" is a love letter to slasher fans, and the next few weeks are going to be quite a ride. Thanks, Chiller.
The series, in classic slasher style, is set up to be a "whodunnit" (something its sister shows had in common), in which the audience will presumably discover the killer's identity in the season finale. But what makes the trip more bearable this time out is that, unlike MTV and Fox's offerings, we don't have to sit through a bunch of teenage angst and bad gags in between the mayhem. Whoever made the decision to have this story focus on adults (and I mean the house-owning kind, not the "I'm away at college" variety), the audience thanks you. Oh, the drama is there, but it's lacking the Dawson/Joey element.
As any effective slasher is only as good as its ability to create suspense, have a good amount of gore, and give us a menacing killer, the series pleasantly gets all of these crucial aspects right. We have ACTUAL suspense (P.S. young, pretty women in these things should never go out walking alone). The Executioner, the show's debut villain, is an imposing cross between the hook man in "I Know What You Did Last Summer" and Ghostface (he proves he can run).
Add in a nice machete kill that I was surprised made it past the censors, and there's your gore aspirations being met.
The cinematography is also worthy of mention, as it's even better than "Scream" or "Scream Queens." A Chiller TV series having better production values than a Ryan Murphy production on Fox? I almost didn't believe it myself.
Chiller scores a hit with its first original series, and the first two episodes breeze by leaving you wanting more (instead of checking your watch, something I did frequently during "Scream Queens" interminable two hour premiere). "Slasher" is a love letter to slasher fans, and the next few weeks are going to be quite a ride. Thanks, Chiller.
While not a shot-for-shot remake (the angles and cinematography are different), this remake uses the same script as the 2002 original with slight alterations. Despite this seemingly pointless exercise, I was prepared to give it a chance and not hate it for failing to aspire to anything original. I'll go on the record saying I -wanted- to like this film, despite some unease after watching the trailer. I'm sad to say it fails to live up to the original in nearly every regard.
What sets this remake apart from it's 2002 predecessor is the lack of any chemistry between the actors. It's not that any one particular actor is singularly bad, it's that none of them feel like they're in the same movie. It literally feels as if they pulled random strangers off the streets and asked them to make-believe they were friends for a weekend. I simply couldn't buy that any of them would take off for a weekend together, much less have known one another for years, as is the case for at least two of the characters. They feel like strangers and it doesn't help that all of them seem to be acting as if they're in completely different films--the disconnect is that apparent. It's upsetting that, despite having many of the same scenes and lines as their original characters, everyone in the cast feels so disconnected from the script that they utterly fail to bring any of their characters to life. They're the ghosts of what we saw in the original film, the acting completely lifeless. It's as if none of them wanted to be there.
Roth's trademark humor is also excised in favor of a few random throwaway jokes, delivered in such a deadpan tone by the actors that each one falls flat on its face. This time around, the director goes for a more serious approach to the material (a mistake, I believe) and attempts to paint the film as a tragedy. Nothing attempts to sell this more than the overly-ambitious music score, which is so epic at times that it feels like it belongs in a big-scale war movie. The composer feels the need to John Williams this thing up at times, which just leaves the viewer scratching their heads at why such a big spectacle of a score is being utilized for a film that largely takes place in a single cabin.
As if to keep from being too familiar, the deaths are altered just enough to qualify as being original, as long as you don't count on being surprised. Practically everything is telegraphed a mile in advance thanks in no small part to the reliance on the original script so that even the prospect of new deaths isn't enough to warrant much excitement.
Perhaps the biggest blunder is the recasting of Deputy Winston as a woman, played by an actress with zero comedic timing (although this doesn't stop her from being handed humorous dialogue). The character is a painful reminder that no one invested in this remake knows how to bring life to their character, as is true with the weed-toting camper (played by Eli Roth in the original). No one would call the acting in Cabin Fever '02 a revelation, but it's as good as gold compared to this.
The entire film is permeated with a depressing lack of passion on or off camera. It's as if no one wanted to be doing this. Roth's film, while certainly underrated by many, at least felt as if it was made by someone who cares. This is a lifeless remake on par with the new Nightmare on Elm Street. Truly a flat, emotionally barren production not even worthy of viewing as a curiosity.
