I definitely wouldn't go anywhere near calling it a masterpiece myself. I thought it was fine. Maybe even good, but not great. I didn't hate it either though. I think it could've been much better, that's for sure.
Seems to be the sort of schtick he’s falling into a bit. I think his direction took a BIG step here, but a lot of the writing still needs some work imo!
It definitely has stuff that I really enjoyed. The list of things I liked was just as big as the stuff I was still undecided on. Really, there were only two things I didn't like. I expected more but didn't dislike the movie by any means.
@@BAMTubeMovies I too expected more but I think they left it open for sequels and I would LOVE them to expand on satanist rituals and get fucking wild with it.. like doomsday armageddon shit with RAMPANT violence. Think like "Crossed" but maybe less rapey
I find Perkins kind of smug in interviews given the sheer laziness of this plot, and tbh the execution of the Longlegs character. My theater was *cackling* every time Nick Cage was on screen, the exception being the opening and I think it’s because his face is obscured. The horror just didn’t work for me - funny at best, cringe at worst. I actually felt secondhand embarrassment. The makeup was giving Mrs. Doubtfire, not Buffalo Bill. I’m personally offended on behalf of Silence of the Lambs for all the comparisons. I also always found Buffalo Bill’s depiction of queerness as problematic and this gives me the same feeling, especially given its inspiration of Perkins' father’s secret homosexuality. Same with the autism comparisons for the lead - if this is actually true in the story, the implications are troubling and not in the horror sense. She’s like that bc her brain is (semi?) controlled by the devil, what does that say about people with autism? And with Perkins’ mother aiding his father in keeping his sexuality secret, Longlegs and his “companion” suggest the devil in the basement is his father’s secret homosexuality, his mother wrapped into his evil as his companion to save her child from the horrible truth that would destroy the nuclear family unit. As I said, problematic. Which also brings up a bit of a plot hole - Lee’s family doesn’t fit the criteria of the killings bc her dad isn’t around/is potentially Longlegs. This really throws a wrench into things bc Longlegs was already doing this before, seven times before, so why break pattern? Another issue, who would commit the murders if there is no father to hypnotize (still unclear how exactly the father is affected by the doll) into committing the murders? In Lee’s case, Longlegs would have to commit the murders himself or at least threaten to in order to coerce Lee’s mom into becoming his “companion”, which doesn’t fit his profile or adhere to the satanic ritual, and begs the question why does Longlegs need the doll to hypnotize the fathers if he’s capable of getting inside and killing the family himself? I get why metaphorically, I don’t get why logically. And I just don’t buy or even understand in any way how Longlegs could be Lee’s father from a logic standpoint. It’s clear in film the mother’s never met Longlegs before the would-be murders. Bc Perkins has so explicitly said this is about his family, I can’t help but feel this gives weight to the idea that Longlegs is a manifestation of his father’s homosexuality/femininity. This becomes disturbing in terms of the filmmaker’s POV bc it links homosexuality with the destruction of the nuclear family unit and the literal devil. A choice. The script is a mess. Whole plot lines are just dropped, there’s almost no conflict and the ending was so predictable yet totally unsatisfying that I actually turned to my friend and said, that’s it?? That’s the end?? The crime thriller plot loses all its fun when the detective has a special power which makes all actual investigative work totally unnecessary. I felt about as psychic as she was w every predictable, frictionless beat. This aspect really worked against the story and imo the arbitrary 90s period setting (Bill Clinton’s framed photo should be top billed). Longlegs as a character also felt artificial in general (I had trouble believing he was a real person at all) and superficial to the plot, so it’s not surprising that Perkins said he was a character he didn’t know where to put and he just wound up in this movie. There’s very little integration of his character into the plot and I don’t think the devil needs a conduit for another conduit for another conduit. The satanic logic fell apart for me. Even the name Longlegs has no meaning according to Perkins, other than Perkins’ liking the way the word sounded. I feel this sort of arbitrary “I did that cause I liked it” approach belies many of the film’s choices, to the great detriment of the film. I think Perkins is right in saying he just took a bunch of things he liked - and then he stole them, but he didn’t really elevate or change them to a significant degree or bring them together in a satisfying way. It feels like a collage of Perkins’ favorite movie moments with the thinnest thread of a plot barely connecting them. The mental gymnastics I’ve seen critics and commentary channels go through trying to make