This is the silliest thing I've ever seen. The first 70 minutes are the most implausible horror movie you've ever seen. this middle aged guy is attacking a family and you're like "run, fight back, do something, he's like 50 and slow!!!" then it does the Fight Club twist thing. How did this movie get made? It's a real oddity. My gues is many people won't even finish it because it seems so stupid.
I remember in college in art history we looked at this guy who did paintings that were purposely bad to make some sort of point. My teacher said he talked to the guy at a party and the guy was like "that wasn't a very good idea in retrospect those "bad" paintings". Seriously, I think I'd rather just see a good horror movie
I thought Haute Tension was pretty good, considering the crappy horror movies that hollywood has been putting out. On the rotten tomatoes forum for The Fog, one poster summed up hollywood with the phrase "This is the scariest horror movie coming out this week."
I think it did get too much hype though, like Saw. Heck, at least Tension's ending was plausable compared to Saw.
so you thought that guy in the jumpsuit was a genuinly formidable villain? the "twist" was pure hollywood. There's a reason french and horror aren't seen together in the same sentence too much
Villians don't have to be formidable to be scary. Tension uses its villain similar to Psycho and Sleepaway Camp. You don't need a teleporting zombie to have a good villain.
anyone in that house could easily have beaten the hell out of him. the guy who answered the door should have said "hey this guy just stabbed me!!!" they were all home! it's like if the lady in "wait until dark "wasn't blind. there's no movie!
I personally thought that Haute Tension was one hell of a kick ass flick.
The killer never says a word, and is as cruel, evil and sick a bastard as has ever graced the screen. As soon as I saw the scene with the guy and the decapitated head, I knew I was in for something absolutely great.
I thought the twist worked, especially after multiple viewings. It starts to make sense after a while, especially if you realize that the chick never stayed with her friend at the farm. She was the killer. She was the person who stabbed the father through the door, chopped off the mother's hands, shot the kid, etc.
I say bravo to the director. It was a film that threw me back to the 70s when gore and suspense ruled. THe movie was worth it just to see a killer actually use a K-12 saw in a horror film.
Btw, I own this film uncut on DVD, and it is an import. I have yet to see any American cuts of the film, which is what you might have seen. I'm sure much of the violence is cut.
Post Edited (10-16-05 15:56)
I own on dvd(import) and saw it when it had a limited release which I think some of it was cut and enjoyed it. The ending did get me at first like well that was stupid but I saw a couple of times and finally got it. It nice to see a horror fllim thats not a remake or PG-13.
-------------------------------------------------
Most of all I hate dancing then work, exercise, people,stupid people
I was actually quite interested in seeing this film, heard good stuff about it despite the cliche 'twist' ending.
But then I found out that this film ripped off a novel called "Intensity" and that the film takes entire scenes from this book in the film, I think it uses a good 75% of the book, but it doesn't offer any acknowledgement to the book in any way.
Which made me lose interest at that very point because the film is basically stealing/plagurizing, ripping off from someone elses work and trying to claim the project as somehting else entirely.
Guess there are pieces of hollywood s**t among French Directors as well.
2xSlick wrote
>You don't need a teleporting zombie to have a good villain.
They might not make a good villain, and they ooze blood and bile instead of smooth charm and wit, but by God would it be great to see a teleporting zombie film...
As for High Tension, I haven't seen it nor do I have any plans to [I don't think it's even released yet here] So I really don't have anything to say on that topic.
you guys are totally high. the whole POINT is that you are SUPPPOSED to think it's ridiculous that this little guy is killing all these people and they aren't doing anything about it. particularly the muscular lesbian, who could out run or fight the guy easily. the movie is completely and totally built around the twist, which is totally cliched. so it's a failure on many levels
Three things:
a) That guy seemed to be fairly tough looking.
b) They were all French, and therefore weak.
c) The ending explains why they would've been confused and not run.
Besides which, no one much had a chance to run or fight, given that the attacks were relatively quick, and the house was isolated. But you are Mr. Toughguy, and I'm sure you would've laid the smack down on his candy ass.
