Camp Blood :: The Films :: Photo & Video Gallery :: Facebook :: YouTube :: Store

January 16, 2018, 04:25:06 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Join us in the Chat Room every Friday night @ 9PM EST! - Chat is not working in firefox or chrome. Must use IE aka Microsoft Edge for the time being
 
   Home   Help Rules Arcade Search CHAT Donations Login Register  

Random Quote: "You're doomed if you stay here!"
Welcome Guests!
By viewing this site as a guest you are missing out on member only forums and other features. Registeration is free, so SIGN UP now and remove this annoying message!
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]
  Print  
Share this topic on FacebookShare this topic on DiggShare this topic on RedditShare this topic on StumbleUpon Topic: Black Christmas (1974)  (Read 12975 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Jameslofton
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 387


WWW
« Reply #120 on: May 21, 2017, 12:18:47 AM »

There is no contradiction and certainly not because Fuller talks to "the chick". That's laughable.

If there were any contradictions, this debate wouldn't have lasted 43 years and counting.

I've seen people over the years go in depth looking for signs pointing either way. Your overly simplistic analysis doesn't even come close to cutting the mustard.
Logged
Gash
"Gash, the bloodless man."
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 827

Jason Rick!


WWW
« Reply #121 on: May 22, 2017, 10:39:53 AM »

On the phone he John Saxxon asks her questions about Peter being there and calling and she says out lous that it could not have been due to circumstances. People argue about everything and anything to hear themselves talk. The Killer is billy, who cares lol. Some people think in the original Friday the 13th that Pamela had an accomplice due to what we saw being done. A lot of it was impossible for some old lady to do but we just accept it because it is a fictional movie.
Logged
Jameslofton
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 387


WWW
« Reply #122 on: July 16, 2017, 01:59:17 AM »

On the phone he John Saxxon asks her questions about Peter being there and calling and she says out lous that it could not have been due to circumstances.
Its not a contradiction. If it does anything, it reinforces it. This is an opening for the involvement of Chris.


People argue about everything and anything to hear themselves talk. The Killer is billy, who cares lol.

Who cares?!? Obviously a LOT of people. Its been discussed for 40 years for heavens sake. No one is arguing about it "to hear themselves talk".

This wasn't a typical slasher. Its a suspense film and what continually fuels the story is the fact nobody knows who the killer is.

As far as you looking for contradictions that aren't there, the fact that they originally wanted Chris to mention Billy and Agnes after Peter is dead is a sign that its not some lunatic stranger named Billy. Since they didn't include it, it allows the guessing games that have always been around since it was released.

A better statement would've been YOU don't care but that begs a question...why even jump into the thread and comment about it if you don't even care.
Logged
Gash
"Gash, the bloodless man."
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 827

Jason Rick!


WWW
« Reply #123 on: July 16, 2017, 02:03:30 AM »

Its not a contradiction. If it does anything, it reinforces it. This is an opening for the involvement of Chris.

 Who cares?!? Obviously a LOT of people. Its been discussed for 40 years for heavens sake. No one is arguing about it "to hear themselves talk".

This wasn't a typical slasher. Its a suspense film and what continually fuels the story is the fact nobody knows who the killer is.

As far as you looking for contradictions that aren't there, the fact that they originally wanted Chris to mention Billy and Agnes after Peter is dead is a sign that its not some lunatic stranger named Billy. Since they didn't include it, it allows the guessing games that have always been around since it was released.

A better statement would've been YOU don't care but that begs a question...why even jump into the thread and comment about it if you don't even care.



I watched the movie and it they addressed it. I don't understand how it's a mystery.
Logged
Trivago
Guest
« Reply #124 on: September 06, 2017, 06:39:20 AM »

Quote
A lot of it was impossible for some old lady to do but we just accept it because it is a fictional movie.

A demented, driven, psychopathic old lady on the other hand..

Also in brief:

Quote
I watched the movie and it they addressed it. I don't understand how it's a mystery

I saw no conflict within the movie.
Logged
Jameslofton
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 387


WWW
« Reply #125 on: October 12, 2017, 05:19:48 AM »

I just got through watching this again. We get a reveal at the beginning of the film I hadn't noticed until now. I don't think anyone years ago in these discussions who also believed its Peter and Chris noticed this although my memory is hazy and that was years ago. They probably did notice as it sticks out if you're paying close attention for any reveals.

