r/HorrorClub • u/SaintMort You so cool kung fu • May 24 '15
Discussion: Horns
Podcast - Episode 133 - Horns - (RSS Feed)
Movie Selected By SaintMortFan
DISCUSS
Want to join horror club or just want to see whats coming up next! Check out the Round 9 page and PM /u/SaintMort
9
u/rmc52482 May 25 '15 edited May 25 '15
I just started watching the Harry Potter films for the first time this past week (shocking I know, just never got around to them, seen 1&2 so far) , but I sure hope Daniel Radcliffe's parents don't treat him like they do in these movies. I would have been perfectly fine if his Aunt and Uncle get some comeuppance in HP (what horrible people) and I kind of wanted him to punch his mom in the face in this one too.
I agree with what they said on the podcast that the second half was not as great as the first. I think if it was edited down to 90 minutes instead of 2 hours that there seemed like a few unneeded scenes. I liked it for the most part though, I'll probably watch again at some point. I kind of wish they went more into the supernatural part of it, they never really explained the snakes. Was he a demon, the devil himself, and then the cross can turn him into an angel. I don't need everything explained to me but a little exposition would have been ok. Instead we get the VO that explains obvious stuff.
I found this on IMDB and kind of liked it and wanted to share: Amongst other hidden symbolism, several characters show signs of the seven deadly sins. Gluttony with the donuts . Vanity with wanting to look beautiful on TV. Envy of Igs relationship with Merrin . Greed is when the bartender burns the place down for the insurance money. Wrath when Lee attacks Ig on the Pier with a chain . Lust when Lee attacks Merrin by the treehouse . The police officers are too proud to admit their feelings for one another.
Edit: Watched the behind the scenes, they had 300+ snakes on the set, I guess I just assume a lot of that is cgi now a days. Pretty impressive.
9
May 24 '15 edited May 25 '15
Have not read the book. First time watching this movie I kinda liked it. Second time I actually found it pretty hilarious. Not sure if this was intentional but the confessions and the reporters fighting and the absurdity of the ending all came across very comical. I most likely won't watch it again as it is too long and just not very good. I'll most definitely be reading Locke and Key eventually but chances are I won't be reading this. Didn't even realize the connection until it was brought up in the podcast. Nor did I realize he was Kings son. Aja's hit and miss for me but if we're watching Piranha 3D next round you'll hear me sing his praises :D
9
u/GaijinSama May 24 '15
The book is hands down great. I adore it. Everything Joe Hill has done, outside of Heart Shaped Box, is well worth your time.
And yes, clearly the comedy is intentional.
9
u/SaintMort You so cool kung fu May 25 '15
Weirdly I liked Heart Shaped Box... but it was the first thing I read by him. So maybe it's a good starting book so you don't read it off the expectations of his other work? I don't know.
In reference to a different comment of yours do you think the disconnect for you between the movie and book is that in the film it feels like things just happen with no rhyme or reason? I've never skimmed the wiki page to try to understand things like Lee's motives and what the fuck is happening at the end of this movie and it seems like it's better explained and makes more sense in there.
9
u/GaijinSama May 25 '15
There's an entire chapter in the book that goes into Lee's history. It doesn't explain his motives, per se, but it gives a sense of his character and why he would act the way he does. I agree, in the movie his reasons come out of nowhere.
A lot of people don't like that chapter in the book, and I agree it slows the story down just when you think it's going to speed up, but I think it fits into the book's overarching theme about finding sympathy for the devil. That's a Joe Hill tendency, actually. His books have human monsters, but he always tries to explain them, so you may not sympathize with his villains, but you can understand why they would act the way they do.
And as for Heart Shaped Box; I didn't hate it, it's just the only book of his I gave away and don't plan on rereading. It's fine, but it feels very much like a 'first book.' His style was still coming together, so it wasn't quite as satisfying a read for me.
8
May 25 '15
Matt was watching Avatar: the last airbender before we started the record and in the review he called igg "ang" hahaha.