That said, the ending was dumb.
three oranges
okay
"c) The ending explains why they would've been confused and not run.
"
so for the first hour or so what are you supposed to do? wait for the ending that you don't know about? you are watching a sucky movie, which given a lame twist is essentially a dumb implausible ed wood level horror movie with a trendy ending stuck on the end.
Hey Three Oranges, quick acting like a goddamn Noobtard. We dont need that here.
And I honestly think Lester brought out excellent points here about slasher movie sin General. Most people who get attacked give up on sight and run from a guy with a knife, or a chainsaw, or a whatever.
In some cases i can understand this if the guy is a hulking monster of a man, But its a muscley dyke witha power tool then what the f**k is wrong with them? Pick up a chair and chuck it at her, or a table. Don't sit there and let her chop you up because you're in a bad movie.
This sounds liek the creeping terror all over again.
lester1/2jr wrote: "So for the first hour or so what are you supposed to do?"
Nothing. Feel as weak and helpless as the victims feel. I understand your issues with the ending, really, but not the rest of your complains. I really felt it was a extremely slick film, as it manages to rebuild a Tobe Hooper horror-style slasher from scratch (something we've seen a million times) and yet be damn, damn scary.
Actually, it is far more scary than most of its american counterparts, if you ask me. I think the reason is the one I mentioned above, you get to feel the helplessness of the victims as they are slashed in really extreme ways. I also think Three oranges hit the nail in the head when he mentioned that the victims did not run or defend themselves as they knew the murderer. Nor that a skinny woman in her 20s looks THAT threatening.
Anyway, things like that should be kept at the back of your mind when you see an slarher film, as it is a common mistake they make, such as the teleporting murderer.
Ha ha, Dunners, you called me a "noobtard." zomg lol wtf ghey!
a/s/l?
And lester's points weren't particularly good. They were bad enough, in fact, that they caused me to defend a movie I don't particularly like. Armchair quarterbacking the defensive capabilities of isolated, rural French folk is not particularly insightful.
But the answer to lester's question about what you do for the first hour is that you be frustrated by and sorry for the people who were unable to save themselves, and then you have this subverted into an ecstatic, confused death orgy at the end.
Or you do what lester did, and posture as the tough guy. "That Freddy guy's a total wuss...if he came at me with his knife hand I'd be all like 'You can't step ta dis" and I'd kick him in the balls! BOOYAH!"
three oranges- I wasn't being a tough guy. there is a logical amount of fight in even the weakest people. If this was thew first horror movie ever made I might agree with you, but come on. What's the point of recreating the cliches "scream" made fun of ten years ago? People aren't THAT helpless. even vaguely socialist people
I find amusing no one has mentioned how ludicrous the death sequences were in this movie! I mean come on! A guy gets decapitated by a wooden dressed being pushed very slowly! The most that dresser would have done is smash in his temple or snap/break his neck. But decapitate him?!?!?!?! What the Hell?!?!?!?!
I find this movie very overrated and moronic. Hell, the twist itself has been used so many times in many movies as of late it isn't even funny! I could have at least made the twist more believable and slightly original by:
1.) Having the killer actually exist but Alex hesitates to act because it's an opportunity to save Marie and prove her love to her.
or
2.) Have Alex hire the killer to do what he did so she could save Marie and prove her love to her.
That would have at least made the film more redeemable along with realistic death scenes. The movie is just way too ludicrous to be taken seriously. Hell, I take Troll 2 more seriously and that's as incoherent as it can possibly get!
Just leave the troll alone guys, he's not gonna last for all that long. We've seen his type come and go quite speedily.
Dunners:
Disagreeing = trolling. Got it. You are 1337.
For the person who responded reasonably:
The point in revisiting the slasher genre straight up is that "Scream' didn't really explode them or make them irrelevant, except perhaps to people who were already tired of the genre and wanted an opportunity to be smug. Tell a man who shows up at your door with a machete that the slasher thing has been totally done, and see if you don't still die.
