MovieChat Forums > 31 (2016) Discussion > this was by far his bloodiest movie peop...

this was by far his bloodiest movie people

posted 8 years ago by tbickle84
12 replies | jump to latest

I've been reading everyone's reviews and listening to vlogs since this movie premiered and most people are saying this film is tame compared to his other films.

I just watched it today on demand and although I was disappointed in the film like most fans, it have to say that it's by far his bloodiest film. Which one of his films is gorier/bloodier than this?? None. Lets give em a basic break down.

In house of 1000 corpses the bloodiest scenes are a scalping, hand hack and multiple stabs to a chest. The hand hack and scalping scene are so quick, you barely even see anything.

Devil's rejects - not really a gory movie at all. Some gunshots, throat slash, a few stabbings. More intense than gory.

Halloween 1 - stabbings, bludgeonings, throat slash. Not reinventing the wheel. Again more intense than graphic n gory.

Halloween 2 - Similar to part one but ups the intensity. The sawing off of the coroner's head with the broken glass was the most graphic scene in that film.

Lords of Salem - practically no gore whatsoever.

Spoiler Alert:

31 has all of the above methods of death but much more of it and way more blood spray than any prior Zombie film by far. There are repeated brutal stabbings, heads are bashed in multiple times, a guy's head is sawed off with a chainsaw very graphically, a woman is sawed open with a chainsaw, another head falls on a chainsaw and is sawed in half, etc. It's by far his bloodiest movie. There's not even a question. People are delusional. I think it's the shaky camera work that's throwing everyone off. Again, this wasn't even the uncut version.

Having said that I think Rob Zombie's reputation for being this crazy gore monger horror filmmaker is completely unwarranted. If you actually go back and watch his films they're not extremely gory at all compared to MANY other horror films. They're intense and brutal. Stabbing someone 20 times is brutal. It's not necessarily graphic.

[–] MartenBroadcloak 8 years ago

To me 'House' still comes off has his most goriest and mean-spirited movie. For example the scene where Otis skins the father's corpse and we get a close-up of the face afterwards or Jerry in Dr. Satan's lair with his brain exposed. etc. A lot of it seemed more prolonged than the violence in 31.

[–] tbickle84 8 years ago

Yeah but to me that wasn't really graphic. To me a movie like the original Dawn of the Dead is the true meaning of graphic. Actually seeing chunks of skin bitten off people, stomachs being torn open, etc.

What your describing is after math stuff. Yes, it's gory but I'm thinking more in terms of the actual inflicted violence.

[–] darthsitkur 8 years ago

I'm one of the people waiting for the director's cut but thanks for being on the same page as me, and to sorta correct you on your analysis, house of 1,000 corpses barely had any gore due to studio problems and losing 17-32 minutes of graphic footage (which I highly doubt), the devil's rejects DELIVERED on the gore and so did the remakes of Halloween 1 and 2, EL Superbeasto was super gory as well, and I haven't seen the lords of Salem but I have the book and it is EXTREMELY gory lol

[–] tbickle84 8 years ago

Yeah you can tell House was cut when you see how quick the cuts are.

I just watched Rejects again the other day. What did you find so gory about it? I feel like the Bounty Hunters slashing the woman's throat and the other woman getting hit by the truck were the most graphic. Everything else happens off camera or it's like a stabbing or a gunshot. Things you've seen countless times.

I think Halloween 2 was his most brutal up until now but I think 31 has the edge. Didn't see Superbeasto and I only saw LOS once. LOS is still my least favorite but trust me it has no gore that I can remember lol Zombie tried to go Polanlski and Ken Russell with LOS.

[–] darthsitkur 8 years ago

you gotta read the lords of Salem book, it DELIVERS on the gore, and the gore is actually on camera in devil's rejects, well, except for when Otis skins the guy's face and the corpses in the motel room getting *beep* up, the stabbings and gunshots were gruesome dude lol, and Otis got his hands nailed to the chair at the end and Charlie got an axe to the neck, remember?, and the old guy got his head bashed in

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] darthsitkur 8 years ago

Do you mean the book Nuxcapacitator?

[–] Laserseightoclockdayone 8 years ago

Dead Alive is gory. This was an exercise in being bloody but NOT gory. Unless you saw a different cut than I saw.

[–] tbickle84 8 years ago

I agree it's his "bloodiest" movie but like I said before, when you really think about it, RZ's movies are not really gory at all compared to movies like Dead Alive or Dawn of the Dead. They're violent. Big difference.

[–] Alex_de_Large_18 8 years ago

The violence in this movie had no effect on me at all. All his other movies felt much more violent and vicious. And they had more gore fx, too. The violence here mainly took place off screen or was totally ruined by the shaky cam. It was simply there but had not meaning.

[–] JJett131313 8 years ago

Alex, i agree w/ you 100%. i found H2 to be far more gory/brutal than just about anything in 31.

[–] StaunchWoman 8 years ago

A lot of blood on screen ≠ good special effects. The quality was seriously lacking, and the budget was not to blame.

We've met before, haven't we?