Today's Scary Movies

[Charity]

I am a big horror and sci-fi movie fan of movies made before 1970. In those days they left enough to the imagination to actually give you a little fright and a good time or a good laugh. Has anyone noticed just how sick and disgusting most all the newer movies are? They lack plot, acting ability and that good old pass the popcorn mood. They all seem to need at least one X rated sex scene, lots of guts falling out of bellies and more cussing that many of us will hear in a month. You can almost be sure that the cussing, sex and grossness will show up in every single horror movie made in the last few years. I have to wonder how this is effecting the kids and young adults who are watching them. Horror movies have become more like training videos for the future psyco-generation. It makes me sick!!!!! Do kids really like this stuff or do they watch it because there are no alternatives and they don't know about the good old horror movies of yesteryear?

[Charity]

For any of you who like the good old days horror and sci-fi, I have found a site that offers a lot of neat movies called oldies.com
http://www.oldies.com/

I have bought a lot of their movies and I wanted to share it with you guys. It is nice to know there are alternatives out there.

[ThomasMore]

Charity, if you haven't seen F.W. Murnau's "Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror," do yourself the favor.

It is a 1922 German silent version of Dracula. Much more chilling and horrifying than any version made since. It uses all the tools of German expressionist filmmaking (as in Metropolis and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) to add to the uneasy, creepy atmosphere.

Movie experts and horror fans consider it one of the best, most chilling movies ever made. From Roger Ebert's review (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19970928/REVIEWS08/401010345/1023):

To watch F.W. Murnau's "Nosferatu'' (1922) is to see the vampire movie before it had really seen itself...It seems to really believe in vampires.

...

The vampire should come across not like a flamboyant actor but like a man suffering from a dread curse. Schreck plays the count more like an animal than a human being;

...

I admire it more for its artistry and ideas, its atmosphere and images, than for its ability to manipulate my emotions like a skillful modern horror film. It knows none of the later tricks of the trade, like sudden threats that pop in from the side of the screen. But "Nosferatu'' remains effective: It doesn't scare us, but it haunts us. It shows not that vampires can jump out of shadows, but that evil can grow there, nourished on death.

...

It is commonplace to say that silent films are more "dreamlike,'' but what does that mean? In "Nosferatu,'' it means that the characters are confronted with alarming images and denied the freedom to talk them away. There is no repartee in nightmares. Human speech dissipates the shadows and makes a room seem normal. Those things that live only at night do not need to talk, for their victims are asleep, waiting.

<object width="425" height="349"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/34J6KiA_HNo&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/34J6KiA_HNo&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6&border=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="349"></embed></object>

[TeenageRepublican]

I am a big horror and sci-fi movie fan of movies made before 1970. In those days they left enough to the imagination to actually give you a little fright and a good time or a good laugh. Has anyone noticed just how sick and disgusting most all the newer movies are? They lack plot, acting ability and that good old pass the popcorn mood. They all seem to need at least one X rated sex scene, lots of guts falling out of bellies and more cussing that many of us will hear in a month. You can almost be sure that the cussing, sex and grossness will show up in every single horror movie made in the last few years. I have to wonder how this is effecting the kids and young adults who are watching them. Horror movies have become more like training videos for the future psyco-generation. It makes me sick!!!!! Do kids really like this stuff or do they watch it because there are no alternatives and they don't know about the good old horror movies of yesteryear?

Charity, I'm a horror writer and I'm big fan of the genre, and I disagree with you.
It's just flat-out wrong to say that all modern horror movies being released are full of sex, gore, and language. Have you ever seen "The Orphanage" or "I Am Legend"? Both of those films were released last year and both have little language and no sex.
The genre is expanding, more and more people are contributing to it. In time, you will see skilled artists emerge and make entertaining horror. The ones you're talking about are the Indie and/or Just-out-of-College film makers who don't have the skill that's necessary to do horror.

[hosl]

There Will Be Blood...
little violence...
no sex...
very little profanity.
Nominated for 8 Oscars; won 2.

[Charity]

Thanks Thomas for the tip. I will check it out. :-)

Teen-I am sure there are a few newer movies made that may be ok but generally speaking, most are garbage.

[Trevelyan]

There Will Be Blood...
little violence...
no sex...
very little profanity.
Nominated for 8 Oscars; won 2.

It's not a horror movie.

[TeenageRepublican]

Teen-I am sure there are a few newer movies made that may be ok but generally speaking, most are garbage.

I completely disagree.
Have you even seen any of the modern horror movies that have been released in theaters in the last three years or are you judging them by the few that go straight to DVD?

[Charity]

Well let's see...the last 20 horror movies I have seen made in 2007 were nothing but pure garbage.

