list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Re-Animator on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Re_Animator/28245/default.aspx Title: Re-Animator
Year: 1985
Director: Stuart Gordon
Plot: Herbert West (Jeffrey Combs) is a brilliant medical student who has perfected a green-glowing serum for regenerating life into dead things -- or even parts of dead things. But a corrupt superior, Dr. Carl Hill (David Gale), assumes control of West's experiments and winds up, by ghastly necessity, using the stuff on his own severed head and body. West and in-over-his-head co-worker Dan Cain (Bruce Abbott) struggle to control the now out-of-control effects of the serum, but the bone-saws and zombies complicate their plans. ~ Buzz McClain, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 12
Number of Lists: 34
Number of blog posts: 4
Number of discussion threads: 8
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:27:29 GMTRe-Animator1985Stuart GordonHerbert West (<a href="/players/P____14373/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jeffrey Combs</a>) is a brilliant medical student who has perfected a green-glowing serum for regenerating life into dead things -- or even <i>parts</i> of dead things. But a corrupt superior, Dr. Carl Hill (<a href="/players/P____25565/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>David Gale</a>), assumes control of West's experiments and winds up, by ghastly necessity, using the stuff on his own severed head and body. West and in-over-his-head co-worker Dan Cain (<a href="/players/P_______68/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bruce Abbott</a>) struggle to control the now out-of-control effects of the serum, but the bone-saws and zombies complicate their plans. ~ Buzz McClain, All Movie Guide12Tag Target (>10)34483http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/u41783lx9g2.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Re_Animator/28245/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/rik_tod/archive/2008/9/10/34966.aspx Post By: rik_tod
Post To: The Cinema 4 Pylon: SpOutpost
Post Date: 9/10/2008 2:04:56 AM
Body: Director: Shawn KuUS, 22 minutes, colorCinema 4 Rating: 5Despite a title sure to be at least partially tempting to any horror nut, Pretty Dead Girl: A Musical Necromance turns out to be rather tame. And if you could get the subject of necrophilia past the initial tsk-tsking of your grandma, there is a good chance that she would end up at film’s end thinking the movie was rather sad and sweet, and would hardly take offense at all to what is being suggested by its potentially creepy premise.I first saw Pretty Dead Girl on some cable network sometime about a year ago. I am not sure if it was Sundance or IFC, but honestly, I mix those channels up so much that I am never able to check out any of their shows regularly. Of course, most of the shows I have seen on there are of the variety about which I don’t give a rat’s ass, except for the ones done by Henry Rollins and Jon Favreau, but honestly, even thinking really hard, I can’t remember which one of the channels, Sundance or IFC, either show was actually on. I keep wanting to check out Live from Abbey Road – which is also on one of them -- but every time I flick over to it because someone I like – Muse, for instance – is on there, I end up having to sit through someone deplorable, like Josh Groban, Big and Rich or some Idol failure, to get to the good stuff, all of which seems to be interspersed with the horrendous. Can’t they just concentrate on one artist for a show? And one of these channels shows a bunch of '70s horror flicks on Friday nights -- all of which I already own, but it's nice to have them at one's fingertips anyway -- and one of them shows a lot of Japanese samurai and gangster films from the ‘50s and ‘60s, so they have that going for them. Whichever channel they are.What does this have to do with Pretty Dead Girl? Well, nothing at all, but -– Hey! Maybe I saw this on one of the Showtime networks instead? All I know is that I had Pretty Dead Girl on my DVR queue for a good long while, meaning to show it to Jen, who has some measured interest in musical films, and musical theatre in general. I watched it and enjoyed it, whatever channel it was on, though I wasn’t blown away it by it. This possibly had something to do with the musical episode from Buffy, titled Once More With Feeling, and how it seems, in my head at least, that any attempt to music up the horror or sci-fi genres should actually run through Mr. Whedon first. (Oh, if only Firefly had made it to that style of episode…) We are now in an age where, every time one turns around, it seems that another classic horror or science fiction film is being adapted into a musical (or opera – big difference there…) onstage. (Plan 9 from Outer Space, The Evil Dead, Carrie, Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Fly, etc.) Or, at least the notion gets raised that such-and-such (say, Chainsaw) would make a swell musical. I don’t know why things are trending this way – perhaps because the horror genre itself has gotten more and more trapped in its current torture porn rut – but outside of an almost rubbernecking interest I have towards these things, since I like both musicals and horror films, I actually start to despise the gimmick after a short while. And then it affects my attitude when confronted with mildly ambitious little films like Pretty Dead Girl.It’s not a fair comparison, though, because Pretty Dead Girl is not really in the horror genre; it merely teases the viewer with promises of sick glory via its title. Honestly, once I realized it was a musical, I started to imagine a remake of Return of the Living Dead 3 with that hot little zombie chick played to pierced goth glory by a smokin' Mindy Clarke. Now, that would be highly interesting (and also make RotLD3 a much better overall film.) Pretty Dead Girl doesn't even get near such possibilities, centering itself on all-out romantic tragedy instead. All told, it is no more offensive than any number of other Romeo and Juliet-style stories, where suicide is playfully dangled in the air due to the hopelessness of the romance. The title, though, implies so much more beyond a simple desperate love affair that it really is disappointing to see that all told, Pretty Dead Girl is nothing more than magic potion fluff, with a bottle of poison bringing on the appearance of suicide, but only if every single drop is gulped down the gullet (hence the magic part). Otherwise, it becomes a full-on suicide. That this storyline springs forth from the actions of a morgue techie (with a clearly misguided missile) who cavorts and dances about (always in a G-rated way) with the bodies of deceased hotties does make it seem potentially horrific at first, and one almost can’t wait for the film to go all Re-Animator on us and suddenly we shall find torrents of blood gushing from the stumps from where the limbs of unsuspecting doctors have been ripped, and there shall then commence a rising bout of rampant cannibalism in the halls of the hospital, syringes stuck through eyeballs of screaming nurses, zombie fetuses that devour their mothers from the inside out, and, perhaps worst of all, an Alaskan governor will then get dangerously close to the White House. And then only one of those things happens… and it’s not even in the movie.Unlike most of the examples listed two paragraphs above, the musical part in Pretty Dead Girl is not the gimmick. Instead, it is the false trappings of horror that are the actual gimmick, and it almost seems like a gimmick which has only been employed to get people to watch the film who are ultimately going to be disappointed