Not So Scary Movies

[Brittany Kingston]

Whatever happened to the truly scary movie?

I watched "Drag Me To Hell" and it did nothing for me. Maybe it's just me, but I found it very B-Grade and cliched. Plenty of gore and action but nothing truly spooky or supernaturally scary.

What happened to all the great scary vampire stories? Where are the psychological thrillers?

I'm going to see "Orphan" when it comes out. I hope that one is sufficiently scary to keep me satisfied.

Cheers

Brittany K.

[William Butler]

I agree. It seems "scary" movies, any more, are just outings in gore and violence. Most are predictable, lack plot and character development, and are geared toward an audience who either doesn't want to or is unable to think.

The Village would be an exception. Especially since it was all done without a "monster"; although we don't learn that truth until the end. Unfortunately, that type of film tends to be very rare, these days.

[Brittany Kingston]

I also liked "The Village". I really liked "Mirrors" too.

Really sad here in Wangaratta. I was looking forward to seeing "Orphan" and asked the cinema manager when it will be coming here. He said they're not getting it because nobody comes to the scary movies. It has become financially unviable for them.

What's next? They'll stop getting scary books in the bookshops because people don't buy them?

I only have two friends who are avid scary book and movie fans like me. The rest are wimps. Even the people I grew up with and used to watch all those old vampire movies with have totally changed their attitude.

Oh come on, people. It's entertainment, not reality. What's wrong with a good, fun scare?

[Lexie]

See now Drag Me To Hell was by Sam Raimi--a horror director (amongst other genres), but his movies tend to over the top almost spoofs (Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2, Army of Darkness). Startling at times, but mostly just for entertainment purposes.

If I want a horror movie now I turn towards Korean and Japanese movies. NOT the redone American versions of Asian Horror Movies, but the actuals themselves. They don't 'scare' me, but they do provide more chills since by in large Asian Horror stems around psychological shockers or atmosphere. I really enjoy the Ghost School movies from Korea (there's 5 of them that aren't connected at all except they are all about school students).

I think there's also been such a glut of scary movies in the last decade or so and the newer generation of 'scary' movie fans want violence/gore and are willing to overlook the lack of subtly to achieve such. The trend really began with the Slasher films of the late 70's/Early 80's and only grew worse as special effects were used more and more. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed Freddy vs. Jason (for the lolz if nothing else) and the Sleepaway Camp movies are pretty amusing too (if disturbing at times) and hell even Jason X (though I like Lexa Doig...so that makes me a bit biased I think), but the trend of blood and gore vs. chilling atmospheric visuals seemed to have started to die down then.

[William Butler]

While the last post to this thread was from nearly two months ago, I wanted to add a little something.

First and foremost I wanted to pose the question: What scares you?

I think the answer to that question goes a long way toward pin pointing movies that fit the bill as scary. I'm reminded of Arnold's comment in the first Predator movie, "If it bleeds, we can kill it." When it comes to movies about "things that go bump in the night", unless the movie is developed to the point where the viewer is drawn into the story so far that they can suspend belief or just so engrossed with the telling that they become a part of story, it's hard to really "scare" modern audiences.

There is an exception; movies based on true stories that lead us down the path of exceptional circumstances. One film that comes to mind is Serpent and the Rainbow. It was a John Carpenter film from a few decades ago, set in Haiti. It featured voodoo and zombies, with a fair amount of shock, and spatterings of violence and gore. However, what set it apart from its contemporaries is that it was taken from the accounts of real event.

I remember, all too well, when a friend of our oldest son sat and watched it with us. He was fine with the movie until the end when reading the credits he noticed the part where it was a "true" story. That was enough to give him nightmares for the next several days.

Stephen King made mention of something in his non-fiction book "Danse Macabre". Basically the book was a discussion of the horror genre, as a whole (covering both film and written works). One of the things he mentioned that has always stuck with me is that many times the things we can't see will be far more frightening than the things we can see. It goes a long way toward explaining why in the modern way of movies where producers and directors are more concerned with how well they can use special effects to "show us everything" than in using the elements of true storytelling. The point they've missed is that if we can see it, we're better able to control our fear. Maybe because our imagination is much more able to frighten us than anything the special effects unit can cook up.

We well,
William

[Brittany Kingston]

I agree. Our imaginations are far more adept at scaring us than anything we can see on the big screen by way of special FX.

Personally, I love a good supernatural scare. I'm not afraid of the dark, but things that can hide in the dark can be scary. The unseen monsters that lurk in our imaginations that AREN'T seen on the big screen are the scariest.

These days of modern technology, it is harder to scare a sophisticated audience.

I don't mind a good edge of the seat thriller with great FX, even a bit of gore, as long as the "plausible impossible" is satisfying.

Cheers

Brittany K.