[Charity]

Check out 2007-2008 and tell me it's not mostly garbage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_horror_films:2000s

[M.C.]

Check out 2007-2008 and tell me it's not mostly garbage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_horror_films:2000s
Heh they are ALL garbage imo. Some of them are worth a watch if you have a really odd sense of humor though. For instance, the movie teeth is some sort of feminist-driven movie about a girl with teeth in her private areas, however I think that alone is worth a good laugh. Also drive-thru was free on Comcast on-demand, so I watched that horrid garbage movie and was rolling on the floor laughing at how bad it was. What can I say? I get a kick out of horrible movies and laughing at them.

[TeenageRepublican]

Check out 2007-2008 and tell me it's not mostly garbage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_horror_films:2000s

Those are mostly indie films that haven't been successful. Those are the bad ones to avoid (excepr for "The Gravedancers", that was really good for an indie flick). Here's the TR Filter for horror films for 2007-2008.
2007:
"1408"
"28 Weeks Later"
"30 Days of Night"
"AVP: Requiem"
"Dead Silence"
"Hannibal Rising" (read the book first)
"House" (read the book first; written by Christian authors and has a spiritual message in it. No language, no sex, some violence)
"I Am Legend"
"The Invasion"
"The Messengers"
"The Mist" (one of the most original horror films ever made, imo)
"The Orphanage"
2008:
"Cloverfield" (a thrill ride, it's a fun flick)
"The Happening"
"The Ruins" (read the book first)

I don't (usually) pick out indie horror movies unless they look really good (rare) or I've heard good things about them. I am talking about the ones that have come out in the theaters, not the indie flicks that are a joke. Most of the ones that come out in theaters have a good plot and great writing. Avoid indie horror films like Rosie O' Donnell avoids salad.

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

I absolutely agree with Charity. Over the weekend we watched two so-called "horror" movies (one of them on TR's list below, "The Ruins"). Neither of which were scary, and DEFINITELY not worth paying $10/tix to go see in the theater. Hollyweird doesn't really seem to know what a horror movie is anymore, they feel it necessary to include voluminous amounts of blood and gore, bad acting, and thin plot lines hoping that the few tried-and-true tricks (cats popping out of nowhwere, the bad guy coming up from behind and appearing in a window or mirror, etc.) will cover up the films weaknesses.

Of TR's list:
"1408" - stupid
"30 Days of Night" - Gore, blood, blood, gore, and gore and blood, plus think plot
"AVP: Requiem" - come on! They can do a better monster movie than THIS!
"Hannibal Rising" (read the book first) - absolutely RUINED the book on film!
"I Am Legend" - good, not great, best of those on the list, though
"The Messengers" - just okay
2008:
"Cloverfield" (a thrill ride, it's a fun flick) - stoo-pid! I was SO disappointed by this movie! Was silly, and certainly wasn't a horror film imho! Tried to be a suspense thriller, but failed miserably.
"The Happening" - decided not to go see it based upon the review at my Christian Movie-Review cite. I won't ruin it for anyone that wants to go see it, but in finding out the plot, I was enraged! More liberal trash.
"The Ruins" (read the book first) - The people in the movie were idiots, the movie totally unbelieveable, and they just HAD to add all that blood and gore, didn't they.

We also saw "Shutter" over the weekend -- it was better than "The Ruins" by far, but still not as good as the worst horror film from Hitchcock. I really think Hollyweird doesn't know what a good horror film is/does.

[TeenageRepublican]

Okay, Homes and Charity obviously have different tastes than yours truly. That's a good thing.
However, I did notice a hidden Christian message in "The Mist". I think Stephen King did this on purpose, because the passage I'm about to quote fits in with the story perfectly:
James 4: 13-17
13 Now listen, you who say, "Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money." 14 Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. 15 Instead, you ought to say, "If it is the Lord's will, we will live and do this or that." 16 As it is, you boast and brag. All such boasting is evil. 17Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn't do it, sins.
Both the book and the film basically come off like that. I think the main message of the story is this: How can we play God when we don't even know what's going to happen next?
Plus, it deals with lawsuits against your neighbor (literally) and the effects that can and follow and it deals with holier-than-thou Christianity.
That was my take on it. I found "The Mist" to be a refreshing horror movie that makes you think after the credits roll.

[TeenageRepublican]

I'm not going down without a fight, sorry.
Horror movies weren't the masterpieces that most of you put them out to before the 70's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_horror_films:1950s
Come on, "I Bury the Living"? Or how about "Caltiki: The Immortal Monster"? Yep, you pop any of these in and you can expect to see plotless films with no point of existence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_horror_films:1960s
You can't tell me that "Eegah" and "Beast of Yucca Flats" is better than your average modern horror movie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_horror_films:1970s
"Werewolves on Wheels", what the hell?
Look, my basic point I want to say is this: horror takes brains and a lot of people in this genre don't have them. I personally have noticed great film makers rise up and create terrific movies that have gone to new boundries.
It has nothing to do with what decade we're in, there's always going to be craptacular horror movies. We shouldn't throw the baby out with the water because of those films.

