Essential The Official Coli Horror Film Thread: Discussion, Recommendations And Murder.

Jello Biafra

A true friend stabs you in the front
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
46,184
Reputation
4,912
Daps
120,859
Reppin
Behind You
@Jello Biafra what’s the controversy with this Zach Snyder? The film critics seem to have some type of targeted hate for him- with all the bad reviews or little snarky remarks? But the public reviewers seem to like it - I don’t see why the critics have unwarranted hate for this movie bc from what I’ve seen so far it’s better than most of the big releases from early this year. Seems like they have a vendetta for him, making it out to be a trash movie when it’s not.
I really do think it is because Snyder is probably one of the most populist directors in the industry right now so most reviewers go into his films with a preconception that he's making pablum that is targeted to the lowest common denominator and they write their reviews with an obvious bias against him personally.

I tend to like Snyder's work manly because I think he is a visually dynamic director but I have always said that he is really self-indulgent with his work especially stuff that he has final say over or writes and directs alone.

With a creative partner who could tamper down some of Snyder's bad tendencies I think he could have been a much more critically beloved director but the guy basically just makes the movies he wants to make and he has a core group of dedicated fans who will work overtime to make his stuff as successful as possible so I doubt he will ever see the need to make any changes.

But that's just my take on him. :manny:
 

Jello Biafra

A true friend stabs you in the front
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
46,184
Reputation
4,912
Daps
120,859
Reppin
Behind You


You can watch Linnea Quigley's Horror Workout for free on FuseTV.

If you are a fun of campy 80s horror that is so bad it's good then I recommend checking this video out.

It is delightfully awful.
 

MartyMcFly

What's up doc, can we rock?
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
59,888
Reputation
9,170
Daps
161,011
Reppin
P.G. County
I really do think it is because Snyder is probably one of the most populist directors in the industry right now so most reviewers go into his films with a preconception that he's making pablum that is targeted to the lowest common denominator and they write their reviews with an obvious bias against him personally.

I tend to like Snyder's work manly because I think he is a visually dynamic director but I have always said that he is really self-indulgent with his work especially stuff that he has final say over or writes and directs alone.

With a creative partner who could tamper down some of Snyder's bad tendencies I think he could have been a much more critically beloved director but the guy basically just makes the movies he wants to make and he has a core group of dedicated fans who will work overtime to make his stuff as successful as possible so I doubt he will ever see the need to make any changes.

But that's just my take on him. :manny:
I agree with a lot of this. For me, Snyder is great visually and has dope ideas. But he doesn’t have someone to do the character stuff and hone his ambition. He likes to have his cake and eat it too and that doesn’t always work. His best stuff normally comes when someone else is handling or handled scripting duties and he just matches the visuals.
 

Lord_nikon

Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
25,628
Reputation
12,360
Daps
131,499
Reppin
127.0.0.1
I come across the most random things. This is really being sold on Amazon and I’m buying the whole set.
47496666dd942f407c2ea992c7fd9881.jpg



Feisty Pets are the latest line of fun and innovative toys from the creative minds at William Mark corporation- the creators of air swimmers! Feisty pets are a line of plush animals with "stuffed attitude"! Each pet changes expression from cute to 'feisty' when you gently squeeze it behind the ears. No batteries or extras necessary. Captivate and entertain any audience, young or old with these unique and animated animals! They're great to cuddle and play with, but are also perfect for a hilarious and innocent prank on friends and family!

Sir Growls-A-Lot is a bear! They're cute, but they're feisty! Feisty Pets plush stuffed animals will turn on you if you squeeze them. The bad boys of plush. You won't like me when I'm angry . Each Feisty Pet has their list of likes and dislikes, so consider yourself warned! Collect them all!

