# What Are The Things You  Dislike most about Modern Horror Movies ?



## BAYLOR (Feb 21, 2022)

I tend to like the classics  even though they don't really scare me anymore. They seemed  have craftsmanship and care and entertainment value  that modern films with some notable exceptions seem to lack .


----------



## CupofJoe (Feb 21, 2022)

For me, it could be the lack of restraint. There doesn't seem to be much that can't be shown on screen.
When, even in to the 70s, things had to be suggested and hinted at, there was tension. It built and built and then you got your release as a gag or a shock.
Now films seem to go from 0 to 11 in no time at all. There is no middle ground.
But I am far from an aficionado of the horror genre. I can't remember the last horror film I watched let alone enjoyed.
Except for maybe *Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale*. That was great fun but not only a horror.


----------



## Justin Swanton (Feb 21, 2022)

No real horror. Or maybe I'm just jaded.

One of the most effective horror films I saw recently was *I am a Ghost.* No gore or any CG terrors. Just a gradual revelation to the protagonist of her true nature and her utterly horrendous fate when that revelation is complete.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 20, 2022)

They're not scary


----------



## Rodders (Mar 20, 2022)

Horror is a really tough genre to get right. 

I think jump scares are a pretty cheap trick in horror movies.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 20, 2022)

Rodders said:


> Horror is a really tough genre to get right.
> 
> *I think jump scares are a pretty cheap trick in horror movies.*




I agree, although they can also be very effective, especially if you've built up the tension successfully.

Sound can also play an important part in building the horror/scares. Two of the most effective for this are Jaws with the incidental music playing when the shark is lurking, and Aliens with the beeping of the scanners on the marines' rifles.

I think the toughest thing for modern horror is the number of quality horror movies that have gone before. Whereas other genres can use modern effects to bridge the lack of quality, CGI only serves to decrease the overall experience when it comes to horror. Because there's nothing that the movie director can put on the screen which will be as scary as that which is in the imagination of the viewer.


----------



## Rodders (Mar 20, 2022)

Do you think Horror loses something when it becomes a franchise?


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 20, 2022)

Rodders said:


> Do you think Horror loses something when it becomes a franchise?


It loses evething because it become predictable cliched and unscary.


----------



## worldofmutes (Mar 20, 2022)

I love the jump scares.
Give me nothing but jump scares. 

*Evil Dead *is the good stuff.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 20, 2022)

worldofmutes said:


> I love the jump scares.
> Give me nothing but jump scares.
> 
> *Evil Dead *is the good stuff.



Evil Dead 1 and 2 are great stuff  

* Army of Darkness *is flat-out funny as a hell and, a terrific time travel fantasy adventure film. It was foreshadow by the second film and its original title was *The Medieval Dead. *I kid you not*. *


----------



## worldofmutes (Mar 20, 2022)

Cool!  
What I dislike is the people who have complained so strongly about jump scares that they’ve replaced them with superstitious/religious phooey that is just plain corny and dumb.

People don’t like jump scares for the same reason they don’t like needles. It hurtz! It hurtz! Oooh, that wasn’t so bad!


----------



## KGeo777 (Mar 20, 2022)

I've lost interest in horror for a long time. Thinking of a couple--they are 20 years old yet somehow it doesn't feel like a long time--the House on Haunted Hill 1999. I watched that recently.

That had some good things in it--I liked the black vapor ghost at the end but the CGI was so dated that it doesn't impress or scare.
If they had done a practical version I may have liked it more. It would have felt more real--using a water tank or something. It was a neat design with the faces appearing on it.

Plus the film was so brightly lit--the sets seemed artificial and you couldn't be creeped out when you assumed 100 crew people were standing by the lights.  The Shining never gave that impression.
You knew it was expensive but it didn't seem like it--the outside snow scenes--I assumed that was a real outdoor location.
I liked Geoffrey Rush's Vincent Price homage. That was a nice touch but otherwise, the movie didn't do anything for me. And I am not a fan of the original either so...

Another was 30 Days of Night--it had potential but got bogged down by a few things.
The cast was good, and it had a spooky idea but something just didn't work. The vampires were interestingly weird.

Oh I know one that was effective.
The Ring--the asian version.
I am not interested in rewatching it--it did have atmosphere and some creepy things like the blurry photos--but that scene with the TV really creeped me out.
I was squirming in my chair and swearing outloud about how creepy it was.
So effective and yet simple--the guy doesn't see the long hair shape coming out of the tv--the shot is one continuous sequence with no edits (I hear the US version cuts away).
Ironically I watched it on VHS-it was a tape someone had sent to me!


----------



## paranoid marvin (Mar 22, 2022)

Horror lost a lot when they moved to colour. There's something so much more atmospheric and uncanny about a b&w horror movie.

I think the last one I saw that creeped me out was probably the original Blair Witch Project.


----------



## Guttersnipe (Mar 25, 2022)

Jump scares, I think, are the worst feature of more contemporary horror films. And they're just not that scary.


----------



## worldofmutes (Mar 26, 2022)

Eh, I like them though. 
Instead of feeling completely underwhelmed with the anticipation of something only to be left hanging. That throws my serotonin out of balance.



worldofmutes said:


> they’ve replaced them with superstitious/religious phooey that is just plain corny and dumb.


