The Twilight Zone did it!

I get ya. Yeah. I think the reason these adaptations are happening now is because of the massive success of the Silo books by Hugh Howeyn (or whatever). People wanted to cash in on the theme before that movie came out. I've only read the first book of the Silo series (Wool), but from what I can tell the source material for both Snowpiercer and Hi Rise are vastly superior. I thought Silo read like the kind of book a retired tour guide from Florida would write. Which is exactly what it is.

see you were trolling so perfectly with the Die Hard thing but then you backtrack into a serious discussion..

Cronenberg's Shivers feels pretty close to High Rise. Not an adaptation but it seems to push similar ideas. And of course he did Crash, which I really need to watch again. If Ballard has an equivalent in film Id say it's Cronenberg.

I thought the Judge Dredd flick was bad-ass

Wow really? The opening twenty minutes in Suspiria might be the best I've ever seen in any horror movie. My only complaint is that the remainder of the film never quite lives up to it. But then I don't think Argento has ever made a film that's great from beginning to end.

Woah woah, nobody's saying it wasn't badass. It was TOTALLY badass. And again, that's an adaptation of classic, decades old source material. Whether it's the classic 200 A.D. version, or the Eagle version or DC or even IDW. Judge Dredd is badass and the DREDD reboot was like a antidote to the '95 Stallone film with freaking Rob Schneider (though I won't lie and say I wasn't waiting in line the day that film opened.)

While the 2012 version was still very loosely based on the hilarious and awesome comic, it was definitely a huge improvement and as a movie it kicked all kinds of ass. I loved Karl Urban as Dredd. Hoping they make another one of those at some point.

I just meant that it sort of followed the same "Try-Hard Die Hard" formula with almost everything taking place in the same building, but I don't actually think that was an attempt to capture the Silo/Wool vibe. Rather, it seemed to be a tool for making the film more minimal and focused on character and action.

And I liked Snowpiercer as well actually. I liked the comic, of course, but I liked the film too. It was beautifully made but had a very convincing "b movie" sheen to it. Reminiscent of A Boy and His Dog ad the like. I'm guessing I'll like Hi Rise too, as I like Tom Hiddleston (if not his choice in women), and I like the film's that the director seems to take aesthetic cues from (Clockwork Orange, Bond).

So I'm not hating. Just musing.

Also, this:

Oh yeah, it's great! But the production foibles — though not as bad as some say — always stand out. I shouldn't say I "laugh my ass off" because that's not true. I'm usually totally wrapped up in the intensity of the scene.
But there are a few things that bug me... like, how does Tracy get from the inside of the building facing out, to that non-descript, caged-in area? And from there to the stained glass? And why, when she is hanged, does the rope tighten and suspend her twenty feet in the air, only to have her mere inches above the floor tile in the very next frame? And what's with the finger nails? Did the murderer fly off to quickly trim them between one moment and the next?

Little silly things, I know. I'm just always susprised that Argento — who painstakingly plotted every shot, even then — would not take the extra few minutes to make sure the scene went a bit smoother. Obviously Tracy's being pulled out onto a roof area, but from the outside looking in, there is no deck or widow's walk surrounding the apartment. So why not show her being transported if that's what happened? You know?

Again, it's probably among my top 10 favorite films of any genre of all time. It's fucking terrifying. And the Goblin score is one of the best and most underrated in horror history.

But you're right, from what I've seen Argento has never made a film that's consistently great all the way through. I think Suspiria actually is great from start to finish, but that's because I'm at peace with the filming kerfuffles and I just allow the excellent sinister mood to carry me through. So it's great in spite of Argento. And the rest of his films, though there are definitely some must-see slaughterfests in there, have flaws that are too big to be ignored.

Suspiria is absolutely a great, 5-star film despite its quirks. But I'll never understand why the audio doesn't sync up. Why does the audio never seem to sync up in Argento films, even when they're not dubbed? For such a masterful, perfectionistic and talented director, one who reliably creates thrilling and epic single shot sequences that play out like orchestras, he certainly fills his work with a lot of stupid mistakes. I'm afraid he's never going to live up to his potential again. Since Suspiria, his films have for the most part just gotten increasingly unwatchable. Have you seen Giallo? The Adrian Brody one? My God in heaven, what a fucking shitshow.

Love Suspiria though. Love love love it.

They're remaking Suspiria by the way. Have been for a while now, so I imagine it's almost in the can. Tilda Swinton will be in it, presumably as the headmistress, which sounds pretty perfect. Still, I don't really understand the point of remaking films like this. While it could and should be awesome (Suspiria + modern effects + beloved modern acting talent), how many horror remakes actually are? Dating back to that ridiculous Psycho remake, it's been a losing game for everyone involved. I can see how it would work at the box office level with things like Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but Psycho and Suspiria are not just slasher films, they're cinema classic. Works of art. Why bother?

For every good or decent remake of a classic (True Grit, Inglorious Basterds and 3:10 to Yuma being, in my opinion, examples of "good"; Evil Dead 2014 being "decent") there's COUNTLESS complete and utter fucking failures. Just a head scratcher for me.

erotic horror....hmmmm

The thing that Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel always said, and which I always wholehreatedly approved of, is that Hollywood is a bunch of chicken shit fucks afraid to take a risk of any kind.

They stated that people should remake movies that failed, or sucked, or no one cared about, and make them BETTER, instead of remaking an already proven success.


A remake of something shitty like Ghost Dad would be great if it was good!

i'm getting some from these lists

http://illusion.scene360.com/movies/...horror-movies/

http://flavorwire.com/545577/10-of-t...t-horror-films

http://screenrant.com/best-sexy-horr...time/?view=all

etc

Bad Argento is fucking appalling, by any standards. I wasn't really criticising Suspiria. I love it too, even with its faults. But yeah, His more recent stuff like Giallo is just terrible. And generally, I think too big of a cult has been built around him rather than 90% of the films he's made.Maybe because Dario Argento, as a person, is scarier than 90% of the films hes made.

Hey man, Ghost Dad had its cheesy fun moments if I recall correctly.

Bet it would be downright terrifying watching it now... in light of.. well... y'know

Creature From the Black Lagoon

A perfect thing.

My favourite monster movie bar none.

Apparently getting the remake treatment.

Cunts

Come on man. Have you seen the one he's talking about? The 2012 version written by Alex Garland (Ex-Machina)?

The film was pretty well received. Not a major breakthrough or a blockbuster, but for an R-rated comic book adaptation, it landed quite well. And it was tons of fun. Closer in spirit to the source material than the terrible 1995 film (though still admittedly very far from it). I liked it. Quite a bit. A nice gorey shoot 'em up with great camera work and a lot of satisfying, tense moments.

I saw that Dredd as a pure adrenaline vehicle, ,like the awesome mad max with that one armed bandit lady....

the Martian.. i ignored this for a long time because frankly i thought it would be stupid, and while it was more or less a copy of Apollo 13 i still surprisingly enjoyed it