52 thoughts on “Movie Podcast Weekly Ep. 109 – Halloween Edition: John Wick (2014) and Annabelle (2014) and Open Windows (2014) and The Town That Dreaded Sundown (2014)”

1. Hi guys! So excited that the new episode is up. I’ll play in in a minute, but first a question that is eating all my brain cells at work. There was a movie that was either a 2013 or 2014 release and I can’t remember its name. I remember someone talking briefly about it, but I don’t think you guys ever reviewed it. It’s about a kid that was taken in by a very religious family and he (or she?) was asked to do evil things by said family in the name of faith. The movie looked really interesting and it was made out to be, at least by the trailer, a smart and high quality entry in horror. Anyway, if anyone knows the name of the movie, please let me know. Hey thanks!

   Reply ↓

   • Juan, I know there was one called “Grace: The Possession” that had themes of religious fanaticism but I don’t know if it’s the one your looking for.

     Reply ↓

     • David, thanks for the reply, but no that’s not it. Is the movie you mentioned any good though? I’m always interested in possession movies.

       Reply ↓

2. Juan,
   The film is called “Frailty” (2001), directed by Bill Paxton. Definitely check it out!

   http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0264616/

   Jay of the Dead

   Reply ↓

   • Jay,

     Thank you for quick reply, but no, it’s not Frailty. The movie I’m talking about is very recent, like either this year or last year recent. But Frailty is an excellent movie. I like it a lot.

     Reply ↓

     • OK, sorry. Was it “We Are What We Are”?

       JOTD

       Reply ↓

       • Jay, another excellent movie, but again, it’s a no. Sorry if I’m driving you crazy lol, but if it makes you feel better, I’m driving myself crazy too.

         Reply ↓

         • I haven’t seen it but I seem to recall reading somewhere that it wasn’t very good.

           It might be worth asking about the film you’re looking for over on the HMP comments. I’m sure some of the folks over there might be able to figure it out.

           Reply ↓

         • Jug Face?

           Reply ↓

         • Thanks Josh, but it’s not Jug Face either. I hated that movie by the way. Sorry Jay!

           Reply ↓

3. Man, I’m not even past the mini-reviews yet and I already have a few things to say.

   Firstly, It’s a shame there’s an absence of Andy (and of course Karl) on this episode but I always love to hear ChrisExcess, he never seems like anything less than a wonderfully passionate, intelligent and lovely chap.

   I thought Josh’s question for Chris concerning the kind of reaction he has watching something like “Martyrs” was great too. This is yet another topic that I’d love to hear expounded upon on HMP (add it to the infinite list guys!) because I often find myself considering why I can happily enjoy a gross-out Fulci gore-fest yet tend to avoid most films considered a part of the “Torture Porn” sub-genre. I know Jay is always strongly recommending the movie “Inside” and I feel bad for not giving it a chance yet but the whole thing just sounds like a horrible, upsetting thing to watch. I do agree with ChrisExcess that art should have no limitations (aside from causing suffering to any people or animals) but there are some things that on a personal level I just find too harrowing. I feel like there’s a line between spooky/scary/fun horror and ugly/mean-spirited horror for me, but that line is a hard one to define. It’s like some horror films are about evil and a byproduct of that evil happens to be the suffering of the characters whereas others are JUST about the suffering of the characters, like that’s the main focus of the film and to me that’s not something I enjoy. I do like movies like “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” and even “Cannibal Holocaust” (though I detest the scenes of animal cruelty) but I almost feel like I don’t watch those films for the same reason I watch most other horror; they’re films that I admire but that I have to be in a very specific mood to endure and I feel that they’re more a long the lines of “Deliverance” in that they affect me more like an extremely upsetting and realistic drama would as opposed to something as fun as “Return of the Living Dead” or as spooky as “Sinister”. Anyway, I’m not trying to suggest that these more emotionally disturbing films are less worthwhile nor am I casting any aspersions on those who enjoy them, I just find the delineation intriguing.