I’d like to retract this statement as a personal bias after seeing The Conjuring I and II, and also a really bogus short film.


----------



## Randy M. (Apr 4, 2022)

I dislike franchises. The first movie may have some impact, but the photocopies rarely do. Usually that ties into my next dislike ...

Poor scripts. You can have a director with a distinctive style and you can hire talented actors, but you need to give them material to work with. And the scripts don't need to be overly complicated. I saw _Sinister_ for the first time recently, and it's not a complex story, but the way it's filmed and acted, with direction and editing that enhances the creepiness. (Yeah, I know it's a franchise, and I doubt I'll ever watch the 2nd one.)


----------



## Zach777 (Apr 4, 2022)

I would also have to agree with making everything a franchise. Why can't we just have a standalone movie, or at least a movie series that has a concrete ending?

I would say there have been some good modern horror movies, but some seem to just go for trying to be scaring and either not working, or not having a compelling story along with the scares.


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 4, 2022)

Randy M. said:


> I dislike franchises. The first movie may have some impact, but the photocopies rarely do. Usually that ties into my next dislike ...
> 
> Poor scripts. You can have a director with a distinctive style and you can hire talented actors, but you need to give them material to work with. And the scripts don't need to be overly complicated. I saw _Sinister_ for the first time recently, and it's not a complex story, but the way it's filmed and acted, with direction and editing that enhances the creepiness. (Yeah, I know it's a franchise, and I doubt I'll ever watch the 2nd one.)





Zach777 said:


> I would also have to agree with making everything a franchise. Why can't we just have a standalone movie, or at least a movie series that has a concrete ending?
> 
> I would say there have been some good modern horror movies, but some seem to just go for trying to be scaring and either not working, or not having a compelling story along with the scares.



The Resident Evil films for example should have been maybe 3 films tops with a definite ending.  Better writing and script would have also helped here.


----------



## Zach777 (Apr 4, 2022)

BAYLOR said:


> The Resident Evil films for example should have been maybe 3 films tops with a definite ending.  Better writing ans script would have also helped here.


Exactly. Many companies just want to milk a series for as far as possible instead of just ending it at a coherent and reasonable spot.


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 4, 2022)

Zach777 said:


> Exactly. Many companies just want to milk a series for as far as possible instead of just ending it at a coherent and reasonable spot.



Thats standard practice in Hollywood.


----------



## Zach777 (Apr 4, 2022)

BAYLOR said:


> Thats standard practice in Hollywood.


Yes, and it's dumb.


----------



## KGeo777 (Apr 4, 2022)

The mentality of making movies has changed so dramatically. Horror films used to be the most lucrative genre for low budget producers. I sometimes hear about a very low budget film--amateur type--with an interesting premise. There was one about people on a barge with monsters in a lake. Not original but there's potential for it to be decent, especially if the characters and tension are thought out. The Flesh Eaters was super cheap and yet very effective.

I heard about a guy who was a film critic and he has a Kickstarter film going--a horror film.  I am not excited because it is found footage (which I hate). Also he revealed he is pansexual.
Do I need to know this in deciding whether to watch his movie? If he told us his favorite food or sports team, then it would be a done deal, of course. I would have to rush to see whatever he made if he loved avocados.


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 4, 2022)

KGeo777 said:


> The mentality of making movies has changed so dramatically. Horror films used to be the most lucrative genre for low budget producers. I sometimes hear about a very low budget film--amateur type--with an interesting premise. There was one about people on a barge with monsters in a lake. Not original but there's potential for it to be decent, especially if the characters and tension are thought out. The Flesh Eaters was super cheap and yet very effective.
> 
> I heard about a guy who was a film critic and he has a Kickstarter film going--a horror film.  I am not excited because it is found footage (which I hate). Also he revealed he is pansexual.
> Do I need to know this in deciding whether to watch his movie? If he told us his favorite food or sports team, then it would be a done deal, of course. I would have to rush to see whatever he made if he loved avocados.



Hammer made some of the greasiest Horror and science fiction films of all-time and , they were quality  ans so were some American Internationals films.


----------



## Le Panda du Mal (Apr 8, 2022)

I think my two biggest problems with modern horror movies are the following:

1. The urge to explain. Oftentimes a film has a somewhat effective atmosphere, or particularly unsettling imagery, but then squanders it with banal exposition. Generally speaking we really don't need the monster's back story, or an explanation of the precise mechanism by which a curse is activated and its motivation.

2. "It's actually about real life." All horror touches on "real life," duh. Shoving this realization in the audience's face does not actually make the horror feel more relevant, just less effective. So many promising films get ruined by the filmmakers' desire to shout "This is actually a metaphor for losing a parent/ cancer/ divorce/ loneliness, guys! We're not just a genre movie, we're serious stuff!"

I guess the above two points could be subsumed into one: A fear of ambiguity, irrationality, and loose ends- all of which feature heavily in a lot of effective horror.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 8, 2022)

What are ‘Modern Horror Movies’? Perhaps ‘Hollywood’ ones. If you’re serious about horror (and know anything) you avoid English language ones. Turkey, Argentina, Spain (esp Spain, actually) stand out as good producers. 

