| Topic List | Page List: 1 |
|---|---|
| Topic | Snake Ranks Anything Horror Related - LIVE! (sort of) |
| plasmabeam 10/30/22 4:27:43 PM #76: | Snake5555555555 posted... I mean horror in general, not just slashers, just don't do sequels well. Honestly, it's difficult to be scared by the same thing twice. With Art though, I just feel like he has a ton of sadistic tricks left up his sleeve. Yeah, horror sequels are almost damned to fail. I believe that's why Stephen King had so much success--he stuck to writing standalone horror novels instead of trilogies/series. I read a lot of horror, but I can only think of a few horror trilogies off the top of my head (and Book 1 is usually the best by a mile). The only way to make a sequel work seems to be by doing a genre swap (Aliens) or by somehow finding a way to make everything fresh again like in Terrifier 2. I also think Terrifier 2 benefited by shifting away from the nihilism at the heart of the first movie toward a stronger sense of meaning in the sequel. Like, it was refreshing that Art didn't kill/mutilate everyone. I wanted to touch on the psychological elements more. It's a bit easy to overlook Art and the little girl's relationship with everything else going on (and the fact it's played as a kind of whimsical rom-com thing) but it's actually one of the most fucked up parts of the film. And it's interesting to glimpse further into Art's mind and see just how he perceives his victims if his gory slayings weren't already enough. Did you feel there were more focus on facial disfigurement in this film compared to the more genital focused attacks of Terrifier 1? Or just me? Didn't notice this it till now. When I rewatch it, I'll pay closer attention, but I recall One thing I want to point out: every time someone got cut, I felt it. I don't know if it was the way the movie was shot or the sound design, but I had a visceral reaction every time. --- ~Jacksonville Jaguars~ ... Copied to Clipboard! |
| Topic List | Page List: 1 |