   Next; I felt bad hearing that Doc was embarrassed about his slightly vitriolic turn on HMP. I hope you guys will let him know that it made for an extremely entertaining podcast and that we certainly won’t think less of him for it. Of course I don’t know the guy personally but Doc seems to me like a genuinely decent, respectful and polite fellow though I sometimes get the impression that he worries a little too much about how he comes across on podcasts and such. He shouldn’t because even when he’s laying the smack down on One Sick Puppy he’s always sincere and great to listen to. I think Scott was doing of good job of pushing everyone’s buttons on that episode too.

   And my final note for now: Josh, I’ve recently gotten around to checking out “The Killing”. I’m sure you’ve mentioned it several times before on the podcast but on Ep. 101 specifically you peaked my interest and I’ve been sitting on it since. Then last episode it was brought up again and with it fresh in my mind I sprung into action and have worked my way through all of season one and a few episodes into season two.

   All I can say is that I think I have my new “The Wire”. This show is just excellent. Realistic and detailed yet extremely watchable and compelling. It’s such a great spin on the usual murder mystery, like it’s taking the usually throw-away concept of the red herring and adding thought and colour to what is more often than not whitewashed and contrived. So many great twists and revelations tightly woven together but without coming across as artificial or inorganic. Flawed, very human characters interacting in believable ways. The moody backdrop of rain drenched Seattle. There was even a song by the band “Cursive” (who I’m a big fan of) in the background of one of the episodes which took me of guard. I love this show so far. I’m totally addicted.

   – David

   Reply ↓

   • I don’t think society should put any limits on artists, aside from, as you say, causing suffering to innocents, and I believe in trying (almost) anything once, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to take something meaningful from all art or that all who create art are equal in their talents with message and form or that all even intend to create something other than “shock-art” or that I’ll continue to subject myself to art I find meritless just because it is art. I like my food spicy too, literally and figuratively, and I like to push my limits, but I’m also very conscious of when I’ve reached them.

     In other news, it made my day that you’re enjoying The Killing.

     Reply ↓

     • I think I feel pretty much exactly the same way Josh. I don’t have anything against shocking art that pushes the limits and I can certainly enjoy it if I feel that the shocking elements serve the art appropriately but I’m not going to say that something is good just by merit of it being shocking.

       And I just finished season 2 of The Killing and wow! It kept me guessing, not to mention perched precariously on the edge of my seat, until the very end. That last episode was like a punch in the gut. Both seasons so far have been 10/10 and I’m curious to see where the next season goes now that the Rosie Larsen storyline has wrapped up.

       Many thanks for the recommendation Josh!

       Reply ↓

4. Man, I love how I’ve become the whipping boy for pansies listening to the Podcast.

   “This is probably too scary for listeners like Vance.”
   “This one is pretty disturbing…Vance should avoid it.”
   “This one isn’t for kids…or Vance.”
   “Big Vance man babies should sit this one out. The rest of us grownups should give it a watch.”

   But hey, if the shoe fits, I’d best quiet down and wear it. Ha ha.

   Reply ↓

   • Vance,
     This is one of the funniest comments I have ever read! I just about choked on my cereal at breakfast this morning. Hilarious.

     In reality, you’re a better fit than Karl for a viewer with this type of sensibilities… Karl just doesn’t try certain types of movies at all, usually. But I’ve gathered that you’ll be adventurous and watch Thrillers and some mild Horror stuff. Well, that’s valuable (to me) for explaining to the MPW community which types of viewers might appreciate a certain type of film.

     I mean, I can appreciate your feelings about being “categorized” inaccurately… You heard in Josh’s pan of “John Wick” that he thought I would appreciate that movie… How am I supposed to take that for a movie that he thinks is stupid? : )
     Jason

     Reply ↓

     • Yes, I did catch Josh’s subtle slam about someone like you liking “John Wick”. I am curious for another viewpoint on that one. I am surprised so many critics have been digging it.