once the film doesn’t follow through on its sick promise. It certainly tricked me into watching it the first time. And instead of where I thought it was going, I got a nice – just nice – little musical instead, with a couple of catchy tunes (I have had that “I have waited more than the better of my life” melody ear-worming me for the past couple of weeks since I started watching the film again), a lot of leggy dames hoofin’ it in a dream sequence, a trio of well-turned (and well cast) performances in the main roles and… well, that’s about it. It doesn’t go beyond that for me. It’s good, it's pleasant, and then I forget about it.When I first saved it on my DVR to show Jen, I never followed through. A couple of months later, as it sat there unwatched, I finally deleted it after convincing myself that she really wouldn’t think that much of it. And then I forgot about it until I received the Shorts! Volume 3 collection from Spout Mavens. Now, with DVD in hand, I have once more sidled up to the “should I show it to her?” stage, and already I am convincing myself to the negative impulse again of not even showing it to her. The problem here is one of too much familiarity with the genre. The more experience or expertise one has in a certain genre, the more lesser items in that genre start to give way almost immediately to feelings of ennui. At least, that’s the way it normally works. I know some people that are horror nuts – some even on this very website -- who unabashedly adore every single horror movie that comes out, practically carving little gory hearts with dripping arrows through them into the top of their computer desk while once more giving five stars to something like Saw IV. Sure, some are better than others, but still… horror is great! Isn’t it? Aren’t all horror movies, no matter how bad, instantly awesome and cool, just because they are horror movies? Well, no. Some just blankly suck outright, and some are just downright atrocious from every conceivable angle. The same with every genre.As I have said before, at least 75 percent of everything is garbage, no matter what form of media, no matter how much there is, and into this giant slice of pie, I heap mounds of the merely average. There is another slice of percentage, a chunk that perhaps appears as a normal slice of that pie, which accounts for the merely good. And finally, there is left a much thinner slice, the remainder, that denotes that which exists in the "very good to great" range. The continued and legendary greatness of certain entries in any genre make it increasingly harder, over time, to enjoy that category’s far more noxious efforts. It is towards a target sublime to which artists, even popular artists, should aim their talents. Back to the point, because my girlfriend has a good deal of experience, and therefore opinion, regarding the musical genre, and is well versed in those films which serve as the pinnacles of the form, I know instinctively that it is going to take far more to impress her in this genre than it would, say, me.And I already think that Pretty Dead Girl is merely a good short musical film. Not fantastic, not knock your socks off, but just good. And so, for someone with the more than average eye for musicals in general, having seen the excellence which can be achieved in the genre, watching this is like seeing a dance sequence pop up in Ally McBeal. Sure, the actors might be giving it their all, but they are miles from being in the real thing. And, further discounting it for the gimmick factor of its fake fantasy horror trappings, Pretty Dead Girl can seem pretty dead from the beginning. And, if not dead, then just merely playing possum. And nicely at that.And, speaking for myself, though I liked it well enough, nice is not what most people who would be intrigued by such a title as Pretty Dead Girl are going to be expecting.
]]>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:04:56 GMTrik_todThe Cinema 4 Pylon: SpOutpost9/10/2008 2:04:56 AMDirector: Shawn KuUS, 22 minutes, colorCinema 4 Rating: 5Despite a title sure to be at least partially tempting to any horror nut, Pretty Dead Girl: A Musical Necromance turns out to be rather tame. And if you could get the subject of necrophilia past the initial tsk-tsking of your grandma, there is a good chance that she would end up at film&rsquo;s end thinking the movie was rather sad and sweet, and would hardly take offense at all to what is being suggested by its potentially creepy premise.I first saw Pretty Dead Girl on some cable network sometime about a year ago. I am not sure if it was Sundance or IFC, but honestly, I mix those channels up so much that I am never able to check out any of their shows regularly. Of course, most of the shows I have seen on there are of the variety about which I don&rsquo;t give a rat&rsquo;s ass, except for the ones done by Henry Rollins and Jon Favreau, but honestly, even thinking really hard, I can&rsquo;t remember which one of the channels, Sundance or IFC, either show was actually on. I keep wanting to check out Live from Abbey Road &ndash; which is also on one of them -- but every time I flick over to it because someone I like &ndash; Muse, for instance &ndash; is on there, I end up having to sit through someone deplorable, like Josh Groban, Big and Rich or some Idol failure, to get to the good stuff, all of which seems to be interspersed with the horrendous. Can&rsquo;t they just concentrate on one artist for a show? And one of these channels shows a bunch of '70s horror flicks on Friday nights -- all of which I already own, but it's nice to have them at one's fingertips anyway -- and one of them shows a lot of Japanese samurai and gangster films from the &lsquo;50s and &lsquo;60s, so they have that going for them. Whichever channel they are.What does this have to do with Pretty Dead Girl? Well, nothing at all, but -&ndash; Hey! Maybe I saw this on one of the Showtime networks instead? All I know is that I had Pretty Dead Girl on my DVR queue for a good long while, meaning to show it to Jen, who has some measured interest in musical films, and musical theatre in general. I watched it and enjoyed it, whatever channel it was on, though I wasn&rsquo;t blown away it by it. This possibly had something to do with the musical episode from Buffy, titled Once More With Feeling, and how it seems, in my head at least, that any attempt to music up the horror or sci-fi genres should actually run through Mr. Whedon first. (Oh, if only Firefly had made it to that style of episode&hellip;) We are now in an age where, every time one turns around, it seems that another classic horror or science fiction film is being adapted into a musical (or opera &ndash; big difference there&hellip;) onstage. (Plan 9 from Outer Space, The Evil Dead, Carrie, Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Fly, etc.) Or, at least the notion gets raised that such-and-such (say, Chainsaw) would make a swell musical. I don&rsquo;t know why things are trending this way &ndash; perhaps because the horror genre itself has gotten more and more trapped in its current torture porn rut &ndash; but outside of an almost rubbernecking interest I have towards these things, since I like both musicals and horror films, I actually start to despise the gimmick after a short while. And then it affects my attitude when confronted with mildly ambitious little films like Pretty Dead Girl.It&rsquo;s not a fair comparison, though, because Pretty Dead Girl is not really in the horror genre; it merely teases the viewer with promises of sick glory via its title. Honestly, once I realized it was a musical, I started to imagine a remake of Return of the Living Dead 3 with that hot little zombie