Threads like this exasperate me — as a minority fan (in terms of genre preferences) on this site the stuff that gets thrown around… my god. It’s like seeing those Twitter posts where someone unremarkable somehow has 2k+ followers by asking questions like ‘what’s your favourite horror, you can choose only 3’. 

So reductive.


----------



## Le Panda du Mal (Apr 8, 2022)

Phyrebrat said:


> What are ‘Modern Horror Movies’? Perhaps ‘Hollywood’ ones. If you’re serious about horror (and know anything) you avoid English language ones. Turkey, Argentina, Spain (esp Spain, actually) stand out as good producers.
> 
> Threads like this exasperate me — as a minority fan (in terms of genre preferences) on this site the stuff that gets thrown around… my god. It’s like seeing those Twitter posts where someone unremarkable somehow has 2k+ followers by asking questions like ‘what’s your favourite horror, you can choose only 3’.
> 
> So reductive.



It's a fair point. It's a shame that discussions get stuck on US/ Anglosphere films. One of the finest horror films I've seen in the past 10 years is The Wailing, directed by South Korea's Na Hong-Jin (who previously directed the excellent thrillers The Chaser and The Yellow Sea).


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 8, 2022)

Le Panda du Mal said:


> It's a fair point. It's a shame that discussions get stuck on US/ Anglosphere films. One of the finest horror films I've seen in the past 10 years is The Wailing, directed by South Korea's Na Hong-Jin (who previously directed the excellent thrillers The Chaser and The Yellow Sea).



Loved the Wailing. I’ve loved Asian horror for about 20 years but it’s becoming very samey. There’re some great Asian horror tv shows on Shudder, Netflix etc. 

I can see the limitation of our thinking in past decades, but the availability of non-Hollywood horror via streaming, indies and YouTube counters that nowadays. My advice would be don’t go see ‘modern horror’ (whatever that is) if you’re expecting no jump scares or the usual cliches and tropes. 

I’ll still watch a film where a new family move into a house — one of my favourite setups— but if it’s American mainstream I know it will be the same old same old.


----------



## Le Panda du Mal (Apr 8, 2022)

Phyrebrat said:


> Loved the Wailing. I’ve loved Asian horror for about 20 years but it’s becoming very samey. There’re some great Asian horror tv shows on Shudder, Netflix etc.
> 
> I can see the limitation of our thinking in past decades, but the availability of non-Hollywood horror via streaming, indies and YouTube counters that nowadays. My advice would be don’t go see ‘modern horror’ (whatever that is) if you’re expecting no jump scares or the usual cliches and tropes.
> 
> I’ll still watch a film where a new family move into a house — one of my favourite setups— but if it’s American mainstream I know it will be the same old same old.



What are some Turkish, Spanish, or Argentinean films you'd recommend? I don't think I've seen anything from Turkey or Argentina.


----------



## KGeo777 (Apr 8, 2022)

Phyrebrat said:


> What are ‘Modern Horror Movies’? Perhaps ‘Hollywood’ ones. If you’re serious about horror (and know anything) you avoid English language ones. Turkey, Argentina, Spain (esp Spain, actually) stand out as good producers.


And that is the alarming and depressing thing. In 1970, if you listed horror films of the year--you would have a few Spanish titles (Amando de Ossorio), and some Asian ones--mainly Japan, Brazil perhaps too,  but the rest would be Europe or North America. Dozens of directors who specialized in horror for film or tv.
And these days, Europe and North America have the worst output.
All the energy and excitement and passion is gone, or, if there are decent films being made, they are buried.

It should not be this bad. 
It shouldn't just be Blumhouse and dilettante horror films like the Witch--that walks the line between horror and drama.


Maybe some of it is just a lack of desire but I think the monetary restrictions on media opportunity is the main culprit.
 In 1970 there was Mario Bava, Dario Argento, Curtis Harrington, Jess Franco (for better or worse), Bob Kelljan, Jean Rollin, Al Adamson (definitely for worse), Dan Curtis, Freddie Francis, Peter Sasdy, Robert Fuest, Gordon Hessler, Daniel Haller, Terence Fisher, Peter Collinson, Stephen Weeks, Pete Walker--and this is just English language films or dubbed into English---not including the murder mysteries and thrillers.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 8, 2022)

Le Panda du Mal said:


> What are some Turkish, Spanish, or Argentinean films you'd recommend? I don't think I've seen anything from Turkey or Argentina.


Aterrados/Terrified is probably the best horror I’ve seen for many years. Very original and it has a couple of set-pieces that turned my blood cold. There’s a recent Spanish one set in the civil war in a country farmhouse about a woman and her child. I’ll post the name when I remember it. 

I recently saw an incredible Turkish film where the police go to check out a disturbance… it’s got a strange name like Baskin or something. Very strange and enjoyable, I suspect, because we are so used to watching horror with a western eye, that when we watch foreign horror films or non-English-language horror films they give us a sense of isolation or otherness that is missing in the safety and cosiness of American horror.

Having said all that about western and English language horror, the horror films that I have really enjoyed from Hollywood such as Sinister; such as The Conjuring such as Paranormal Activity 1-3.  I have watched The Witch, Midsommar and The Lighthouse — also The Babadook (obviously). But if I want to watch something that is a real treat and original, I will watch a non-English language horror film.

