Halloween Spooktacular

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

After watching Midsommar, and also after talking to my sister, who is obsessed with horror, I really have to disagree with the idea that horror is only for sickos.

Everyone has heard of fight or flight. There are some things you can't flee from. Maybe what watching horror does is that it trains you to deal with the fears you cannot avoid, with the ones that come true? I think if we all knew the right way to handle and deal with fear, we'd be much better off as a country.

 

[The Cat]

After watching Midsommar, and also after talking to my sister, who is obsessed with horror, I really have to disagree with the idea that horror is only for sickos.

Everyone has heard of fight or flight. There are some things you can't flee from. Maybe what watching horror does is that it trains you to deal with the fears you cannot avoid, with the ones that come true? I think if we all knew the right way to handle and deal with fear, we'd be much better off as a country.

Its ok. You can be a sicko with the rest of us. It's fun.

 

[Totenkindly]

Patrick Swayze is somehow perfect for Jim Cunningham. I don't mean that as a diss on Swayze, just that he fit that thankless role really well in the film. I don't mean to impugn his character off-screen in any way.

Yeah, it was a good cast and he really sold the part. That can be hard, when it's a part that is so scummy in some ways; he really did his job as an actor.

That Little Women movie was pretty good, but very different from the one in the 90s with Winona Ryder, Christian Bale, and Kirsten Dunst. The one with Florence Pugh and Laura Dern focused much more on the death of Beth, and apparently departed from the book in interesting ways.

I've never really gotten into Little Women much for whatever reason, it just doesn't emotionally hit me very much. I did watch the Pugh version and bits of the others but don't ask me to tell you any details about the film(s) anymore because I was really not engaged. I understand a lot of people really love the films so... everyone to their own, I guess?

still, I think having the different remakes and having them be their own things is good. It's the point of a remake, right? You are accentuating certain things important to you as a writer or filmmaker, regardless of what has been accentuated in other tellings. It is so much better than just remaking a prior film stroke by stroke.

After watching Midsommar, and also after talking to my sister, who is obsessed with horror, I really have to disagree with the idea that horror is only for sickos.

Everyone has heard of fight or flight. There are some things you can't flee from. Maybe what watching horror does is that it trains you to deal with the fears you cannot avoid, with the ones that come true? I think if we all knew the right way to handle and deal with fear, we'd be much better off as a country.

Yeah, horror to me is partly that -- you can't always run from your fears, and sometimes the WORST things that can happen DOES happen. (I'm accidentally paraphrasing a line from "The Descent" now -- when Beth tells Sarah that the worst thing that could have happened has already happened to her, so she is able to survive this as well.) How do you deal with inescapable doom or threat?

So many people waste their energy running from things they cannot escape from. (let me refer to "The Wizard of Earthsea" now, when Ged wastes so much time trying to run from his shadow who has been tracking him for months... and he realizes that he has to stop being the hunted and instead become the hunter. And once he does, his shadow flees from him.)

Anyway, I've always loved dark fantasy and horror and resonated with Stephen King's books that were coming out as I reached my teen years (and Stephen Donaldson's dark fantasy). Maybe it is because my childhood was spent dealing with darkness I couldn't escape, trapped between the trans feelings and also an alcoholic father / dysfunctional family with no out. So horror all felt real to me. Like, the rosy world does not exist. Do you have the courage to face the inescapable, regardless? Or will you pretend it does not exist and become a victim, or fall into a delusional world because your mind is not strong enough to deal?

I'm not much for shlock or slasher horror, but I am really big on horror that offers growth experience or forces people to face dark things and rise above them even if it kills them. the body is weak, but sometimes the spirit is still strong.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Day 5

Child's Play (2019)

I went with this because the original is my favorite 80's horror film, and because the cast (Mark Hamill, Aubrey Plaza, Brian Tyree Henry) is terrific.

This version is practically a different film than the original, although it keeps the names and the Chicago location (I always get excited about Chicago locations, even though it's usually depicted as somewhere dangerous, much more than New York. John Hughes is the one exception to this, but his movies are all about rich kids.). This movie is sort of about Big Tech, and there are a lot of satirical elements and exploitation of fears involving Big Tech. This movie takes on self-driving cars, Uber, the cloud, Google/Amazon/Samsung/Microsoft/Apple, AI, and drones. It's all there.