chick played to pierced goth glory by a smokin' Mindy Clarke. Now, that would be highly interesting (and also make RotLD3 a much better overall film.) Pretty Dead Girl doesn't even get near such possibilities, centering itself on all-out romantic tragedy instead. All told, it is no more offensive than any number of other Romeo and Juliet-style stories, where suicide is playfully dangled in the air due to the hopelessness of the romance. The title, though, implies so much more beyond a simple desperate love affair that it really is disappointing to see that all told, Pretty Dead Girl is nothing more than magic potion fluff, with a bottle of poison bringing on the appearance of suicide, but only if every single drop is gulped down the gullet (hence the magic part). Otherwise, it becomes a full-on suicide. That this storyline springs forth from the actions of a morgue techie (with a clearly misguided missile) who cavorts and dances about (always in a G-rated way) with the bodies of deceased hotties does make it seem potentially horrific at first, and one almost can&rsquo;t wait for the film to go all Re-Animator on us and suddenly we shall find torrents of blood gushing from the stumps from where the limbs of unsuspecting doctors have been ripped, and there shall then commence a rising bout of rampant cannibalism in the halls of the hospital, syringes stuck through eyeballs of screaming nurses, zombie fetuses that devour their mothers from the inside out, and, perhaps worst of all, an Alaskan governor will then get dangerously close to the White House. And then only one of those things happens&hellip; and it&rsquo;s not even in the movie.Unlike most of the examples listed two paragraphs above, the musical part in Pretty Dead Girl is not the gimmick. Instead, it is the false trappings of horror that are the actual gimmick, and it almost seems like a gimmick which has only been employed to get people to watch the film who are ultimately going to be disappointed once the film doesn&rsquo;t follow through on its sick promise. It certainly tricked me into watching it the first time. And instead of where I thought it was going, I got a nice &ndash; just nice &ndash; little musical instead, with a couple of catchy tunes (I have had that &ldquo;I have waited more than the better of my life&rdquo; melody ear-worming me for the past couple of weeks since I started watching the film again), a lot of leggy dames hoofin&rsquo; it in a dream sequence, a trio of well-turned (and well cast) performances in the main roles and&hellip; well, that&rsquo;s about it. It doesn&rsquo;t go beyond that for me. It&rsquo;s good, it's pleasant, and then I forget about it.When I first saved it on my DVR to show Jen, I never followed through. A couple of months later, as it sat there unwatched, I finally deleted it after convincing myself that she really wouldn&rsquo;t think that much of it. And then I forgot about it until I received the Shorts! Volume 3 collection from Spout Mavens. Now, with DVD in hand, I have once more sidled up to the &ldquo;should I show it to her?&rdquo; stage, and already I am convincing myself to the negative impulse again of not even showing it to her. The problem here is one of too much familiarity with the genre. The more experience or expertise one has in a certain genre, the more lesser items in that genre start to give way almost immediately to feelings of ennui. At least, that&rsquo;s the way it normally works. I know some people that are horror nuts &ndash; some even on this very website -- who unabashedly adore every single horror movie that comes out, practically carving little gory hearts with dripping arrows through them into the top of their computer desk while once more giving five stars to something like Saw IV. Sure, some are better than others, but still&hellip; horror is great! Isn&rsquo;t it? Aren&rsquo;t all horror movies, no matter how bad, instantly awesome and cool, just because they are horror movies? Well, no. Some just blankly suck outright, and some are just downright atrocious from every conceivable angle. The same with every genre.As I have said before, at least 75 percent of everything is garbage, no matter what form of media, no matter how much there is, and into this giant slice of pie, I heap mounds of the merely average. There is another slice of percentage, a chunk that perhaps appears as a normal slice of that pie, which accounts for the merely good. And finally, there is left a much thinner slice, the remainder, that denotes that which exists in the "very good to great" range. The continued and legendary greatness of certain entries in any genre make it increasingly harder, over time, to enjoy that category&rsquo;s far more noxious efforts. It is towards a target sublime to which artists, even popular artists, should aim their talents. Back to the point, because my girlfriend has a good deal of experience, and therefore opinion, regarding the musical genre, and is well versed in those films which serve as the pinnacles of the form, I know instinctively that it is going to take far more to impress her in this genre than it would, say, me.And I already think that Pretty Dead Girl is merely a good short musical film. Not fantastic, not knock your socks off, but just good. And so, for someone with the more than average eye for musicals in general, having seen the excellence which can be achieved in the genre, watching this is like seeing a dance sequence pop up in Ally McBeal. Sure, the actors might be giving it their all, but they are miles from being in the real thing. And, further discounting it for the gimmick factor of its fake fantasy horror trappings, Pretty Dead Girl can seem pretty dead from the beginning. And, if not dead, then just merely playing possum. And nicely at that.And, speaking for myself, though I liked it well enough, nice is not what most people who would be intrigued by such a title as Pretty Dead Girl are going to be expecting. http://www.spout.com/groups/Zombie_Obsession/Re_Zombie_Critters/329/25595/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: Zombie Obsession
Post Date: 2/26/2008 12:31:12 AM
Body: You forgot to mention the zombie-cat from Pet Sematary . At the time this movie came out, my Mom had a big, fat, grey cat named 'Smokey' who was absolutely identical to the one in the movie... Pretty creepy... But you MUST check out the 'zombie-horses' (!) in Amando DeOssorio's Return of the Evil Dead aka Return of the Blind Dead aka El Ataque De Los Muertos Sin Ojos ... Those things are pretty freaking cool!
]]>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 05:31:12 GMTDr_GorZombie Obsession2/26/2008 12:31:12 AM You forgot to mention the zombie-cat from Pet Sematary . At the time this movie came out, my Mom had a big, fat, grey cat named &#39;Smokey&#39; who was absolutely identical to the one in the movie... Pretty creepy... But you MUST check out the &#39;zombie-horses&#39; (!) in Amando DeOssorio&#39;s Return of the Evil Dead aka Return of the Blind Dead aka El Ataque De Los Muertos Sin Ojos ... Those things are pretty freaking cool! http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Top_31_Horror_films_of_the_past_31_years_on_The/222/25045/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Puhnner
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 2/12/2008 2:22:34 PM
