joshreluctant
Well-known member
Re: Retribution, Full (FINALLY!)
[quote author=Jim Brennan link=board=Offtopic;num=1099932448;start=15#19 date=11/09/04 at 10:14:09]Gore doesn't mean violence. To me it's more violent when implied because no visual can truly capture the horror of the human imagination (especially on a low budget). It's more about mood, acting, and editing than buckets of blood. Not that gore doesn't have it's time and place as well...[/quote]
haha, I know this is going to turn into a huge discussion, but I love discussions (especially about movies
)
It's not that I don't feel implied violence in more violent. Because Psycho is, in ways, scarier than Dead Alive. Dead Alive had more of a comic gore feeling to it. The gore was fun, excellent fun to just sit and watch people get torn apart, zombies, the Lawnmower scene. But I feel that the horror genre is a mixture of scares and gore. You aren't horrified by Jason in the woods, that's more of a thriller trait. The implied stalking is terrifying with a good imagination. But the gore leaves nothing to the imagination, and it relieves you of the terror. Whereas our movie is a violent action movie. I know it's 4 minutes long, haha, but we went for an action packed opening, very violent, very fun. Whereas most people have said the second half, with it's brooding music (compared to the hard pack of a KMFDM song for the intro), slow performances, and IMPLIED violence, was much better, and put a better chill through them. When we re-do it, with all the additional scenes, (we're also reshooting what you see today), we're going to work more of the violence of the first half (much better, from our make up effects guy), and more implied violence, and hopefully mix them enough so that it leaves the audience with a great feeling of terror, hype, sorrow, and some decent thrills as well.
Josh
[quote author=Jim Brennan link=board=Offtopic;num=1099932448;start=15#19 date=11/09/04 at 10:14:09]Gore doesn't mean violence. To me it's more violent when implied because no visual can truly capture the horror of the human imagination (especially on a low budget). It's more about mood, acting, and editing than buckets of blood. Not that gore doesn't have it's time and place as well...[/quote]
haha, I know this is going to turn into a huge discussion, but I love discussions (especially about movies
)It's not that I don't feel implied violence in more violent. Because Psycho is, in ways, scarier than Dead Alive. Dead Alive had more of a comic gore feeling to it. The gore was fun, excellent fun to just sit and watch people get torn apart, zombies, the Lawnmower scene. But I feel that the horror genre is a mixture of scares and gore. You aren't horrified by Jason in the woods, that's more of a thriller trait. The implied stalking is terrifying with a good imagination. But the gore leaves nothing to the imagination, and it relieves you of the terror. Whereas our movie is a violent action movie. I know it's 4 minutes long, haha, but we went for an action packed opening, very violent, very fun. Whereas most people have said the second half, with it's brooding music (compared to the hard pack of a KMFDM song for the intro), slow performances, and IMPLIED violence, was much better, and put a better chill through them. When we re-do it, with all the additional scenes, (we're also reshooting what you see today), we're going to work more of the violence of the first half (much better, from our make up effects guy), and more implied violence, and hopefully mix them enough so that it leaves the audience with a great feeling of terror, hype, sorrow, and some decent thrills as well.
Josh