       No worries about using me as a way to steer listeners. I just thought it was funny. I couldn’t convince the wife to watch “The Others” last night, so I had to watch it on my own. It wasn’t near as scary as when I was a kid, but I liked the idea (7/10). It felt like a family horror movie to me…maybe I will convince her next Halloween. I did convince her to watch “Burning Bright” last week. Tigers in the house aren’t as scary as ghosts in the house apparently. We liked that one (6.5/10). Thanks.

       I have “Poltergeist” coming in the mail today. I have never seen that one. Baby steps, right?

       Reply ↓

       • Oh, you need a second opinion huh, Vance?

         That was in no way a slam to Jason, btw. Jason likes Gangster movies. Jason likes action. I wasn’t saying he would like it, I was just saying out of everyone else on the podcast, he has the highest chance, for those reasons.

         Reply ↓

         • Sorry Josh, but I think you were the wrong person to review “John Wick”. Your lack of interest in the action genre is a big enough bias for me not to take your review to heart, especially considering I’m a big fan of action movies. That’s not to say that your review should be dismissed, but you’ve expressed in the past how you feel about action movies in general, so it wasn’t a surprise to me that you scored the movie so low. Now, I haven’t seen “John Wick”, so I won’t defend it either, but I’m about 91.25% sure that I will like it quite a bit more than you did. I’m a very visual guy, so anything that’s visually interesting, even if it lacks substance, engages me. And if the movie is as explosive, fast paced, and action riddled as you described in your review, then I’ll probably be on the same boat as the people who have the movie at an 86% on Rotten Tomatoes.

           This brings up a question about objectivity and fairness when reviewing a movie. Is it fair to review a movie that falls on a genre that you loathe or dislike? How can one maintain objectivity if there are already set expectations—be them high or low—going into a movie? I believe it’s important to hear from various points of view, but I also believe it’s a bit unfair to give a movie a bad review based on your own biases. I’d like to hear any thought on this.

           Reply ↓

         • I’ve heard Josh say that he doesn’t like action movies quite a few times but I don’t know if that’s really the case. I’m sure I’ve heard him praise stuff like Die Hard, Terminator 2, Indiana Jones, RoboCop etc. Josh are these movies just rare exceptions or do you feel that they have enough elements of other genres that they are exempt. I guess when I think of “Action Movies” my mind immediately goes back to the classics but are you moreso referring to stuff like “Battleship” and “Wild Wild West”.

           I’m not trying to be pernickety here rather I’m curious about what you might define as an “Action Movie” because it’s always seemed like such a broad term to me.

           Reply ↓

         • @Josh, Sorry to hear that you weren’t taking a shot at Jason. He needs a good slam now and again. But that makes sense.

           Reply ↓

         • Juan (and Vance), the question is not whether the movie is great, good, or below average. I’m telling you, it is a below average film. The question is whether you, as a apologist for the action genre, are still going to enjoy a mediocre film. It’s quite possible. I enjoy lots of mediocre films when I’m a fan of the genre.

           I think when we are fans of a genre, we tend to let lesser elements slide, elements that the average viewer might not. I think Jay, David and Juan know what I mean if you apply that to horror. Take my mind-melting Halloween franchise reviews, for example. Halloween 3, 4, 5, and Resurrection are all mediocre films–there’s no way around that–but I still love them. Fans have a fondness for the genre or maybe a nostalgia for some of the films and so we are more willing to look for the good and overlook the bad. But, EVERYBODY knows what the best horror movies are. They are the movies that film-lovers everywhere can agree on–that Ebert would give a good review. The Shining, Jaws, Halloween, the Universal monsters, Hitchcock, etc all get a pass because they are actually good movies. Check out this post I tweeted the other day called “A Horror-hater Picks his Top 10 Horror Movies” http://buff.ly/1FZEnoC It’s a decent list because even a horror hater knows the great ones. It’s the mediocre ones that take a fan to enjoy.