I have noticed there have been a lot more productions made as a short series lately and these can be really terrifying. They allow they allow full character development and backstory without going into some boring origin prequel movie franchise.

I think people wanting to watch original horror need to do a bit more research before paying out the money and then complaining it’s something they’ve already seen 10 times.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 8, 2022)

KGeo777 said:


> And that is the alarming and depressing thing. In 1970, if you listed horror films of the year--you would have a few Spanish titles (Amando de Ossorio), and some Asian ones--mainly Japan, Brazil perhaps too,  but the rest would be Europe or North America. Dozens of directors who specialized in horror for film or tv.
> And these days, Europe and North America have the worst output.
> All the energy and excitement and passion is gone, or, if there are decent films being made, they are buried.
> 
> ...



^this!!

And, it just occurred to me, that as Hollywood is so figures-oriented, I suspect they restrict themselves to categorising a horror audience as  teens and thus dumb it down (even tho today’s teens are so switched on and capable of grasping themes and symbology). 

I also get frustrated as a horror reader; so many outstanding stories to adapt but no, let’s keep on pouring out the Blumiverse franchises.


----------



## Randy M. (Apr 8, 2022)

Actually, in some of those cases the lack of money inspired greater imagination. That was true earlier, too, as when Val Lewton had little budget and went more for atmosphere and a healthy script, or with George Romero and _Night of the Living Dead_.


----------



## Le Panda du Mal (Apr 8, 2022)

A recent American release I really liked was David Bruckner's _The Night House_. Takes its time and keeps things suggestively creepy. It does veer a bit toward the "hey kids, this is a metaphor" but didn't drive off the cliff with it. I was less impressed with Bruckner's previous film _The Ritual_.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 8, 2022)

Randy M. said:


> Actually, in some of those cases the lack of money inspired greater imagination. That was true earlier, too, as when Val Lewton had little budget and went more for atmosphere and a healthy script, or with George Romero and _Night of the Living Dead_.



So true. Limitations often make great strictures  for work. The recent structures of a Covid lockdown lead to the massive success of indie cheapie ‘Host’. Whilst not my favourite horror, and only semi-original, it was far better than, say, the horrendously vapid Texas Chainsaw Masacre on Netflix.

It chapter 1&2 were a riot and highly enjoyable but that’s because Pennywise/The Losers/ SK are pop-cultural touchstones for us. Pennywise is cool not scary. How did we end up feeling joy for a child-killing Alien in a clown costume? The same way we did with Freddie Krueger. Isn’t child abuse and murder the most horrible thing? Yet here are two massively successful franchises that make their protagonist ’cool’.

Horror is so complex and diverse but it gets treated as a ‘kill count’ movie by so many.

Ftr I don’t find gore or blood scary. I find it lazy. I’d rather see jump scares than gore. Bring back the creeping dread of an M R James story, not the gore of 70s and 80s!! If anyone’s seen the 1968 Omnibus version of ‘Oh Whistle and I’ll Come to You, My Lad’ with Michael Hordern as Professor Parkins you’ll see no gore or jump scares need be employed  in horror to evoke a visceral reaction.


----------



## Le Panda du Mal (Apr 8, 2022)

KGeo777 said:


> And that is the alarming and depressing thing. In 1970, if you listed horror films of the year--you would have a few Spanish titles (Amando de Ossorio), and some Asian ones--mainly Japan, Brazil perhaps too,  but the rest would be Europe or North America. Dozens of directors who specialized in horror for film or tv.
> And these days, Europe and North America have the worst output.
> All the energy and excitement and passion is gone, or, if there are decent films being made, they are buried.
> 
> ...



60's and 70's are definitely my favorite era for horror, and there always seems to be another forgotten gem waiting to be dug up. For instance there seems to be a whole raft of great Mexican films that have yet to be made properly available to the Anglo audience. Some great recent films I've seen from this era are Daughters of Darkness and The House with Laughing Windows. I'm currently in the middle of a German horror flick delightfully titled The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism and so far it compares well with classics from Hammer and Bava.


----------



## alexvss (Apr 8, 2022)

I agree with what's been said about mainstream Horror, but I'd add A24 as an American production company that deserves your attention. The movies by Ari Aster (*Hereditary* and *Midsommar*, with the exception of The Strange Thing about the Johson's cause that's simply disgusting), Robert Edgers (*The Witch*, *The Lighthouse*, *The Northman*) and Alex Garland (*Ex Machina*, *Annihilation*) are considered modern classics. There are also less known movies by this producer. I'd mention *Lamb* and *X*.

I also agree that Horror is a very international genre though, and The U.S. has lost its dominance (if it ever had in the first place). Thailand makes great horror. I recently watched a movie from Guiana called La Llorona, which is great.


----------



## KGeo777 (Apr 8, 2022)

Le Panda du Mal said:


> 60's and 70's are definitely my favorite era for horror, and there always seems to be another forgotten gem waiting to be dug up. For instance there seems to be a whole raft of great Mexican films that have yet to be made properly available to the Anglo audience. Some great recent films I've seen from this era are Daughters of Darkness and The House with Laughing Windows. I'm currently in the middle of a German horror flick delightfully titled The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism and so far it compares well with classics from Hammer and Bava.




Mexico was influential on the gothic horror cycle--they may have sparked the Hammer gothic phase which in turn inspired the AIP Poe series.


