Badmovies.org Forum

 I dont think ive ever been so misslead in my whole life. Before I bought it and watched it today, I had heard nothing but GOOD thingS about this movie. Isnt this supposed to be a classic of its genre or something? Guys, its........BORING. With a NON-EXISTANT PLOT. I think I'd be more entertained watching mud dry!

So in conclusion, PHUCK PHANTASM. This one gets a skull. I want my 17 bucks back.

I love this movie.  Shame on you!

KYGOTC, you didn't find it even the least bit funny?  Even back when I saw it as a kid, the clay-mation fly scene was a hoot.  I'm sorry you didn't like it, but hey, to each his own.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but could you please specify more on what you disliked about it? I thought the music, acting, story, and overall condition of the movie were great.

I don't know about KYGOTC, but my problem with Phantasm is that Coscarelli and co. just got together every so often and said, "Ok, what can we afford to film today?" until they decided they had enough for a movie.  The "it was all a dream" thing comes off more like a last-ditch attempt to justify the thrown-together feel of the film than something they had in mind all along.

The famous balls were hardly even in the movie and the famous Tall Man didn't do anything but glare at the camera and shout, "BOY!".

The only good thing about the movie was some of the music.

If I try really, really hard, I can imagine why some people would like it but Phantasm went straight from my DVD player to my "I'm Never Watching This Again" box of movies.

I never misled you.

I won't exactly say that it was boring, but it is certainly not the classic everybody pretends it is. It lacks much of a coherent plot and the sequels try to fill some of the gaping holes in the continuing story and fail.

The first one does have quite a few funny moments, a fast car, a car chase with a shotgun included, an ice cream man (okay, I really don't know what that means myself), a tall man who likes to say 'boy' a lot (and no, I'm not going there), a funky fly, and...oh...let's not forget...stainless steel balls. Those elements may add up for an interesting movie, but they certainly don't equal either a good one or a classic; and I could understand if you were expecting it to be either, that your disappointment was greater than if you had not been misled.


Now you'll have to go right back to disagreeing with me again (http://smileys.on-my-web.com/repository/Tongue/mockery-022.gif)

 I didn't think the first one was to hot either...I enjoyed the follow up's MUCH more!

While the sequels are much better, the original is a classic in my book.  Admittedly, I also hated it my first time around.  I rented it on VHS after reading so many good things about it, and it was a HUGE letdown.  I eventually picked it up on DVD when they first came into vogue and enjoyed it much more.  If you go into it without any real expectations, then it's a hell of a fun film.  There is a certain cheesyness to it that is hard to resist.  Not only that, but the Tall Man is one of the greatest villains in horror history.

I love the film, but as I said, it's not that great.  It's just....fun.

Hey! Who un-karmaified me? I FEEL SUCH ANGST!!

Eh, the writing was lame, Nothing was ever fully explained, (who the tall man was, why he was doing what he was, ect.) It was choppy, It was sslllloooooooowwww, and ill never get over the part when they pull the little boy out from the portal after he saw all the hooded thingies and he imedietly knows whats going on and how to defeat them and he explains all this crazy stuff to the guys and they say "OF COURSE! ITS SO OBVIOUS!"
Ach!! And I completely understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I wasnt trying to push my opinions all over everyone else. Soory 'bout that my friend! :cheers:

My guess would be the same little p***y who just did it to me. Seems like they need to chill out in the same asylum with the Zardoz nuts.

Fear not! I have RESTORED you! (heh heh, "Zardoz".)

Hmmm. They hit me too. Hmmm. Let's see if I can make him do it again. PHANTASM is the most overated piece of s**t film in the universe! Iv'e had hangovers,where I have headaches,the sh1ts,and puking all over my kneecaps while sitting on the toilet,which was much more interesting and exciting! At least that s an expeiriance I won't soon forget,unlike the snoorefest that is PHANTASM!....Now...I wait and see!!!  :drink:

We might need to call to him first to get his attention.


here...p***y, p***y, p***y

here...p***y, p***y, p***y


I hope he can hear me from that corner he's cowering in.

 Hmmm. If someones going to f%ck me...the should at least have the balls to say why....obviously some body has no class. Or maybe they are afraid I'll de-karma them. I won't-"Hey! LOOK! I'M un armed! C'mon out! " Ah...screw him. IHmmm...lets try some more anti PHANTASM  baiting...."PHANTASM sucks buttermilk up the a$$!  I would rather watch  roadkill rot...at least It smells better than this movie! Watching a toothless women eat apples is much scarier than this! " Ehhh...I wait more.