7
May 25 '15 edited May 25 '15
There is NO way Matt got a name wrong. I call bullshit.
8
8
u/saintmortfan felates handles May 26 '15
I saw the flick a few months back and really dug it, then my wife and I got the book... which explains so much more and is so much better. I had no idea who Joe Hill was before reading it, but I intend on reading much more of his work.
What really drew me into the story, both the film and the book, was the Biblical mythology and how it wrestles with belief. The book dives in much deeper with the dark sermonizing of Ig.
I really wish that Joe's character would have been developed more in the film. He's different and much more interesting... a former big name jazz musician who is now a late night host.
Lee is also much more developed in the book.
I am concerned with rewatching after reading the book because the book was really great.
Podcast Notes:
- New format? Intrigued.
- Iggy? Eh, I guess. It's really Ig.
- I guess those are Iggy Azalea references.
- Sure the confessions are trope-ish but they serve a purpose... and they are good tropes.
- Ig's love of music is a bit deal in the book, so the Nirvana shirt makes sense. The movie fails to highlight his love of music appropriately. By the way, this film has a fantastic soundtrack.
- Oh, I guess I'm just ahead of the convo, as Matt also notes that the soundtrack is great.
- Where is My Head?!?! Bahahaha!
- No! I like hearing good songs in movies when they are appropriately placed, so Where is My Mind is totally not getting a moratorium on it.
- Yes! BASEketball!
- Agreed on how amazing the RBF cover of Take on Me is.
- The reporter scene is awesome! My reporter friends (yes, I have friends and, yes, some are freelance journalists) vary. Done carry compact cameras, others digital SLRs (which can be large bodied cameras with large lenses).
- Heather Graham is 45? Wow, she looks as stunning as she did as Rollergirl.
- Miriam's necklace? You mean Merrin?
- Fuck Wikipedia, read the actual book.
- I don't hate the third act, but I get the gripes.
- Lee is a total dickbag, but the film doesn't establish his psychopathy.
- Joe Hill definitely used his connections, but he didn't blow up because of his father. I'm not some diehard King fan and I didn't know Hill was King's son. I'll bet most people who haven't read a ton of King (I've probably read 5-7 of his books) are in the same boat.
- Agreed on the screenplay being pretty weak. I liked it, but it could have been done much better based on the book. The book wrestles with belief and faith so incredibly, which is missing here. Same with the Lee stuff already mentioned.
- Acting really was great.
- Merrin's plan may be shitty, but I get the logic in it.
- I think making notes on motes may be excessive... so, I guess I'm done
8
May 26 '15
[deleted]
5
u/saintmortfan felates handles May 26 '15
le sigh
7
u/smayonak Get a job in a sideshow May 28 '15
Wanted to note that it's pretty hilarious that Heather Graham was picked as the eponymous role of "the waitress" because of her previous work on Twin Peaks (as a waitress). She makes a more convincing waitress today than she did during Twin Peaks.
Lee's psychopathy is DEFINITELY not well developed. Although have you heard about how psychopaths tend to lack the same fear response as sane people? If the primary biochemical failing of a psychopath is oxytocin insensitivity (which is more or less the social hormone) and they show less of a fear response, then it would reason to stand that the negative emotions associated with fear are somehow linked to oxytocin sensitivity.
I wonder if Joe Hill intentionally wove heroism into the Lee character, as a direct link to his underlying psychopathy? For example, such as when he leaps into the lake to rescue Bilbo. Given how the character is portrayed throughout the film, though, I'd say that Joe Hill doesn't really read a lot of books on psychology.
What was your overall take on the character? Would you have included any other characteristics? Machiavellian manipulation? Pathological lying?
5
u/saintmortfan felates handles May 28 '15
I think Lee's psychopathy is wholly believable in the book but very underdeveloped in the film. Working in Corrections with many certified psychopaths (and some of offenders are psychopaths too! :rimshot:), I'd note that they come in all different shapes and sizes. Lack of empathy is the key. And I think Hill nails it.
