"Slither" Red Band Trailer Up

[dubq 0]

Once this one started to actually get good reviews from critics, I predicted that there would be certain horror fans that turn on it.

 

Ditto. Those kinds of horror fans suck IMO, and take the fun out of everything.

 

OH NO A NEW HORROR MOVIE FROM HOLLYWOOD! I'M GOING TO RANT ANOUT IT FOR YEARS! LET'S WATCH THAT NEW SHITTY ZOMBIE MOVIE I SHOT IN MY BACK YARD THAT WAS MADE FOR $500! TAKE THAT HOLLYWOOD!

 

Seriously! I'm suck of those fuckers!

[NoCalMike 0]

Just got home from Slither. I enjoyed it. Lots of over the top cheeziness. Good Gore. A couple of parts gave my lady a scare. More of a Comedy-Horror though, but that isn't necessarily bad.

 

I wonder if the bathtub chick was under 18, because she definately showed her tits, but you'd have to have the DVD to frame-by-frame the scene where she jumps out of the bath tub. Yeah I am a perv, sue me.

 

I haven't seen the Hills Have Eyes remake(going tomorrow at matinee) so I can't compare it, but I have a feeling both will be so different from each other that a comparison would be a waste of time anyway.

[bob_barron 0]

She's 24

[Downhome 0]

You can't really compare Slither to The Hills Have Eyes at all other than the fact that both flicks have horror elements. I enjoyed them both in completely different ways.

 

But I still enjoyed Slither a hell of a lot more.

[dubq 0]

You can't argue whether or not one sub-genre of horror is better than another because they'll always have fans for each of them, and you're just going to end up talking in circles around eachother.

[Downhome 0]

Yeah, but you can sure can say which one entertained you the most.

[nl5xsk1 0]

I saw Slither this afternoon ... liked it but far from loved it. (for comparison, I liked Hills Have Eyes a lot more, and didn't really like that all that much, either ... the friend that I saw both movies with, though, liked this better than THHE).

 

The best way I could describe Slither was that it seemed like a low-budget movie that just happened to have a bigger budget. There weren't any scary parts, nothing even remotely scary, and the funniest parts were things that weren't really supposed to be funniest parts (e.g. the "deer" attack ... holy crap, could that have been any dumber?) There were some funny lines, but for the most part it was just kind of 'meh'.

 

To me, it seemed like a movie that'd be on Sci-Fi or a direct-to-video release.

 

I'd give it a 1.5 out of 5 ... maybe a 2 if I was feeling generous.

[dubq 0]

Yeah, but you can sure can say which one entertained you the most.

 

Yeah, true. It's like opinions and assholes, everyone has 'em.

 

I saw it this afternoon and thought it was great. Very funny and really gross. I love campy shit like this.

[Vyce 0]

Once this one started to actually get good reviews from critics, I predicted that there would be certain horror fans that turn on it. I'm not saying that's what you are dong, if you didn't like it all that much that's cool, but I do think that's going to happen for some fucked up reason.

 

I 'turned' on this film because it just isn't that great. It's okay, but niskie's right in that this seems like a film that'd 'debut' on Sci-Fi. Whether the critics loved it or not makes no fucking difference to me. I enjoyed the Hills Have Eyes remake, and that was pretty well panned by critics, at least more so than "Slither".

 

Judging by its box office this weekend, looks like a lot of people either weren't too impressed with it, or just decided to stay away anyway.

[Just call me Dan 0]

I always like to know about the gore scenes. Can anyone describe them? I don't know if I'll ever see it, and I just like to get those kind of details. Any help?