[quote=“Phil H, post:859, topic:405”]Horror of Frankenstein is the worst of the series imo but Kate O’Mara makes up for most of its failings. 
The monster is awful though. What were they thinking?[/quote]
It’s certainly not my favourite, but I found it better than I expected it to be (had not seen it before)
The monster is of course ridiculous, indeed makes you wonder what kind of ‘effect’ they had in mind.
Funny I am watching Frankenstein and The Monster from Hell tonight.
Frankenstein and The Monster from Hell
I love that one!
Watched the Geman dvd this time as only cut by about 40 frames from what I have read.
Maniac (2012)
I haven’t seen William Lustig’s original, but I like his Maniac Cop and the taste for movies demonstrated by his retro cult label Blue Underground. This Maniac remake is reminiscent of his style and to 70/80s cult horror movies, augmented by Carpteneresque soundtrack, but there’s more to it than plain nostalgia. Movie is very interesting because it is completely told from killer’s POV. Killer’s POV is nothing new off course, but ALL we see in Maniac, every second of it, is from killer’s POV. We only see Elijah Wood’s face in mirrors and in his dreams/hallucinations. This makes for nauseatingly disturbing movie. Recommended.
Have to admit I didn’t care for the MANIAC remake. The wife liked it, though.
[size=12pt]CARRIE [/size](2013, Kimberly Ane Peirce)
A surprisingly good remake (or re-imagining as it is called) of the Brian De Palma movie, in some aspects a bit closer to the original Stephen King novel. As a horror movie it’s not very special, but Peirce direction is more subtle than De Palma’s and the emphasis is more on the mother-daughter relationship and the psychological development of the outcast girl, who becomes aware of her body, and her telekinetic powers after she’s had her first period. Chloë Grace Moretz is a wonderful Carrie, suffering from the ugly duckling complex, not because she is ugly, but because her abusive, hyper-religious mother has made her feel ugly. Julianne Moore is also quite good (as always) as the mother.
Reactions weren’t all positive though; while most critics thought it was well-told and very well-acted, some also thought it didn’t add much to the 1976 version or the original novel. Admittedly it has its shortcomings: some of the effects look very computerized and familiarity of the narrative is a major problem, and no doubt the reason why some felt the new version was redundant: the approach may be different, but the key moments remain the same (Carrie having her first period, the prom night, the bucket of blood, etc.); we know them and where they will lead us to - always a drawback, unless the imagery is hypnotizing - which isn’t the case: if Peirce is better at portraying a young frightened girl, De Palma was better at creating the ultimate telekinetic inferno.
Surprised to hear that it may be closer to the novel. I remember Carrie being one of the King-based films which most matched the book. Salem’s Lot was the other one which I remember being a close match, although boring
[size=12pt]CARRIE[/size] (1976, Brian De Palma)
I thought it was a good idea to rewatch this version after watching the new Carrie from 2013. In retrospect I find it hard to say which version is the better of the two, they both have their pros and cons. De Palma is a horror director (at least he was back then) and his grand guignol, and (especially) the build-up to it, is masterful, but the problem of his movie, is his portrayal of the girl Carrie, more mouse than girl, almost a caricature. I’ve spent more than enough time in education to know the results of school bullying (and I was born and raised in a strict catholic environment), but I feel no emotional involvement with Sissy Spacek’s Carrie (otherwise the casting is great, with Nancy Allen, Debra Winger and a young John Travolta). So, as effective as it may be as a horror flick, it’s a bit of a cold achievement. The new version is quite the opposite: emotionally it’s more involving, but as a horror movie, it falls short.
I really enjoy the original. The remake… not so much.
Never knew the film had been remade 
.
[quote=“ENNIOO, post:871, topic:405”]Never knew the film had been remade .[/quote]Third version now. Only ever seen the De Palma one myself, I didn’t bother with the TV Movie one from 10+ years or so ago.
It was 2002 the other one.
Still in the horror mood, I went back to Hammer:
Love that film!
Lots of people seem to love it … these days.
It is quite the popular film.
I remember going to the drive-in to see it. And then I caught it on television several times before I finally owned the sucker.
Didn’t do much for me. Imo Hammer’s first two Frankensteins are the best.
As far as their Dracula movies are concerned, I prefer the later entries (although the very first one is very good too)
I enjoy their DRACULA series, too. The films got a bit goofy towards the end, but I thoroughly like those, too. Hard to beat Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing.
Whispering Corridors, 2003… Convoluted plot about a haunted art-room at a private girls-school. -Choppy editing, and the ghosts weren’t scary. It needed actual lesbian-sex and a contextual backdrop for the murders. It’s supposedly a modern learning-center… not a sacred temple where nobody ever questions anything. 4-out-of-10.