ZDoom

http://deadline.com/2015/07/five-nights ... =ext_iosp_

This is the guy who made the animated movie Monster House,kids movie City of Ember and the Poltergeist remake. If you ask me this guy is not guy at making horror. He's good at making kids movies I mean hell even the Poltergeist remake was way too kid friendly more so than the original. Don't get me wrong his movies are good,but what he's only had 3 movies? I mean I think the only way this guy got anywhere is because of Stephen Speilberg helped him with Monster House. I mean if Poltergeist is any thing to go by with Five Nights At Freddy's then I'm expecting just an ok movie. I know I'm rambling on here,but if you ask me the guy is just not qualified to make this. Someone like John Carpenter or Brian De Palma could have made this really awesome I bet. Tell me what you guys think.

What I think is that you stopped coming here for Doom and only come here for notable movies and movie announcements; I only see you here, like, once every month or two. I think there's a subreddit for that, and probably a million other forums, too.

I have been kinda on and off. I really only come back to see the new wads and stuff. But I just thought this was interesting since it's a video game movie.

spoone wrote:Don't get me wrong his movies are good,but what he's only had 3 movies?

Would you expect a more established/big name director to do something like Five Nights At Freddy's? I wouldn't.

Well no of course not. If you think about it though Brian De Palma or John Carpenter could have seriously made this a legitimate scary movie instead of some kids horror movie. I mean John Carpenter even said he would love to do a Dead Space movie so he's not shooting down video game movies.

Get Oren Peli to do it, FNAF is so stupid as Paranormal Activity is, interesting story but stupidly forced on the methods it uses to make the jumpscares.

Now if you want a good director for that, to fix the bad part FNAF have, the guys who did V/H/S 2 will do it nicely

As much as I love V/H/S I think they would have not been right. They would have made it extremely gory. Also I didn't even think of Oren Peli. I mean Five Nights At Freddy's should be a found footage movie now that I think about it.

But the nice part of V/H/S trilogy is the gore, they reduced it on V/H/S 3 and everyone finds it the weakest movie of the trilogy also the stories shown isn't so nice as the other two movies had.

I find that hard to believe especially after watching the trailer for VHS viral. I never said I had a problem with the gore. It's just it's not right for FNAF.

Well, Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost did a nice job on Paranormal Activity 3 and 4, for me those are the only ones who saves from the stupidy of a static scene with only a fucking single object moving on it while everyone sleeps, exactly because they did scenes which was more aggressive and intense other than "pay attention and see the door closing itself".

spoone wrote:Well no of course not. If you think about it though Brian De Palma or John Carpenter could have seriously made this a legitimate scary movie instead of some kids horror movie.

I dunno. FNAF has never seemed much more that a stupid, kiddyish jumpscare "3spooky5me" game to me. Seems appropriate.

spoone wrote:I mean Five Nights At Freddy's should be a found footage movie now that I think about it.

While that probably would make sense, I think found-footage is a terrible genre. Now that there is no longer any novelty value to it and you can't really have all that "is it real" Blair-Witch-like hype going on, it usually just means a movie that is difficult to watch because it is filmed in a way to deliberately make it look amateur/grainy/shaky/whatever.

Enjay wrote:While that probably would make sense, I think found-footage is a terrible genre. Now that there is no longer any novelty value to it and you can't really have all that "is it real" Blair-Witch-like hype going on, it usually just means a movie that is difficult to watch because it is filmed in a way to deliberately make it look amateur/grainy/shaky/whatever.

I don't find it so stupid, i don't like Blair Witch by the same reason Cloverfield and Paranormal Activity 1/2/Tokyo Night/The Marked Ones is stupid, those doesn't give any true immersion with the scenes, unlike something like V/H/S which they even processed the image of the movie to look like a real 90s VHS tape on supposed scenes and used more pratical VFX than CGI.

Also the new Poltergeist movie is just a bit childish exactly because the excessive use of CGI (Damn that scene inside the Dimension of the dead is so retard as Transformers 4 entirely)

Was Tokyo night even canon to the rest of them? Also I didn't mind that Ghost dimension thing in Poltergeist. I just wished it were done better.

Toyko Night is a spin-off between the storyline of 1 and 2, however it can be completely discarded and The Marked Ones can be (especially because that fail try to chain the ending with the beggining of the first movie)

Enjay wrote: While that probably would make sense, I think found-footage is a terrible genre. Now that there is no longer any novelty value to it and you can't really have all that "is it real" Blair-Witch-like hype going on, it usually just means a movie that is difficult to watch because it is filmed in a way to deliberately make it look amateur/grainy/shaky/whatever.

I would recommend the movie "Grave Encounters". It's low budget, but it does something in horror I'd not seen before and managed to make found footage believable. Just stay far away from the sequel.