- Welcome to Badmovies.org Forum.
Recent posts
#11
Good Movies / Re: Unofficial Horror Movie Un...
Last post by zombie no.one - Today at 12:19:49 PMQuote from: claws on Today at 01:37:53 AMThe 1970s Radioactive / Desert Connection
"Atomic Horror" was popular during the 1950s, and still lived on in the 1970s.
Terror Circus (1973)
Phase IV (1974) Cosmic radiation, but still radiation.
The Hills Have Eyes (1977)
yeah EMPIRE OF THE ANTS has that premise as well... :)
Quote from: M.10rda on July 24, 2026, 07:27:31 AMThis one has occasionally occurred to me:
Fulci's THE BEYOND
Argento's INFERNO
Polanski's THE NINTH GATE
Michael Winner's THE SENTINEL
...All are about occult (in the literal sense) or cryptic portals to the netherworld, just hangin' out surreptitiously though more or less in plain sight. There must be more movies in this unofficial universe that I've yet to recall...
INFERNO is part of its own Argento trilogy as well isn't it? not sure if the other 2 SUSPIRIA and MOTHER OF TEARS would really fit into that universe you've described though
#12
Entertainment / Re: What have you been listeni...
Last post by Allhallowsday - Today at 12:02:27 PM #13
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 10:30:53 AMI reviewed UGLY STEPSISTER in the recent theatrical viewings thread when it came out. I felt about it about like you did (also gave it a 4/5).
#14
Good Movies / Re: Recent Viewings, Part 2
Last post by M.10rda - Today at 10:25:14 AMTHE UGLY STEPSISTER (2025):
I thought someone reviewed this at some point but I couldn't find it. Madame 10RDA suggested this one, then (like about 25% of the films she suggests) she apologized for suggesting it for the next couple of days, but I wasn't looking for an apology. A synopsis is somewhat redundant as eventually (after a rather more abstract open) it begins to more or less follow the beats of the fairy tale, though w/ a good amount of elaboration. The female W/D creates a world reminiscent of COMPANY OF WOLVES or LITTLE OTIK w/ an odd whiff of THE REFLECTING SKIN. (I kept thinking of that famous quote "Sometimes terrible things happen quite naturally.")
Alas one's taste for UGLY STEPSISTER may depend on your tolerance for feminist criticality (mine is sky-high) and also your ability to accept (diegetically, not personally) the phallocentric standards of beauty that the world of the film insists upon. That latter challenge may also be a litmus test for your sympathy for the characters. I felt carte blanch sympathy for Elvira, the "ugly" stepsister who isn't ugly to begin with, just average (and has a smokin' hot bod under her corset, even when the film tells us she's "round as a ball") - and then (d)evolves into something like a gothic Norwegian Barbie doll, admired by all who behold her though she's deteriorating inside and out. What she does to herself in the film isn't really her fault - nor is it entirely the fault of her only mildly wicked (though utterly brainwashed) mother, who also had some line of credit from me until the last 15 minutes of the film. The (smart, redheaded) younger stepsister is entirely acquitted of blame/is the voice of reason.
As for "Cinderella", however - just average like Elvira, not supernaturally gorgeous as the supporting ensemble would have it, but moreover w/ a dog's arse of an attitude - Cinderella can fffffffffffffffaaaaaaack right off. (I realize this wasn't the moral intended by the director but I calls 'em like I sees 'em.)
I might've preferred it had the writer/director departed a bit more from the source material - as one of the film's arbiters of body horror/dysmorphia is named "Von Kronenberg", I'd hoped the film might take a sharp left at the end into SHIVERS or RABID or even THE FLY. It doesn't - in spite of the film's vein of baroque humor, the ending remains black as pitch. A warning: the ending also gets really, really gross - both in the HOSTEL sense (to be expected per the source material) and in the ERASERHEAD or THE KINGDOM sense. The final special effect left me disturbed (and wary of my own digestive system) for a couple days.
Not a joyride, but I respected it. 4/5
I thought someone reviewed this at some point but I couldn't find it. Madame 10RDA suggested this one, then (like about 25% of the films she suggests) she apologized for suggesting it for the next couple of days, but I wasn't looking for an apology. A synopsis is somewhat redundant as eventually (after a rather more abstract open) it begins to more or less follow the beats of the fairy tale, though w/ a good amount of elaboration. The female W/D creates a world reminiscent of COMPANY OF WOLVES or LITTLE OTIK w/ an odd whiff of THE REFLECTING SKIN. (I kept thinking of that famous quote "Sometimes terrible things happen quite naturally.")
Alas one's taste for UGLY STEPSISTER may depend on your tolerance for feminist criticality (mine is sky-high) and also your ability to accept (diegetically, not personally) the phallocentric standards of beauty that the world of the film insists upon. That latter challenge may also be a litmus test for your sympathy for the characters. I felt carte blanch sympathy for Elvira, the "ugly" stepsister who isn't ugly to begin with, just average (and has a smokin' hot bod under her corset, even when the film tells us she's "round as a ball") - and then (d)evolves into something like a gothic Norwegian Barbie doll, admired by all who behold her though she's deteriorating inside and out. What she does to herself in the film isn't really her fault - nor is it entirely the fault of her only mildly wicked (though utterly brainwashed) mother, who also had some line of credit from me until the last 15 minutes of the film. The (smart, redheaded) younger stepsister is entirely acquitted of blame/is the voice of reason.
As for "Cinderella", however - just average like Elvira, not supernaturally gorgeous as the supporting ensemble would have it, but moreover w/ a dog's arse of an attitude - Cinderella can fffffffffffffffaaaaaaack right off. (I realize this wasn't the moral intended by the director but I calls 'em like I sees 'em.)I might've preferred it had the writer/director departed a bit more from the source material - as one of the film's arbiters of body horror/dysmorphia is named "Von Kronenberg", I'd hoped the film might take a sharp left at the end into SHIVERS or RABID or even THE FLY. It doesn't - in spite of the film's vein of baroque humor, the ending remains black as pitch. A warning: the ending also gets really, really gross - both in the HOSTEL sense (to be expected per the source material) and in the ERASERHEAD or THE KINGDOM sense. The final special effect left me disturbed (and wary of my own digestive system) for a couple days.
Not a joyride, but I respected it. 4/5
#15
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by bob - Today at 10:23:37 AMto go
Who clogged the tiolet?
Who clogged the tiolet?
#17
Bad Movies / Re: Generate Movie Poster with...
Last post by bob - Today at 10:21:34 AM
I only get the AI message with copilot
Grok and Chat GPT let the posters be
#18
Bad Movies / Re: Generate Movie Poster with...
Last post by claws - Today at 09:46:22 AMI will continue with ChatGPT, but not as often than before.
#19
Bad Movies / Re: 100 Historical Movies in O...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 09:28:19 AM59. All Quiet on the Western Front (any version, but I hear the 2022 remake is good) (set in 1918)
By the way it is possible to have two movies in the same year, if one ends before the other. Not sure it will come up (maybe in WWII?) but wanted to throw the reminder out there.
By the way it is possible to have two movies in the same year, if one ends before the other. Not sure it will come up (maybe in WWII?) but wanted to throw the reminder out there.
#20
Games / Re: Answer the question with a...
Last post by Rev. Powell - Today at 09:18:30 AM
Why did you go to the river?