Are They Afraid To Scare People?

[Royal]

I'm sick of these supposed horror movies that are supposed to be these right proper horrorshows at first & then end lightly & dramatically happily ever after. Y'know the ones. It started with The Sixth Sense and then Snowballs into Dragonfly, Mothman Prophecies, The Forgotten & now The Jacket.

Did I miss the memo here? When was it a rule to deball the ending? When did we go back in the 1920's & tell the film company that Caligari had to happen in a dream? Horror is ment to scare the everloving S*beep* out of you. When did this become a sin? Are we THAT puritanical?

[Scorpion13]

No, But you have to understand, not all those were horror. Sixth Sense and Dragonfly werent horror.

And having a downer ending doesnt mean the movie is good. Look at movies like Cabin Fever, House of A thousand Corpses and the TXCSM remake. They all had downer endings, and they sucked.

But then there are great horror movies with both endings. NOTLD had a downer ending, and Psycho had a slightly upbeat one.

I happen to think the problem lies with the look of movies lately. Super-fast, smash cuts dont make a movie scary. Making everything look like a Trent Reznor video doesnt make a movie scary. Little girls with english accents dont make movies scary.

[Pól Rua]

It's not so much a 'happy ending' thing as much as it is a reassuring ending.
Different thing.

[Rabid Trekkie]

I'm sick of these supposed horror movies that are supposed to be these right proper horrorshows at first & then end lightly & dramatically happily ever after. Y'know the ones. It started with The Sixth Sense and then Snowballs into Dragonfly, Mothman Prophecies, The Forgotten & now The Jacket.

Did I miss the memo here? When was it a rule to deball the ending? When did we go back in the 1920's & tell the film company that Caligari had to happen in a dream? Horror is ment to scare the everloving S*beep* out of you. When did this become a sin? Are we THAT puritanical?

Sure you can do the whole good guy loses hopeless and alone thing, but soon people are just going to go "Why go, the guy is screwed beyond belief anyway."

And The Forgotten was less horror and more sci-fi suspence. And just because the bad guy loses doesn't mean it can't scare you half to death. Both versions of The Mummy did a good job of that in my opinion. In the Boris Karloff version the man himself is creepy beyond reason and the story is done well enough that even I got that chill running up and down my spine (something that does that today would have women fainting back then) especially when they zoom in on his face and his eyes look like they're glowing.
The second one with Brendon Fraiser I thought did a good job showing the apocalyptic feel that the new version of the Mummy was bringing. Both of these were well done and had the good guys win. The Wolfman with Lon Chaney jr. has nobody win.

Sorry I can't give more modern examples of how horror can be good having both kinds of endings but I'm just starting to get into the more modern stuff and I like the classics a lot.

Edit: "Little girls with english accents dont make movies scary."

Says you. Little girls with english accents creep the hell out of me.

[Donald M.]

No, But you have to understand, not all those were horror. Sixth Sense and Dragonfly werent horror.


Of course The Sixth Sense was horror. "Supernatural Thriller" is a euphamism for "Horror without balls."

[IamtheRock3]

dont know if the thesis is true my friend

Lot of the old horror movies I saw the monsters got killed, Night of the living dead and body snatcher were acception

sure the monster came back in the sequel, but they all ways got there.

[Arrjay]

I think one of the major problems with most new films is that there really isn't too much attention being paid to many important aspects of film-making. When I say this I am not thinking of The Sixth Sense per se because that particular film (as is typical for M. Night Shyamalan) isn't a 'horror' film which is quite obvious and therefore it really doesn't apply to the topic at hand.
The problem with Hollywood movies is that good film-making is restricted to only a certain percentage of directors. Most of the stuff that Hollywood churns out is utter crap. That's not to say that there aren't good films coming out of Hollywood, just that that those films are few and far between.
This applies to all other popular film genres as well as Horror films. It's happening across the board. The key aspects of good film-making are being fiercely ignored in the race to thrill teenagers with special effects and the race to see how many romantic comedies Meg Ryan and Hugh Grant can do simultaneously.

[StoneGold]

Besides, the good guys die endings test bad. Go watch the Freddy vs. Jason DVD. I know, it's only nominally a horror film, more of an action flick, but when they tried to give it the stinger ending, with Freddy coming back, and killing the girl post-coitus, it tested poorly.

[hulahulk]

I'm sick of these supposed horror movies that are supposed to be these right proper horrorshows at first & then end lightly & dramatically happily ever after. Y'know the ones. It started with The Sixth Sense and then Snowballs into Dragonfly, Mothman Prophecies, The Forgotten & now The Jacket.

Did I miss the memo here? When was it a rule to deball the ending? When did we go back in the 1920's & tell the film company that Caligari had to happen in a dream? Horror is ment to scare the everloving S*beep* out of you. When did this become a sin? Are we THAT puritanical?

I think writers are running out of original ideas. Several generations of movie-goers are still going to the movies on a semi-regular basis and perhaps have become desensitized/more sophisticated in their viewing.

I dunno, I've seen so many horror flicks from A - Z that I really don't get psyched for them anymore. I really wish that weren't the case though, because I like the entertainment value of a flick that scares the bejeesus out of me.

[pirulaso]

psycho had an happy ending and that scare me
birds too
the ring and the grudge were scary and they had downer endings
usually the ending isnt what ruins a movie.
what ruins a movie is the plot in general or bad everything else.
example: darkness. everyone loses in the end. but the whole movie didnt make sense so u didnt care. oh yeah and besides the old lady, the movie wasnt scary
firefly and sixth sense are under suspense from what i understand.
the problem is slasher films have become a joke.

[Royal]

I'll fend for Darkness. It was terribly re edited in america. I'm looking for the original print.

[Adrian Tullberg]

What makes a movie scary?

