Chad

Trevor

I have vague memories of buying this. If I did, have way too many places to look where I could have put it, probably still in the packaging. Ugh. Guess I’ll renew Shudder before this day.

Gobear

Don't forget Part II, also on Shudder, and they are crowdfunding Part III now.

Kurt D

Not participating in the challenge, but watched both of these over the last week or so (About 9 hours total!) and loved them. My love for Tom Atkins just grows, and who knew Chris Jericho and the singer for Slipknot would be such entertaining commentators?

Spiderbite

I enjoyed this and feel it was worth my time though not a ton of new information is brought to the table for the average horror movie fan who has done even the slightest bit of reading behind the movies.

The talking head choices are pretty good. You can never complain about having the actual writers, directors, and main actors comment on the movies they were involved in. It is also interesting to hear from those same people (the creators) what they thought of their peers' work.

What isn't so interesting are the few talking heads that are just magazine writers, second banana commentators, etc. that really don't bring any true history to their remarks ala VH-1 style. They just tend to either regurgitate the same tales you have heard multiple times, give their opinion and/or throw out a quick zinger. Oooo...aren't they witty!

Also, not many of the movies are surprising choices to discuss but that isn't really upsetting since the basis of this documentary is to discuss the biggest movies (box-office and cultural impact) of the time. So there aren't many revelations to be had here but it is still entertaining. Even though it is 4 hours, it moves at a quick pace which, as a positive, lets them cover as many movies as possible but, as a negative, feels like so many get such a brief mention and just as you are getting to some meat, it is time to discuss the next movie.

But that makes me excited to see Part II which I also plan to watch before the month is over (I subscribed to Shudder for both of these plus a few others for the Challenge). So I look forward to getting hopefully a little more obscure stuff in the next part (and in the now announced Part III) plus a few more factoids I may not have heard.

My rating: **** out of *****

ps. Can we just go ahead and move Tom Atkins to Betty White's place as a national treasure that must be protected at all costs? The guy is just utterly charming.

pps. What the fuck is up with Shudder not having surround sound for their app? And supposedly the best their stuff streams at is 720p. What year is this?

exharrison

Joe Dante gave out a number of opinions about the works that were similar or copying his. But he went ahead and said it isn't fair for him to criticize knock-offs of his work considering his first movie was a knock-off.
And yes, Tom Atkins was probably the most enjoyable and likable of the bunch.

Even though, the two already on Shudder are long, I've used them over the last week or so to watch 15-20 minutes at a time. Nice to break up either the movies or work. I will say I did enjoy the first more though.

Spiderbite

I am actually halfway through Part II. I have been breaking them into one hour segments and watching them both that way. So far I kinda like Part II a little more but probably because a lot of the movies aren't quite as well known as the ones focused on in the first part.

Gobear

The 80s spanned my late teens to my late 20s so this talking heads retrospective doc really hits my nostalgia nerve. I wish they had talked about some of the more obscure movies from that decade instead of rehashing the franchises and the movies we all know like the Friday the 13th series and the Elm Street films.

Toddarino

I still want to punch that podcast guy in the throat

exharrison

Which one are you calling the podcast guy? James?

Toddarino

I can’t remember his name. I’m going to watch this tomorrow, but I’ve seen it before. He was in both. It’s the dude with the game show host voice. I have to mute when he pops up.

Trevor

I enjoyed the first one. Fast forwarded the second one to the end just to see my name.

exharrison

You are probably talking about James Janisse. I was unfamiliar with him before this. You could possibly be talking about Cecil (ballcap and beard). I knew of him from his youtube channel.

Toddarino

Yep it’s that James guy. Youtuber not podcast. My mistake.

exharrison

I assumed you were right about being a podcaster since I really don't know what his claim to importance is. I guess I just don't spend enough time on all the right social media content sources these days. I'm not too broken up about it

Spiderbite

Finished Part II this morning. I enjoyed it as much, if not a little more, than the first one. Had a few more obscure movies covered than the first part. Out of both parts, there are still several I have still not seen but only one or two that I had actually never even heard of or couldn't remember. So if you are a major horror fan, these documentaries aren't going to bring very many revelations for you or introduce many new movies you haven't heard of. Granted that was not the purpose of these documentaries so you can't really fault them for that. Just giving a bit of info.

But as I stated before, it is nice to hear from a lot of the creative voices behind these movies. But some of the talking heads are annoying and others make you scratch your head wondering why they are even featured.

I could definitely do without the above mentioned James Janisee. His voice is like nails on a chalkboard and he comes across immediately as one of those bad comedy commenters on those VH-1 shows. Another that I couldn't find his name in the credits on IMDB was a white, pasty dude with dead, black eyes and a blank expression on his face every time as he described stuff but also had a whiny voice like Janisee. <shudder>

Then there is the stuff of nightmares like Diana Prince ("Darcy The Mail Girl") and Geretta Geretta. They are both hard to look at and difficult to listen to. Make a movie starring them both and it will be the scariest thing you see that year.