Chucky here is basically a rogue robot. He has a prime directive to make Andy happy (unless Andy rejects his friendship...). His programming is faulty because a disgruntled factory worker in Thailand set the doll to evil. All of the gruesome things Chucky does here are things he picked up from other sources like horror movies Andy watches. I'll discuss this more later when I articulate what I think of the movie.

I'm biased because I like Aubrey Plaza anyway, but she gets some chances in this to be snarky like April Ludgate and I love it. I particularly enjoyed seeing her do this while working customer service.

I knew the cat was doomed as soon as I saw it.

Does Orion Pictures still exist? I saw the logo at the beginning and I thought I picked the wrong version.

I like the satirical elements of the movie, and the jokes are funny. However, it's not as scary as the original. This isn't Marc Hamill's fault. There are two reasons for this:

• The designs of these dolls are not on the right side of the uncanny valley. They have these gigantic, almost anime-like eyes. The original dolls were spooky-looking before you even saw them do anything.
• In the original film, Chucky is inhabited by the soul of a serial killer, Charles Lee Ray (Brad Dourif). Charles was being chased by the police and runs into a store or warehouse with "Good Guy" dolls, and performs a voodoo ritual to transfer his soul into one of these dolls to escape death or imprisonment. Despite the supernatural elements, though, the movie is about a very human evil. Chucky takes delight in causing pain and harming others, he has no "prime directive" of protecting Andy. This is scarier to me than a misguided AI whose actions can be understood by being aware of certain rules. Brad Dourif's Chucky is gleeful about everything he's doing, which is horrifying. The Chucky in the 2019 movie is just following faulty programming. His actions are horrible, but it's almost like he's a naive child who doesn't understand what he's doing, a sort of evil Data. The original Chucky knew exactly what he was doing and loved it.

It was a good way to spend an afternoon, but I probably wouldn't watch it again. I do appreciate them trying something different.

I'm only five days in and I'm already tired. Tomorrow I'll pick something less than half an hour long.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Yeah, it was a good cast and he really sold the part. That can be hard, when it's a part that is so scummy in some ways; he really did his job as an actor.



I've never really gotten into Little Women much for whatever reason, it just doesn't emotionally hit me very much. I did watch the Pugh version and bits of the others but don't ask me to tell you any details about the film(s) anymore because I was really not engaged. I understand a lot of people really love the films so... everyone to their own, I guess?

I think Jo is interesting as someone trying to live life on her own terms when that wasn't very easy for women to do. Her interactions with Laurie (played by Christian Bale in the 90s version and Timothy Chalumet in the other version), her neighbor are also interesting. I feel for Laurie in this scenario, and then of course he goes with Amy (who must have known she was his second choice, which can't feel good) .

I'm also reminded of this:

still, I think having the different remakes and having them be their own things is good. It's the point of a remake, right? You are accentuating certain things important to you as a writer or filmmaker, regardless of what has been accentuated in other tellings. It is so much better than just remaking a prior film stroke by stroke.

It's exciting to see a remake do something totally different. See above.

Yeah, horror to me is partly that -- you can't always run from your fears, and sometimes the WORST things that can happen DOES happen. (I'm accidentally paraphrasing a line from "The Descent" now -- when Beth tells Sarah that the worst thing that could have happened has already happened to her, so she is able to survive this as well.) How do you deal with inescapable doom or threat?

Exactly. There was something I feared for years and years. I saw it as the worst thing that could have happened to me. Enough years passed, though, that I decided I was in the clear. And then, of course, my worst fear came true. I haven't really processed what this actually means, yet, but I'd by lying if I said it didn't have an impact.

So many people waste their energy running from things they cannot escape from. (let me refer to "The Wizard of Earthsea" now, when Ged wastes so much time trying to run from his shadow who has been tracking him for months... and he realizes that he has to stop being the hunted and instead become the hunter. And once he does, his shadow flees from him.)

Anyway, I've always loved dark fantasy and horror and resonated with Stephen King's books that were coming out as I reached my teen years (and Stephen Donaldson's dark fantasy). Maybe it is because my childhood was spent dealing with darkness I couldn't escape, trapped between the trans feelings and also an alcoholic father / dysfunctional family with no out. So horror all felt real to me. Like, the rosy world does not exist. Do you have the courage to face the inescapable, regardless? Or will you pretend it does not exist and become a victim, or fall into a delusional world because your mind is not strong enough to deal?