Now that you pointed those out, I do see what you mean. I still need to see the sequels and the first may suck in comparison. And about the whole karma thing, I exalted all three of ya guys just for watching Phantasm.

Actualy, I DO remember laughing at 2 parts-

*When the kid runs screaming across the cemetary while his brother and some gurly are tryin ta do stuff.

*When The kid its trying to convice his brother that weird sh!t is going on so he shows him a twitching severed finger in a box and the brother says so suttley, "Ok, I beleive you."

I must be the only person here to never have seen any of the Phantasm movies.

What are they like and which one is the best?

You makes these sound like BAD things.

This movie came out when I was in middle school and we were all astounded by it.  It was completely surreal, and on that basis alone it didn't NEED to make sense.  I think the best summation of this movie ever was when someone -- Stephen King? -- compared it to "an ABC Afterschool Special gone wacka-wacka."  And being a kid watching it, I had no trouble with the fact that nothignwas explained.  That's the story of all our lives as kids.  No meaning, no control, bizarre terrible crap happens because of scary adults and their hooded midgets...OK maybe that was just my childhood.

But I don't see it appealing as much to someone who sees it for the first time as an adut.

Or someone who's around 18, perhaps.

Since when is 18 not an adult, at least on paper?

KYGOTC is referring to himself as being 'around' 18, but he's not on paper yet. :tongueout:

The title of this thread should've been "1st Phantasm classic, 2nd good, 3rd and 4th films suck".

Obviously you have not been reading this thread as the initial complaint was about those who keep calling this movie a classic, misleading someone into watching it for the first time and being in for major league disappointment, as they were expecting something great and obviously did not find it in this overrated b-movie.

I saw PHANTASM the first time back in the 80's shortly after it came out and thought it was incredibly spooky!  Watched it again about five years ago and laughed at how cheesy the special effects were.  That being said, the Tall Man STILL creeps me out!!!

True.  If I had seen it when I was little, I'd probably have thought it was the scariest movie ever.

Tagline: "If this one doesn't scare you, you're already dead."

We saw this on the big screen during its release.  With no overture or fanfare, about halfway throught PHANTASM,  my friend Termite looked over at me and said "I must already be dead."

All I remember is the sphere with the drill bit.

I still stand by the first sequel being the best in the series. More action, more humor, more gore and more violence. Here's a tip for anyone who hasn't seen a movie everyone else calls a classic: always rent before you buy. The only time I drop change on a movie I haven't already seen is when buying the DVD costs less than renting it brand new. With any luck you won't have a hard time re-selling it though KY, given the number of fans who love the movie but might not want to pay full price for a new copy.  :thumbup:

Personally I'm not really sure how Phantasm came to be the sacred cow it is today, but there are far worse movies out there that are even less deserving of their own acclaim.

Guys, I feels for you. Though I am a huge phan, I must say that it truly p**ses me off to see a film that I see idiotic get such acclaim. I know from my little experience with Rear Window what it feels like to be in a "fandom minority" and although our opinions on Phantasm are vastly different, I can see where you are coming from.

Have you watched the deleted scenes yet KYGOTC? There used to be even more plodding!


I like P3 almost as much as P1. I mostly don't like the second because it had "80s Mike" in it, and didn't like the 4th because it seemed like a whole movie full of exposition that could have fit into as bigger movie (The studio screwed Coscarelli over the budget)

I hear you Mr. Briggs.  I love the second film, but I loathe LeGros in the Mike role.  Not only does he not look the part, he also doesn't act like Mike either.  Other than that though, the sequel is an excellent film and quite possibly the best of the bunch.

Surely Torgo has the right to disagree.  I certainly do myself.

Anybody has the right to disagree and/or state a contrary opinion (no matter how wrong it is  :tongueout:).

Apparently there are now two contributors to this thread who have not bothered to read what has come before; so I am not really certain with what you are agreeing or disagreeing.

The comment 'The title of this thread should've been "1st Phantasm classic, 2nd good, 3rd and 4th films suck".' rather ignores that the reason this thread exists in the first place is due to people calling Phantasm a classic, thusly blindly leading others to watch it with overexpectancy and come away disappointed.


