A Recurring Theme in Recent Horror Movies . . .

Flem said:
the subtext of slashers has always been that sex is sin, and you must die for it. sex has always had a role in horror. hell even psycho had that pervy shower scene.
Click to expand...

i think this is what is put out there, but i do not think this is true. I think lots of term papers and shit are putting meaning where this is none.


i think slashers found out that boobs + blood = money, but i don't think they have some moral message about sexuality.

Sex sells. Violence sells. lets mix the 2 like chocolate and milk.

nightmare on elm street had nothing to do with sex = sin

even Friday, i would say is not. yes, jason drowned while counselors were boning, but both mrs voorhees and jason were killing mfers regardless of sex or Shelley and Ralph would still be alive

texas chainsaw i would say the same thing and as someone pointed out leatherface = just evil mfer

i like the pure evil too, like friday 13 1 - 4, NOES 1, original TCM

all these new i was molested movies suck like silent house and etc.

The latest new horror i have seen that is any good is The Moth Diaries, REC, and YellowBrickRoad (in that order)

didn't like vhs but had a good premise.
 
Joe McPherson said:
Good call. There's a bunch too many. So many I can't remember them all.
Click to expand...

Ya pretty much a dime-a-dozen. But as a horror movie fan I tend to have a bias for even the weakest horror films.
 
Nomad Nemesis said:
i think this is what is put out there, but i do not think this is true. I think lots of term papers and shit are putting meaning where this is none.


i think slashers found out that boobs + blood = money, but i don't think they have some moral message about sexuality.

Sex sells. Violence sells. lets mix the 2 like chocolate and milk.

nightmare on elm street had nothing to do with sex = sin

even Friday, i would say is not. yes, jason drowned while counselors were boning, but both mrs voorhees and jason were killing mfers regardless of sex or Shelley and Ralph would still be alive

texas chainsaw i would say the same thing and as someone pointed out leatherface = just evil mfer

i like the pure evil too, like friday 13 1 - 4, NOES 1, original TCM

all these new i was molested movies suck like silent house and etc.

The latest new horror i have seen that is any good is The Moth Diaries, REC, and YellowBrickRoad (in that order)

didn't like vhs but had a good premise.
Click to expand...

this is all fine, but how the hell do you like texas chainsaw massacre? that movie sucks butt.

 
goleta83 said:
then you don't like horror
Click to expand...

sure i do. i like horror technique. tcm abandons great, classic technique in hopes that the realism will be scarier. i hate that shit. i like being intelligently manipulated into being scared by the filmmaker. i can't stand that wannabe snuff film shit.
 
Flem said:
sure i do. i like horror technique. tcm abandons great, classic technique
Click to expand...

TCM contributed to the "classic" slasher technique you speak of. Also, the Franklin character is supposed to be annoying. Even some of his fellow cast members hated him.
 
Lost Limb said:
TCM contributed to the "classic" slasher technique you speak of.
Click to expand...

not nearly enough. it isn't very cinematic. Halloween on the other hand...

and annoying is not the word for Franklin. "Take-you-out-of-the-moment lame" is much more accurate.
 
Flem said:
this is all fine, but how the hell do you like texas chainsaw massacre? that movie sucks butt.

Click to expand...


The original had some serious scares to it. Leatherface was very original and though I'm not just for raw looking, the film was grainy and had a realism to it. It just felt evil and the scene of Leatherface running through the woods after the chick at the end will always be scary to me. Not like one of the scariest horrors ever, but it is one of a kind that's been copied so many times because of that original affect.
 
thefirstemporer said:
Ya pretty much a dime-a-dozen. But as a horror movie fan I tend to have a bias for even the weakest horror films.
Click to expand...

Lol, my favorite genre too. I watch pretty much everything - just watched a fairly decent lower budget one tonight called Mask Maker. But I've noticed a LOT of horrors deal with some avenging spirit of sexual abuse. The films feel preachy or that they have an underlying motivation beyond being terrifying - which isn't scary IMO.
 
El Moose said:
I had the same thought earlier watching Lovely Molly
Click to expand...

Funny, I thought of that film as well but couldn't actually remember id that was for sure part of the plot. I felt that film borrowed a lot from past horrors - Drag Me To Hell specifically.
 