Cheaper can definitely be better for creativity.

There's a quote by Orson Welles which I like repeating: *an* *absence of limitations is the enemy of art.*

Another problem is the MST3K attitude--there's a mocking attitude towards a suspension of disbelief nowadays and I think it hinders the ability to appreciate straight horror stories, especially economical made ones with an imaginative theme.

I really hate found footage films though.
I despise them because the lack of traditional narrative structure and musical scores and photography---it's not a boon for horror to do everything like a news documentary.
I really hate them.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 8, 2022)

Le Panda du Mal said:


> The House with Laughing Windows


This is one of my favourite ever films. Soundtrack, eerie pre-Twin Peaks community, ‘that scene’, the painting, all of it. It’s exceptionally good. I’ve order Pupi  Avati’s _Zeder_ from overseas because I loved HWTLW so much.


----------



## Le Panda du Mal (Apr 8, 2022)

KGeo777 said:


> I really hate found footage films though.
> I despise them because the lack of traditional narrative structure and musical scores and photography---it's not a boon for horror to do everything like a news documentary.
> I really hate them.



I admit I liked the first Blair Witch and also the first Paranormal Activity, though I wouldn't hold them up as masterpieces. I suppose found footage could be roughly construed as a cinematic equivalent to found manuscript stories like Machen's The White People (not that any of these films is that good). I agree that "found footage" doesn't seem to carry much promise as a sustainable sub-genre. I think the last film I saw in this strain was As Above, So Below which was a waste of time (and a waste of a great title and premise too).


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 9, 2022)

Le Panda du Mal said:


> I admit I liked the first Blair Witch and also the first Paranormal Activity, though I wouldn't hold them up as masterpieces. I suppose found footage could be roughly construed as a cinematic equivalent to found manuscript stories like Machen's The White People (not that any of these films is that good). I agree that "found footage" doesn't seem to carry much promise as a sustainable sub-genre. I think the last film I saw in this strain was As Above, So Below which was a waste of time (and a waste of a great title and premise too).



 The Blair Witch and its found footage gimmick and other plot devices didn't impress .


----------



## paranoid marvin (Apr 9, 2022)

Horror an comedy I think are the hardest things to film (or write about). Generally the purposes of a movie is to entertain and (sometimes) to inform the viewer; sit back and enjoy the ride. Comedy and horror are different, because they have to exact an emotional response from the viewer; and the issue with these two subjects is that we all have different things that elicit these responses.

Personally I found the first Blair Witch to be innovative, interesting and quite scary in parts. But since this time the genre has been done to death, and there are few (if any) that are worth more than a cursory glance.


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 9, 2022)

paranoid marvin said:


> Horror an comedy I think are the hardest things to film (or write about). Generally the purposes of a movie is to entertain and (sometimes) to inform the viewer; sit back and enjoy the ride. Comedy and horror are different, because they have to exact an emotional response from the viewer; and the issue with these two subjects is that we all have different things that elicit these responses.
> 
> Personally I found the first Blair Witch to be innovative, interesting and quite scary in parts. But since this time the genre has been done to death, and there are few (if any) that are worth more than a cursory glance.



Didn't The Blair Witch get parodies in one the Scary movie films?


----------



## Vladd67 (Apr 9, 2022)

BAYLOR said:


> Didn't The Blair Witch get parodies in one the Scary movie films?


Yes with a nose full of snot in the close up.


----------



## KGeo777 (Apr 12, 2022)

I think there should be more focus on performance.
It's easy to underestimate how much spookiness can be generated from just acting.

I.e. in Jaws, the Indianapolis story. That's like a ghost story being told. There's a little music with it but otherwise it is all based on words and the single performer.
I was thinking of a scene in The Legend of Hell House where someone is possessed and she's acting really creepy while speaking to Roddy McDowall.
It is is entirely without special effects and yet one of the creepiest scenes. Also, same movie, where  McDowall explains what happened to the previous team of investigators.
It helps establish a spooky atmosphere if you can believe in the sincerity of the performances and not have it disrupted by too much music, editing, or spfx.

My favorite scene in Lord of the Rings is when Gandalf is facing the Balrog and shouts, "you shall not pass!" It sells the scene as much as the cgi because he behaves so passionately-you can believe he is really seeing this giant creature in front of him.


----------



## BAYLOR (Apr 24, 2022)

*It Follows  *This one got raves. I finally got to see it and found it to be both dumb and not scary .


----------



## paranoid marvin (Apr 25, 2022)

KGeo777 said:


> I think there should be more focus on performance.
> It's easy to underestimate how much spookiness can be generated from just acting.
> 
> I.e. in Jaws, the Indianapolis story. That's like a ghost story being told. There's a little music with it but otherwise it is all based on words and the single performer.
> ...



Yes, Robert Shaw was magnificent in that movie, and in particular with his telling of the Indianapolis. 

For me the Balrog scene in the book is memorable because it is the only time that we see see pure fear from any of the Fellowship. "Ai! Ai!" wailed Legolas. "A Balrog! A Balrog is come!" Of all the creatures in Middle-earth from mountain trolls to ring-wraiths to Sauron himself, never is a sense of fear and peril instilled in the reader than in that moment. Quite possibly (with the destruction of Smaug) the most dangerous living creature in the whole of Middle-earth.


