Candyman

Ass of Can Whooping said: Please don't use that word. I'll sooner see switch ports before **** ports This like that candyman movie? I say XBOX three times and you jump out of the PS5 and hack me to death?

Watched a remake of Candyman on iPlayer. It was pretty shit.

So I guess CM is like Candyman

Silva 5 said: ↑ REWINDER!!!!!!!!!!!! Click to expand... REWINDER!!!!!!!!! (is he like Candyman?)

Quote: Originally Posted by disengage Bill Nunn Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh

...=PINHEAD, RED FACE, THE NUN, CANDYMAN, ANNABELLE, GHOSTFACE AND ARACHNOPHOBIA. FIND...

_Here_For_The_Comments said: The DIRT of the sheet Some difference between that shot and of her other day and ill just ignore whatever stain that is Also be careful of banging pots - mighr be like Candyman. Bang it few times, she'll think theres mince in the pot and suddenly appear!!

Don't say my name, it's like a reverse Candyman thing where it conjours up Mike instead

...) Zedd f/Aloe Blacc - Candyman 3.) (1.) (7) Ellie Goulding...

... pretty obscure B movie level. Candyman maybe? Who else is really...

Originally posted by Candyman: I’ve used longer wings off ...

... guy's been in at least candyman and willys wonderland. And to...

This is interesting. But I got to be honest. When I read the title Candyman, I was convinced that we were talking about a crossover between marvel and the horror movie.

... View attachment 202578 John the Candyman had one of these clankers...

The VVitch Blair Witch Project The Omen The Exorcist Candyman

candyman×5 kirjoitti: To Maalis 05, ...

candyman said: The 20-50 focal length ...

... World” between Mama Tried and Candyman

Candyman is near.

... Webmail) 18. Christina Aguilera - Candyman (13:37 - Webmail/) 19...

candyman said: Well, it will be 6 to 8 years before an R6 Mark V arrives (if) R6 V will be 'old' by then. More important: it is called R6 Mark V Also, has any Canon product ever reached mark V designation? Maybe one of the old 18-55 kit lenses?

... of alcohol while on duty. "Candyman" Allegations: During his time in... House, Jackson earned the nickname "Candyman" due to allegations that he...

... some horror movies, most notably Candyman (1992). 8/10

... some horror movies, most notably Candyman (1992). 8/10

... Costa (avec le remake de Candyman), Jen et Sylvia Soska, Natalie...

submitted by /u/Sorry_Phone1676 to r/moviecritic [link] [comments]

I watched the most recent Candyman last night and didn't really care for it. It just dosen't really compare to the original at at all, lacking both the dream like quality and Tony Todd's sheer charisma. Some interesting ideas, but largely very boring. However, there is one part of the story that I found so utterly tasteless that I can't believe that no one talks about it, that this movie never got any major heat for it. In the movie the main human villain explains that the Candyman from the original is not the only candyman. In fact, any Black man who dies from a racially motivated murder can potentially become a candyman. These candymen include Anthony Crawford, James Byrd Jr., and George Stinney, who are all actual Black men who have been murdered. I'm not opposed to the idea of more than one candyman if the concept is actually used well but the movie totally wastes it. The Tony Todd one only shows up in (admittedly very well done) flashbacks and then at the very end for some reason that's never fully explained. Anthony isn't a candyman until the very end, and the candyman we do get for most of the movie, who provides all the kills, is just boring. Dude just smiles and floats around. He has none of the hypnotizing, Phantom of The Operaesque energy of Todd. But not only is this idea poorly implemented, it just dosen't make sense in-universe. Both the O.G Candyman and this film's Candyman have hook hands being major parts of their backstory. Anthony is given before he dies because certain criteria needs to be met or whatever. But none of the other guys had hook hands irl or anything like that. So why did Anthony need one? Was him being murdered by the police not enough? And, again, all the other candymen mentioned were real people. The most recent one, James Byrd Jr, died in 1998. That's less than thirty years ago! His children are still alive! This film implies that these real people, who suffered real violence, are evil murder ghosts. What the actual fuck? That's like if a movie twenty years from now said "oh yeah George Floyd is the boogeyman btw." I remember when this movie came out and so many heaped praise on it. I'm just in awe that this script was actually allowed to see the light of day. We should've got that Leperchaun crossover instead. submitted by /u/insane677 to r/horror [link] [comments]

