This just occurred to me.

Not having a reflection, how......did....Glaeken...................Shave?
(gratuitous pauses to keep within Michael Mann format)

The first safety razor was patented by KIng Gillette in the early 1900's. That means Glaeken would have used a straight razor for several centuries. If he cut himself, how did he apply the styptic? I cannot imagine he had the time or inclination to get the sword blade out every morning to regenerate the damaged tissue.


keith the elder

that has the editorial glitch

Reprisal

Location: In the Dark Harvest and NEL Hardcover editions a mysterious paragraph appears on page 322, beginning "Glaeken liked Jack".

I just finished the book. I loved the Herb Lom "bio-construct". Poor Father Bill, Rasalom really messed with his mind. And poor Danny Gordon buried (un)alive for 5 years, that's got to screw a kid up in the head!!! :eek:

This is a film about 2 brothers forced to join the Korean War. The older brother is very protective of the younger and is willing to sacrifice himself in order to get him sent back home to care for their family. The war gradually takes it's toll on each of them, and their bond as family. The film was shot very much like Saving Private Ryan and very well done(and graphic), but not very realistic in some senses. It is a good movie and worth checking out.

I see a listing for Black Spiral: Twisted Tales of Terror on Amazon. What story (short story, I assume) of Paul's is in this compilation?


http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/det...OTVFWI78OD

Do we really need this remake?

I was a little more than perturbed when I saw this trailer when I went to watch Boogeyman. The sad fact is though, this trailer was more frightening than the movie that followed it.

My main problem with the remake is that the entire series of events that the Lutz family endured in real life which prompted the book and movie was proven a hoax. The family was simply in over their heads with the mortgage and concocted an outlandish tale to break the agreement and make a little cash on the side.

The current owners of the home as well as any family that occupied it after the Lutz have never reported any paranormal activity. How could this be though? The Lutz went on record to state that the evil in the house, which was spawned by the true crime of Ronnie Defeo killing his entire family in the house a before the Lutz family took up residence there, followed them to their new home on the west coast.

So my question is, why would hollywood market the movie as a true story when it is documented that NO paranormal activity transpired and tat the true horror existed only in the mids of the creative and financially bankrupt Lutz family?

Will this open up the door for the Amityville II: The Possession remake and Amityville 3-D reamke?

Will I still see this movie? Yes. Because I am a sucker and the studios know it. Will I bitch afterwards? Absolutely.

http://www.horrordvds.com/vb3forum/showt...hp?t=23199

(this courtesy of Stephane Piter (http://www.the-keep.ath.cx )

I went and saw BOOGEYMAN yesterday and again I was disappointed. Why do I insist on shelling out money for such nonsense? Why won't I learn?

The movie is a tired rehash of several movies that have come out over the past few years, none of them worth imitating yet some writer/director named Stephen kay insisted on robbing them anyway.

It is a mix of THEY and Darkness falls and a myriad of other tired monster flicks.

I personally find a human villian more terrifying than a monster. The creature in the film has no reason to exist other than it is the Boogeyman who lives in closets and under beds and underdeveloped scripts.

The acting is sub-par, the only twist the film tries to throw the viewers way is weak and overshadowed by the films lame attempt at jump-scares which there are several.

But I wan't more than a loud musical cue to make me jump out of my seat and when i wan't my skin to crawl I want it to do so because I am scared and not pissed that I spent money to see such a film.

The film is non-sensical at best and just plain awful at its worst. It's not a complete waste of celluloid, I'll let The exorcist: The Beginning hold that honor indefinately. But this film comes as close as any other.

Bottom Line: I am not scared of the boogeyman, but I do regret having made his aquaintence.

TMD is an inspirational look at the journey undertook by Ernesto Guevara and Alberto Granada on back of "The Mighty One"-a dilapidated motorcycle-through South America at the beginning of the 1950's. The movie meanders slowly through the exotic beauty of Argentina, Chile and Peru while we are introduced to the many people that would help shape Guevara's ideology. Gael Garcia Bernal is excellent as Guevara, he has the magnetism of a major star. Rodrigo de la Serna is also effective as the lovable rogue Granada.

Quote:We also have two new projects that the Overlook Connection Press is publishing with F. Paul Wilson. We'll announce these by the end of February.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHH!!
Sounds interesting!!
Can you drop any hints Paul?

One week ago, I saw "The Stepford Wives" in theater. Performers are Nichole Kidman and Matthew Broderick. It's remake version. Until I see it, I didn't know about The Stepford Wives, so I thought this is comedy. Nichole Kidman, Matthew Broderick, Bette Middler, Christopher Walken, Glenn Close, and director is Frank Oz. Well, everybody will guess this is comedy. Surely, in some scenes, it cracked me up. And, I felt present social sarcasm in last scene.

And......yesterday, I saw original version "The Stepford Wives"(1974). Performers were Katharine Ross. It was not comedy. It was almost suspense thriller. I felt very chilly and weird. I understood why it's scary. This movie was based on the book by Ira Levin. Some scenes were similar to Rosemary's baby.

If you have a chance, judge by comparison. I like both movies, but I rather prefer original.