That said, "Haute Tension" harkens back to an era that precendes the films lampooned by "Scream," the 70s exploitation and earlier slashers, and so the existence of "Scream" is doubly irrelevant.
Only the 70's exploitation horror films were hell of a lot better than High Tension. In fact, they p**s all over High Tension's grave!!!
Well, yeah they do.
"High Tension" is a well-intentioned, passably entertaining movie that doesn't achieve near what it seems to think it does, given the title.
It delivers enough blood and lesbian masturbation to work from a bad movie standpoint. And the chase scene at the end is fairly awesome, if only because that saw is really big.
You started this three oranges, so dont act high and mighty about being called on it.
Every few months some dumbass like you pops up and feels the need to rattle the cages here and every few months or so get banned for being nothing more than the common 'aintitcoolnews a***ole'.
Whats the difference between a disagreement and an argument? An argument doesn't end with one person acting like an s**thead, it starts with one person being an s**thead, s**thead.
Go back to your cave little troll, we don't need you here. The only trolls we like here are from those rotten 1980's films.
Hi, Dunners...
As you may have noticed, all posts of mine have had something to do with the movie. In fact, the conversation stemming from my original post has been entirely in keeping with the tone of the initial post, which was hyperbolic and inflammatory in its own right.
Your posts (and now this one) have been the only ones that are wholly off-topic and personal. You are engaging in a common type of trolling in which you pose as the forum police. You have nothing to contribute to the thread, apparently. Have you even seen the movie?
Here's the most important part: The only guy who might possibly have been entitled to take offense didn't. Any harm done was therefore invented by you to give youreslef something to work up into a self-righteous froth about.
Post Edited (10-20-05 08:34)
youreslef?
Welcome to the bottom rung of the Internet ladder.
You found a typo and pointed it out. I notice you don't apply the same standard to your own posts. Worse than typos, you make actual spelling errors.
Good trolling, guy.
Post Edited (10-20-05 11:53)
I do have to agree with Three Oranges on this one Dunners. You're taking it all too seriously. Take a chill pill.
Three Oranges, you might want to step back too because you're falling into Dunners trap. You're getting personal now (with that last post) like he wants you to do. It's all too obvious. Don't give in to the bait.
Post Edited (10-20-05 17:41)
"Welcome to the bottom rung of the Internet ladder. "
Love what you've done with the place. Seriously, it's quite well decorated with your ego as well the bed filled with teddybears and your autobiography entitled "If people don't like my opinion I make weak insults at them and expect to get away with it". Signed and autographed too. Nice to know theres some TP down here.
"Three Oranges, you might want to step back too because you're falling into Dunners trap."
...Yes, my trap...the one involves a large cardboard box thats help but by a stick on string made just for this type of situation.
*Box drops* ooh lets see what I caught now!..dang, it's Lycurgus1985 and he's too small! Guess I'll have to throw him back.
And should I be offended by this?
You made me laugh more than anything.
Besides, it's really not wise to accuse people of things you are guilty of yourself. It makes one look like a fool.
------------------------
Post Edited (10-20-05 19:48)
The box part is for humor yes. The first part however doesn't really concern you, so do stay out of it.
Oranges and I are taking care of this ourselves. I honestly dont see it lasting much longer as thats the way the flames go.
"Three Oranges, you might want to step back too because you're falling into Dunners trap. You're getting personal now (with that last post) like he wants you to do."
I tend to respond to posts in the tone in which they're delivered. High road or low road ... I leave it up to my travelling companions.
"I honestly dont see it lasting much longer as thats the way the flames go."
My experience is that these things usually turn into last word competitions. I'll stop posting in this thread now, so that I win no matter what. Either you don't reply, and I get the last word, or you do reply, thus showing that you are trying to get the last word, and revealing yourself to be a petty troll. Either way, I win a thing that isn't worth winning.
If you say so, course by that logic you're admitting you're a troll as well.