Likes:

Trash cans

Raw meat

Hibernating

Dislikes:

Waking up

Loud noises

Jail food


———
61P9CY0at9L._AC_SL1300_.jpg

61BFQW3Qu5L._AC_SL1108_.jpg


Glenda Glitterpoop is a unicorn! She’s cute and sweet, but she’ll turn on you if you squeeze her! Glenda is extremely dangerous, always one step ahead of us. You get the feeling she knows what humans are thinking. Each Feisty Pet has their list of likes and dislikes, so consider yourself warned! Collect them all!

Likes:

Zombies

Mushrooms

Electrical Sockets

Dislikes:

Balloon Animals

World Peace

Lollipops

517XUS0SnTL._AC_SL1107_.jpg


Feisty Pets Tiger Jagged-Edge Jennifer https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08NWKSCTK/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_glt_fabc_QRTN9DRSY0GFXWVF3G7E
I need these. So cute -

:deadrose:

reminds me of that bill and ted bunny :picard:
made me fill funny

200.gif
 

storyteller

Superstar
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
16,091
Reputation
4,935
Daps
61,172
Reppin
NYC
I really do think it is because Snyder is probably one of the most populist directors in the industry right now so most reviewers go into his films with a preconception that he's making pablum that is targeted to the lowest common denominator and they write their reviews with an obvious bias against him personally.

I tend to like Snyder's work manly because I think he is a visually dynamic director but I have always said that he is really self-indulgent with his work especially stuff that he has final say over or writes and directs alone.

With a creative partner who could tamper down some of Snyder's bad tendencies I think he could have been a much more critically beloved director but the guy basically just makes the movies he wants to make and he has a core group of dedicated fans who will work overtime to make his stuff as successful as possible so I doubt he will ever see the need to make any changes.

But that's just my take on him. :manny:

To me, he's a visual genius with a great sense of humor but his work is all shallow popcorn-movie territory. So when he's chosen to adapt stuff with deeper contexts, it tends to feel like all that stuff flew right over his head. His Watchmen adaptation totally whiffed on some important subtext from the books (Rorschach is a crazy, right-wing vigilante in the books and just a principled badass in the movie). His versions of DC characters totally miss on important aspects of the characters too, here's a good quick video to show his miscues on a bunch of 'em



Then, to complicate this all...he was extra faithful in his adaptation of 300. I never read 300, but I've seen it described as some genuine fascist ish. So I can't say how legit that is, but I think this is where people started building the "he's a low-key fascist" ish from.
This article gets into it pretty heavy:
Zack Snyder’s 300 presaged the howling fascism of the alt-right

“Was that racist, or did it just seem racist?” That was the basic idea of the conversation that my friends and I had as we left the movie theater in the spring of 2007. We had just borne witness to 300, Zack Snyder’s gruesome orgy of CGI blood-spurts and thunderous group-grunts. The movie had been a sensory experience, every frame made to look like a Frank Frazetta painting or a funeral doom album cover. And we were buzzing from it, having fun recounting all the oh-shyt decapitations and inexplicable mutant attackers and portentous catchphrases. But as soon as the buzz wore off—and it wore off pretty quickly—we had to ask ourselves if this was all supposed to be some sort of sly Starship Troopers-esque comment on totalitarianism or whether it really was as fukked up as it appeared. And it probably was that fukked up.

Snyder famously did whatever he could to make the movie echo its source material, a 1998 comic from Frank Miller, as closely as possible. Individual shots are precise recreations of comic-book panels. Grotesque, distended character sketches are rendered in loving detail. Snyder shot the whole thing on a green-screen set because real, actual mountains and cliffs wouldn’t jut and loom the way they’d done in the books. This wasn’t the first time someone so slavishly recreated one of Miller’s comics; Robert Rodriguez had done the same thing with Sin City in 2005, even giving Miller a co-directing credit. But 300 was even more striking in its fealty, partly because it’s a more sweeping, immersive cinematic vision and partly because it more closely mirrors Miller’s worldview. And Frank Miller happens to be fukking crazy.