Body: Revised List of 31 from 76 through07Mommie Dearest and Red Dawn co-winners of No. 1and wished I could have included:1988 Blood Orgy of the Leather Girls ( have not seen it, but the title is terrific and I cannot find it here ) 1976 Man on the Roof1976 The Sentinel1977 Suspiria 1978 I spit on your Grave 1987 Near Dark 1988 Rabid Grannies ( have not seen )1988 Brain Damage 31. 1988 The Blob 30. 1978 Halloween 29. 1986 Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer 28. 1986 Vamp 27. 1976 The Omen 26. 1979 The Brood 25. 1985 Lifeforce 24. 2001 Frailty 23. 2002 28 Days Later 22. 1990 Jacob’s Ladder 21. 1995 Se7en 20. 1986 Manhunter 19. 1987 Angel Heart 18. 1995 The Addiction17. 1997 Office Killer 16. 1986 Nomads 15. 1981 The Howling 14. 1979 Nosferatu 13. 2007 Bug 12. 1987 Street Trash 11. 1987 Evil Dead II 10. 1987 The Hidden 9. 1989 Shocker 8. 1987 Hellraiser 7. 1985 Re-Animator 6. 1986 The Hitcher 5. 1991 The Silence of the Lambs 4. 1982 The Thing 3. 1992 Twin Peaks Fire Walk with Me 2. 1997 Lost Highway 1. 1999 Audition
]]>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 19:22:34 GMTPuhnnerHORROR MOVIES 1012/12/2008 2:22:34 PMRevised List of 31 from 76 through07Mommie Dearest and Red Dawn co-winners of No. 1and wished I could have included:1988 Blood Orgy of the Leather Girls ( have not seen it, but the title is terrific and I cannot find it here ) 1976 Man on the Roof1976 The Sentinel1977 Suspiria 1978 I spit on your Grave 1987 Near Dark 1988 Rabid Grannies ( have not seen )1988 Brain Damage 31. 1988 The Blob 30. 1978 Halloween 29. 1986 Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer 28. 1986 Vamp 27. 1976 The Omen 26. 1979 The Brood 25. 1985 Lifeforce 24. 2001 Frailty 23. 2002 28 Days Later 22. 1990 Jacob&rsquo;s Ladder 21. 1995 Se7en 20. 1986 Manhunter 19. 1987 Angel Heart 18. 1995 The Addiction17. 1997 Office Killer 16. 1986 Nomads 15. 1981 The Howling 14. 1979 Nosferatu 13. 2007 Bug 12. 1987 Street Trash 11. 1987 Evil Dead II 10. 1987 The Hidden 9. 1989 Shocker 8. 1987 Hellraiser 7. 1985 Re-Animator 6. 1986 The Hitcher 5. 1991 The Silence of the Lambs 4. 1982 The Thing 3. 1992 Twin Peaks Fire Walk with Me 2. 1997 Lost Highway 1. 1999 Audition http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Top_31_Horror_films_of_the_past_31_years_on_The/222/24986/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Puhnner
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 2/11/2008 2:34:19 PM
Body: Here is my list, although it is a bit different in that the list allows only one Film from each of the 31 years, which believe me, limits the choices; for instance 1986: The FlyFrom BeyondHenry: Portrait of a Serial KillerThe HitcherInvaders from MarsManhunterNomadsVamp1987 is just as hardI am working on another one, which is just my 31 favorites regardless of how many a year. These choices listed, fit my definition of horror. They are horrifying and extremely unsettling, but may not be, in the strictest sense, horror. but well, here it is. Oh, I also did not not include the Alien films which although 'monster goes boo!', even though I love every one of them, fall somewhere in the realm of Science Fiction to me...enough gibberish, here it is:By the way, I want 'Mommie Dearest' to be No. 1, but that is another story.Years 1976 through 2007 ( the Spout year listings are a bit different than Wikipedia's which I used ) 31. 1984 A Nightmare on Elm Street 30. 1994 Natural Born Killers 29. 2004 Dawn of the Dead 28. 2003 Texas Chainsaw Massacre 27. 2005 Sin City 26. 1993 Army of Darkness 25. 1998 Fallen 24. 1983 Videodrome 23. 2006 Fido 22. 1996 The Frighteners 21. 2007 Zodiac 20. 2000 Crimson Rivers 19. 2001 Frailty 18. 2002 28 Days Later 17. 1990 Jacob’s Ladder 16. 1988 The Vanishing 15. 1995 Se7en 14. 1989 Shocker 13. 1976 The Tenant 12. 1977 Rabid 11. 1987 Hellraiser 10. 1985 Re-Animator 9. 1981 The Howling 8. 1979 Nosferatu 7. 1978 Halloween 6. 1986 The Hitcher 5. 1991 The Silence of the Lambs 4. 1982 The Thing 3. 1992 Twin Peaks Fire Walk with Me 2. 1997 Lost Highway 1. 1999 Audition
]]>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:34:19 GMTPuhnnerHORROR MOVIES 1012/11/2008 2:34:19 PMHere is my list, although it is a bit different in that the list allows only one Film from each of the 31 years, which believe me, limits the choices; for instance 1986: The FlyFrom BeyondHenry: Portrait of a Serial KillerThe HitcherInvaders from MarsManhunterNomadsVamp1987 is just as hardI am working on another one, which is just my 31 favorites regardless of how many a year. These choices listed, fit my definition of horror. They are horrifying and extremely unsettling, but may not be, in the strictest sense, horror. but well, here it is. Oh, I also did not not include the Alien films which although &#39;monster goes boo!&#39;, even though I love every one of them, fall somewhere in the realm of Science Fiction to me...enough gibberish, here it is:By the way, I want &#39;Mommie Dearest&#39; to be No. 1, but that is another story.Years 1976 through 2007 ( the Spout year listings are a bit different than Wikipedia&#39;s which I used ) 31. 1984 A Nightmare on Elm Street 30. 1994 Natural Born Killers 29. 2004 Dawn of the Dead 28. 2003 Texas Chainsaw Massacre 27. 2005 Sin City 26. 1993 Army of Darkness 25. 1998 Fallen 24. 1983 Videodrome 23. 2006 Fido 22. 1996 The Frighteners 21. 2007 Zodiac 20. 2000 Crimson Rivers 19. 2001 Frailty 18. 2002 28 Days Later 17. 1990 Jacob&rsquo;s Ladder 16. 1988 The Vanishing 15. 1995 Se7en 14. 1989 Shocker 13. 1976 The Tenant 12. 1977 Rabid 11. 1987 Hellraiser 10. 1985 Re-Animator 9. 1981 The Howling 8. 1979 Nosferatu 7. 1978 Halloween 6. 1986 The Hitcher 5. 1991 The Silence of the Lambs 4. 1982 The Thing 3. 1992 Twin Peaks Fire Walk with Me 2. 1997 Lost Highway 1. 1999 Audition http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Re_Re_Re_Top_31_Horror_films_of_the_past_31_years/222/23639/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Dr_Gor
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 1/8/2008 6:27:33 PM
Body: In the interest of science, and fairness, I will check out your list only after I have posted mine... might be interesting...
]]>Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:27:33 GMTDr_GorHORROR MOVIES 1011/8/2008 6:27:33 PM In the interest of science, and fairness, I will check out your list only after I have posted mine... might be interesting... http://www.spout.com/groups/HORROR_MOVIES_101/Recommendation_2_Cthulhu/222/22676/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: TheWorkingDead
Post To: HORROR MOVIES 101
Post Date: 12/9/2007 8:48:42 PM
Body: This is another blog post, not really a discussion idea, but since Dr. Gor has stated that we can post whatever we want, and in fact he will fight to the death any of you who don't like it, I decided what the hell. If no one has any problem, I think I might do this anytime I come across a movie that I think will be of particular interest to this group(I'm also posting it in my group The Film Library). I promise not to do this unless I really think it pertains to this group. This film may not be for everyone here, but I think it's worth a look and I'm sure some of you will be interested in what someone has to say about it. This last few weeks have marked the passage of the seventh annual Anchorage International Film Festival, an event for which I was lucky enough to be a judge(in one of the short film categories). This presented me with a golden opportunity to attend every screening for free. I was in heaven. Unfortunately, this happened to coincide with my increasingly stupid looking decision to take on a second job for extra holiday money. Coupled with normal familial duties, I was unable to attend all but two films. The first of the two, Once, was extraordinarily enjoyable, and I'll be writing about that one at a later date. The second film, and subject of this post, was Cthulhu, a low budget, DVE-shot horror film loosely based on HP Lovecraft's Shadow Over Innsmouth.In this filmed version, the main character, Russ, is a gay history professor