[Heccubus]

This movie looks INSANE. You can see the trailer here.

[Just your average movie goer]

Reading the warning about the movie and just the preview alone on that internet site, I decided that whatever this is, I can live quite happily without seeing anything from it.

I chose not to watch the preview.

This post has been edited by Just your average movie goer: 13 June 2004 - 12:14 AM

[Heccubus]

Wuss

[Just your average movie goer]

That's fine. You may call me what you will. But I go to movies to be entertained and moved - and I like a bit of escapism. I don't like to be disturbed by highly unpleasant films with lots of gruesome violence and excessive cruelty.

The world's got enough unpleasantness as it is, without those kinds of films.

[Jordan]

I can't stand horror either. The only Horror movies I ever liked were EVENT HORIZON and CANDYMAN 1.

Event Horizon had alot of suspense, as did candyman, which is why I liked them. Gore is just plain dumb. I don't like gore scenes. I like them as much as I do long explicit sex taking place on the movie screen. I just shift unncomfortabely in my seat waiting for the pain to end.

[Heccubus]

That's fine.  You may call me what you will.  But I go to movies to be entertained and moved - and I like a bit of escapism.  I don't like to be disturbed by highly unpleasant films with lots of gruesome violence and excessive cruelty.

The world's got enough unpleasantness as it is, without those kinds of films.

Either you didn't read to where I added the cute little smiley jokingly sticking his tongue out, or you take things way too seriously.
And the world may have a lot of unpleasant things in it, but since most of those unpleasant things involve war and hate, how can one find the beauty in some truly great films like American History X, Saving Private Ryan, or any of a thousand other films that deal with similar subject matter if all one does is say "Oh, it deals with something that I dislike about the world, I do not like this movie"? True, Saw is not one of those films, but just because it deals with unpleasant subject matter that can be cringe-inducing does not neccesitate that it is not without its merits as a horror flick.

[Heccubus]

I don't like gore scenes. I like them as much as I do long explicit sex taking place on the movie screen. I just shift unncomfortabely in my seat waiting for the pain to end.

I have nothing against gore, since most of it is exaggerated and completely unbelievable most of the time, but I do dislike explicit sex scenes. I usually sort of let my eyes wander a bit and check my watch or something.

[Jordan]

I usually sort of let my eyes wander a bit and check my watch or something.

Ditto

[Just your average movie goer]

Don't worry, Heccubus. I wasn't taking it too seriously. Horror is just not my cup of tea. And there's a difference between good war movies and things like that... from horror films. It's a bit hard to explain. They are disturbing but they are good movies.... like Three Kings for example. And I also like good documentaries like Bowling for Colombine. Horror movies just seem like cruelty and violence for the sake of it. Not interested.

[Jane Sherwood]

I love horror. Love it, love it, love it. I'm just disappointed that it's become such a joke. There are just so many levels left unexplored in so many of them that make the movies pure gold.

All right, a lot of ideas are pretty stupid to begin with, but with some of them, if they tried to stop appealing to teenagers or just relying entirely on blood and gore (not that those are bad things), and started focusing more on the actual story or the concept of the villain or whatever the evil element may be, if they just made it a bit more intellectual...god, the genre would be so much better for it...

I want a horror story that will leave an impression. Something that will give me nightmares, keep me awake at night, and maybe even traumatize me. I want to be scared, goddammit!

Of course, I'm a writer-wannabe. Fear and angst and drama make my muses hyper as hell.



I really wish this trailer would work...damn thing won't play...

EDIT: Would you believe I wrote all this before reading the summary?

This post has been edited by Jane Sherwood: 14 June 2004 - 04:36 AM

[Mist]

This is a bit off-topic but relates to the horror genre. I think that the reason most horror movies end up being disappointing whereas other mediums don't is just the simple fact that a movie that is going to be scary has to present something scary to scare you with. It's difficult to allude to or foreshadow things in a film without being overly obvious. Also, they need to provide you with the antagonistic element in a visual way. That means either a monster movie, or figuring out the challenge of presenting soemthing that's non-visual in a visual way without being stupid or obvious (narration, etc.) The problem is that they aren't able to provide antagonists that live up to our imagination's standards for horror. If they make the film without showing the antagonist until the end, it's gotten so built up in our minds that it's disappointing. If, however, they don't build it up enough beforehand, we merely see the monster, or whatever, in a technical way rather than seeing the monster that is being portrayed as a real being. In that context, I'm not certain that a true horror film could be made that is really that scary. The best they can do, currently, is make it tense, and throw in the cheap "jumpy" scary moments (things jump at the screen).