----------



## asp3 (Apr 25, 2022)

I'm not a fan of newer or older horror films.  They generally make me anxious and the world does a great job of that all by itself.  I have no desire to bring more anxiety into my life especially during my leisure time.


----------



## KGeo777 (Apr 26, 2022)

_"The true horror film (I use the abominable description) has its roots in the fairy tale, and the fairy tale has its roots in the soil of humanity....For the audience, this kind of film is a release--a bizarre world outside ordinary experience where the tensions are enjoyable."_
Boris Karloff


----------



## KGeo777 (Apr 26, 2022)

paranoid marvin said:


> Yes, Robert Shaw was magnificent in that movie, and in particular with his telling of the Indianapolis.


His presence added a kind of Gothic/Romanticism to the movie that would not have been there if Lee Marvin or someone else American was Quint.
They were using UK actors in key blockbuster movies--Star Wars obviously and Superman and even Halloween used Pleasence in a similar way. Ian Holm in ALIEN as well. Like an anchor for the story to be taken seriously.

 Shaw almost did the Amicus film THE BEAST MUST DIE. He was going to take the hunter role before JAWS came. I bet if he had, a monologue about wolves would have been likely!


----------



## Mon0Zer0 (Apr 27, 2022)

Le Panda du Mal said:


> I think my two biggest problems with modern horror movies are the following:
> 
> 1. The urge to explain. Oftentimes a film has a somewhat effective atmosphere, or particularly unsettling imagery, but then squanders it with banal exposition. Generally speaking we really don't need the monster's back story, or an explanation of the precise mechanism by which a curse is activated and its motivation.



This is true. Horror is best when it's mysterious. (Looking at you Prometheus / Alien Covenant) The xenomorph was more effective when it was unknowable.



Le Panda du Mal said:


> 2. "It's actually about real life." All horror touches on "real life," duh. Shoving this realization in the audience's face does not actually make the horror feel more relevant, just less effective. So many promising films get ruined by the filmmakers' desire to shout "This is actually a metaphor for losing a parent/ cancer/ divorce/ loneliness, guys! We're not just a genre movie, we're serious stuff!"



Horror is never really about real life. *Schindler's List *isn't a horror film, even though the things that happen in that film are beyond anything in any mainstream horror. Same thing with *Come & See* - probably one of the most true depictions of real life horror ever committed to celluloid. 

I think you can split horror into two broad categories - the fairground ride and the encounter with the ineffable. 

The first is about cheap jumps, gross-out visuals and evoking disgust - nightmare on elm street, jason, saw, hostel, buckets of blood, skeletons flying over the audience etc. 

The second is about mood, atmosphere, expectation, the psychological - gothic castles, the strange, the uncanny, madness - they're about reckoning with history (writing the wrong, or the way the past haunts the present) or the unknowable. 



Le Panda du Mal said:


> I guess the above two points could be subsumed into one: A fear of ambiguity, irrationality, and loose ends- all of which feature heavily in a lot of effective horror.



I think it's more that modern audiences are desensitised to so much. There is gore in teen shows nowadays that would have been 18 certificate 30 years ago. 


KGeo777 said:


> Another problem is the MST3K attitude--there's a mocking attitude towards a suspension of disbelief nowadays and I think it hinders the ability to appreciate straight horror stories, especially economical made ones with an imaginative theme.



Agree - we're much more self conscious nowadays than we ever were. 



KGeo777 said:


> I really hate found footage films though.
> I despise them because the lack of traditional narrative structure and musical scores and photography---it's not a boon for horror to do everything like a news documentary.
> I really hate them.



Found footage was a novelty. Blair Witch was good at the time, I thought. It did bring something new to the table - both in terms of marketing and in the way it was shot. The iconic scenes of the harsh lighting and the performance of the lead actress very much sold the terror. 

I watched Scorcese's Cape Fear for the first time yesterday. Even in 1990 it was a period piece - Scorcese is trying to channel Hitchcock (as was the original on which the film is based). But the sheer creativity in the editing, the use of camera, blocking really was fantastic - but having lived for twenty years now with over the shoulder shots and documentary style shaky cam, it also looked bizarre. 

I was also watching something about film editing, and they were saying that modern films cut almost every second because they're concerned audiences will get bored - instead of letting a scene play out they make up for the deficiencies in script and performance by putting the most obvious musical scores on them to signify YOU SHOULD FEEL SAD HERE. THIS BIT IS DRAMATIC. THIS GUY IS AN IDIOT. etc.

One of the things I objected to about Jackson's LOTR was the score. Other than the use of the execrable Uillean pipes and the trite "oi'm from oireland, talooraloora" cod-folk melodies (much better was Bakshi's score), Jackson uses it like a crutch -  as a bed under every scene.  It's like the performances weren't good enough, so here, FEEL THIS.

Going back to Cape Fear - I LOVE LOVE LOVE Bernard Hermann. The score is fantastic, but it's much better used sparingly. Towards the very end of the movie where it somehow manages to push melodrama through the veil of comedy, the music does feel too much. That vein of Debussy and Rachmaninoff that Hermann is cribbing from seems out of place now we're accustomed to the generic Hans Zimmer / Junkie XL sparse music score. 