For me, it's meant that I'm more likely to entertain worst case scenarios, and work off of that. I was already somewhat prone to that to begin with, though. I find that expecting bad things to happen often works better for me, especially because you get pleasant surprises when they don't happen.

I've read Stephen Donaldson (halfway through the first book of The Land series) and it's much darker than I expected. I want to see where it's going, so I'll finish the book, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else. I was just shocked, like, did the protagonist of the book just do that?

I'm not much for shlock or slasher horror, but I am really big on horror that offers growth experience or forces people to face dark things and rise above them even if it kills them. the body is weak, but sometimes the spirit is still strong.

I am sometimes up for slashers. I'm not sure if the original Child's Play is one or not. The original Nightmare on Elm Street and the original Halloween would probably considered as such and are pretty good. I don't care too much for Friday the 13th, Jason lacks any personality and that's not interesting. The best Friday the 13th is probably the one with Crispin Glover and one of the Coreys, since that tries to flesh out the characters a little. But most of the Friday the 13th movies aren't about anything other than why you shouldn't have premarital sex. Michael Myers, meanwhile, is mute (like Jason), but is an archetypal almost fay-like figure; in the first film, he's just credited as The Shape. I think in the later sequels they made his archetypal, druidic qualities more explicit?

And yes, I know Pamela Voorhees was the killer in the first film but I am too lazy to address that anymore than I'm already doing.

 

[Totenkindly]

I've read Stephen Donaldson (halfway through the first book of The Land series) and it's much darker than I expected. I want to see where it's going, so I'll finish the book, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else. I was just shocked, like, did the protagonist of the book just do that?

Yeah, it actually makes thematic sense -- he thinks the Land is a delusion, offering him what he desperately wants the most (health), but to accept that health is suicide if it's just a fantasy because it will strip away his keen sense of self-preservation; and so he responds in a really terrible way, if the people there ARE actually real.

It's a sticking point that polarizes the readership. Some people just quit reading. Others continue and find a lot of beauty. That act by Covenant actually has terrible ramifications through the first three books and you can see how something horrible ends up hurting other people outwards in a rippling web of pain. It's not just a shock point, it actually is tied to the themes of the series (Lord Foul is in a sense trying to do the same to the Land -- it's even more clear in the second series -- and there's unsettling connections between Foul and Covenant) and it's played out bitterly to the end. The main injustice is that others have to bear the cost of Covenant's action along with him.

It's why I like the second series the most, where Covenant goes back 2000-3000 years later and sees what Foul's "done with the place," but he is now capable of finding beauty and in essence becomes the person he could never be in the first trilogy. He's moved past "is this real or not?" and it has become, "Do I value this or not?" and he actually realizes he values it and puts everything he has in the pot.

The first trilogy, though, is "how do I read a book where I hate a lot of what the main character is doing?" The answer is that the secondary characters are so noble in comparison that you kinda love them and want to see them succeed -- Foamfollower, Bannor, Mhoram, etc. Because the first three books take place over about 47-49 years, you get to see their entire arc and Mhoram also go from a youngish man to a middle/later aged leader.

But there's also a lot of horror elements, like the Lurker of the Sarangave, and the decimation of the Giants (talk about your magic slasher story), and the Forestals who are like the druidic/fey dangers of the Forest's sentience. It was my first exposure (along with the first few books by Stephen King) of real horror writing. Donaldson also did the army of the dead thing before GRRM did; they are a bit different in nature, though, but it shows how horrible it is when you're fighting something with necromantic abilities and can raise your own dead to fight against you.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Yeah, it actually makes thematic sense -- he thinks the Land is a delusion, offering him what he desperately wants the most (health), but to accept that health is suicide if it's just a fantasy because it will strip away his keen sense of self-preservation; and so he responds in a really terrible way, if the people there ARE actually real.

It's a sticking point that polarizes the readership. Some people just quit reading. Others continue and find a lot of beauty. That act by Covenant actually has terrible ramifications through the first three books and you can see how something horrible ends up hurting other people outwards in a rippling web of pain. It's not just a shock point, it actually is tied to the themes of the series (Lord Foul is in a sense trying to do the same to the Land -- it's even more clear in the second series -- and there's unsettling connections between Foul and Covenant) and it's played out bitterly to the end. The main injustice is that others have to bear the cost of Covenant's action along with him.