Supernatural horror >>>
I guess because theyre turning the tables on us to what we've been used to. Sexual abuse is truly scary shit thought. If you talk to someone that has been, they're really fucked up. Mysterious skin is a good example.

To me its just another genre, slasher, supernatural, sexual abuse, etc.

Hope you're doing well Joe.
 
While I agree with TS to a degree and pretty much everyone here, all I got to say is "I spit on Your Grave" pulled off the rape abuse fairly well. However it was more of a slasher-horror-revenge film than a pure horror/slasher film.
And I'm talking about the original, not the new one (haven't seen the new one).
The 1970's Last House on the Left could be another example

The thing that peeves me off about horror films now are the "found footage" paranormal films. Paranormal activity, the American version of REC (like the Spanish one better), Grave Encounters, etc, etc. To me its just lazy, cheap film making, not because of the low budget, but because of the feeling that I get watching them (like as if it was a friend's home video that he edited)
 
destructive said:
Supernatural horror >>>
I guess because theyre turning the tables on us to what we've been used to. Sexual abuse is truly scary shit thought. If you talk to someone that has been, they're really fucked up. Mysterious skin is a good example.

To me its just another genre, slasher, supernatural, sexual abuse, etc.

Hope you're doing well Joe.
Click to expand...

Hey doing well Destructive - thanks! Hope you're well too.

I think for me the biggest thing about the abuse-avenged theme is that it probably worked the first time or two . . . But the horror genre as a whole works on a much more sinister level IMO. The scariest horrors are those where malevolence is indiscriminate and genuinely evil. Sure some of the motives may be payback/revenge, but there's a lot of collateral damage and terror. I don't believe the sexual abuse payback works over and over again. There's too much of a moral righteousness on the part of the villain/monster/demon that goes against establishing an evil, malevolent nature.

And I agree supernatural horror >>>> slasher/other types.
 
m0353 said:
While I agree with TS to a degree and pretty much everyone here, all I got to say is "I spit on Your Grave" pulled off the rape abuse fairly well. However it was more of a slasher-horror-revenge film than a pure horror/slasher film.
And I'm talking about the original, not the new one (haven't seen the new one).
The 1970's Last House on the Left could be another example

The thing that peeves me off about horror films now are the "found footage" paranormal films. Paranormal activity, the American version of REC (like the Spanish one better), Grave Encounters, etc, etc. To me its just lazy, cheap film making, not because of the low budget, but because of the feeling that I get watching them (like as if it was a friend's home video that he edited)
Click to expand...

Both of those worked IMO because they weren't deceptive in their telling (IMO). And it wasn't some ghost or demon/angel working to steer a victim through her catharsis and deliverance while kicking the asses of the perpetrators of the crimes. The slasher payback films like I Spit on Your Grave are more believable because the victim is taking action, vengeance into her own hands. That said, I never found either of those scary and I honestly can't handle excessive screaming and yelling constantly - a major problem I have with the horror genre though it is still my favorite. The slasher horrors tend to be the worst for excessive noise and verbal angst. They don't seem as smart and rely and inferior forms of inducing fear (generally).

Regarding the self-shot horrors . . . VHS is the first one Ive thought that worked since Paranormal Activity 1. Some of it generally freaked me out. Attrocious wasn't bad either - particularly the ending. But I agree that there have been far too many and most don't really deliver, are too predictable, already been done. Overall, not much of a fan of those.
 
I just hate this gore/horror trend.

Hostel/Saw
movies aren't scary. They aren't gross. They're just lame.
 
Chernabog said:
What bothers me sometimes isn't the motivation but "the reason". There always has to be a reason why something is there. Sometimes evil is best left unexplained.
Click to expand...

That's just where society is trending in general regarding dealing with evil. Just look on this forum whenever there's some mass shooting, you'll always have your emo hipster posters trying to explain (rationalize imo) why some asshole shot up a movie theater or elementary school. People don't want to accept that there can indeed be some people who are just inherently evil douchebags. It's because the idea of that terrifies them imo.
 
Rob Battisti said:
I just hate this gore/horror trend.

Hostel/Saw
movies aren't scary. They aren't gross. They're just lame.
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part . . . Though I thought the first Saw was pretty good because of the plot twist, and also thought the pig-head and paper-m
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,658
Messages
55,432,483
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top