I gotta go with Romero's Dead films. The first 3 are all 5 start films, and Land and Diary, personally, are fun films and I enjoyed them.
Easily Evil Dead, the only series listed where every entry was good. But, I guess it's easier to do that when there are only 3.
I like Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness quite a lot and find them better than the first one, so I went with those.
Agreed, I love when Raimi added the humour to the trilogy, especially Army of Darkness! Made the films stand out from just another scary film. Don't understand all the hate behind it, I guess people just wanted to see more of the same and were startled by the change. The only franchise up there where every movie was good in my opinion. Second would probably be the Friday films, but like Dave said, I think they fell apart after the 7th film (Hopefully the remake resurrects the franchise for the better!). Halloween, and Nightmare are close behind them, but again fell apart with each sequal.
I don't think the only alternative to making them comedies is "more of the same". Surely there were many directions it could have gone in? Army of Darkness is pure and simply not funny. Therefore, I didn't like it. Not funny, not horror, just dumb. And boring. That's why I personally didn't like it. Still, they seem popular enough. I don't mind some humor with my horror, but when they do away with the horror completely and make a Python wannabe title, I'm drawing the line.
As much as I love the Universal Monsters, my vote goes to Hammer's Dracula series. Christopher Lee is my favorite actor to ever play Dracula, yet even a film without him such as Brides of Dracula is a classic in my eyes. Peter Cushing brought so much to the series despite only being in five of the films. The later sequel Taste the Blood of Dracula is a very well made atmospheric horror film. I really love the Frankenstein series from Hammer too. This would probably rank a close second for me. Terence Fisher can't be praised enough for his superb direction of so many films from both series.
Fair Enough. I personally loved it, and thought the humor worked well, especially all the quotable one liners. As for boring, it's one of the most re watchable movies to me. I love the adventure aspect of it, and the fact that it is a fish out of water story, as well about an idiot who has to save the planet. And there were quite a few horror aspects to it, scary, not even close, but there were zombies, skeletons, witches, ect. it's too bad you didn't get the same feeling watching it as I did. And I agree, I'm sure they could have stayed on the horror route and came up with some creative way to make it work, and do a proper sequel. But at the same time, I do think it's awesome that they completely changed it's style, and still at least to some people, made it work as well, if not better. Not a hard feat to accomplish, as so many other movies have tried and failed in my opinion.
What, no love for Tremors?:lol: Tough decisions. I love the Universal's Frankentein series for all its art and history, and I love the Friday films for all their laughs and ridiculousness. But, I've seen the ED series the most, and it gives me the most entertainment for my dollars. I'm an unabashed loved of Army of Darkness, and I think EDII is my fave of the series, and ED is a classic that I admire.
Haven't read any comments yet...I'll wait till after I post. Chose Phantasm, only for the fact that it had the same director and (mostly) the same actors throughout the series. Sure, it's uneven in a lot of parts, but you really do get to know the characters. Saw also kept a lot of personnel, but there's a definite "cashing in" vibe there. One movie a year for 5 years now. Phantasm took more than 9 years just between the first two, so it was a labor of love. Not an effort to cash in on the popularity. Romero's Dead films are certainly tempting, especially since Dawn and Day are fantastic films. But the decrease in quality of the recent sequels takes a bit away. Friday the 13th? After seeing the original theatrically back in June, I'm amazed at how BAD each subsequent film got. The first was a real horror movie, after a couple of sequels Jason actually became the HERO of that series! Evil Dead is sure tempting, with three quality films (all with same director and same actor, a key element). But the inclusion of slapstick and intentional humor in the sequels certainly changes the tone. I like both the serious original and the humorous conclusion, but they feel a lot differently (not to mention that the second film is practically a remake of the original)
You know, this is a really good call. You pointed out one of my loves of the series - that it is NOT just a revive-the-monster outing every time. Frankenstein does different experiments with each film, which is quite logical. My other love is that make no doubt, the villain in this series is Dr. Frankenstein. Which is the way it was always meant to be. When someone hear's "Frankenstein", the image that comes to mind is Boris Karloff as the monster. Peter Cushing and Hammer did it the way it always should have been done. And just how nasty is he in Frankenstein Must Be Destroyed??
Cushing is at his best in FRANKENSTEIN MUST BE DESTROYED.I had the pleasure of seeing that film at the American Film Institute's Silver Theater on Halloween of 2006 (along with THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN and REVENGE OF FRANKENSTEIN) and the audience loved it.Cushing is so clever and sleek that you kind of like him,but then he'll do something that is totally heartless and you remember just how twisted his character has become.Cushing brought great dimension to the role,great actor.
Oddly enough, the two series that I first thought of aren't on this list: Hammer's Frankenstein (the first five Fisher films just increase in excellence) and Aliens. Judging each series as a whole, I went with Evil Dead. Even though it is one of the shortest series here, the quality of the series on a whole is 100%. While I'd probably rather watch Romero's first three Dead movies, the last two have been huge disappointments.
I haven't really seen any of the Hammer horror films. I have been wanting to, but heard there have been problems with the Universal box set, as the discs are double sided, and I had problems with the Munsters box set before because of that Anyone else have problems with these? I am now using a PS3 to play movies, so maybe now they will play better? It looks like to have the complete monster series I would need the Hammer Horror Collection (Warner), Hammer Horror Series (Universal), and Icons of Horror: Hammer Films (Sony), Dracula: Prince of Darkness/ The Satanic Rites (Anchor Bay), Revenge of Frankenstein (Sony), Frankenstein Created Woman/The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires (Anchor Bay), Horror of Frankenstein (Anchor Bay), Frankenstein and the Monster From Hell (Paramount), Scars of Dracula (Anchor Bay), Dracula A.D. (Warner Bros.), The Mummy's Shroud/The Plague of Zombies (Anchor bay), Blood From the Mummy's Tomb (Anchor Bay). Would that be all the Hammer monster movies, and the best versions in Region 1? Are they all worth owning? It sucks that so many companies own them, as I guess that stops there from being a complete box set collection. And sorry, this should be in the Hammer forum! Maybe I will repost it over there.
I re-posted this in a hammer forum, so instead of taking up space in here, if you want to reply or give me your opinions, reply in the other forum, thanks!
A lot of good choices. I have to go with Hammer's Dracula. Mainly because the four first sequels are not just good, but great! Dracula Prince Of Darkness is one of the finest Dracula film and Brides Of Dracula is too often forgotten by fans! Amd even if Dracula Has Risen From The Grave and Taste the Blood Of Dracula don't bring anything new, their gorgeous to look at!!
Couldn't agree more. Always hated Army of Darkness...I don't know why they went in THAT direction. The first one was actually really scary in places, then you watch Evil Dead II and......eugh. Such a waste of time. ~Matt
