I'm stunned and disappointed that SyFy can't get behind an update of one of the classic anthology series...and CW doesn't seem like a great fit for this sort of thing...but I'll give it a shot.
Why in the hell would you want a **** channel or network like SyFy to make this?
I'm all for a new version of Tales From the Darkside. I don't know why people are worried to be honest. Hell, I was just telling my wife a few weeks back that I wish HBO would bring back Tales From the Crypt(most likely never going to happen sadly), this is the next best thing in my eyes.
Hey guys! As I mentioned a few days ago, me and a couple of buddies have started a podcast all about Horror movies, called ATMOM (At the Movies of Madness). We watch a Horror movie once a week, and then record our bantering about that movie, and other movies / the Horror genre in general.
Our first episode is officially uploaded! We watched Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992). Check it out!
[YT]Fh-KTXLFh4I[/YT]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh-KTXLFh4I
Episode 2 next week will be Suspiria!
Why in the hell would you want a **** channel or network like SyFy to make this?
I'm all for a new version of Tales From the Darkside. I don't know why people are worried to be honest. Hell, I was just telling my wife a few weeks back that I wish HBO would bring back Tales From the Crypt(most likely never going to happen sadly), this is the next best thing in my eyes.
I tried watching your podcast. It's just an hour and a half of your shows title, with soundbites of the movie you watched, followed by your guys' banter. I guess you're going for a "radio show style" of podcast? I'm sorry, but I just didn't find that all that interesting & turned it off shortly after the movie clips ended.
Just my opinion.


I was always hoping that horror icons would get behind fear.net or chiller and make it into horrors scyfy.I'm stunned and disappointed that SyFy can't get behind an update of one of the classic anthology series...and CW doesn't seem like a great fit for this sort of thing...but I'll give it a shot.
Battle of the Horror Remakes (or reboots if you prefer)
Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) vs Halloween (2007) vs Friday the 13th (2009) vs A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
Which one do you prefer and why? Also if you can be bothered rank them.
Friday the 13th is one of the two horror remakes(along with The Hills Have Eyes)that I actually prefer over the original. Out of the big slasher films of the past, I could never get into the Friday franchise. I've seen them all but always preferred the Halloween and Nightmare films. My only real complaint about the remake was that Jason didn't kill Padalecki's sister in the beginning. I hated how he kept her chained up underground. I realize he spared her because she was wearing his mother's necklace but I still would have preferred her dying.
For me its...Battle of the Horror Remakes (or reboots if you prefer)
Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003) vs Halloween (2007) vs Friday the 13th (2009) vs A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
Which one do you prefer and why? Also if you can be bothered rank them.
Its more than that though, as we saw from the picture in the locket she resembled Jason's Mother. I think he was confused as to why she looked like his mother and maybe even if she was his Mother. The confusion for him there us he saw her die and she looks younger.
I have it on DVD but haven't watched it in quite some time. I completely forgot she also resembled his mom.
Friday the 13th: A film hated on out of sheer spite. I honestly don't see how true fans of the franchise can hate this film. I mean, it's one of the only films out of the whole "reboot" craze that can legit be called a reboot without everyone calling BS. The "remake" part is the opening credits. That's it. The rest of the film is more like a lost sequel than anything else. Aside from the use of modern technology and cars in the film it would fit snuggly between parts 3 and 4. It has everything a Friday film needs to have for fans to enjoy it and doesn't change the mythology what so ever. It's typical of the franchise to a fault. Fans make none issues out of stuff like Jason having a lair that he lives in when that is what fans just assumed he did most of the time anyway-is live in the woods.
I also remember fanboys whining about Jason having hair, running, wearing a belt and yadda yadda yadda when all these "fans" have to do is watch the other films and see Jason with hair (part 2 & 9), run (Part 2-4), and wearing a belt (part 6) to see their complaints as utter nonsense. They also complain about the gore not being good enough when it was probably the most brutal next to 4, 9 and Jason X. Not to mention Derek Mears is my favorite Jason since part 3. Richard Brooker has always been my favorite Jason as he had a sort of humanistic, animal cunning to him others lacked. Ted White was aggressive, but Brookers Jason felt the most like a wild, crazy backwoods killer while most of the other Jasons (even White and Hodder) felt more like the typical unstoppable juggernaut. Not to dis those guys, but part 3's Jason creeps me out the most.
See I never cared for Brooker I thought Ted White was the best of the early Jason's. He was the first Jason that was scary to me.
To me, Brookers Jason felt like one that likes killing the most. All the others were just a variations of an unstoppable machine.
Part 2 he was a vengeful killer.
Part 3 he was a crazed, deformed maniac.
Part 4 he felt more like a hunter on a job.
Parts 6-11 are him as basically the un-killable zombie brute.
Did you get that from his smile? I just thought Brookers Jason seemed far too relaxed and I don't get where the he enjoys killing thing comes from at all. To me it felt like he couldn't be bothered at times. Add to that its one of the most overrated of the series, its a horrible film with horrible actors and for me an average Jason
Ted White is for me easily the best of the early Jason's, he's vicious and he's fast, a damn site scarier than the previous 2.