in Seattle who is called back to his home town of Rivermouth when his mother passes away. Back in Rivermouth, Russ can't wait to return to Seattle, finding nothing but antagonism from his father(who leads the church of the Esoteric Order of Dagon) and the townsfolk who view his sexuality as the height of mental degeneration. His father, and indeed a few of the townspeople, take a very aggressive interest in wanting to see Russ have children(for reasons I'll explain later, but will probably make a bit of sense to people familiar with the story). The only friendly face he sees is that of his childhood friend Mike, a divorced father with whom he had a... sexually ambiguous relationship growing up. I suppose at this point something should be said about the homosexual themes in this film, since the protagonist's homosexuality is a large part of the plot both literally and metaphorically. Russ' father is upset at his son not for being gay, it seems, but for not having children, and metaphorically Russ' homosexuality heightens the tension and fear of returning to a small town, let alone one as bizarre as Rivermouth.The plot(and I'm going to give spoilers here, so if you haven't read the story, or want to see this fresh, I'd suggest you skip ahead a paragraph) revolves around Russ' heredity, and the Esoteric Order of Dagon that his father leads. Dagon, as Lovecraft readers know, is one of the Deep Ones, a fish-god that grants wealth to those who offer up human sacrifices. There's also a lot of inter-species breeding going on, as the fish-men mate with humans and produce immortal offspring, and the people themselves begin to become more fish-like. Russ' family is so intent on him having children because his family has long been the emissaries of Cthulhu(although the church names Dagon, he is never specifically mentioned in the movie, instead they use the more popularly known Cthulhu), and they need him to father the next generation of fish-people and pave the way for the return of the Deep Ones. This is a little ill-defined in the movie, as much of the film is. A lot of it still works, however, to heighten the confusion and fear, but at times is the ambiguity is a bit off-putting. It works well when the characters are confused and unsure of things, but when they seem completely aware of everything and the audience is in the dark, it's a bit frustrating.Now, I'll be honest here and admit that my initial reaction as the film went to black was 'god, what a mess!' The film is so jumbled and switches scenes and tones at such a jarring rate that it seemed to me a horribly confused mess. But, as the credits rolled, and that final image stuck with me, and I thought back over the film, I realized that the film had some very good ideas, but was slightly off the mark. The film feels one or two drafts, and several days in the editing bay away from being a really good film. The director, Dan Gildark, was at the screening I attended, and said that his distributor was imposing 8 minutes of edits on him, and I really do think that with those trimmings the film could be something special. Particularly, the flashbacks seem largely unnecessary and confusing. There's a brief flashback of Russ entering a room where a woman is crying, you see him with a shocked face as the woman screams 'What did you do to me?' Later in the film Russ is seen attempting suicide in flashback. Who was this woman? Was it his sister(the only prominent female from his childhood we see)? What was done to her? Did Russ attempt suicide because of this or some other reason? It's not clear at all, although when I asked him the director said there was a whole side story there that he cut out, choosing instead to make that vague and mysterious. I think this was a mistake, because without any context the flashbacks only serve to distract from an already convoluted plot, and it seems like these scenes should be important but there's absolutely no connection to the rest of the film.But let's focus on what does work. As I said, the idea of an ostracized gay man returning home to face malevolent cosmic forces AND unfriendly townspeople is well realized, and more literally turns the hero into 'the outsider', something the film is tactful enough not to hammer you over the head about. The more mundane family and relationship moments work very well, which is something that doesn't happen often in horror movies. There's frequent, albeit brief, suggestions that place this movie in the near future; radio programs talk about increasing violence and ecological decay, one reports that the last surviving wild polar bear had died in Siberia, and every television station seen in the background has a 'breaking news' banner and blurry images of violent events. This all serves to heighten the 'Lovecraftian' horror of the story, with the madness being an ever present threat around the edges of the characters lives until it forces it's way into the center stage. The ever-present threat of rising ocean waters brings with it the implication that the world of the Deep Ones will be coming to overtake the world of man, which is a pretty clever twist.Cthulhu was shot on DVE, which gave the theatre image a slightly blurry, out of focus look(I don't know if this will be the same for the image on a smaller television set), but made the colors incredibly bright and pure. This is a fairly low budget horror film, so anyone expecting a horror-fest like the Stuart Gordon/Brian Yuzna Lovecraft adaptations is going to be very disappointed. The effects, what little there are, are only briefly glimpsed and, at one point, slightly cheesy. Instead this film is more of a character driven drama with horror elements in it. Some of the horror elements, unfortunately, rely a little too much on the trappings of the genre, such as a scene where a little boy in front of a staticy television screen says "we're waiting... for Cthulhu" and the camera jump cuts a bit closer as he says Cthulhu. Or the crazy old aunt in a mental ward who turns away from the character, towards the camera as she starts over-emoting her forebodings of doom. Or a scene with a weird glowing tentacle thing that would look cheap no matter what, but is made slightly silly by the jump-cut and ominous, piercing string music that accompanies it. All of these scenes are played with such straight-faced seriousness that they stumble over the line and into camp, and are at odds with the tone of the rest of the film.Speaking of things at odds with the film; Tori Spelling. The director had nothing bad to say about Tori Spelling, but I wanted to comfort him and give him my condolences that she was in this film, because her completely over the top performance suggests an alien trying to emulate femininity after watching hours of Marilyn Monroe, Betty Boop and really bad porno dialogue. I might be a bit harsh on her, but she was really, really unconvincing, and while her plotline was funny and integral, a better actor would have focused the laughs on the humor in the script, not the horrible line readings and unattractive come-ons. Aside from her, I have nothing but good things to say about most of the cast. Although some of the supporting characters ham it up a bit, the two male leads are generally well suited to the parts they play.So in the end my rating for this film would put it around 3 out of 5 stars, which may be a bit misleading. I don't dislike this film, in fact I quite enjoyed it and plan on seeing it again when it gets an official distribution. But, due to some jarring tonal shifts and jumbled plotting it didn't fully engage me. I have high hopes that a slightly edited version, released in the spring, will improve my rating for this film. The director