Saw seems interesting, though.

[Heccubus]

Mist has a point, The Exorcist gives me the screaming heebie jeebies, but I know a lot of people that aren't bothered by it at all. It's simply because the concept of possession/demonic manifestation freaks me out, and they aren't bothered by it. On the other hand, I have friends that are freaked out by Freddy Krueger, and I find his movies to be little more than a collection of ironic murders and cheeky one-liners. Mind you, that's why I like them, but still...
It can all be based around personal preference when dealing with what is and isn't a good horror movie. Plus, a lot of them seem to be bad because it's hard to get decent funding for a horror movie that isn't some stupid teen sex romp/slasher train wreck, or made by Wes Craven (despite clear evidence that he lost his touch in the late 80s).

[Jane Sherwood]

As far as Freddy goes...that's a bit of a disappointment.

Anybody who was at the old FullyRamblomatic forum will know that I'm a Freddy-Fangirl from the great Freddy vs. Jason debate, but honestly, most of my enthusiasm is created from my own attempt to understand his character (or at least, what it had the potential to be), and from extraordinarily well-written fanfiction (a hard thing to come across) from like-minded Freddy fans. Here's a (rather long and slightly edited) quote that I still think sums it up pretty well.

All right, look past the humor (whether it be good or bad) and try to remember just what he is and what he does. He kills people in their sleep. [...] the guy kills you when you're most vulnerable. He can get inside your head and use your darkest fears against you. Freddy can put his victims through their own personal Hell before he goes for the kill. (Remember cockroach girl? Whoo!)

And just think of how Krueger was before the whole dream demon gig. [...] Freddy [...] was always evil. Let' see, according to the flashbacks I can remember:
He’s the “Bastard Son of a Hundred Maniacs” (and a nun), brutal killer of small classroom pets, he killed his foster(?) father, and of course, child murderer/molester.

You have to admit it. He's by far the sickest, most twisted horror movie monster/villain of them all. Of course, the idea of psychological torture has always scared the hell out of me.

Sure, I love his games and one-liners, those add to the "charm" of his methods. And maybe I'm just doing this to reassure myself, but it also seems to be an act of complete gleeful sadism. You can honestly tell that he enjoys what he's doing, and feels no remorse whatsoever.



Why did they have to go and ruin something like that?! Why?! Sorry, I tend to start ranting when it comes to this subject...

[Mist]

I based my earlier comment on Saw looking interesting solely off its summary. I then watched the trailer, and thought I should point out that it doesn't look terribly interesting. It looks like it has the tense part in there with her having to hurry up before the time's up, and it looks like they threw the excessive gore in there just to try to shock people, although it does serve to heighten the tenseness since it's banking on people's insecurities about their own mortality. The problem with that is that it's so overused that most children are completely jaded when it comes to violence (adults even moreso), so it doesn't add what it could add if violence were used "artistically". Basically, I think it looks like just another dumb horror flick, but that's just me, and that's just based on the trailer. I doubt I'll actually take the time to see it.

[J m HofMarN]

I have to agree, horror movies have just become about gore and stupid teenagers (( I have no problem with teenagers, I was one a year ago, but they portray teen agers as panicky idiots who only think of sex or as stereotypes. )) The recent exception was "The Ring" Not a teenager in sight and yet it captured the creepiness and mystery of the sixth sense along with a way better twist ending and it was genuinely scary. You did not know that the good guys were going to win at all.

And yeah, the over use of gorey scenes has really just killed gorey scenes. They can be used to accentuate the plot and value of the story, not to replace it. Too many people don't grasp that. They figure the badder the villain looks the better the heros will look so theres no need for characterization or sympathy. The problem is it really does fail to shock now and after a while there's not that much more gore you can fit in. I mean really what are they going to do, rivers of blood flowing out of people?