What sets this remake apart from it's 2002 predecessor is the lack of any chemistry between the actors. It's not that any one particular actor is singularly bad, it's that none of them feel like they're in the same movie. It literally feels as if they pulled random strangers off the streets and asked them to make-believe they were friends for a weekend. I simply couldn't buy that any of them would take off for a weekend together, much less have known one another for years, as is the case for at least two of the characters. They feel like strangers and it doesn't help that all of them seem to be acting as if they're in completely different films--the disconnect is that apparent. It's upsetting that, despite having many of the same scenes and lines as their original characters, everyone in the cast feels so disconnected from the script that they utterly fail to bring any of their characters to life. They're the ghosts of what we saw in the original film, the acting completely lifeless. It's as if none of them wanted to be there.
Roth's trademark humor is also excised in favor of a few random throwaway jokes, delivered in such a deadpan tone by the actors that each one falls flat on its face. This time around, the director goes for a more serious approach to the material (a mistake, I believe) and attempts to paint the film as a tragedy. Nothing attempts to sell this more than the overly-ambitious music score, which is so epic at times that it feels like it belongs in a big-scale war movie. The composer feels the need to John Williams this thing up at times, which just leaves the viewer scratching their heads at why such a big spectacle of a score is being utilized for a film that largely takes place in a single cabin.
As if to keep from being too familiar, the deaths are altered just enough to qualify as being original, as long as you don't count on being surprised. Practically everything is telegraphed a mile in advance thanks in no small part to the reliance on the original script so that even the prospect of new deaths isn't enough to warrant much excitement.
Perhaps the biggest blunder is the recasting of Deputy Winston as a woman, played by an actress with zero comedic timing (although this doesn't stop her from being handed humorous dialogue). The character is a painful reminder that no one invested in this remake knows how to bring life to their character, as is true with the weed-toting camper (played by Eli Roth in the original). No one would call the acting in Cabin Fever '02 a revelation, but it's as good as gold compared to this.
The entire film is permeated with a depressing lack of passion on or off camera. It's as if no one wanted to be doing this. Roth's film, while certainly underrated by many, at least felt as if it was made by someone who cares. This is a lifeless remake on par with the new Nightmare on Elm Street. Truly a flat, emotionally barren production not even worthy of viewing as a curiosity.
I'll keep this short since plot descriptions are redundant and attention spans are short these days.
Sinister 2, instead of giving us a straight rehash of the original, changes the perspective from the parents to the kids and introduces a menacing, ghostly group of children that give the Children of the Corn a run for their money in terms of creepiness.
The story sees the return of Deputy So-and-So from the original film, following up on leads and attempting to stop the string of murdered families. In his quest, he comes across our new family, living next to a church where a horrible crime took place (which we do eventually see on 8mm, and it's quite gruesome).
The film worked for me because Deputy So-and-So is an affable, much more sympathetic main character than Ethan Hawke from the original, and the story takes time to develop the entire family. No one feels like a side character or a throwaway.
Amidst all of this are themes of parental abuse and domestic violence, all gelling together to make a richer plot than the original's. There's simply more going on, and contrary to the trailer, the film is not loaded with jump scares. When they occur, which is seldom, the music is more revelatory than "gotcha."
I found the directing to be more nuanced and the added element of the familial drama to be much more involving than anything in the original.
In short, I think this was a more accomplished, classy film. It kept my interest throughout and had a lot more going on than the original.
A rare sequel that actually surpasses its predecessor.
Sinister 2, instead of giving us a straight rehash of the original, changes the perspective from the parents to the kids and introduces a menacing, ghostly group of children that give the Children of the Corn a run for their money in terms of creepiness.
The story sees the return of Deputy So-and-So from the original film, following up on leads and attempting to stop the string of murdered families. In his quest, he comes across our new family, living next to a church where a horrible crime took place (which we do eventually see on 8mm, and it's quite gruesome).
The film worked for me because Deputy So-and-So is an affable, much more sympathetic main character than Ethan Hawke from the original, and the story takes time to develop the entire family. No one feels like a side character or a throwaway.
Amidst all of this are themes of parental abuse and domestic violence, all gelling together to make a richer plot than the original's. There's simply more going on, and contrary to the trailer, the film is not loaded with jump scares. When they occur, which is seldom, the music is more revelatory than "gotcha."
I found the directing to be more nuanced and the added element of the familial drama to be much more involving than anything in the original.
In short, I think this was a more accomplished, classy film. It kept my interest throughout and had a lot more going on than the original.
A rare sequel that actually surpasses its predecessor.