I am fully prepared to be attacked for this opinion so I want to preface this by saying I do not know much of the history of how the film was made and I just finished watching it for the first time. I am just trying to gain a better understanding of the film when I am writing this. I do not understand why Candyman (1992) is so highly praised, when it makes the same mistakes that so many other horror movies make. I went into this with minimal knowledge besides the fact that this movie is widly loved and it is a film that prominently features black stories. What I didn't except watching it was for this film to make the exact same mistakes that every other horror movie makes and end up having the main focus on the movie be from a white woman's perspective. Black people throughoit the entire movie are simply used as a device to move Helen forward in the movie and none of them are ever fully actualized. Instead we see the only black people living in the projects, living simple, slow lives. I did not believe that Cabrini Green exists as anything but to aid Helen in her own quest to "save" these poor black people who couldn't do anything without her. My main issue with the film is that it poses itself as a black story while only focusing on the experience of a white woman and it comes of as just some white savior disappointment. I will say I still don't hate the movie. I think the score was amazing, the setting was incredibly haunting, and I think Candyman is a super well designed character who I wish the movie focused more on. The execution is just not as incredible as I was led to believe by the raving reviews I have heard from this film. Please, if I missed the point of this whole film let me know. I may have just misunderstood everything and gone in with the wrong expectations, but I really just want to gain a better understanding of why this is a cult classic. submitted by /u/Snoo-25642 to r/horror [link] [comments]

Whenever you see people post pictures or talk about the legends of horror, Candyman is nowhere to be seen. The first Candyman has one of the best stories I’ve seen for a slasher movie and Tony Todd’s performance has a presence that’s just unmatched. It’s really a shame how little attention this series has. submitted by /u/manymade1 to r/slasherfilms [link] [comments]

I thought it had really cool moments and the acting was excellent. It felt like a lot was missing though, like they clearly cut a lot of scenes out including Helen. I also didn’t care for the ending. Unless I’m misinterpreting it (so please correct me if I’m wrong), it felt like they were trying to make Candyman an Anti-hero which doesn’t work well for me personally. What were your thoughts on the film? submitted by /u/tsalyers12 to r/slasherfilms [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/MarvelsGrantMan136 to r/television [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/cruelsummerbummer to r/horror [link] [comments]

I’ve always been a huge fan of the OG Candyman film from 1992. So when I heard that it was getting a sequel I was really hyped for it, as everything about the advertising and trailers really seemed interesting. The idea of the kidnapped baby being the main character all these years later was very interesting to me and I think the spookified version of Say My Name from Destiny’s Child was actually well done. That being said, when the film came out I never got around to seeing it in theaters(In retrospect I’m glad I didn’t), but a few days ago me and my girlfriend rewatched the first one and we ended up finally checking out the long awaited sequel. Now I remember a decent amount of praise the movie received upon release but if i’m gonna be honest, as a fan of both Horror and the OG film, this sequel was not good at all and it left me extremely disappointed. It’s hard to narrow it down but in the most concise way I can say it, I think the movie fails because it is completely vacant of all the things that made the original great. Candyman in this movie, quite frankly, sucks and I don’t get how more people that favored the movie upon release didn’t mention this. I get what they were going for with the multiple Candymen thing but the stand in they create just doesn’t work. In the first film Candyman was an enigmatic entity, but he had an agenda and goal. His obsession with Helen and his motive for killing was one of the highlights. The “Candyman” in this film was just a hollowed out shadow of the original. He doesn’t talk, he doesn’t have any real objective and simply comes and kills people upon being summoned(bit of a nitpick but his drip was also waaaay shittier than the OG’s fur coat). Which yeah, Candyman kills people that say his name 5 times, but it's made abudnantly clear in the first film that he does that ultimately just to keep his legend going, and he is completely capable of killing and not killing at his leisure. Hell it's left open if he even actually kills people everytime people say the chant because the movie cleverly makes it apparent that alot of the stuff exposited about him is folklore and rumors and it's completely impossible to tell who was and wasn't killed by him and not just a product of violence in the projects before the events of the movie. The reason for this is Instead of actually going all in and exploring the concept of Candyman existing as an ever changing variable entity dependent on the perspective of the people he’s hunting, the movie backseat the character of the Candyman in favor of heavy handed political soapboxing and an absurd plot about the laundromat guy trying to create a new Candyman. The first film was about belief and the power it holds, that's why a black community scarred by gentrification was able to sustain this inhuman venegful ghost. Daniel Robitalle was a victim, but his tragedy became a legend that immortalized him and made it so that he had to shed innocent blood so that NO ONE would forget who he was and why he was. But the sequel would rather throw away subtlety and subtext and make Candyman less of an urban legend made real, and more a political statement. The final scene is absolutely ridiculous and by the film's end I think the movie wants you to forget that inspite Candyman's tragic backstory he is a still villain who lost his humanity and became utterly rotten to the core. Furthermore, as I said before, the idea of making the now grown up baby the main character was a good one, but the actual character is poor. He acts incredibly weird throughout the film and is nowhere near as well rounded a character as Helen was. So it was difficult for me to empathize with him. He spends like half the mvoie just getting pushed around from plot point to plot point and the other half as if he's under some sort of weird trance. Like why the hell did he wait so long to get his hand checked out at the hospital and how the fuck did the Laundromat get him completely under his control at the end? By the end when he is killed I don’t feel sorrow for his character’s rebirth into the Candyman, I just feel frustrated that Helen’s valiant sacrifice and effort went to nothing. The baby would become a spectral murderer and she didn’t truly defeat Candyman. Pretty much everything about this movie was absurd to the point where I question if Nia DaCosta and Jordan Peele had ever seen the original film. To be honest I think I actually prefer Farewell to the Flesh and Day of the Dead over this film as a Candyman film. submitted by /u/Spidey_Jay_ to r/horror [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Hjortenn to r/LivestreamFail [link] [comments]

