Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Conjuring (upcoming horror/ghost film)


Cary Kollins

Recommended Posts

The first reviews are popping up, and it seems like this will be an instant classic. Director James Wan really impressed me with "Insidious" and supposedly he knocks this one out of the park.

The film is rated R not because of violence or language, but because it's too damn intense and scary.

Justin Chang – Variety:

“It takes almost no time for “The Conjuring” to immerse the viewer in its spell, as it teases seemingly minor jolts into frissons of terror, and turns a simple game of hide-and-seek into a tour de force of sustained excitement… The film achieves its most startling effects through motion, not stasis. Wan’s command of horror technique isn’t just virtuosic; it’s borderline rhapsodic, playing the audience like Hitchcock’s proverbial piano.”
http://screenrant.com/the-conjuring-reviews-previews-2013/


I'm not going to read anymore about the film so I'm as green as possible when I see it. This film gets my "CAN'T WAIT" stamp. Comes out July 19th.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James Wan didn't do Sinster, I think you mean Insidious.

 

This does look good though.

 

 

That's right, for some reason I keep wanting to think he did Sinister.  Well obviously I thought Sinister was done well, and it gave me the same creepy feeling as the first half of Insidious.

 

To me the first half of Insidious was terrifying, but it came off the rails in the second half with all the other dimension stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's right, for some reason I keep wanting to think he did Sinister.  Well obviously I thought Sinister was done well, and it gave me the same creepy feeling as the first half of Insidious.

 

To me the first half of Insidious was terrifying, but it came off the rails in the second half with all the other dimension stuff.

 

I liked both personally. Insidious 2 comes out on September 13 btw.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I definitely need to go back and rewatch Insidious.  I saw it in theaters without knowing what to expect and was thrown for a loop when it went from "haunted house" to "alternate dimension twilight zone". 

 

Wan has a very unique talent for crafting suspense on-screen.  He really is virtuosic in that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...