mentioned as his influences the films of Japanese directors Takashi Miike and Kyoshi Kurosawa. Miike I didn't spot, but anyone who enjoys the glacial pace and subtle horror of Kurosawa's films(particularly Charisma, a film I should admit I understand not a goddamn bit) will probably find a lot here to enjoy.One last thing should be said about the sexual themes in this movie; I've been lurking around in the wastelands of the IMDB comment board, seeing what people had to say about this film. Many are purists upset at the liberties taken with the source material, and angered by the lack of tentacled monsters and outright scares(there are a few in Cthulhu, but that isn't the main focus), but a surprising amount of them are angered by the fact that the film has a publicly gay main character. This is upsetting, and surprising to me because I assumed that anyone open-minded enough to read Lovecraft, with his mind-bending mythology that isn't exactly Judea-christian friendly, should be open-minded enough to deal with a movie where two men kiss(yes, there is a love scene, and although it will gross many people out, it is filmed with more class, tenderness and romanticism than most heterosexual love scenes, and has 100% less testicles than Borat did). Some have argued that Lovecraft didn't write about sex at all, and so it should be left out of any filmed adaptations. And while that's true to a point, it should be mentioned that many of his stories dealt indirectly with bestiality. What is The Shadow Over Innsmouth about, if not a bunch of fishermen having sex with fish?
]]>Mon, 10 Dec 2007 01:48:42 GMTTheWorkingDeadHORROR MOVIES 10112/9/2007 8:48:42 PMThis is another blog post, not really a discussion idea, but since Dr. Gor has stated that we can post whatever we want, and in fact he will fight to the death any of you who don&#39;t like it, I decided what the hell. If no one has any problem, I think I might do this anytime I come across a movie that I think will be of particular interest to this group(I&#39;m also posting it in my group The Film Library). I promise not to do this unless I really think it pertains to this group. This film may not be for everyone here, but I think it&#39;s worth a look and I&#39;m sure some of you will be interested in what someone has to say about it. This last few weeks have marked the passage of the seventh annual Anchorage International Film Festival, an event for which I was lucky enough to be a judge(in one of the short film categories). This presented me with a golden opportunity to attend every screening for free. I was in heaven. Unfortunately, this happened to coincide with my increasingly stupid looking decision to take on a second job for extra holiday money. Coupled with normal familial duties, I was unable to attend all but two films. The first of the two, Once, was extraordinarily enjoyable, and I&#39;ll be writing about that one at a later date. The second film, and subject of this post, was Cthulhu, a low budget, DVE-shot horror film loosely based on HP Lovecraft&#39;s Shadow Over Innsmouth.In this filmed version, the main character, Russ, is a gay history professor in Seattle who is called back to his home town of Rivermouth when his mother passes away. Back in Rivermouth, Russ can&#39;t wait to return to Seattle, finding nothing but antagonism from his father(who leads the church of the Esoteric Order of Dagon) and the townsfolk who view his sexuality as the height of mental degeneration. His father, and indeed a few of the townspeople, take a very aggressive interest in wanting to see Russ have children(for reasons I&#39;ll explain later, but will probably make a bit of sense to people familiar with the story). The only friendly face he sees is that of his childhood friend Mike, a divorced father with whom he had a... sexually ambiguous relationship growing up. I suppose at this point something should be said about the homosexual themes in this film, since the protagonist&#39;s homosexuality is a large part of the plot both literally and metaphorically. Russ&#39; father is upset at his son not for being gay, it seems, but for not having children, and metaphorically Russ&#39; homosexuality heightens the tension and fear of returning to a small town, let alone one as bizarre as Rivermouth.The plot(and I&#39;m going to give spoilers here, so if you haven&#39;t read the story, or want to see this fresh, I&#39;d suggest you skip ahead a paragraph) revolves around Russ&#39; heredity, and the Esoteric Order of Dagon that his father leads. Dagon, as Lovecraft readers know, is one of the Deep Ones, a fish-god that grants wealth to those who offer up human sacrifices. There&#39;s also a lot of inter-species breeding going on, as the fish-men mate with humans and produce immortal offspring, and the people themselves begin to become more fish-like. Russ&#39; family is so intent on him having children because his family has long been the emissaries of Cthulhu(although the church names Dagon, he is never specifically mentioned in the movie, instead they use the more popularly known Cthulhu), and they need him to father the next generation of fish-people and pave the way for the return of the Deep Ones. This is a little ill-defined in the movie, as much of the film is. A lot of it still works, however, to heighten the confusion and fear, but at times is the ambiguity is a bit off-putting. It works well when the characters are confused and unsure of things, but when they seem completely aware of everything and the audience is in the dark, it&#39;s a bit frustrating.Now, I&#39;ll be honest here and admit that my initial reaction as the film went to black was &#39;god, what a mess!&#39; The film is so jumbled and switches scenes and tones at such a jarring rate that it seemed to me a horribly confused mess. But, as the credits rolled, and that final image stuck with me, and I thought back over the film, I realized that the film had some very good ideas, but was slightly off the mark. The film feels one or two drafts, and several days in the editing bay away from being a really good film. The director, Dan Gildark, was at the screening I attended, and said that his distributor was imposing 8 minutes of edits on him, and I really do think that with those trimmings the film could be something special. Particularly, the flashbacks seem largely unnecessary and confusing. There&#39;s a brief flashback of Russ entering a room where a woman is crying, you see him with a shocked face as the woman screams &#39;What did you do to me?&#39; Later in the film Russ is seen attempting suicide in flashback. Who was this woman? Was it his sister(the only prominent female from his childhood we see)? What was done to her? Did Russ attempt suicide because of this or some other reason? It&#39;s not clear at all, although when I asked him the director said there was a whole side story there that he cut out, choosing instead to make that vague and mysterious. I think this was a mistake, because without any context the flashbacks only serve to distract from an already convoluted plot, and it seems like these scenes should be important but there&#39;s absolutely no connection to the rest of the film.But let&#39;s focus on what does work. As I said, the idea of an ostracized gay man returning home to face malevolent cosmic forces AND unfriendly townspeople is well realized, and more literally turns the hero into &#39;the outsider&#39;, something the film is tactful enough not to hammer you over the head about. The more mundane family and relationship moments work very well, which is something that doesn&#39;t happen often in horror movies. There&#39;s frequent, albeit brief, suggestions that place this movie