August 28, 2009
Oh, it seems like only yesterday that people were asking if Rob Zombie’s decision to remake Halloween made him a hypocrite. After all, he was the auteur who said:
I feel it’s the worst thing any filmmaker can do. I actually got a call from my agent and they asked me if I wanted to be involved in a remake of CHAINSAW. I said no way! Those movies are perfect.
But a scant while later Halloween II has hit the theatres with Zombie’s name firmly attached. And now comes some very odd news from Variety.
Rob Zombie is remaking The Blob.
Yes, The Blob. The one that starred Steve McQueen, produced a sequel directed by Larry Hagman, and was remade as a gory little flick in 1988. That The Blob.
It’s easy to second-guess, of course. To accuse Hollywood of having no imagination. Although I would argue that it certainly takes a lot of imagination to put “The Blob,” “remake,” and “directed by Rob Zombie” into a coherent sentence without forgetting how to breathe. My own opinions about the quality of Zombie’s previous work aside, one has to admit that his comfort zone is rednecks, white trash, and strippers.
Which makes the key point of his vision all the more fascinating.
“My intention is not to have a big red blobby thing — that’s the first thing I want to change,” Zombie said. “That gigantic Jello-looking thing might have been scary to audiences in the 1950s, but people would laugh now.”
The Blob without the Blob? Brilliant! And I’ll bet there are white-trash alcoholics and strippers involved, as well!
August 14, 2009
More comments on pulp movies coming soon. Also coming soon, more news on Suspiria, and a chance — well, several chances, really — to win a movie from Doctor Day’s collection.
For more details, stay tuned to this station.
August 3, 2009
Seriously.
Seriously.
Seven minutes of copyright warnings?
Presented with commentary by Glen and music by Nine Inch Nails: Copyright Madness!
April 17, 2009
April 5, 2009
Got Facebook? If you do, then you might want to fan us.
Our series has a page on Facebook - Suspiria’s Rent-Free House of Horrors. You’ll see promo photos, videos, and receive the latest updates on our pilot and where it can be seen.
And/Or, if you’d like to fan Suspiria herself and let her know how eagerly you’re anticipating the pilot, you can do so at Suspiria’s fan page.
And of course, keep checking back here for more talk on midnight movies and on our own humble effort.
Egon has become attached to Suspiria over the years...
March 25, 2009
Ready for your first look at Suspiria, scream queen of “Suspiria’s Rent-Free House of Horror?”
Boop-boop-be-DOOM!
The lovely and talented Amy Tallmadge is burning up the editing station as the sexy and dangerous Suspiria, the newest tenant of Dr. Day’s house built on dangerous cinematic experiments. The pilot is halfway through the shooting stage, and will be editing soon!
If you noticed the script pages first, something might be wrong with you.
February 14, 2009
We are currently working on two video projects concerning the Horror Hostess Project.
One will be an instructional video for people who are interested in investing, but who have had some difficulty with Indie Maverick. We’ll show you how you can quickly become an investor for as little as $25.
The other - still currently in pre-production - is a pilot episode. To better demonstrate the potential of the Horror Hostess Project, we will be filming a pilot featuring a full-length movie.
Stay tuned - more details as these stories develope!
January 27, 2009
At long last I hauled my booty down the highway to the nearest theatre that actually shows all of the new 3D movies in 3D to see the remake of My Bloody Valentine. I guess I considered it a moral imperative to get the full 3D experience - just as it was a moral imperative to hit up my local drive-in movie theatre when they decided to show Grindhouse. And in case you’re wondering, you haven’t lived until you’ve watched Planet Terror while five- and six year olds run wild three cars up.
I learned two things from my visit to the theatre today.
First, I learned that of all the film studios currently remaking horror flicks of years past, Lionsgate is the one that has truly earned the right. They stared down a massively violent, controversial film of yesteryear and didn’t blink by trying to turn it into a PG-13 flick. Good for you, Lionsgate. Horror movies shouldn’t be afraid of an R rating. And not only that, but they made My Bloody Valentine 3D not just violent, but ridiculously so.
Second, I learned that if you’re making a horror movie today and you have the budget for it, yet you’re passing up the opportunity to shoot it in 3D, you’re an idiot.
I say this because My Bloody Valentine 3D - as much as I respect it for being true to the violent nature of the original - is a bad, bad movie. Not just bad on the level one is used to seeing from old slasher flicks, but actually featuring some startlingly incomptetent directing.
Even so, I was able to enjoy the movie. Because it was in 3D. It was fun. The pickaxe flew at the camera. Multiple times. And so did the blood. And one jawbone.
January 6, 2009
It’s time to play the newest game that’s sweeping the nation! Or, rather, that would be sweeping the nation if this weren’t the very first installment in it ever published anywhere.
Here are two plot summaries.
One is a highly-lauded art film, well-known for its sumptuous cinematography and its brilliantly understated performances!
The other is a cheaply-produced exploitation flick that is remembered for its beautiful star and its wild, over-the-top abandon.
So, can you spot the film? Can you pick the flick?
Movie A:
A spoiled-rotten younger woman marries an old business tycoon. Frequently neglected by her husband, she falls in love with her stepson - who is closer to her own age - and they conduct a season-long affair all over the countryside!
Movie B:
A young woman trying to succeed in business is used and manipulated by every man around her and manages to get nowhere, while all of the women who willingly surrender rise in the ranks above her!
Which one’s the film and which one’s the flick? The answer is in the extended entry!
(more…)
January 5, 2009
It would be unfair to say that great art is not nearly as memorable as the kind of film we think of as disposable.
It would be unfair because great art in film enriches our lives, uplifts our spirit, or leaves us standing slack-jawed in shock and perhaps a little bit of dismay. Unfair because great art in film has the ability to move us, to stick in our minds and give us memories to hold and to cherish. When art can mean so much to us, to deny that it has any effect - or that it has a lesser effect - simply because it is art would be to deny it the credit it is due.
On the other hand, it would be inaccurate to say that “disposable” media is not as powerful as artistic media. Inaccurate because sometimes it is the pulp film, the film that is thought of as a product of the moment, that sticks in our brains and makes us ponder the moment and why it worked.
Yes, art films can inspire and uplift or shock and appall, but pulp films perform the same function. And the chances are very good that in your life, you will see more of the latter than of the former. And with good reason. They’re movies that draw us into the theatres. Sometimes, it can be hard to get into the mood to watch an art film. But any mood can quickly become a mood for pulp.
It would perhaps be more fair and more accurate to say that it doesn’t matter the size of the budget, the intent of the filmmaker, how permanent or ephemeral the film is intended to be. All that matters is the person behind the camera and the people in front of it - the skill they show, the craft they bring to the table.
It is the artists that determines the impact - and not whether they defined their work as “art” from the start or not.