Obsession (new movie)

[dahliaclone]

Went and saw the new horror movie Obsession this weekend. Pretty unheard of A- score from audience polls...for a horror movie that is very rare.

On its surface, the movie delivers great gory thrills, but the director and writer have actually crafted a devastating takedown of modern male entitlement and the toxic "Nice Guy" complex. While the film plays with the "crazy girlfriend" trope, the real monster isn't the girl at all.

As a social commentary, the film offers a fascinating, uncomfortable look at modern dating and the illusion of consent. It’s a brilliant horror film because the threat isn't a masked killer, it's the terrifyingly familiar face of a man who believes he is owed a woman’s heart. One of the best horror movies in a while and the two main characters I've never heard of but they are incredible and will both be stars.

 

[pourcyne]

Thanks for the review, @dahliaclone.

My question: If people in the audience are paying the high ticket price to go, they are unlikely to say that a movie is poor, aren't they?

Personally, I would never pay to see a horror movie. You can get real-life horror on a daily basis just by reading the news (or the you-know-who files).

Does the film at least not go schlocky at the end? That was my major complaint with "The Substance".

 

[HitItHard58]

Been following Curry Barker for a little while and love his stuff. Check out his horror shorts on YouTube specifically The Chair and the not so short Milk & Serial to see what he can pull off with practically no budget. His tiktok account That's a Bad Idea has a lot of funny comedy sketches as well. I want to see Obsession in theaters so bad but pesky adult responsibilities and obligations are really getting in the way. Happy to see it had a great opening weekend and hope it can hang around theaters long enough for me to get my ass in a seat.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Honestly, that description sounds preachy, which is a turnoff for me, but I'll overlook it if the story and acting are good.

 

[PrimeCy]

I've heard good things about this one. A really good horror movie is kind of rare so I'll be checking this one out.

 

[dahliaclone]

Honestly, that description sounds preachy, which is a turnoff for me, but I'll overlook it if the story and acting are good.

I don't think it's preachy at all. A couple of the people I went with it didn't really even register with them about the undertone of toxic masculinity etc.

 

[NorthCyd]

If people in the audience are paying the high ticket price to go, they are unlikely to say that a movie is poor, aren't they?

Well, relatively low audience scores for movies do exist and he said the score was unprecedented in a positive way, so that kind of answers your question right there doesn't it?

 

[pourcyne]

Well, relatively low audience scores for movies do exist and he said the score was unprecedented in a positive way, so that kind of answers your question right there doesn't it?

No, it doesn't. Most people don't go to a horror movie on a whim.

Case in point: I worked a PS event at the local library last week, and it was one of those where you put a candy dish out to get people to stop. Every kid but one said "Thank you" when invited to take a piece of candy. I was impressed, but the person I was working the event with said, "Yeah, but they're the kind of kids who go to the library". I guess he meant that the unwashed hordes of rude freebooters are more likely to hang out at the local pool hall than at the liberry.

Maybe a better example: I'm a foreign film buff and I'm always going to rate a foreign film higher than someone who hates reading subtitles. Every time.

"Consider the source" goes for rating reviews as well. Doesn't mean that the source has to be a bad one. De gustibus non est disputandum (*) as the ancient Romans used to say.

(*) I think in modern English, that translates to "Don't get into a fight on your CyRide."

 

[Cyclones_R_GR8]

I saw it, When I saw it was Blumhouse my expectations dropped a bit but it turned out to be a good movie. I would give it a solid 7 but Inde Navarrette's performance bumped it up to an 8-8.5

 

[Cyclones_R_GR8]

Well, relatively low audience scores for movies do exist and he said the score was unprecedented in a positive way, so that kind of answers your question right there doesn't it?

On Rotten Tomatoes it is scored 95% for critics and 94% for viewers which is pretty incredible.

 

[NorthCyd]

No, it doesn't. Most people don't go to a horror movie on a whim.

Case in point: I worked a PS event at the local library last week, and it was one of those where you put a candy dish out to get people to stop. Every kid but one said "Thank you" when invited to take a piece of candy. I was impressed, but the person I was working the event with said, "Yeah, but they're the kind of kids who go to the library". I guess he meant that the unwashed hordes of rude freebooters are more likely to hang out at the local pool hall than at the liberry.

Maybe a better example: I'm a foreign film buff and I'm always going to rate a foreign film higher than someone who hates reading subtitles. Every time.

"Consider the source" goes for rating reviews as well. Doesn't mean that the source has to be a bad one. De gustibus non est disputandum (*) as the ancient Romans used to say.

(*) I think in modern English, that translates to "Don't get into a fight on your CyRide."

Yeah, but he said for a horror film it's very rare... so relative to other horror films it has a much higher audience score. I get the point you are trying to make but you are making this much more complicated than it is.

 

[pourcyne]

Yeah, but he said for a horror film it's very rare... so relative to other horror films it has a much higher audience score. I get the point you are trying to make but you are making this much more complicated than it is.

On the contrary, it's very simple.

If you ask church-goers after church if going to church is worthwhile, they're not going to say no.

People who think it's not worthwhile aren't there in the first place.

Same for horror movies.

 

[NorthCyd]

On the contrary, it's very simple.

If you ask church-goers after church if going to church is worthwhile, they're not going to say no.

People who think it's not worthwhile aren't there in the first place.

Same for horror movies.

Lol! I understand that you think horror fans will have a positive bias for horror films and only horror fans watch horror films, but If that's the case then every horror film would have a high audience score. Dahlia's point is the exact opposite of that.

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

On the contrary, it's very simple.

If you ask church-goers after church if going to church is worthwhile, they're not going to say no.

People who think it's not worthwhile aren't there in the first place.

Same for horror movies.

That's a high rating for any movie, let alone horror.

 

[pourcyne]

That's a high rating for any movie, let alone horror.

Uh-hunh.

https://www.imdb.com/list/ls042036071/

 

[pourcyne]

Lol! I understand that you think horror fans will have a positive bias for horror films and only horror fans watch horror films, but If that's the case then every horror film would have a high audience score. Dahlia's point is the exact opposite of that.

I wonder. You saw who won Eurovision this year, right?

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

Uh-hunh.

https://www.imdb.com/list/ls042036071/

Why didn't they include the rotten tomato score on that list? Seems relevant.

 

[andybernard]

On the contrary, it's very simple.

If you ask church-goers after church if going to church is worthwhile, they're not going to say no.

People who think it's not worthwhile aren't there in the first place.

Same for horror movies.

Yes, but if every sermon was scored by those same church-goers and the average of all sermons was ~70%, and then one sermon scored 95%, common sense would tell you that sermon was "better" than the others.

Do you really not understand this, or are you being purposefully obtuse?

 

[pourcyne]

Do you really not understand this, or are you being purposefully obtuse?

For starters, where do you think name-calling ranks among methods of convincing others of your viewpoint?

One last time for those in the cheap seats...

Horror is a genre that appeals to specific tastes. People who don't care for it are not likely to go to the film. People who do care for it are likely to go to the film.

Polling people who go to such a film and getting a high positive score is no indication that it's a without question a good film. The results show just that people who go to horror movies liked it.

What about that is so hard to understand?

 

[pourcyne]

Why didn't they include the rotten tomato score on that list? Seems relevant.

For "Obsession"?

Probably because the list was created 7 years ago and modified 6 years ago.