At 6:34 after "Billy" has entered the house, we get the first prank call in the film. Its technically the second call as the first was for Barb(her mom) and she says she'll take it in the other room. THis is to let the audience know that there's another phone in the house.

This scene between Barb's phone call and "Billy"'s entrance/the prank call focuses on Barb talking on the phone, and Claire and Chris talking by the front door before Chris leaves.

Anyways, after Jess answers the phone and hears "Billy", she tells the other girls, "Quiet! It's him again , the moaner". They all come running to listen. Barb says, "He's expanded his act." This obviously indicates they've been dealing with this for awhile.

Claire then makes an interesting comment.

"Could that be one person?"

That is not a throwaway line just tossed in there by accident. It's by design.



This is not the first time "Billy" has called. If Billy is just some random lunatic who has just entered these girls lives right now, this means any previous calls cannot be him since this is his first time in the house calling the girls.

I also like the timing of Chris walking out the door seconds before the call. It just points out even more the Peter/Chris dynamic.

This film really is a masterpiece. THIS is how you make a horror film. Just the fact that you can continue to see new things and the clues spread throughout decades later is amazing. The story was well thought out and I can see why they went back and forth between wanting it to be Peter and Chris or leaving it open as they did.

Clarke never should've stopped making horror films. He clearly had a knack for it and Clarke and Moore(screenwriter) should've teamed up again for a horror film.

Even though IMDB's forums turned into a troll factory and had to be taken down, I wish they were still open as I'd love to have a discussion with those people from years ago who believed it was Peter and Chris killing the girls. I'd also like to know what many believe is the point of the unrelated young girl going missing and is eventually found murdered(all offscreen). It doesn't fit in to the the overall story but there has to be a purpose to include it.


Quote
I saw no conflict within the movie.
Sweet baby Jesus.  You didn't pay any attention to the film. There's conflict by design! How can you possible say with a straight face there's no conflict?!? The whole point of the film is the suspense of not knowing exactly who the killer is and all these clues layered throughout the film. This is what makes it the most unique slasher ever made. Like I said before, this has been debated amongst fans long before there was even an internet and last but not least, the filmmakers considered a reveal of Peter and Chris as the killers but Clarke wanted it left open to debate.

Even before I was on the Peter and Chris side of the fence, I acknowledged how they keep you guessing and not knowing who is doing what and when.




I find it interesting that Chris was in the house a few minutes before the final call.
Like I mentioned above, I find it even more interesting that Chris was also in the house a minute before the first call.

It's not a coincidence.

If its Peter and Chris, this places both of them in the house at the beginning and end of the film. Peter would be upstairs making the first call as Chris leaves the house, and Peter's corpse being taken away at the end and Chris leaving the house as we hear "Billy" the final time(with Jess still in the house asleep).


They don't make horror films this good anymore. Probably never will either.
Logged
Jameslofton
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 387


WWW
« Reply #126 on: November 20, 2017, 06:03:26 AM »

Tonight's double feature was F13 part 8 and Black Christmas.

I spotted another clue....

Mrs. Mac gets murdered and right after that, her taxi shows up, the driver knocks on the door yelling if anyone is there, and leaves. barbara is of course passed out drunk upstairs. Jess was out searching for the missing girl Janice(I never understood this subplot), and she went to the police station with Chris trying to find Clare.

When Jess comes home, she immediately gets a call from "Billy" and then calls the cops asking if they can do something about these calls. Peter sneaks up behind her. He came from upstairs and told her he didn't feel like waiting outside so he came in to get a little sleep.

Its subtle but it might be the biggest reveal in the film. There's no time for him to have come in the house and went to sleep. Mrs. Mac was murdered right after the other girls left and before Jess came back, and even if we pretend he's not involved, he would've heard or even witnessed Mrs. Mac's murder. She was screaming.

Right after the Lieutenant and the phone tech leave the house, Peter is standing right outside the house. Peter is at the house. Who was with the girls at the police station? Chris. At every single critical moment in the film, Peter and/or Chris is right there in the mix.

There's a scene when Jess is waiting for the next call. It cuts to "Billy" up in the attic pushing Clare in the rocking chair. This "Billy" is probably Chris.