It is understandable, though, why someone could feel so strongly that this is a great movie:

• Hey, it was the 70s
• They could have been giving themselves a handjob at the time and just remembered getting off on this movie
• They could have a thing for tall men
• At one point in their life, they had a fantasy that involved a prematurely balding ice-cream man; this fulfills that fantasy
• They had just seen Zardoz prior to this movie; comparatively, any other movie would seem like a classic after that
• This is your brain on drugs

There are any number of other perfectly good reasons why someone would have considered Phantasm to be a classic; feel free to add your own.


It is unfortunate to have Torgo's comment brought up again. Torgo made another post in which he brings up a good comparison of how people can react differently to films. I don't know why he removed the post, but it was well stated.


Feel free, Fishasaurus, to state your opinion in any way and anywhere you like.


My reputation not only precedes me, it is absolutely true and hangs around like a bad stench long after I am gone. :tongueout:

I myself was not a "Phantasm" fan until I saw 2 and 3. The first one has since grown on me and I enjoy watching it from time to time, but I can see why KYGOTC got a bit uppity about the movie. And for the record, I don't think they can make this series make sense at this point. The Phantasm movies have always wandered in a wonderful mind-f*cked world where nothing is as it seems. It's like watching someone's really messed up nightmare; you just don't know what's real, or what can possibly happen next. Then they ruined things by trying to explain the Tall Man's origins in "Phantasm OblIVion." If you didn't like it man, don't feel like an outsider, but do give it a second or third chance now that you know what to expect. You may just begin to like it...... BOOOOOOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!  :teddyr:

why is Phantasm great? three words Big Block Mopar..... :teddyr:

But for the most part i liked 1,2,3  i found the story a little disjointed but for me it fit with the movie, the Tall Man is a great villian, the jawas are suitably creepy, the spheres are a nice touch all in all it's not to bad.

I can appreciate that these films wont appeal to everybody

I've always found the original to be quite creepy at times, and has one of the most effective atmospheres of any horror film I've seen.  I don't know if I'd call it one of the best in the genre, but I'd say the film entertained me and even creeped me out the first couple times I watched it. 

BTW, I think the sequels, even if they are a bit more coherent, are awful.

The Phantasm movies are fun.  That's why I enjoy them.  The gravity-squished slaves remind me of lil' Templar ewoks.  I have never found the films to be particularly scary, but then again, most horror films aren't.  I think the "classic" status is in large part due to the originality of the series, not its quality.

KYGOTC:  Unfortunately, being burned by hype or clever box art is part and parcel with being a movie-obsessed freak.  Typically, a re-re-release ultra-mega edition DVD is a good indication of a film's importance, so I think you acted as any of us would.  However, you must always remember that Anchor Bay also released 3 of the 4 Ilsa movies in a collector's edition box set.  :teddyr:  If you saved your receipt, you may be able to return it by running a simple con:  Develop a gentle Arkansas accent á la Bill Clinton, go to the customer service department, and slowly explain that the video is broken.  "The top and bottom of the picture is black.  It doesn't fit on my TV."  Play up the pity factor and you may get store credit.  Use that credit to buy Zardoz, as Menard has repeatedly hyped.  Sean Connery running around in a Tarzan costume?  You can't lose!

Bingo!  Karma for you.   :smile:

They remind you of lil' Templar ewoks too, huh?  :drink:  Haha.

One thing I like about Phantasm is it gives you a reason to keep watching the sequels, instead of like the Friday the 134th sequels that rehash the general principle of the films whilst making only minor changes to the story.

Jason Rules!!! :teddyr:

Yes, but it's those minor additions to the overall story that give the Friday the 13th series such a rich tapestry (yeah, a little overdramatic, I know :tongueout:) without over complicating things so as to scare away otherwise casual viewers... with the exception of Jason X, which was probably the most ambitious attempt at stirring things up and, as such, was deemed as a complete failure to so many of the series' fans. The Phantasm movies, as it's been said, are primarilly meant to be a mind phuck that plays with your head and changes things around to see how much viewers can put up with, alienating some while urging other to keep watching out of curiosity for what the next sequel will show us. The F13 movies are just violence against sexy teens with a villain whose motivations are simple and whose victims are a rotating door or social stereotypes that are better off dead anyway... now there's an idea: Jason Vs. the League of Homicidal Paperboys! "TWO DOLLARS VOORHEES! TWO DOLLARS!"

Now THERE is a series I absouloutly cannot stand! The first 3 Fridays were ok,liked Goes to Hell....otherwise the Jason fliks are a waste of film stock. IMHO...of course!