[Trevelyan]

I watched "Funny Games" last night. It sucked epically hard.

[Gonzo67]

I have to agree with Charity on this one. I like some of the new Horror Flicks, but they're only good if you're in a Gore/Slasher mood. They can not, nor never will, compare to the older classics. Back when the movie relied on the viewer's imagination and elements you DIDN'T see to cause the fright. I mean let's face it, today's movies aren't "scary" they are "startling". Any asshole can jump out from behind a big wooden crate, yell "BOO!" and make someone jump. And that's all that today's "horror" movies seem to know how to do. Victim walking down a dark hall, camera close up... Maniac BURSTS THROUGH THE DOOR SCREAMING WAVING AN AXE! That's not "scary" that's STARTLING! It's a cheap trick, performed by someone lacking the intelligence to play on the other person's imagination and fears.

You have movies in your list that should NEVER be used in the same sentence with the phrase: "good film".

28 Weeks Later - Seen it. I thought the FIRST one (28 Days Later) was bad, and I figured, no way could they screw it up twice... how wrong can one person be? They should have aborted this hell-spawn "2 Days Later". On a scale of 1 to 10, I give it a 10... as in how many ice-picks I would willingly shove into each one of my eye balls just so I don't have to sit through that piece of shit a second time!

30 Days of Night - First, just let me say if I want to READ a story, I'll go buy the friggin book. This movie was nothing but one long unending "arterial spray" and sub-titles. They could have gotten the same effect if they just hired one single actor to stand in front of the camera, slash his wrist and then film him while he bleeds out. Personally, I would like to see Tom Cruise cast in that role. And what's with those retarded vampires? You can't tell me they have lived in American cities for thousands of years and NOT been noticed running around talking that bullshit language they speak!

AVP: Requiem - Ok, the unending "sequels" are bad enough. But if you SERIOUSLY lack the imagination, that you have to resort to taking TWO retarded movies, and putting them together to make ONE retarded combo franchise, then seriously... get out of the business! It didn't work when Freddy left Elm Street and started f**king with Jason every Friday the 13'th, it's NOT going to work for TWO aliens to conduct a war on Earth. I mean, they're ALIENS! They have space ships, they can go ANYWHERE in the universe! What the f**k is so appealing about having your little pissing match on a back-water, primitive little piss ant planet like Earth? Get real!

The Mist - While I loved the short story as Steven King wrote it, it was a SHORT STORY. To make a "short story" into a movie means you have to add a BUNCH of stuff that was not in the original story. Hence, it ceases to be the story you know, and becomes the bastardized vision of the brain dead monkey that produced it. They added too much, SHOWED too much, and completely tanked the ending. After renting this DVD, my first thought was to drive to Bangor Main and bitch slap Steven King for allowing that shit to happen. The story (as King wrote it) gripped you because you did NOT see what was in the mist. The "horror" was caused by what you CAN'T see, which is how it SHOULD be. But tell me, what the hell was with those spiders with dentures?

Cloverfield - Warning: Anyone with epilepsy should AVOID THIS MOVIE AT ALL COSTS! Look, the whole "Blair Witch - Film the entire thing on a hand held camcorder" has been done to death. Film Producers PLEASE STOP OR I WILL F**KING KILL YOU!!! You can not watch this movie. You want to experience this movie without wasting the $3.00 to rent the DVD? Easy, Take your video recorder, mount it to a pant can shaker, start recording, turn the paint mixer on, and let it record for 2 and a half hours. Then watch the video. THAT is "Cloverfield"!

The Happening - There is nothing more sad than a film maker who gets lucky on his first film, and thinks because of that, he has talent. I will admit, Shamalan had a GREAT release with Sixth Sense. The twist at the end grabbed most people by the booboo and gave them a good start. But ONE GOOD FILM DOES NOT EQUATE TO TALENT! Which is PERFECTLY illustrated in every single M. Knight Shamalan release since Sixth Sense! Mr. Shamala, please, take my advice... The "Bonus Features" you include on your DVD's, are not BONUSES! They are TORTURE! Seriously. We're happy that you are "interested in films". We're glad that you "enjoy what you do for a living". But honestly, the films you made when you were 15, THEY SUCK! So PLEASE stop including them on your DVD's. Believe it or not, they make you look even MORE retarded then the piles you are currently releasing do!