I like that he's not just doing dwarves and elves, etc, and making them slightly different, but rather creating his own things. For instance, I want to learn more about the Waynhim.

I can certainly see how people would quit after that, I think what made me decide not to quit was that it was clear that the author thought it was a terrible thing, as well.

I'm also curious as to how this world is connected to Earth. What was up with those monks that don't seem to belong to any religion I've ever heard of?

It's why I like the second series the most, where Covenant goes back 2000-3000 years later and sees what Foul's "done with the place," but he is now capable of finding beauty and in essence becomes the person he could never be in the first trilogy. He's moved past "is this real or not?" and it has become, "Do I value this or not?" and he actually realizes he values it and puts everything he has in the pot.

The first trilogy, though, is "how do I read a book where I hate a lot of what the main character is doing?" The answer is that the secondary characters are so noble in comparison that you kinda love them and want to see them succeed -- Foamfollower, Bannor, Mhoram, etc. Because the first three books take place over about 47-49 years, you get to see their entire arc and Mhoram also go from a youngish man to a middle/later aged leader.

From where I'm at, it looks as though everyone is extremely misguided to place their trust in him, but how does that explain the prophecies, which are usually true in stories like this?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

This Canadian-produced show was appointment viewing for many 90s children. When viewing the show as adults, the cheesy acting (even though some of the child actors are now big names, and some were already stars when this show was on), dialogue, and special effects add entertainment to the nostalgia factor.

Are You Afraid of the Dark?: Season 1, Episode 12: The Tale of the Sorcerer's Apprentice

Unfortunately, Nicolas Cage isn't in this one, nor are there any dancing broomsticks. I should also make it clear that the main character does not fall under the tutelage of Emperor Palpatine, either (that's a different episode).

Summary: Dean, a troubled teen who is failing chemistry, becomes in possession of a magical staff belonging to an ancient sorcerer named Goth. It seems to solve all his problems, but is he controlling it, or is it controlling him?

1966: A young person with a cobra tattoo hides her stash in the bowels of a high school.

Present day (that is, 1992), same high school.

Hi, I'm a weird archaeologist lady here to teach you about ancient cultures. Here's a random fucking specimen of a scorpion and a bunch of other junk.

"Goth was a very nasty magician." He would force thousands to listen to Bauhaus.

"The writings say that following Goth will bring you incredible fortune." See, I knew I didn't wear enough black when I was younger!

Those red LEDs on the cobra staff are so spooky!

This kid looks so happy to find a soggy, moldy bag of weed from his stash.

See, now that Dean has accepted Goth as his personal savior, he's started wearing black! He even starts hanging with a new group of kids, the Goth kids!

Now there's a bunch of stuff about mystic vapors.

I'm just glad this cobra staff found his everlasting gobstopper.

I love the floating Goth head talking about how he'll rule the universe. It's great.

Chemistry teacher: Jooooin us, and jOoOiIin GoOoOth!

Yeah, all the Goth kids wear black. Was this episode supposed to be a warning that becoming a goth was a gateway to turning to drugs and Satanism, without ever using the word Satan for some reason?

Dean's friend Alix confronts Dean on how he has changed.

"Goth has given me the power, and I'm using it to bring him back!"

Maybe the power of friendship will save the day, though!

Other storytelling kid (Gary, who is now an Ontario weatherman); "Now that acid has to do with those mystic vapors, right?" I'm reminded of theories that the Oracle of Delphi was just priestesses getting high from gases emerging from the Earth in that particular spot. Maybe the floating Goth head wasn't even real!

Early episodes of this show would cut back to the crew of storytellers in the middle of the episode like this. This was abandoned in later seasons.

Dean: "There's a place in this school not many people know about. It's been closed off for 25 years. They say... a girl went mad in there..." Hmmm, I wonder whatever happened to her....

"Too late, I'm far too powerful now!"

The Goth kids try to ressurrect Goth in a swimming pool using chemicals and nightshade, and the serpent staff with the everlasting gobstopper. This ressurection scene is great. Dean, saved from the Goth side by his friend Alix, uses the magic of chemistry to save the day, much like Walter White. Goth: "What is happening? The nightshade! Nooooooooooooooo!" Goth is vanguished, and the Goth kids all move on to some other trend.