Agree; the first one is still kind of fun, but I think they descend into a downward spiral.  Interestingly, the first one remains the most intriguing and is the least "Jason" focused. 

It's funny how film fans talk a lot about sequels to FRIDAY THE 13TH and TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE and PSYCHO and PHANTASM . . . in our sequel-happy world, none of these films were originally conceived with sequels in mind, but cable TV, VHS in the 80s and now DVD rental has changed all that!

Jason Rocks!!! :teddyr:

I had deleted my prior post as I felt that I could state a bit better what I was trying to get across the 1st time.  Sorry for the length on this one.   :wink:

Anyway, I was having a discussion with a friend of mine today about the band Grand Funk Railroad.  He absolutely loves them while I think that they're one of the worst bands of all time.

But through our discussion, I came up with an opinion that he liked Grand Funk Railroad more due to the fact that they're viewed as "classic" rock rather than making up his own mind about them with a clear and objective mind. He also hates the fact that I can't stand Bad Company as well.  I just happen to think that they are an awful band, but yet again, I can understand how someone would like them a whole lot.

The same thing goes with films.  I've found that there are some people who can't bring themselves to throw criticism towards a film that is deemed classic.  While someone who might dislike a "classic" film may be looked upon with disdain by a lot of movie fans because "they must be morons to not like *insert name of classic film here*".

As I stated in my previous post, I happen to think that the Charlton Heston version of Ben Hur (there was silent version prior to that) is one of the most woefully overrated films of all time.  It was recommended to me years ago when I was really getting into films as a "classic" film.  When I told my friend that I didn't like it and couldn't figure out why he spoke so highly of it, I then realized that he thought it was a classic film because he had been told to think that way by so many people that he didn't want to disappoint them by stating otherwise. 

I've also met people who genuinely like Ben Hur and don't care if it's viewed as a classic or not.

That's how I am with the 1st Phantasm.  I think that it's a classic and I really like the movie.  But I didn't automatically like the movie just because I was told that I had to in terms of being a true horror fan.  I liked it simply because I think it's a really cool film.   

I don't think lowly of someone who says that they didn't like Phantasm since it's regarded as a horror "classic".  But I do hate it when defenders of a movie deemed classic attack someone who doesn't like it.  I see that on Rotten Tomatoes so much that I hardly frequent their message boards anymore.

Another example is that I think that Monty Python & the Holy Grail is the greatest comedy of all time. One of my ex-girlfriends literally sat through the entire movie stonefaced and didn't find it funny at all.  While I couldn't understand how she didn't like it, she explained in a very thoughtful manner why she didn't like it.  It made sense to me why she hated it and I didn't question it.

(She also hated Citizen Kane as well.)

I just chalk it up to individual preference.

I hope that I made some kind of sense.   :teddyr:

coff,coff,arehmmm nohedonthesucks cofff...COUGH!...'scuse me...sorry...(   :tongueout:  )

Jason rules!  He's a huge guy in a hockey mask who kills people.  I guess some people wouldn't understand why that's awesome.  Heck, I'm not sure I understand it, myself, but I still love the character.

Ah, but he's not just a huge guy in a hockey mask who kills people, because after F13 Part 6, he's a huge SUPER ZOMBIE guy in a hockey mask who kills people!... except for Jason X, in which he's a huge SUPER ZOMBIE CYBORG guy in a sorta-hockey mask thing who kills people!... and Jason Goes to Hell, in which he's a body jumping, uhm, evil heart thing that, errr, possesses people who choose not to wear hockey masks but, uhm, still kill people... yeah, that just got needlessly complicated. And I thought Michael Myers being an invicible magic killer for a cult of druids was bad...

We all thought 4: Final Chapter was going to be the end.  He was cremated.  Dead.  End.  Fin.  But no!  In 6: Jason Lives, he's dug up from the ground, struck by lightning, and spry as a spring chicken once more.  SUPER indeed!  :teddyr:

I love the Friday the 13th films because by 3D they realized they were a joke and went with it anyway.  Yet somehow, the self-mocking humor is still more subtle than Troma, say.  An excellent balance.  Worthy of fragmentary sentences.  And praise.  Haha.