           And so, as someone who isn’t a fan of the genre, I have no problem stating my affection for great movies like Die Hard, SuperCop, RoboCop, Aliens, The Matrix, T2, etc. Those are all solid films. But, it would take an action fan to enjoy a piece of crap like John Wick.

           In that way, I think my review is useful to anyone from Juan to Vance. It’s not a great action film or I would have been able to appreciate it (though, if you remember, I did compliment the action choreography).

           I thought, of the reviewers on our podcast, Jason has the best chance of enjoying it because he’s the only one who is a fan of action and he has a special interest in crime films. Only he might be able to appreciate a film as mediocre as John Wick. If that’s you, you have your review, guys. No need for a second opinion. 😉

           Also, BTW, one of my favorite sub-genres is the 80s adventure-comedy. That’s what I call The Goonies, Indiana Jones, Back to the Future, The Lost Boys, Romancing the Stone, Ghostbusters, etc … not action. If my choice is to watch Con Air or paint dry, I’m going to choose paint. If my choice is to watch Bad Boys or nothing, I choose nothing. Action generally bores me.

           Does that make me the wrong person to review this movie? Only if you think a review has to be glimmering to be useful. Because every reviewer has their biases. Hopefully, I rise above my biases to give you a good idea of what to expect when you walk into a film. I think I did with John Wick.

           That’s why I hate rating the movies. You shouldnt be paying nearly as much attention to my rating as to the conversation we’re having. If you do that, you’ll know what the movie is.

           John Wick a movie with a generic story, flimsy plot, flat characters, pathetic dialog, and lots of impressive, stylish action. Or, said in a more humorous way, John Wick 90 minutes of people getting flipped around and shot in the head. If you disagree with that assessment after having seen the film, I’ll eat my hat.

           Reply ↓

         • Thanks for taking the time to clarify that Josh.

           And I’m also a big fan of what you term 80’s adventure-comedies. All those movies you listed are some of my favourites. I think for me the term “action” is almost synonymous with “adventure” but i definitely see where you’re coming from now. Personally I do have a soft spot for stuff like “Bad Boys”, “The Last Boy Scout”, “True Lies” etc but it’s something that’s only recently surfaced. I think the 90’s has moved from “that lame decade I grew up in when everything sucked” to “That decade that is getting too far away from me and I really kind of miss” so a lot of those pretty soulless action movies have taken on a nostalgic sheen. Of course they still don’t compare to the 80’s stuff.

           Reply ↓

       • “Poltergeist” is great. It’s definitely pretty spooky but in kind of a fun, Spielbergian way. Hope you enjoy it good sir.

         Reply ↓

       • @Vance,
         I’m so happy you two liked “Burning Bright”!

         Reply ↓

   • You shouldn’t feel that not liking horror movies is synonymous with wimpiness Vance. Case in point: I’m the biggest wimp in the world and I love them.

     Reply ↓

     • Thanks David.

       I think I’ll look over the edge of a cliff, ride a roller coaster, and get some flu shots over the next couple of days, just to remind myself that I am a brave man.

       Reply ↓

5. How come in this episode Jay said of Nosferatu: “It’s a silent film so it’s kinda boring.” yet I’ve heard him an almost innumerable amount of times repeat the slogan “The cinema should show NOT tell”. Way to be paradoxical Jay!

   Reply ↓

   • Jay contradicts himself a lot. I’ve already caught a few movies that in theory he shouldn’t like, but loves and vice versa. Like Tyler the Creator once said: “I’m a f***ing walking paradox, no I’m not”.

     We love you, Jay.

     Reply ↓

     • Ha ha. That’s a big statement to make, Juan, without any evidence… Cite some examples. I can tell you why I like or dislike a movie. : ) Name a movie, and I’ll tell you why I feel as I do.
       Jay

       Reply ↓

   • Two things, David:
     Just because a film “shows” things doesn’t make it great cinema. The cinema should show, not tell, but even then, it’s no guarantee that it will be a great film. Michael Bay shows us lots in every movie. His films are indeed cinematic, but usually not what you’d call great cinema.