in the near future; radio programs talk about increasing violence and ecological decay, one reports that the last surviving wild polar bear had died in Siberia, and every television station seen in the background has a &#39;breaking news&#39; banner and blurry images of violent events. This all serves to heighten the &#39;Lovecraftian&#39; horror of the story, with the madness being an ever present threat around the edges of the characters lives until it forces it&#39;s way into the center stage. The ever-present threat of rising ocean waters brings with it the implication that the world of the Deep Ones will be coming to overtake the world of man, which is a pretty clever twist.Cthulhu was shot on DVE, which gave the theatre image a slightly blurry, out of focus look(I don&#39;t know if this will be the same for the image on a smaller television set), but made the colors incredibly bright and pure. This is a fairly low budget horror film, so anyone expecting a horror-fest like the Stuart Gordon/Brian Yuzna Lovecraft adaptations is going to be very disappointed. The effects, what little there are, are only briefly glimpsed and, at one point, slightly cheesy. Instead this film is more of a character driven drama with horror elements in it. Some of the horror elements, unfortunately, rely a little too much on the trappings of the genre, such as a scene where a little boy in front of a staticy television screen says &quot;we&#39;re waiting... for Cthulhu&quot; and the camera jump cuts a bit closer as he says Cthulhu. Or the crazy old aunt in a mental ward who turns away from the character, towards the camera as she starts over-emoting her forebodings of doom. Or a scene with a weird glowing tentacle thing that would look cheap no matter what, but is made slightly silly by the jump-cut and ominous, piercing string music that accompanies it. All of these scenes are played with such straight-faced seriousness that they stumble over the line and into camp, and are at odds with the tone of the rest of the film.Speaking of things at odds with the film; Tori Spelling. The director had nothing bad to say about Tori Spelling, but I wanted to comfort him and give him my condolences that she was in this film, because her completely over the top performance suggests an alien trying to emulate femininity after watching hours of Marilyn Monroe, Betty Boop and really bad porno dialogue. I might be a bit harsh on her, but she was really, really unconvincing, and while her plotline was funny and integral, a better actor would have focused the laughs on the humor in the script, not the horrible line readings and unattractive come-ons. Aside from her, I have nothing but good things to say about most of the cast. Although some of the supporting characters ham it up a bit, the two male leads are generally well suited to the parts they play.So in the end my rating for this film would put it around 3 out of 5 stars, which may be a bit misleading. I don&#39;t dislike this film, in fact I quite enjoyed it and plan on seeing it again when it gets an official distribution. But, due to some jarring tonal shifts and jumbled plotting it didn&#39;t fully engage me. I have high hopes that a slightly edited version, released in the spring, will improve my rating for this film. The director mentioned as his influences the films of Japanese directors Takashi Miike and Kyoshi Kurosawa. Miike I didn&#39;t spot, but anyone who enjoys the glacial pace and subtle horror of Kurosawa&#39;s films(particularly Charisma, a film I should admit I understand not a goddamn bit) will probably find a lot here to enjoy.One last thing should be said about the sexual themes in this movie; I&#39;ve been lurking around in the wastelands of the IMDB comment board, seeing what people had to say about this film. Many are purists upset at the liberties taken with the source material, and angered by the lack of tentacled monsters and outright scares(there are a few in Cthulhu, but that isn&#39;t the main focus), but a surprising amount of them are angered by the fact that the film has a publicly gay main character. This is upsetting, and surprising to me because I assumed that anyone open-minded enough to read Lovecraft, with his mind-bending mythology that isn&#39;t exactly Judea-christian friendly, should be open-minded enough to deal with a movie where two men kiss(yes, there is a love scene, and although it will gross many people out, it is filmed with more class, tenderness and romanticism than most heterosexual love scenes, and has 100% less testicles than Borat did). Some have argued that Lovecraft didn&#39;t write about sex at all, and so it should be left out of any filmed adaptations. And while that&#39;s true to a point, it should be mentioned that many of his stories dealt indirectly with bestiality. What is The Shadow Over Innsmouth about, if not a bunch of fishermen having sex with fish? http://www.spout.com/blogs/hostelkiller65/archive/2007/7/16/15099.aspx Post By: hostelkiller65
Post To: hostelkiller65 Blog
Post Date: 7/16/2007 6:16:16 PM
Body: the animation is not very good but its a good classi movie and everryone should see it at least once its got a tone of gore and a zombie sex skit its pretty good so go see tit and be ammazed at it its a horro genuis
]]>Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:16:16 GMThostelkiller65hostelkiller65 Blog7/16/2007 6:16:16 PMthe animation is not very good but its a good classi movie and everryone should see it at least once its got a tone of gore and a zombie sex skit its pretty good so go see tit and be ammazed at it its a horro genuis http://www.spout.com/groups/Zombie_Obsession/Re_Zombie_Quote_Tag/329/12331/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: ottobud
Post To: Zombie Obsession
Post Date: 6/27/2007 8:01:53 AM
Body: Yes, Re-Animator is right. And please don't try and tell me that it isn't a zombie movie! The Fog I could understand the objection....maybe....but not Re-Animator! :-)
]]>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 12:01:53 GMTottobudZombie Obsession6/27/2007 8:01:53 AMYes, Re-Animator is right. And please don&#39;t try and tell me that it isn&#39;t a zombie movie! The Fog I could understand the objection....maybe....but not Re-Animator! :-) http://www.spout.com/groups/Zombie_Obsession/Re_Zombie_Quote_Tag/329/12303/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: divinemsjunebug
Post To: Zombie Obsession
Post Date: 6/26/2007 11:05:45 PM
Body: That's not from Re-Animator is it? I guess that does have some zombie action in it...
]]>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:05:45 GMTdivinemsjunebugZombie Obsession6/26/2007 11:05:45 PMThat&#39;s not from Re-Animator is it? I guess that does have some zombie action in it... http://www.spout.com/groups/Zombie_Obsession/Re_Best_Zombie_Film_Ever/329/9714/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: ottobud
Post To: Zombie Obsession
Post Date: 5/30/2007 7:23:02 AM
Body: Here's another vote for the original Dawn of the Dead, which I've seen more times than I can remember. I also love Shaun of the Dead, Dead Alive, Re-Animator and Evil Dead II. I don't consider 28 Days Later a zombie movie, but I liked it too, as well as its recent sequel.
]]>Wed, 30 May 2007 11:23:02 GMTottobudZombie Obsession5/30/2007 7:23:02 AMHere&#39;s another vote for the original Dawn of the Dead, which I&#39;ve seen more times than I can remember. I also love Shaun of the Dead, Dead Alive, Re-Animator and Evil Dead II. I don&#39;t consider 28 Days Later a zombie movie, but I liked it too, as well as its recent sequel. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/funny/MemberTagFilms.aspxfunny
Number of films tagged: 606