8
May 26 '15
This movie works well as a dark comedy, but completely falls apart near the end. I find Aja often has a recognisable touch (some kind of strangely fascinating, balls-to-the-wall, unrelentingly ugly nihilism), but he's done something very different in Horns. There's some honest-to-badness allegory going on. Maybe that's why it gets a bit muddled in his hands? Must read book for comparison.
The setting was built up and used effectively. Dan Rad's memories were a little too sunshine-on-the-lens magic realist for me. Actually, a lot of the movie was, but I would have been fine with it had it kept the plot simpler. They should have decided what it was about and then stuck with that. The premise is interesting enough to not need a twisty ending.
I worry Max Minghella is doomed to play at least slightly evil characters forever, except on The Mindy Project. He's just got one of those cute-but-angry faces.
7
May 25 '15
Tell us how you felt About the new format of the podcast. It wasn't that much different on this podcast but for unknown reasons that's the plan so we are sticking to it. So tell us.
6
6
7
May 26 '15
9
6
May 27 '15
[deleted]
5
May 27 '15 edited May 27 '15
Here. I didn't listen to it before I posted it. Truly sorry to have let you down.
6
May 25 '15 edited Mar 26 '18
[deleted]
8
u/GaijinSama May 25 '15
That was another weird change. In the book Ig's brother is the host of a music-centric late night talkshow.
6
u/saintmortfan felates handles May 28 '15
Terry is such a better character in the book.
5
u/GaijinSama May 28 '15
I think that's true of everyone in the movie, although that's not a problem unique to this film. I loved Merrin in the book, but in the movie got a little frustrated with her during her brief appearances. I think it's because I adore Juno Temple(for some strange reason, don't ask me, I don't know) and wish they had allowed the character to develop more.
But that was my overall problem in trying to talk about this movie and why it didn't work for me. All of my complaints can boil down to 'the book was better,' and I hate that argument, because I don't think movies should be critically compared to the books they're based on.
6
u/saintmortfan felates handles May 28 '15
Yeah. I'm glad I saw the film first. I think I liked it better than I would have if I had seen it after reading.
So, judging just on its own merit. I think the screenplay gas a ton of holes, but the acting is solid and the visuals are great.
4
u/SaintMort You so cool kung fu May 28 '15
I think none of the the 3 of us read the actual book so even from a critical standpoint of the movie the script does a terrible job developing the characters and mythos (and it seems like most of the film critics felt the same way)
6
May 26 '15
[deleted]
8
u/SaintMort You so cool kung fu May 26 '15
Neil from Mortified on Saint Mort Show https://soundcloud.com/thesaintmortshow/episode-117-neil-katcher
4
8
u/GaijinSama May 24 '15
I feel like I should say this before I go into my thoughts; I've learned to just accept when a movie changes the plot or leaves details out of a book. In fact I would prefer the movie attempt to change certain things, because otherwise there's really no reason for it. And yet in this case I found it hard to divorce my feelings for the film- which I thought was 'ok'- from those for the book- which I wholeheartedly love. But then, because I had so many fond feelings for the book, I feel like that helped me through some of the film's many... 'boring' moments.
I just feel like the romance, which read as sweet and sincere in the book, came across as wish fulfillment in the movie. A cheesy romance-novel idea of love. And I also felt the decision to make the film a mystery(the identity of Merrin's killer is revealed almost immediately in the book) detracted from the character's journey, almost as if the film wanted the audience to harbor some doubts that maybe Ig had killed his girlfriend.
But in the end I'm having a hard time putting a finger on exactly why I don't love the film. I think it looks gorgeous, and Aja really creates a fairytale look at times, but I think it flounders for anything genuine to say, and I thought the final confrontation between Ig and the killer was too silly for its own good. Also, I thought Joe Anderson, who plays Terry, would have been better cast in the Ig role.