     And unfortunately for “Nosferatu,” the things it shows most of the time aren’t that interesting. Max Schreck’s Count Orlok is only onscreen for something like 9 minutes of its 81-minute runtime… Hence the boredom.

     Reply ↓

     • So in fact your statement that “it’s a silent film so it’s kinda boring” should have been “it doesn’t have enough vampires in it so it’s kinda boring”? Or do you maintain a bias against silent cinema despite it being the purest example of your show not tell mantra?

       Haha, I’m sorry for giving you a hard time Jay, I assure you I do so with the utmost respect. Ultimately I’m just being a nitpicking jerk so feel free to ignore me.

       Reply ↓

       • Busted.

         Reply ↓

     • Guess what? We did it! Me and my daughter did the Nosferatu/Shadow of the Vampire double feature! We had so much fun! I’m pretty sure Nosferatu is the oldest full-length film either of us has ever watched and although that was fun and exciting for awhile, we did both get a little sleepy. But we made it through though! 6/10. The payoff came when we watched Shadow of the Vampire. Wow! Super creepy premise. We liked it a lot and made sitting through Nosferatu well worth the time. John Malkovich always brings a good game and he didn’t disappoint here. 7/10. I’d give the double feature as recommended by Jay for a fun Halloween treat – 9/10!

       Reply ↓

       • Well done!

         Reply ↓

6. Also Josh, I don’t find it annoying when you qualify a flick as a “film experiment”. I think it’s cool that you can appreciate that in a movie and personally I think that experimentation in any art-form is at-least worthy of admiration. That said I’m not inclined to go easier on such a film if I feel that those experimental aspects have undermined it in some way or are self-indulgent to the point of rendering it impossible to enjoy. “Open Windows” seems like it might be the kind of film that is so given to its revolutionary/gimmicky concept that it suffocates its own potential. I guess that’s often the cost of experimentation and it can be an interesting thing to witness.

   Reply ↓

   • For me, that experimentation is part of what makes it enjoyable, though. Open Windows was gimmicky to be sure, but it had my interest for the first 3/4 just based on execution of a novel concept. And I legitimately LOVE Van Sant’s Psycho, but I’d need a whole podcast to explain why.

     Reply ↓

7. And another thing, I looked and looked but can’t find the link to ChrisExcess’s creepy doll picture.

   Reply ↓

   • I looked for it as well and couldn’t find it. He must have forgotten. I will message Chris before our next ep.

     Reply ↓

8. Dracula untold – 6/10, low priority theatre/low priority rental

   This is not a movie to avoid. It is better than avoid. You just need to know what it is and who it is for.

   See, there are people who expect “dracular untold” to be cool; then there are people who just think vampires are cool. Those who were disappointed by this movie are from the first group, whilst the movie is clearly made for the group 2, those who loved “warm body” and “twilight”, and don’t care about dracula’s real story. This is a fantasy movie much like “percy jackson” or and it delivers exactly that. A straight forward story, fast food modern emotions, actions and superpowers, vampires, and oh, bats.

   To me this movie has two major issues – old vamp talk too much, and imcompetent delivery of dracula’s wife. Especially the choice of the wife. At times, i think the movie has been cut down too much for my theatre version, since none of dracula’s friends and the bishop got any personality time, it felt like they should have more stories to tell – but over all the movie remains as vanila and easy-sipping as it is. Luke evans and dominic cooper both have a good effort bringing the vibe into the film, as long as the movie didn’t have the wife part on, it is good enough to keep me on the seat.

   Lets say i don’t think more movies like this should be made – and in my book, it is not a memorable movie in any way. I just think the movie is fine for certain audience groups and deserves a fair judge. Hell, there are many movies out there making me want to ask for my money back. This one is not that bad.

   Reply ↓

   • Pardon my spelling – phone keyboard can only get you so far.

