MovieChat Forums > mel2000 > Replies
mel2000's Replies
The subtitle file doesn't explain why Sara went back to retrieve the journal. It only makes a reference to Sara being "ready to face her demons." According to the text, the journal was useful for revealing that the statue was somewhere in the house. Also not sure why Sara would know anything about the journal or statue in the first place.
<blockquote>
00:10:36,454 --> 00:10:40,457
According to Dr. Vannacutt's journal,
the statue is here in Los Angeles...
00:10:40,625 --> 00:10:42,876
...inside the hill house.
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
00:10:49,008 --> 00:10:52,427
Sara would never go back to that house,
she was terrified of it.
00:10:55,556 --> 00:10:59,184
HAMMER: You're right.
Sara was afraid of the house.
00:10:59,352 --> 00:11:01,311
But she was ready to face her demons.
</blockquote>
<blockquote>IF the ghosts in the house want the evil to stop, why are they killing everybody they come across?</blockquote>The main plot is creaky. I find it odd that everyone in the house except Paul and Ariel were there to remove the statue from the house. So there would be no reason for the ghosts to discourage the others from removing the statue.
Dr. Vannacutt killed professor Hammer. He was the only ghost who killed a good guy. Bad guy Desmond killed Richard, the professor's assistant. The other two good guys survived.
<blockquote>And why, if the ghosts know the statue makes him evil, do they all crowd Vannacutt in the end to make him suffer since it's not his fault but the statue's?</blockquote>That's an odd scene. But all the ghosts turned into dust after surrounding Dr. Vannacutt. Not even sure if they killed him.
<blockquote>Don't know why there's confusion? The 1959 film didn't have a plot of a doctor...</blockquote>But who in their right mind would refer to the 1999 version as a classic?
<blockquote>If you're looking for intellectual depth and a submersive plot then you really shouldn't be watching B horror movies anyway.</blockquote>
Huh? All the best B horror movies have a submersive plot that keeps the viewer involved. Night of the Living Dead, REC, Dawn of the Dead, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Blair Witch Project, Paranormal Activity, Saw etc.
<blockquote>As for the lesbian scene... Question is, is there a reason not to include it?</blockquote>
That scene lasted a little over 3 minutes. That's a long time for a movie to waste.
<blockquote>Its not like the film suddenly got worse from that scene.</blockquote>
Why make a bad movie longer than it needs to be?
<blockquote>No, I don't really remember what she said to Ariel.</blockquote>
<blockquote>
00:22:17,210 --> 00:22:19,587
[Harue] You gonna leave without giving me a goodbye kiss?
</blockquote>
<blockquote>has anyone got the scene on video? ...because damn. lesbians are needed.
</blockquote>The lesbian scene starts at about 00:30:00. You can view the movie online at https://filmboards.com/board/10827782
<blockquote>He showed it to studio executives and they said it was fine--but get a few nude scenes in there!</blockquote>The lesbian scene was so unnecessary, I suspect it was added after the movie was wrapped.
<blockquote>The wife and the doctor were the villains</blockquote>They certainly weren't the only villains, otherwise the victims would never have been lured to the house in the first place.
<blockquote>Psychological problems due to him being ugly and unloved.</blockquote>Wouldn't his unusual looks make him easily memorable wherever he went? I can't imagine how he could get away with carrying out murders with few or no witnesses.
He could have completed his documentary without killing or even needing the analyst. Everything we learned about the documentary could have been told from his own mouth.
There's a lot of personal stuff people do that doesn't get regularly depicted on film. Thank goodness.
Thank you for your reply.
<blockquote>it supports his thesis that the murders of the Fact or Fiction hosts did nothing <b>but allow everyone around them to profit and expand their careers with it</b>. And David is exploiting that with the documentary that <b>he plans to release to the public</b>.</blockquote>
So David plans to it turn himself in for the crimes he committed in order to expose profit motives?
<blockquote>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQAqgUKgrkQ</blockquote>
Boyce has a strong victim mentality. He still seems irritated that Australians weren't as angry at the US about CIA policy as he was. And he still seems to think he should have been running CIA policy on Australia. Dude got off easy with 25 years considering that he escaped for 2 years and robbed several banks while out.
He also still doesn't get that Australia itself was in cahoots with the CIA with kicking out Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. He had lots of enemies in Australia. If he weren't so arrogant and angry he would realize that.
In 1978 Dawn of the Dead the main actress calls the character Steven by his real first name, David (David Emge).
https://www.moviemistakes.com/film328/page2
I'm pretty sure you were one of those who was cooking or doing the laundry while you watched <i>Head Count</i> and missed a lot of revealing clues that went by. This is a movie that requires your undivided attention to get the most out of it.
00:24:15 - Who did Evan say "[good] Morning" to as he walked out of the desert party house?
00:29:45 - Who was the 1st person of the group the Hisje duplicated?
00:35:00 - Who made Zoe jump off the cliff?
If you can't answer those strategically memorable questions, you weren't paying attention.
<blockquote>They're two good-looking guys... but I don't see it as anything beyond friendship.</blockquote>
How many men shave the back of their male friends?
How many men sleep on the floor next to another man's bed when there is other household space available?
How many men invite their male friends on a date with them?
How many men like to hug and spend as much time around each other as much as those guys did?
<blockquote>they only needed humans to live a specific amount of time to raise thier young.</blockquote>I don't think anything in that vivarium lived for a long time compared to humans, if that rapidly aging real estate agent is an example.
<blockquote>The significance of all these characters killing themselves is the movie telling us that <b>they had an active role in abandoning the old man</b></blockquote>
No one wanted to abandon the man. Just the opposite. The movie is intriguing and atmospheric, but in the end it is just punishment porn.