The viewer gets strategic hints throughout the entire film. Literally the only thing missing is the grand reveal at the end like you see in most mysteries. The closest we get is Jess realizing Peter is "Billy" when he comes in through the basement right after locking "Billy" out.


Watching this film again a few times this year just reinforced how its remake was pure hogwash. They not only made Billy an actual person but also gave him a backstory....which sucked all the mystery out of the story and made the whole thing pointless.

Logged
fabien
Lifeguard
*

Posts: 213


« Reply #127 on: November 20, 2017, 09:11:21 AM »

Do not forget that this is the first slasher I like this film a preference for the original 1974
Logged
JimmyDancing
Victim
*
Posts: 23


« Reply #128 on: November 27, 2017, 05:26:43 AM »

Black Christmas is alright... There are a number of detractors keeping it from the upper echelons.

First off, there is a very clear tonal imbalance. The scenario of an unhinged, shadowy killer picking off the girls of a sorority, one by one, does not make a good parallel with a cop who is the butt of 'fellatio' jokes. There is nothing wrong with trying to inject humour, but come on.

I applaud the innovative use of POV, but... to be honest this film did very little with it. Let's face it, Halloween is lauded as the real birth of the slasher for a reason.

I can't remember her name, but the famed actress from the original Superman. I despised that character.

The film's ending feels far from complete to me. Not just the identity of the killer being left a mystery, I can understand that. But we're barely given anything to go on as to who it might be. There's next to no confrontation between the killer and the final girl (although I almost screamed when 'Billy' grabbed her hair). And what's with leaving the two bodies in the attic undiscovered? The entire film was leading up to the moment when they would be found.

In short, the suspense is palpable, but too little is done to capitalise on it.
Logged
Jameslofton
Camp Cook
*

Posts: 387


WWW
« Reply #129 on: November 27, 2017, 08:47:29 PM »



I can't remember her name, but the famed actress from the original Superman. I despised that character.
Me too. She's an alcoholic. We know very little about her but she needs help.



The film's ending feels far from complete to me. Not just the identity of the killer being left a mystery, I can understand that. But we're barely given anything to go on as to who it might be. There's next to no confrontation between the killer and the final girl (although I almost screamed when 'Billy' grabbed her hair). And what's with leaving the two bodies in the attic undiscovered? The entire film was leading up to the moment when they would be found.

It feels 'incomplete' because its missing the reveal. The film is very effective taking you on this journey but then it just puts on the brakes. LIke you said, everything is leading up to a conclusion but they do a 180 at the end and decide to leave it open.

It's like it was being filmed for both options but at the last second, decided to pull back. The only thing we know about this is how Clarke balked at the Peter-Chris reveal so left it open to interpretation. While it's a great film, such a tactic isn't fair to the audience. It's almost in a state of limbo...clues spread throughout that we know the killers....but we officially don't know the killers.

Not exactly the same thing but it would be similar to the killers never being revealed in Scream.

Jess knows Peter is the killer....so she kills him. She's then medicated in her bed as the bumbling cops are leaving. It ends as we find out "Billy" is still alive. If it were to continue instead of end, she's going to find out Chris is also a killer as he is unlikely to let her survive. No point in being there if he wants her to live.


Quote
And what's with leaving the two bodies in the attic undiscovered? The entire film was leading up to the moment when they would be found.
Good point. Clare in a rocking chair up in the attic is a 'money shot' in the film. The viewer is taken back to this multiple times...as you pointed out....this should lead us back there at the end. I don't understand why they go undiscovered. It isn't logical. Clare was the first girl to go missing and Mrs. Mac has no reason to vanish....then take into account the killer(s) was in the house and the cops know this.  Simple math would lead them to checking the entire house. The only thing it achieves by leaving them up there is that the cops in the town are completely incompetent...and what's the point of conveying such a statement?

I mentioned this earlier but since we're on the topic of odd directions the story goes....

The missing and then murdered girl offscreen that is not related to the story. It doesn't fit with what's going on in the film. One thing it does is get some of the people out of the house(search party) but it seems like they could've used something else to achieve this. It also might be a diversionary tactic to keep the audience guessing on who the killer(s) is.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Camp Blood 1995-2017 | Like the site? Donate!
Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page November 06, 2017, 04:50:21 AM Page created in 0.163 seconds with 22 queries.