     Reply ↓

9. It is interesting that you compare filth with don Hemingway, in my humble opinion Don Hemingway > filth because of the entertaining elements and the on-the-edge story telling.

   Of course this is of personal opinion so lets fight on this!

   Reply ↓

   • OK, Que. “Filth” and “Dom Hemingway” are so closely related that they seem like two films of a thematic trilogy. (Looking forward to the third one someday…) Both are gritty crime films whose lead characters are men who are delusional in their perceptions of their place in the world and how the world receives them and values them. Both characters are absolute train wrecks. Both characters are dangerous to themselves and to others. In fact, there are many similar character traits between them, but seriously, are you telling me you don’t think these two films would make a great back-to-back double feature?

     Reply ↓

     • oh Jay, they certainly compare – and they would make a fantastic back2back double feature! I complete agree with you with the similarities left right and centre – i am only saying that i might enjoy Dom Hemingway a little more because at times, Dom is funnier. So on my out of 10 marking list, Dom Hemingway gets half extra point for the entertaining elements.

       Reply ↓

10. Guys! Guys! This was a great episode! No offense to those one guys that are missing this week, but really, you all just outdid yourselves. My favorite episode is usually your Best-of-the-Year but this Halloween episode was just stellar! ChrisExcess was a perfect addition. What an intuitive, soulful guy. I loved his input, and especially his scary Halloween story about that creepy doll. Perfect. Also loved his comments and little book recommendations at the end. You just took it up a notch!

    Reply ↓

    • Wow, thanks Jenifer! We will pass your comments on to Chris.

      Reply ↓

11. Hey everyone, in the spirit of the holiday I decided to a list of my top favourite movies to watch on Halloween. Now these aren’t necessarily the scariest, best or most Halloween themed movies rather they’re just the ones that put me in the right mood:

    1. Trick r’ Treat (2007)
    2. Carnival of Souls (1962)
    3. Return of the Living Dead (1985)
    4. The ‘Burbs (1989)
    5. Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
    6. Whistle and I’ll Come to You (1968)
    7. Monster Squad (1987)
    8. The Evil Dead (1981)
    9. Poltergeist (1982)
    10. BeetleJuice (1988)

    Reply ↓

    • Great list. At least half of those would make my list if I made one right now. Although, I’ve never seen Whistle and I’ll Come to You. I will have to search that out.

      A few years ago, back in 2011, I was making an attempt to blog regularly and I did a Top 25 Halloween movies list (which, of course, also had over a dozen honorable mentions) because I am terrible at list-making. But here is a link to that old post if anyone’s interested: http://bit.ly/1o17HoD

      Reply ↓

      • That’s a top notch list Josh, I especially love the double features. Some of those honourable mentions are great too; “The Fog” and the “House” movies definitely have that great Halloweeny vibe.

        And “Whistle and I’ll Come to You” is a short made for TV adaptation of the similarly titled M.R James story. It’s sort of one part eccentric period character piece and one part very chilling ghost story. It’s probably not to everyone’s taste as it’s very old fashioned and the main character is a constantly mumbling cranky old professor but personally I love it. The whole thing is on youtube if you ever have a spare 40 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FUQzd-7dn4

        Reply ↓

        • Adding “Whistle and I’ll Come to You” to my list. Very much looking forward to “The Babadook” as well.

          Reply ↓

12. HAPPY HALLOWEEN to all from your friendly neighborhood Wolfman Josh! http://bit.ly/1Dx2Dw0

    Reply ↓

    • Happy belated Halloween to you too, Josh.

      In other news, what do you think about this?
      http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/11/03/syfy-making-2001-sequel-3001-the-final-odyssey?abthid=5457d9a05f1d810434000020

      Reply ↓

      • My initial reaction is that A) this seems like the worst idea ever.

        My subsequent reactions are that B) nothing is sacred and C) at least it’s Ridley Scott.

        I wish they weren’t doing it, but I will check it out–making me part of the problem.

        Reply ↓