Then you have the few people like Andre Gower and Katie Featherston who made one known horror film and suddenly they are horror experts, I guess? Their comments on other movies bring nothing to the table and I found myself groaning every time they were featured.

Then you have the surprising, unexpected commenters that were actually interesting and entertaining. But all of the above is likely affected greatly by personal taste. One person you may love may be the next viewer's dread.

Anyway, enjoyed both parts and look forward to the upcoming Part III.

My rating for Part II was same as Part I: **** out of *****

exharrison

I was also a little surprised to see Andre Gower. My guess is they got him because (1) He was in a beloved horror movie of the era, (2) He made a doc about said movie so he can be a documentarian added to the mix, and (3) He might have been reasonably cheap compared to some other actors. Not to mention he's still alive which can't be said for all of them unfortunately.
But I also haven't seen his doc, so maybe he was convincing in his knowledge of the genre and era in the doc.

Darkgod

Why did no one clean off Larry Cohen 's shirt.

WillieMLF

Have about an hour and twenty minutes left on this one. It’s moving along nicely. I’m trying to figure out if I’m going to get the last installment or just quit at having the first two. How many movies does this count as?

Spiderbite

Chad said each one counts as 3.

rbrown498

Man, but that was a slog. Just when I'd find myself getting bored, someone would pop up with a moderately interesting observation, and it would draw me back in again for a bit. I have to agree with Gobear about branching out a bit, especially when they're showing posters for films that rarely get talked about alongside the ones that they're about to discuss. I guess that's why they did a follow-up.

I was pretty amazed at how good Caroline Williams looks these days; she may look better now than she did in her brief heyday. I don't understand the love for Darcy the Mail Girl, or really for Joe Bob Briggs, for that matter, and they look like they both use the same plastic surgeon. But I applaud them for riding their public personas as long as they have; I'd probably do exactly the same thing (except without the facial injections).

Like many of you, I developed an almost instant dislike for James A. Janisse. It's not that what he said was objectionable; it was his delivery. He sounded just like, as Toddarino described, a game show host. That's the exact way I described him in my mini-review in my list post, and I wrote it before reading any of the comments here.

Overall, I can't say that I necessary enjoyed the documentary, but it wasn't awful, either. I would think that it's best for putting on in the background as you do household chores, glancing up only when you hear something that might turn out to interest you. But then again, the '80s are my next-to-least favorite decade for horror; I think that once sequelitis took hold but good around '85 or so, the rest of the decade was pretty much a wasteland for horror (with a few notable exceptions).

My subset film rankings for the Challenge thus far:

1. Battle Royale
2. Carrie (1976)
3. Curse of the Demon
4. Slither
5. Witchfinder General
6. A Bay of Blood / The Spiral Staircase (averaged together)
7. Silent Madness
8. Slumber Party Massacre II (based purely on its out-of-left-field aesthetic)
9. In Search of Darkness
10. Road Games
11. Hello Mary Lou: Prom Night II
12. Grave Robbers (Ladrones de Tumbas)
13. The Severed Arm
14. The Mortuary Collection
15. Cutting Class

Undeadcow

I love 80s horror movies but found myself annoyed with In Search of Darkness - it's machine gun approach too fleetingly glossed over too many films giving little of interest from random seeming podcasters and youtubers. There was occasional gold with people like Barabara Crampton (a national treasure), Joe Dante, Caroline Williams, Tom Atkins, or even Slipknot guy Corey Taylor giving insightful or first hand accounts but otherwise it was just fans and celebrities quickly gushing over the most immediate elements of commonly known films from the era. We all know Gremlins is awesome or that it was cool to see Jason in Times Square; but aside from a pep rally kind of enthusiasm for horror there's little to sit through 4 hours for and it could have used a ton of editing. The people who made In Search of Darkness obviously love horror movies so I feel bad not liking their aimless shallow film more.

clckworang

Undeadcow pretty much said what I felt about the movie. I know I already posted my views on it when it was first announced as a subset. The movie choices were extremely obvious. The discussion was as shallow as a kiddie pool, and so little time is devoted to each film that it isn't like you can learn too much anyway. In my previous post, I also compared it to the old Chris Farley Show sketch on SNL. It's pretty just remembrances of things cool. A big missed opportunity to me.

brainee

Is Shudder good about keeping track of where you leave off, even if you watch other things at the same time? I didn't think I was even going to bother with this because of the daunting running time and superficial substance. But as mentioned, it's easy "background" viewing. And if Shudder will let me keep picking up where I leave of, I can see myself making my way through this over the next week or so.

Undeadcow

I watched in a few installments on my television then on my android then television again and Shudder kept track with me; but I did not watch anything in between.