Ok so I rewatched both the 1992 version and the 2021 version. Just to make things clear I love both movies but there is something that always bugged me about both of them... In the 1992 version, Candyman is a painter who was a victim of horrible and brutal racism. So when he's candyman, why does he terrorize an already oppressed community. Seems kind of strange that he would haunt Cabrini Green and be the thing that made him who he is. Dont get me wrong I love the movie but I couldn't for the life of me understand why he would do this. Is he just stuck in Cabrini Green and is forced to terrorize them to keep himself alive? If thats the case, he wouldn't really be able to follow Helen around would he? I kinda thought candyman would align his victims more so for the 2021 version. Killing those who threaten the black community but that also kind of problematic its own. Like how scary is he if he just keeps killing racist white people. Is candyman a good guy? I hope I conveyed my thoughts correctly, let me know what you guys think. submitted by /u/Miggytee1029 to r/horror [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/thetransportedman to r/gorehouse [link] [comments]

I like old and campy horror movies, so it wasn’t at all due to its lower budget feel or age. It just felt like a tv knockoff movie of Nightmare on Elm Street. The only redeemable aspect to me was the use of real bees haha. It blows my mind that it saw several sequels and a remake submitted by /u/thetransportedman to r/horror [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/chanma50 to r/movies [link] [comments]

Poll If you've seen the film, please rate it at this poll If you haven't seen the film but would like to see the result of the poll click here Rankings Click here to see the rankings of 2021 films Click here to see the rankings for every poll done Summary: A "spiritual sequel" to the horror film Candyman (1992) that returns to the now-gentrified Chicago neighborhood where the legend began. Director: Nia DaCosta Writers: Jordan Peele, Win Rosenfeld, Nia DaCosta Cast: Yahya Abdul-Mateen II as Anthony McCoy Teyonah Parris as Brianna Cartwright Nathan Stewart-Jarrett as Troy Cartwright Colman Domingo as William Burke Kyle Kaminsky as Grady Greenburg Vanessa Williams as Anne-Marie McCoy Brian King as Clive Privler Rotten Tomatoes: 86% Metacritic: 73 VOD: Theaters submitted by /u/LiteraryBoner to r/movies [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Samoht99 to r/movies [link] [comments]

The new film adaptation of Books of Blood just premiered on Hulu last week, so I hope you’ve seen it by now. I’m really proud of the way Brannon Braga brought my words to life, and I hope you have some questions about it. I also have a new novel, Deep Hill, a large collection of out-of-print short stories, new short stories and a novella called Mercy and the Jackal, with the collection to be called Fear Eternal. Proof: https://twitter.com/RealCliveBarker/status/1314673139352133632 EDIT I hope at some point I’ll get a chance to do this again with you all. It’s been fun imagining who is at the other end of this conversation, and it’s been a pleasure answering such articulate and well-conceived questions. Thank you so much. Have a good time with the Books of Blood movie and I hope we all have another one to show you next year. Take care everybody, keep safe, my love and best wishes to you. – Clive submitted by /u/Hulu_Official to r/horror [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/SanderSo47 to r/movies [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/hildebrand_rarity to r/movies [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/Fitz_cuniculus to r/todayilearned [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/BunyipPouch to r/movies [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/BunyipPouch to r/movies [link] [comments]

submitted by /u/ZombieSlayer5 to r/deadbydaylight [link] [comments]