Miller was a comics hero, the guy who’d turned Daredevil into a noir fever dream and helped inaugurate a new era of grimly sophisticated storytelling with 1986’s The Dark Knight Returns. Once upon a time, the darkness and misanthropy of his work made him a fascinating, transformative figure. These days, every time he writes a bitterly disgusted blog post about Occupy Wall Street or whatever, it becomes increasingly obvious that the darkness isn’t a put-on. He really lives it: He really is a paranoid reactionary with an active imagination. That helped produce some great art, and it also led him to tell the nakedly fascistic story he told in 300, a story that became all the more jarring when Snyder rendered it as blockbuster entertainment.

Now jumping off the least charitable reading of his work...I think he just doesn't do depth well and doesn't interpret it particularly well either. But this is kinda the direction the harshest critiques come from and I've seen some arguments put together pretty well. I just always lean toward creators and intent deserving a charitable view first. I've never written a damn thing that people interpreted exactly how I intended, and that's without editors and producers changing my work. I also never really explored his work at depth because like I said off the rip..I think he's just making popcorn movies.
 

Jello Biafra

A true friend stabs you in the front
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
46,184
Reputation
4,912
Daps
120,859
Reppin
Behind You
I agree with a lot of this. For me, Snyder is great visually and has dope ideas. But he doesn’t have someone to do the character stuff and hone his ambition. He likes to have his cake and eat it too and that doesn’t always work. His best stuff normally comes when someone else is handling or handled scripting duties and he just matches the visuals.
I agree.
All you have to do is look at his best movies where he shared creative duties with a writer (with James Gunn on Dawn of the Dead; David Hayter+Alex Tse on Watchmen; David Goyer on Man of Steel) compared to his more troublesome films where he was the creative overseer of the entire project and a writer was hired to give his singular vision a voice (Steve Shibuya on Sucker Punch; Chris Terrio on Batman v Superman and Justice League; John Orloff on that weird ass owl movie) and it is plain to see that he would be far more successful staying in his lane of directing only.
 

Jello Biafra

A true friend stabs you in the front
Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2012
Messages
46,184
Reputation
4,912
Daps
120,859
Reppin
Behind You
To me, he's a visual genius with a great sense of humor but his work is all shallow popcorn-movie territory. So when he's chosen to adapt stuff with deeper contexts, it tends to feel like all that stuff flew right over his head. His Watchmen adaptation totally whiffed on some important subtext from the books (Rorschach is a crazy, right-wing vigilante in the books and just a principled badass in the movie). His versions of DC characters totally miss on important aspects of the characters too, here's a good quick video to show his miscues on a bunch of 'em



Then, to complicate this all...he was extra faithful in his adaptation of 300. I never read 300, but I've seen it described as some genuine fascist ish. So I can't say how legit that is, but I think this is where people started building the "he's a low-key fascist" ish from.
This article gets into it pretty heavy:
Zack Snyder’s 300 presaged the howling fascism of the alt-right



Now jumping off the least charitable reading of his work...I think he just doesn't do depth well and doesn't interpret it particularly well either. But this is kinda the direction the harshest critiques come from and I've seen some arguments put together pretty well. I just always lean toward creators and intent deserving a charitable view first. I've never written a damn thing that people interpreted exactly how I intended, and that's without editors and producers changing my work. I also never really explored his work at depth because like I said off the rip..I think he's just making popcorn movies.


I agree that Snyder is not a deep artist but he doesn't realize that about himself so he makes clumsy attempts at it.

I do have to disagree with a couple things though:


I disagree that he doesn't get these comic book characters. He has shown himself to be very well acquainted with all of the DC characters he included in his movies it's just that he doesn't focus on a top level view of the characters; instead its like Snyder has one or two specific depictions of them that he took a liking to and those are how he chose to use them in his movies.

In Watchmen, him boiling characters down to more accessible character archetypes was actually something I commend him for because after 300 it would've been right in character for Snyder to try to be just as slavish with his devotion to Moore's work as he was with Miller's. He actually showed some growth as a filmmaker and recognized his own limitations by not going as deep with the Watchmen movie as the source material was.