sense of it all requires an almost full rewrite of the story. I’m all for films that leave us with things to ponder - for example, Skinamarink totally worked for me even if not an enjoyable viewing experience, but if a film can only be understood by making up backstories and adding plot that doesn’t exist, then the film did not do its job. For all of his disdain for Insidious, The Conjuring etc… Perkins straight stole whole scenes from franchises like that. The companion recalled The Nun almost exactly, there are scenes ripped right out of Hereditary or Talk to Me, the sci fi 90s elements made me think Stranger Things, the dolls reminded me of Annabelle or Megan (and countless other “haunted doll” movies), and every time Maika Monroe looks at her board, all I could think of was Alan Wake II. Ditto to the random flashes of snakes and sudden bursts of music - even though critics call it slow burn/psychological horror, cheap, unmotivated jump scares actually abound. I’m the niche audience this movie is aimed at, and this is a case of style over substance, imo. Lots of cool (if ripped) imagery, I love Maika & Nick Cage (even though they gave Maika almost nothing to work with in terms of character and Cage’s character is… a conundrum…), lots of attention to Satanic detail in terms of Easter eggs etc…, and a great marketing campaign (almost too great bc I think it totally misrepresented the film and the film seems shot to serve the trailer instead of the other way around). There are elements to enjoy and I could not wait to see this movie. But when the story is half baked and the character development isn’t there, it all feels as empty as those metallic balls that somehow hold the magic black smoke that is the devil. 😂 Despite its title, I don’t think this movie will have very long legs at all.
Amazing editing and cinematography. Terrible script. It started strong but as it became apparent this isn't actually a police procedural meets Occult horror, and is instead just a regular dumb horror movie... very disappointing... so much potential, if only they wrote a better script
How does Harker's boss, who has been investigating this case for a long time not mention or seem to even care that his own daughter has the birthday the killer always strikes on? Too many potholes that made me just stop caring
Yeah the more I thought about the script it fell into generic territory. They tried to cover a lot of it up with the flashy visuals, cinematography, Nic Cage, etc. But the ending sort of revealed what it was all along. I enjoyed it for the most part but I think too many people are giving it a pass because it's very arthouse-y, abstract, "elevated", whatever lol
movies today are so bad that people think this is a masterpiece. the writing was a mess. screenwriting today is a joke.
I definitely wouldn't go anywhere near calling it a masterpiece myself. I thought it was fine. Maybe even good, but not great. I didn't hate it either though. I think it could've been much better, that's for sure.
I’m sick of oz Perkins relying on satanism for bad writing.
Seems to be the sort of schtick he’s falling into a bit. I think his direction took a BIG step here, but a lot of the writing still needs some work imo!
loved the movie, love occultism being real through clues, love subtle intensity rising to a cliff hanger or total end
It definitely has stuff that I really enjoyed. The list of things I liked was just as big as the stuff I was still undecided on. Really, there were only two things I didn't like. I expected more but didn't dislike the movie by any means.
@@BAMTubeMovies I too expected more but I think they left it open for sequels and I would LOVE them to expand on satanist rituals and get fucking wild with it.. like doomsday armageddon shit with RAMPANT violence. Think like "Crossed" but maybe less rapey
Overrated in my opinion. It was fine, but nothing special!
At this point in time, I’d agree!
I find Perkins kind of smug in interviews given the sheer laziness of this plot, and tbh the execution of the Longlegs character. My theater was *cackling* every time Nick Cage was on screen, the exception being the opening and I think it’s because his face is obscured. The horror just didn’t work for me - funny at best, cringe at worst. I actually felt secondhand embarrassment. The makeup was giving Mrs. Doubtfire, not Buffalo Bill. I’m personally offended on behalf of Silence of the Lambs for all the comparisons. I also always found Buffalo Bill’s depiction of queerness as problematic and this gives me the same feeling, especially given its inspiration of Perkins' father’s secret homosexuality. Same with the autism comparisons for the lead - if this is actually true in the story, the implications are troubling and not in the horror sense. She’s like that bc her brain is (semi?) controlled by the devil, what does that say about people with autism? And with Perkins’ mother aiding his father in keeping his sexuality secret, Longlegs and his “companion” suggest the devil in the basement is his father’s secret homosexuality, his mother wrapped into his evil as his companion to save her child from the horrible truth that would destroy the nuclear family unit. As I said, problematic.