 Actually,I was just goofing with Menard.  :tongueout: I think the charecter of Jason is really cool. And,as I stated before,I really enjoyed the first 3...and my favorite is when his heart bounces atround Jasonifying (?) people in GOES to HELL , the best in the series! I just wish that the other entries of the series were as interesting as those four were. I was really looking forward to JASON TAKES MANHATTAN...I was expecting him to go psycho in dowtown NYC...against NY's Finest,or some punk rockers or street gangs...maybe bust into Grand Central...I dunno! But he just wanders around on a boat killing teenagers! ARRRGH!

                   What I'm trying to say is...Jason,as a charecter is cool...it just the majority of the FRIDAY the 13th series that could have been much better...just as the original DRACULA (1932) is pretty dam lame,yet Lugosi as Dracula was great. Browning just let the movie peter out into a dull stage play once Dracula arrived in England. And Lugosi is my favorite actor of all time....yet,as a WHOLE...the 1932 DRACULA "sucks".

                                                  OHHHHhhhhh....see what you guys did! You made me think! And now my head hurts....uhhhhh.... :bluesad:

AGREED!!!
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0d/Scarslee.jpg)

 Yeah...Christopher Lee and Bela Lugosi both had very differnt takes on the charecter...Lugosi's was a more urban ,mysterious type of vampire,and Lee was a blood thirsty savage. Love them both! What really bugs people out,though,is when I tell someone that my favorite in the Hammer Dracula series is SCARS of DRACULA!

I love many of the Hammer films, and there's alot of problems with Tod Browning's DRACULA, for sure (that's snatches of Swan Lake you hear in this scoreless movie) but Bela Lugosi will always be the Count (cue Bauhaus). 
(http://a559.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/108/l_b1582db7d18259e1e4e28124921ee6a6.jpg)

 

 What is REALLY amazing though, is that Bela played the charecter of Count Dracula only twice on film! TWICE! In DRACULA (of course) and ABBOTT and COSTELLO meet FRANKENSTEIN.! Yet, when people think Dracula...it is always Bela's unique voice, spidery fingers,and staring eyes that come to mind. Lugosi IS Dracula!!!!

Twue, twoo, but no need to state the incredibly obvious, the merely obvious will do  :wink:
It's worth pointing out they weren't the only times on screen Bela played a vampire that was urbane and Drac-like in both MARK OF THE VAMPIRE (yes I know) and RETURN OF THE VAMPIRE ... should we count any Ed Wood footage?  :teddyr:
You should start a thread and poll of all the different Drax.  Frankie don't know it, but there's only one to choose:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/87/House_of_frankenstein_movie_poster.jpg)

He was even buried in his cape.  Hell, maybe he was wearing it when he died in the course of filming Plan 9.

Actually,he was found dead in his apartment by his fifth wife, Hope Lininger Lugosi, on August 16,1956.
Shortly before Lugosi died Ed Wood had filmed a small amount of footage of Bela walking around in a graveyard in his Dracula cape,and  leaving freind Tor Johnsons house. This was incorporated into PLAN NINE from OUTER SPACE,first previewed at the Carlton theater in Hollwood as GRAVEROBBERS from OUTER SPACE in 1957.  It got a general release under DCA films in 1959 as PLAN 9 . Lugosi never even read a script for the film,as it  didn't exist at the time of his death. He WAS reading a script for an  upcoming project called The VAMPIRES TOMB,which was  nothing like PLAN 9,and the test scenes for that is what you see in PLAN 9.

  (source:LUGOSI-by Gary Don Rhodes)

   How did we go from PHANTASM,to FRIDAY the 13th,to Bela Lugosi? What a tangled web of Horror we weave here!  :smile:

The name of the movie and anchor bay dvd cover art made the movie seem interesting but when I watched it was disappointed. 

definitely not a horror film classic.  if anyone thinks this movie is a classic clearly does not know what it takes to make a good horror movie.  some of my favorite horror films are

friday the 13th parts 1 - 8
pumpkinhead 2 blood wings
childs play 3
suspiria
amityville horror
return of the living dead
candyman

Way to bump an aged thread!

For the record, I haven't seen Phantasm in years 'n' years but even when I did back in the day, I remember wondering what all the whoop de doo was about. I've often thought about re-visiting it all these years later but haven't gotten round to it yet.

I clearly do not know what makes a good horror movie. I never would have guessed PUMPKINHEAD 2 was a better horror movie than the original PHANTASM. Heck, I didn't even know there was an objective standard you could use to rank horror movies! It's nice to learn new things.