The article about him being a fascist for adapting the work of a deeply problematic right leaning a$$hole is a stretch though. He is a Miller fanboy so he wanted to stay as true to what Miller did as possible and 300 was the perfect comic book adaptation to stay true to what the original creator did because 300 aint deep at all.

I do think he has a pseudo-Randian philosophy about personal responsibility and pulling yourself up by your boot straps but it comes across like a guy who has read the Wiki on Ayn Rand but never took the time to do a deep dive into her to discover just what a piece of shyt she was and how she really didn't buy into the bullshyt she was selling and that white men of a certain political bent latched onto as their personal life code.
 

MartyMcFly

What's up doc, can we rock?
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
59,888
Reputation
9,170
Daps
161,011
Reppin
P.G. County
I agree that Snyder is not a deep artist but he doesn't realize that about himself so he makes clumsy attempts at it.

I do have to disagree with a couple things though:


I disagree that he doesn't get these comic book characters. He has shown himself to be very well acquainted with all of the DC characters he included in his movies it's just that he doesn't focus on a top level view of the characters; instead its like Snyder has one or two specific depictions of them that he took a liking to and those are how he chose to use them in his movies.

In Watchmen, him boiling characters down to more accessible character archetypes was actually something I commend him for because after 300 it would've been right in character for Snyder to try to be just as slavish with his devotion to Moore's work as he was with Miller's. He actually showed some growth as a filmmaker and recognized his own limitations by not going as deep with the Watchmen movie as the source material was.

The article about him being a fascist for adapting the work of a deeply problematic right leaning a$$hole is a stretch though. He is a Miller fanboy so he wanted to stay as true to what Miller did as possible and 300 was the perfect comic book adaptation to stay true to what the original creator did because 300 aint deep at all.

I do think he has a pseudo-Randian philosophy about personal responsibility and pulling yourself up by your boot straps but it comes across like a guy who has read the Wiki on Ayn Rand but never took the time to do a deep dive into her to discover just what a piece of shyt she was and how she really didn't buy into the bullshyt she was selling and that white men of a certain political bent latched onto as their personal life code.
Yeah he gets the characters. Whether you like what he does with them is a different issue
 

storyteller

Superstar
Joined
May 23, 2012
Messages
16,091
Reputation
4,935
Daps
61,172
Reppin
NYC
I agree that Snyder is not a deep artist but he doesn't realize that about himself so he makes clumsy attempts at it.

I do have to disagree with a couple things though:


I disagree that he doesn't get these comic book characters. He has shown himself to be very well acquainted with all of the DC characters he included in his movies it's just that he doesn't focus on a top level view of the characters; instead its like Snyder has one or two specific depictions of them that he took a liking to and those are how he chose to use them in his movies.

It's not necessarily that he doesn't "get them" but he makes major changes to fundamental characteristics. Superman's altruism and Batman's self-control are defining characteristics. Their arch-enemies are literally challenging those principles. So Superman being reckless and putting Lois Lane above others or Batman being unhinged and catching bodies...That's Daenarys when the bells ring at the end of Game of Thrones. You have to do a ton of work to get buy-in from the fans for changes those big.

At least do something interesting with the changes. That's how dope "what if" stories pop up in the comic world. I just think Snyder made his shifts mostly for spectacle. He's incredible visually and plays to that strength.

In Watchmen, him boiling characters down to more accessible character archetypes was actually something I commend him for because after 300 it would've been right in character for Snyder to try to be just as slavish with his devotion to Moore's work as he was with Miller's. He actually showed some growth as a filmmaker and recognized his own limitations by not going as deep with the Watchmen movie as the source material was.

I agree that making the characters accessible worked for his limitations, but it's chicken or the egg. I don't think it was growth to create more accessible archetypes of the characters. That's just his limitation. All of his characters are like that before and after (slight hyperbole here).