It's not so much that the ability to suspend belief isn't there - but that the boundary is diminished because so much music / tropes have been reified by other things - adverts / films / comedy. etc.


----------



## Phyrebrat (Apr 27, 2022)

Mon0Zer0 said:


> Horror is never really about real life.



Interesting. I take the opposite opinion, in terms of the horror mcgubbins being a metaphor for something IRL. There's also (again, for me) a large element of being the monster oneself/the outsider and when I grew older I realised why and how I was drawn to horror.

But then it comes down to the most tedious thing, really doesn't it; Genre definitions. A genre aficionado can discern all the nuances between their favoured genre, but others who don't care for that...don't care. I was recently disabused (by Peat) of my opinion that there were only two or three types of fantasy because I'm poorly read in that genre. 

Strictly speaking horror is fantasy, just a darker exploration than swords and sandals or grimdark, for example. The difference is, I suspect, that if you ask the ordinary Muggle on the street what fantasy is, they'll have a good idea (and possibly a wider appreciation of it since GOT), whereas ask them about horror and they might think in terms of blood and gore, as opposed to cosmic or weird fic. I'm constantly defending my genre to Muggles who think of horror as low-brow, low-shelf stuff for disturbed people.

All that relates to literature; when it comes to cinema can you imagine distributors and studios going any further than describing horror as, perhaps something along the lines of 'The thinking man's Nightmare on Elm Street' when discussing, say _Paperhouse_, or more nebulous fare like _Lake Mungo_, _Session 9_, _The Babadook_, _The Lighthouse_.

Luckily, with the explosion of globalism and hyper-connectivity and tech, I can now avoid the James Wan or Blumhouse stinkers and seek out the kind of horror I like. 

Just like I do with literature.


----------



## Mark_Harbinger (Apr 28, 2022)




----------



## therapist (Apr 30, 2022)

alexvss said:


> Thailand makes great horror.


Do you know of any examples? I'm not surprised they make good horror. Thai people seemed to be obsessed with ghosts and ghost movies.

What did people think of Rec (2007) I saw it recently, a highly rated found footage horror from spain. Thought it was okay. Probably would've enjoyed it more if I watched it 15 years ago.


----------



## alexvss (Apr 30, 2022)

therapist said:


> Do you know of any examples? I'm not surprised they make good horror. Thai people seemed to be obsessed with ghosts and ghost movies.


*Shutter (2004)* is a cult classic. There's a plot twist in the end that is almost in the same level of the one in *Sixth Sense (1999)*. The same director made a movie called *The Medium*. The community has been talking about it a lot, but the flick is still to premiere in my country.

*Bad Genius (2017)* is another great Thai movie. It's a thriller based in real-life events.


therapist said:


> What did people think of Rec (2007) I saw it recently, a highly rated found footage horror from spain. Thought it was okay. Probably would've enjoyed it more if I watched it 15 years ago.


It's one of my favorite movies, and I rewatch it now and then. I gave a shout0out about this movie here in the forum not so long ago. Some people confirmed it a good movie, but there's a member here that hates it. We went back and forth in a discussion and I wasn't able to convince him


----------



## BAYLOR (May 1, 2022)

The total lack of good acting.


----------



## Foxbat (May 23, 2022)

I don’t think any movie has creeped me out more than Ringu and yet, by the end of the movie, I was left feeling some compassion towards the ‘monster’.  Same with Frankenstein.

With this in mind I think, at least for me,  horror works best when it involves pathos because that opens the gate to empathy and the realisation that there’s a little monster in all of us.

 What doesn’t work for me are things like the protagonist waking up and realising it was a dream, then waking up and realising that being awake was a dream, then waking up….etc

Once, this kind of scene was probably innovative but now it’s just lazy film making. And that’s the problem with any genre like horror. It’s easier and safer to do it by the numbers but it’s much more difficult and financially risky to come up with a truly wonderful horror movie.

Perhaps the big money thrown around in Hollywood productions makes everybody nervous and play safe, whereas, smaller foreign studios are more likely to explore riskier concepts.


----------



## BAYLOR (May 23, 2022)

Half seeing the monster, menace  or whatever  because of the use of obscuring  shadows . clever and not clever camera angles ,  quick cut  editing and unlikely storyline and plot line  twists. ( which had been overdone by everyone to the point of predictable clichedom  ) makes for a not very scary or  suspenseful movie.


----------



## JunkMonkey (May 23, 2022)

BAYLOR said:


> The Resident Evil films for example should have been maybe 3 films tops with a definite ending.



Personally I think they should have quit after the second reel of the first one. 

For me implied horror is always for more disturbing than body parts flying out at the screen at you.    That moment  towards the end of _Peeping Tom_ where the girl (Anna Massey) is watching the film of the woman watching herself being killed is one of the most disturbing things I have ever seen.   Sadistic voyeurism at it most oblique yet incredibly powerful.  Makes you ask yourself - Why _am_ I watching this?


----------



## Foxbat (May 24, 2022)

JunkMonkey said:


> For me implied horror is always for more disturbing than body parts flying out at the screen


Absolutely. There’s a scene in The Haunting (unless my memory fails me) where the camera rests for a couple of minutes on the shot of a door. There seems to be something happening but you’re never quite sure.


