Hey — it’s that guy from that TV series… er… Firefly?

This is a very… “Hey look at them Southern yokels” movie.

Which is always nice.

As comedy horror movies go, this is on the grisly side? I mean, many comedy horror movies go for gore, but some of the stuff here is just yuck.

Oh, this kinda bombed… Gunn did a bunch of TV stuff after this, and then made Super four years later. (Before going on to do Guardians of the Galaxy and taking over the world.)

I guess I’m surprised that this had such a big budget? It’s not that this looks bad, but it looks… small.

Indeed!

Any similarity to sperm is purely coincidental.

OK, this basically devolves into a zombie movie? (With a group consciousness thing, which is a twist, I guess.)

It’s a pretty good horror movie, but I grew a bit impatient during the middle parts. It needed more of something? Perhaps good jokes?

Slither. James Gunn. 2006. ⚃

I bought this DVD kinda at random — I was looking for the 2006 film with the same name, and this one came up, too. And I thought “what the hey”. So now I’m watching this movie — which I assumed was going to be a horror movie based on the name, but I guess it’s some kind of … thriller/crime/comedy thing?

This is very much of its age — it’s a very 1973 movie, looking all indie (but isn’t actually, I think?), and is all outlaw chic and stuff.

But it’s also a quite odd movie — the storytelling beats are totally unpredictable. People die or start robbing diners at random — but this isn’t one of those zany “satires”, either. It’s kinda… slinky and knowing?

A subtle dislocation of the norm.

And what’s up with that van!

I’m still not sure why this movie is called “Slither”.

I had no idea that Caan was this good at playing slightly goofy guys.

It’s an amiable, original, amusing movie. But the pacing in the middle part is a bit off.

Slither. Howard Zieff. 1973. ⚃

What’s striking about this movie is how much it looks like an 80s movie.

Oh, hi — I bought a Jurassic Park 4K box set, because I think I’ve only seen the first one (or possibly two of them). I don’t really want to re-watch this movie, but I thought I should if I’m gonna watch the rest of them…

I guess this is the final… “Spielberg movie” Spielberg initiated. I mean, he did the second movie, too, but…

I mean, Jaws, Close Encounters, Indiana Jones, ET… and now Jurassic Park. But he was transitioning to a “serious director” (the awful Schindler’s List was released the same year), and I think this is like his final 80s movie? Just a bit late.

That is, I think there was a very distinct 80s sci-fi/action movie thing (Gremlins, etc) going on with Spielberg and his compatriots — it’s what we think of when we think of “80s movies” (except for the John Hughes stuff, of course). And this is where it ended. Sassy kids and all.

I just love that somebody in the props dept spent so much time paper towels around this set.

Finally.

Wow. When they switch to the CGI shots in this 4K version, it’s a bit fuzzy, but it holds up. This 30 year old CGI is better than most of what they do today.

(Or is it all practical? I guess it could be practical? A lot of rubber.)

Ah, this is where all the memes come from.

Whee!

Sassy.

What’s fascinating about this movie is that it’s barely a movie at all: We get the premise presented in the first half hour, and then we get 90 minutes of people being being terrorised by dinosaurs. In one extended scene after another.

And the weird thing is that is works. We’ve barely been introduced to the characters, which is something you’d think matters if we’re gonna be invested in them being terrorised, but nope.

Aww.

But then when I thought this was some kind of masterpiece, the tension drops…

Yes!

This really is one of Spielberg’s better movies, isn’t it? No nonsense; just action.

Jurassic Park. Steven Spielberg. 1993. ⚄