The article about him being a fascist for adapting the work of a deeply problematic right leaning a$$hole is a stretch though. He is a Miller fanboy so he wanted to stay as true to what Miller did as possible and 300 was the perfect comic book adaptation to stay true to what the original creator did because 300 aint deep at all.

I do think he has a pseudo-Randian philosophy about personal responsibility and pulling yourself up by your boot straps but it comes across like a guy who has read the Wiki on Ayn Rand but never took the time to do a deep dive into her to discover just what a piece of shyt she was and how she really didn't buy into the bullshyt she was selling and that white men of a certain political bent latched onto as their personal life code.

Yeah, I agree with you 100% here. The article does a nice job of bodying Frank Miller, but takes out some of that frustration on Snyder. I think people started to side-eye him after that 300 adaptation and that skeptical lens warped some of his other flaws into something they're not. He makes good movies. I like most of his stuff, even the ones that catch flack like Sucker Punch. I do think he sucks at is building his characters though. Bautista's mercenary father who abandoned his daughter after killing her zombie mother was an improvement imo :mjgrin:
 

MartyMcFly

What's up doc, can we rock?
Joined
May 29, 2012
Messages
59,888
Reputation
9,170
Daps
161,011
Reppin
P.G. County
It's not necessarily that he doesn't "get them" but he makes major changes to fundamental characteristics. Superman's altruism and Batman's self-control are defining characteristics. Their arch-enemies are literally challenging those principles. So Superman being reckless and putting Lois Lane above others or Batman being unhinged and catching bodies...That's Daenarys when the bells ring at the end of Game of Thrones. You have to do a ton of work to get buy-in from the fans for changes those big.

At least do something interesting with the changes. That's how dope "what if" stories pop up in the comic world. I just think Snyder made his shifts mostly for spectacle. He's incredible visually and plays to that strength.



I agree that making the characters accessible worked for his limitations, but it's chicken or the egg. I don't think it was growth to create more accessible archetypes of the characters. That's just his limitation. All of his characters are like that before and after (slight hyperbole here).



Yeah, I agree with you 100% here. The article does a nice job of bodying Frank Miller, but takes out some of that frustration on Snyder. I think people started to side-eye him after that 300 adaptation and that skeptical lens warped some of his other flaws into something they're not. He makes good movies. I like most of his stuff, even the ones that catch flack like Sucker Punch. I do think he sucks at is building his characters though. Bautista's mercenary father who abandoned his daughter after killing her zombie mother was an improvement imo :mjgrin:
Character stuff is his weakest element. And I don’t think he doesn’t get those characters you mentioned. Snyder is obsessed with frank Miller and frank Miller loved deconstructing characters. That’s why he loves watchmen
 

darealvelle

Real Talk
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
19,549
Reputation
3,354
Daps
46,730
Reppin
Atlanta
@Jello Biafra what’s the controversy with this Zach Snyder? The film critics seem to have some type of targeted hate for him- with all the bad reviews or little snarky remarks? But the public reviewers seem to like it - I don’t see why the critics have unwarranted hate for this movie bc from what I’ve seen so far it’s better than most of the big releases from early this year. Seems like they have a vendetta for him, making it out to be a trash movie when it’s not.

Yea I dont take those critics seriously. As soon as they start talking about how much they do not like him, they opinion is irrelevant.
 

Nicole0416_718_929_646212

The Prim Reaper
Bushed
WOAT
Supporter
Joined
Aug 10, 2017
Messages
69,608
Reputation
25,880
Daps
200,946
Reppin
NYC and FBA Riverboat Retaliation
Yea I dont take those critics seriously. As soon as they start talking about how much they do not like him, they opinion is irrelevant.
Right - if these mass media critics can’t separate their personal opinions about a creator, over that person’s creative content; then their viewpoint is seriously biased and negates their position. At that point, it’s not an opinion worth any merit - that’s a concerted effort at manipulation.
 
Top