Hey, the weird archaeolgist lady is back! She talk about how she planted everlasting gobstoppers in schools all over the country, and to think, when she was a young girl, they thought she was mad! Cut down to reveal the cobra tattoo from the beginning of the episode, while the weird archaeology lady laughs manically.

OMIGOD, she was the girl who went mad that they were talking about earlier!

All the best episodes of this show had these fake-outs like this where it looks like the heroes won, and then, at the very end you find out they didn't. I guess Siouxsie Sioux will become even more popular than the Beatles now.

 

[Totenkindly]

I like that he's not just doing dwarves and elves, etc, and making them slightly different, but rather creating his own things. For instance, I want to learn more about the Waynhim.

Yeah, this world is entirely his own -- aside from a really broad concept of evil (Lord Foul -- and there are reasons for that), it's all very unique. There's a wood human type vs a more stone-focused human type, but they're all just humans and the fantasy races are unique, including the Ranyhyn and the Ramen who serve them.

I'm also curious as to how this world is connected to Earth. What was up with those monks that don't seem to belong to any religion I've ever heard of?

Do you mean the bloodguard? They're not really religious, they're a physically focused order -- born and bred warriors.

From where I'm at, it looks as though everyone is extremely misguided to place their trust in him, but how does that explain the prophecies, which are usually true in stories like this?

There are those who believe the prophecies, but since his very nature is the White Gold (which will save or damn the earth) they generally choose to believe that he will save it and not damn it because why would they want to ensure he'd damn it by abusing him? So there's a pragmatic element -- but also those who have actual faith don't necessarily have it in Covenant but in their prophecies and the people who spoke the prophecies because they loved the Land.

There are also those who either scoff at the prophecies and/or hate Covenant for his attitude and/or what he's done -- so they totally disregard him. i,e., say what you want about the prophecies, and drag him along if you must, but we will trust in ourselves, our hard steel, our magic, and not depend on this chaotic and unpredictable figure who we don't even respect.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I'm exhausted. I need to take a break from this for a few days. I just want to lie on my couch and read.

I haven't fully decided, but when it comes to what I'm considering for the next entry, the only thing I can say is:

CAAAAWW!

 

[The Cat]

I'm exhausted. I need to take a break from this for a few days. I just want to lie on my couch and read.

I haven't fully decided, but when it comes to what I'm considering for the next entry, the only thing I can say is:

CAAAAWW!

which one?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

which one?

The good one, according to everyone.

 

[The Cat]

The good one, according to everyone.

You'll be getting a glimpse into a lot of people's World of Darkness games from the 90's.

 

[Totenkindly]

 

[The Cat]

Well that takes me back

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

View attachment 31641

Kill it with fire!

 

[The Cat]

Kill it with fire!

This is why you're not allowed in the Neighborhood of Make Believe.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

This is why you're not allowed in the Neighborhood of Make Believe.

Meh, I'm not HO-scale anyway.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Day 10: The Crow (1994)

Summary: A rock musician who was brutally murdered along with his fiance is brought back to life by a mystical crow to avenge the dead and protect the living.

I liked this movie, but it's not perfect. I would say that they don't make them like this anymore, unfortunately. I'm not surprised the recent remake tanked, given modern trends and tendencies in filmmaking; they must have discarded everything people liked about the original (everything has to be fucking grounded). This movie is not ashamed to be operatic and over-the-top, and I like that about it. Most of the time, it works for me. I also appreciate the visual style; it's disappointing that people have all these CG tools at their disposal these days, yet they make everything look so boring.

@The Cat posted a video recently about different types of fantasy, and in the video, it was mentioned that modern fantasy often lacked a mythical dimension. This film very much is, even though it's dark and brooding and violent. For instance, the villains are just psychopaths, they're not "heroes in their own story."

This movie was what I hoped it would be, really.

The next selection will be about witches, either plural or singular.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Modern movies are made to appeal to redditors and cinema sins and stuff like that. But what's the point of believable escapism? I think that's one reason they don't make movies like this today.

On a now defunct message board I used to frequent, somebody was talking about how ridiculous the scenes were where Eric Draven played his guitar on the rooftop. Having seen the movie, finally, it fits in with the dream logic of the rest of the motion picture. I mean these thugs and gangsters barely even care about money, they just love terrorizing people. The big boardroom speech from the head villain is all about how they don't have fun like they used to; earnings or turf don't enter into it.