Which also brings up a bit of a plot hole - Lee’s family doesn’t fit the criteria of the killings bc her dad isn’t around/is potentially Longlegs. This really throws a wrench into things bc Longlegs was already doing this before, seven times before, so why break pattern? Another issue, who would commit the murders if there is no father to hypnotize (still unclear how exactly the father is affected by the doll) into committing the murders? In Lee’s case, Longlegs would have to commit the murders himself or at least threaten to in order to coerce Lee’s mom into becoming his “companion”, which doesn’t fit his profile or adhere to the satanic ritual, and begs the question why does Longlegs need the doll to hypnotize the fathers if he’s capable of getting inside and killing the family himself? I get why metaphorically, I don’t get why logically. And I just don’t buy or even understand in any way how Longlegs could be Lee’s father from a logic standpoint. It’s clear in film the mother’s never met Longlegs before the would-be murders. Bc Perkins has so explicitly said this is about his family, I can’t help but feel this gives weight to the idea that Longlegs is a manifestation of his father’s homosexuality/femininity. This becomes disturbing in terms of the filmmaker’s POV bc it links homosexuality with the destruction of the nuclear family unit and the literal devil. A choice.
The script is a mess. Whole plot lines are just dropped, there’s almost no conflict and the ending was so predictable yet totally unsatisfying that I actually turned to my friend and said, that’s it?? That’s the end??
The crime thriller plot loses all its fun when the detective has a special power which makes all actual investigative work totally unnecessary. I felt about as psychic as she was w every predictable, frictionless beat. This aspect really worked against the story and imo the arbitrary 90s period setting (Bill Clinton’s framed photo should be top billed).
Longlegs as a character also felt artificial in general (I had trouble believing he was a real person at all) and superficial to the plot, so it’s not surprising that Perkins said he was a character he didn’t know where to put and he just wound up in this movie. There’s very little integration of his character into the plot and I don’t think the devil needs a conduit for another conduit for another conduit. The satanic logic fell apart for me. Even the name Longlegs has no meaning according to Perkins, other than Perkins’ liking the way the word sounded. I feel this sort of arbitrary “I did that cause I liked it” approach belies many of the film’s choices, to the great detriment of the film.
I think Perkins is right in saying he just took a bunch of things he liked - and then he stole them, but he didn’t really elevate or change them to a significant degree or bring them together in a satisfying way. It feels like a collage of Perkins’ favorite movie moments with the thinnest thread of a plot barely connecting them. The mental gymnastics I’ve seen critics and commentary channels go through trying to make sense of it all requires an almost full rewrite of the story. I’m all for films that leave us with things to ponder - for example, Skinamarink totally worked for me even if not an enjoyable viewing experience, but if a film can only be understood by making up backstories and adding plot that doesn’t exist, then the film did not do its job. For all of his disdain for Insidious, The Conjuring etc… Perkins straight stole whole scenes from franchises like that. The companion recalled The Nun almost exactly, there are scenes ripped right out of Hereditary or Talk to Me, the sci fi 90s elements made me think Stranger Things, the dolls reminded me of Annabelle or Megan (and countless other “haunted doll” movies), and every time Maika Monroe looks at her board, all I could think of was Alan Wake II. Ditto to the random flashes of snakes and sudden bursts of music - even though critics call it slow burn/psychological horror, cheap, unmotivated jump scares actually abound.
I’m the niche audience this movie is aimed at, and this is a case of style over substance, imo. Lots of cool (if ripped) imagery, I love Maika & Nick Cage (even though they gave Maika almost nothing to work with in terms of character and Cage’s character is… a conundrum…), lots of attention to Satanic detail in terms of Easter eggs etc…, and a great marketing campaign (almost too great bc I think it totally misrepresented the film and the film seems shot to serve the trailer instead of the other way around). There are elements to enjoy and I could not wait to see this movie. But when the story is half baked and the character development isn’t there, it all feels as empty as those metallic balls that somehow hold the magic black smoke that is the devil. 😂
Despite its title, I don’t think this movie will have very long legs at all.
Amazing editing and cinematography. Terrible script. It started strong but as it became apparent this isn't actually a police procedural meets Occult horror, and is instead just a regular dumb horror movie... very disappointing... so much potential, if only they wrote a better script
How does Harker's boss, who has been investigating this case for a long time not mention or seem to even care that his own daughter has the birthday the killer always strikes on? Too many potholes that made me just stop caring
Yeah the more I thought about the script it fell into generic territory. They tried to cover a lot of it up with the flashy visuals, cinematography, Nic Cage, etc. But the ending sort of revealed what it was all along. I enjoyed it for the most part but I think too many people are giving it a pass because it's very arthouse-y, abstract, "elevated", whatever lol