Number of people who tagged: 315

Number of times used: 939

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:40:23 GMT606315939Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/disturbing/MemberTagFilms.aspxdisturbing
Number of films tagged: 283

Number of people who tagged: 119

Number of times used: 394

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:55:54 GMT283119394Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Creepy/MemberTagFilms.aspxCreepy
Number of films tagged: 170

Number of people who tagged: 81

Number of times used: 211

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:55:54 GMT17081211Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/blood/MemberTagFilms.aspxblood
Number of films tagged: 382

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 155

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:50:21 GMT38264155Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/obsession/MemberTagFilms.aspxobsession
Number of films tagged: 1134

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 136

]]>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:00:49 GMT113464136Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/zombie/MemberTagFilms.aspxzombie
Number of films tagged: 449

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 151

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:18 GMT44964151Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/gore/MemberTagFilms.aspxgore
Number of films tagged: 246

Number of people who tagged: 50

Number of times used: 136

]]>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:53:52 GMT24650136Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/underrated/MemberTagFilms.aspxunderrated
Number of films tagged: 139

Number of people who tagged: 48

Number of times used: 156

]]>Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:34:46 GMT13948156Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/undead/MemberTagFilms.aspxundead
Number of films tagged: 203

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 49

]]>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 01:07:26 GMT2032949Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/inventive/MemberTagFilms.aspxinventive
Number of films tagged: 32

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 39

]]>Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:55:55 GMT321139Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/decapitation/MemberTagFilms.aspxdecapitation
Number of films tagged: 76

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 19

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:38:50 GMT76819Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/madscientist/MemberTagFilms.aspxmadscientist
Number of films tagged: 431

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 10

]]>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:03:11 GMT431810Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/bloodgutsandgorecom/MemberTagFilms.aspxbloodgutsandgorecom
Number of films tagged: 240

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 283

]]>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 01:17:40 GMT2405283Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lovecraftian/MemberTagFilms.aspxlovecraftian
Number of films tagged: 16

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 17

]]>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:44:40 GMT16417Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/reanimation/MemberTagFilms.aspxreanimation
Number of films tagged: 82

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 3

]]>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:08:00 GMT8233Tag