----------



## paranoid marvin (May 24, 2022)

Foxbat said:


> Absolutely. There’s a scene in The Haunting (unless my memory fails me) where the camera rests for a couple of minutes on the shot of a door. There seems to be something happening but you’re never quite sure.




Yes. What's in your own imagination is far more personal and therefore far more frightening than anything a film could come up with. What the best horror movies and books does is to provoke and encourage your imagination to head in the right direction.


----------



## JunkMonkey (May 24, 2022)

paranoid marvin said:


> Yes. What's in your own imagination is far more personal and therefore far more frightening than anything a film could come up with. What the best horror movies and books does is to provoke and encourage your imagination to head in the right direction.



Whatever was coming up the path in the Monkey's Paw did not need describing.


----------



## BAYLOR (May 30, 2022)

JunkMonkey said:


> Whatever was coming up the path in the Monkey's Paw did not need describing.



It's a great horror story .  Ive seen one  tv adaptation of it and,  *Buffy the Vampire Slayer*  did a homage to it  in episode where Dawn tried  bring back their mother.


----------



## BAYLOR (Jun 6, 2022)

Foxbat said:


> Absolutely. There’s a scene in The Haunting (unless my memory fails me) where the camera rests for a couple of minutes on the shot of a door. There seems to be something happening but you’re never quite sure.



Ive read Shirley Jackson novel and was not impressed with it. Ive seen both version of the film. I wasn't impressed the film either.


----------



## BAYLOR (Oct 24, 2022)

Modern products  director when the do films  based on classic Horror stores,  rather then do them how they were written,  decide to reimagine them because they wrongly  think that as originally written they wouldn't  appeal to modern audiences.So more often then not , we end u with bad film that ins't the least bit scary or worth watching.


----------



## THX1138 (Oct 25, 2022)

It's like everything else nowadays, it's all about the special effects. There aren't as many psychological horror's or even 'thinker' ones. There are some now and then. But like BAYLOR said, they are made for the market.
But the ones like the original JAWS have just enough effects to get the message across, the rest is psychological and leaves you thinking, 'Is it safe to go into the water?' Didn't matter if it was pool or bathtub, was it safe?


----------



## Vince W (Oct 25, 2022)

Violence porn. It's sickening but not actually scary.


----------



## BAYLOR (Nov 18, 2022)

Vince W said:


> Violence porn. It's sickening but not actually scary.



There are so many good horror novels that if done the way they written would make good films for example   *House on the Borderland* by William Hope Hodgeson    Do it as persons horror film in the time frame setting of the book.   This would make  a spectacular  film !


----------



## paranoid marvin (Dec 4, 2022)

Some of the best horror movies are those that slip under the radar of most people. Some of the worst are those that don't.

One movie that really had me on the edge of my seat, and where the shock scares really do their job, is in Stir of Echoes. Hampered because it came out just after Sixth Sense, this is a really well made horror movie, and a startlingly good performance from Kevin Bacon.


----------



## BAYLOR (Dec 11, 2022)

You know you're  watching  a bad horror film when the only scary parts  of the film are opening  and closing credits  .  The true real life  horror  of those  films is  all the wasted time and effort  that went into them in the first place.


----------



## Mr Cairo (Dec 11, 2022)

Swearing in horror films, Now honestly I swear quite a bit myself but last night we went to see Christmas Bloody Christmas at the local fleapit and its the first film in years that my wife and I left before the film had finished. This was not just because of mediocre acting and an all round pretty poor film but it appears someone told the scriptwriter that its ok to say the word "****ing" in this film and he REALLY took that on board. it was literally in every sentence and rapidly got tedious.

Awful and disappointing film for the 40 minutes that we saw of it and the swearing could really do with an edit.

EDIT- Sorry about the swearing.


----------



## BAYLOR (Dec 11, 2022)

Mr Cairo said:


> Swearing in horror films, Now honestly I swear quite a bit myself but last night we went to see Christmas Bloody Christmas at the local fleapit and its the first film in years that my wife and I left before the film had finished. This was not just because of mediocre acting and an all round pretty poor film but it appears someone told the scriptwriter that its ok to say the word "****ing" in this film and he REALLY took that on board. it was literally in every sentence and rapidly got tedious.
> 
> Awful and disappointing film foir the 40 minutes that I saw of it and teh swearing could really do with an edit.



The previews for this film made me _not _want to go see it.

An actual good Christmas  Horror film is the 2015 film *Krampus.*  That had a pretty good story to go wit the horror.


----------



## Mr Cairo (Dec 11, 2022)

BAYLOR said:


> The previews for this film made me _not _want to go see it.
> 
> An actual good Christmas  Horror film is the 2015 film *Krampus.*  That had a pretty good story to go wit the horror.



We saw the film Krampus and did like that a lot.


----------



## BAYLOR (Dec 13, 2022)

paranoid marvin said:


> Some of the best horror movies are those that slip under the radar of most people. Some of the worst are those that don't.
> 
> One movie that really had me on the edge of my seat, and where the shock scares really do their job, is in Stir of Echoes. Hampered because it came out just after Sixth Sense, this is a really well made horror movie, and a startlingly good performance from Kevin Bacon.



Based on a  Richard Matheson's story


----------



## paeng (Dec 17, 2022)

Gratuitious violence and heavy-handed moralizing.


----------