Pumpkinhead 2?  Not the first one but the much less subtle less creepy sequel?  Child's Play 3?  ANY of the Friday the 13th movies? 

I'm not going to say I didn't enjoy them, but they weren't exactly great movies, and certainly not any better than Phantasm. 

Sic 'em, boy!

And as Chainsaw Midget says, most of the films on that list aren't nearly as good as PHANTASM.

Personally, I love PHANTASM, but not the sequels. The original is a great fever-dream of a young boy dealing with so much loss in his life (family and emotional grounding) that he launches himself into a delusional world full of horrors threatening the things he has lost, but in his dream world, he stands against these threats.

The sequels just cheapened what could have been a wonderful one-shot. But, hey, I'm not the creator, so maybe he really DID have a plan with all those half-assed, boring sequels.

Haven't yet seen Phantasm.

Phantasm definitely has its faults that I couldn't overlook if I wanted to.. actually, the movie is a bit of a mess.  I remember seeing it back in the day and being kinda creeped out, but nowadays it's really not too effective, just weird.  But there are definitely some good ideas in place, and they just weren't terribly well put together.  In the right hands (and with a few celebrities, like perhaps CHRISTOPHER LLOYD as the Tall Man) a remake could be very entertaining!

I don't get it. Everybody raves about this pointless POS.

Phantasm is not a logical movie.  I think that's what throws people off.

Horrible things are happening and they don't always make sense, but that doesn't mean they aren't just as deadly.  It capitalized on a fear of the unknown.  You get just enough hints to suggest what's going on, but never enough to explain anything. 

It's a movie done in the style of a nightmare. 

That can work for a competent director like David Lynch, but for Coscarelli(sp) it's just an excuse for poor filmmaking.

I personally liked it quite a bit, although I will admit it has not aged well.

Is Phantasm 2 any better?

I didn't think so, but it has a lot of fans. It's more of the same, but with a different Mike. The story is slightly more linear, but every one of the movies has basically the same ending.

hehe that's somewhat true. Phantasm is a *concept horror film (it's similar to Beyond, Gates of Hell, Inferno, Suspiria).

* Sorry I believe the term is called concept horror film or maybe Absolute Horror Film.  The intent is to have the story loaded with scary images more then the plot.

I love the story for what it is and that the nightmare effects predates Nightmare on Elm Street :)

I think so.  The increased budget really helps IMO.  I would recommend checking it out.

This discussion has got me interested in seeing "Phantasm" again after a quarter century, so I just reserved it (and "II") via the public library's web site. They have to have it shipped in from another town so I should have 'em by the end of the week.

....and if it turns out that I hate "Phantasm" after this re-watch, I'm blaming you guys!  :teddyr:

By complete coincidence, a writer just submitted a thoughtful essay on PHANTASM to my site. I doubt it will change any haters minds but it suggests a different, non-linear way to think about the movie. http://366weirdmovies.com/phantasm-a-psychogeography/

A very interesting take on the film.

Frankly, I just put my brain in a pickle jar and enjoy the movie for being weird, creepy and funny, all at the same time.

So I re-visited "Phantasm" last night for the first time in dog years. Ehhhh... it was OK I guess. Didn't hate it, but didn't love it either. It didn't make a lick of sense but at least it wasn't boring.
I'm going to watch "II" tonight and if things don't improve in that one I won't be bothering to track down "III" and "IV," that's for sure.

Watched "Phantasm II" last night. Again, I didn't love it but didn't hate it. Overall though,  it didn't do much for me so I think I'm about done with this series.

Which expresses my feelings almost exactly. Though, I will add, oddly enough or maybe not, I made it a point to see all four films, and in the order in which they were released, even though I watched all four on TV. And of the 4, my favorite, and the only one I liked, was the 4th one.

There again, I will add, that silver sphere created for the series, a classic horror icon. When you see it, then you know you are watching one of the films in the "Phantasm" series.

Yeah, those spheres are pretty bad ass. Haha. I wouldn't mind having one of them as a paperweight for my desk at work. Maybe then people would leave me alone out of fear that I'll launch it at them and drain their brain with it.  :teddyr:

When I first saw this thread my thought was "These people are out of their minds.  Those movies were awesome!"  Then, I watched the first two again.  I swear they used to be MUCH better.   :bluesad:

Yeah. I used the think the old Clayton Moore Lone Ranger series was great when I was a kid. Jesus, no wonder I grew up loving bad movies.