Gore?

Tension?

A ratio of the two?

[Neil]

My feelings here are varied and complex.

I think its absurd to think that one should only tell stories about ghosts and monsters that are specifically designed to frighten. There is a vast area within that realm to tell many kinds of stories, and I think lots of stories get dismissed or left untold because we don't nurture and develop that in our culture.

That said, not enough movies that are supposed to be scary are scary. I think the two are tied together. I think a healthy market and recognition of fantastique would allow the terrifying to be developed as a seperate quality and they could be supportive siblings instead of confused rivals.

Ultimately, what's scary? Being unsure. Any movie that can convince me that the characters could meet a horrible fate at any moment will succeed at scaring me. Not many movies succeed at this, so I pretty much have to accept the joys of fantastique or give up on the genre altogether, which I seem unable to do.

[KenK]

My feelings here are varied and complex.

I think its absurd to think that one should only tell stories about ghosts and monsters that are specifically designed to frighten. There is a vast area within that realm to tell many kinds of stories, and I think lots of stories get dismissed or left untold because we don't nurture and develop that in our culture.

That said, not enough movies that are supposed to be scary are scary. I think the two are tied together. I think a healthy market and recognition of fantastique would allow the terrifying to be developed as a seperate quality and they could be supportive siblings instead of confused rivals.

Ultimately, what's scary? Being unsure. Any movie that can convince me that the characters could meet a horrible fate at any moment will succeed at scaring me. Not many movies succeed at this, so I pretty much have to accept the joys of fantastique or give up on the genre altogether, which I seem unable to do.

I definitely feel the same way for the most part. I do think some PG-13 horror films are good, like Sixth Sense, or The Ring, just because films like that do a good job of encompassing a lot of elements to a scary film, beyond an excessive amount of gore. There's an attention to atmosphere, story and especially characters.

But if a horror movie revolves around say, werewolves or vampires, or creatures known for being savage and all-around vicious, I want a hard 'R' every time! I watched 'Cursed' and was dumbfounded by how tame that film was! It made Teen Wolf look hardcore!

[Leslie Lee III]

The Sixth Sense wasn't a horror movie, doesn't seem like it was ever meant to be since the ghosts really aren't powerful or evil, just a mystery at the beginning.

[Greg Hatcher]

I think the thesis is flawed in a different way. Stephen King commmented on this in Danse Macabre: there are simply many, many more BAD horror movies than there are good ones. The good ones we remember, the bad ones get forgotten. This has always been true, it's not some kind of recent trend.

[pirulaso]

The Sixth Sense wasn't a horror movie, doesn't seem like it was ever meant to be since the ghosts really aren't powerful or evil, just a mystery at the beginning.

i dunno, that angry old lady looked like she could hurt the kid.

[Andy S.]

Not everyone finds the same things frightening.

For example my definition of actual scary movies includes movies like Signs, The Ring, Blair Witch Project-movies that use professional script-writing and better actors to enhance the viewers' imagination, suspense and fear.

Movies that rely on special effects, lots of gore, and loud heavy-metal music to "scare" you are largely forgettable. These movies tend to have no point beyond wowing people with flare, sadly lacking in any character development or plot. There are plenty of classics that use special effects, but they usually lots more meaning than "Friday the 13th, part 15-Jason takes Wisonsin" :D

Not that there's anything wrong with liking more maintream horror flics, but after you've seen enough of them, you realize that its just the same plots being recycled over and over and over again. But hey, if that's what floats your boat, whateva...

[Moptormouse]

The best horror movies have uncertain or down beat endings...............hollywood doesn't like downbeat endings (although that could be america in general)

[Neil]

The best horror movies have uncertain or down beat endings...............hollywood doesn't like downbeat endings (although that could be america in general)I still think this is more a natural consequence of creating an environment in which all of the characters are in danger rather than being much of a rule on its own.

[KenK]

I still think this is more a natural consequence of creating an environment in which all of the characters are in danger rather than being much of a rule on its own.

Yeah, in the context of most horror films, survival is just a reward for having to go through some serious shit. You're chased by an axe murdered for most of the movie, it'd be pretty cruddy to have him succeed in killing if you didn't deserve an untimely death.

[Captain_Video]

I think it is more that ...most movies nowadays are the product of boardroom meetings, it is sad but it is true, have been since MGM changed the whole system waaaay back when, Irving Thalberg and such.

Now imagine, you are trying to tell corporate executives that you want to make a film that will revolt, horrify and traumatise people, that this is something people may not want to experience, which means you are essentially selling them something that will make people turn away.

They have no interest in creating something that will horrify people as it will not make money and sadly everyone who supports poorly made modern horror are keeping this system going, traditional horror was made as scary as possible as horror films where big bank, over the years horror is one of the most succesful genres you will find.

As with everything you have to support good horror to see it blossom and continue, now I can understand just wanting to see the latest monster mash, I do it too, but it is the blind acceptance of what hollywood puts out that creates these trends and it can only be stopped one person at a time.

( sorry for the rant but modern horror is something I grow increasingly passionate about in the age of diabolical and shallow remakes and cop outs ).

[Flawless P]

No, But you have to understand, not all those were horror. Sixth Sense and Dragonfly werent horror.

And having a downer ending doesnt mean the movie is good. Look at movies like Cabin Fever, House of A thousand Corpses and the TXCSM remake. They all had downer endings, and they sucked.

But then there are great horror movies with both endings. NOTLD had a downer ending, and Psycho had a slightly upbeat one.

I happen to think the problem lies with the look of movies lately. Super-fast, smash cuts dont make a movie scary. Making everything look like a Trent Reznor video doesnt make a movie scary. Little girls with english accents dont make movies scary.
Actually litte girls with english accents are kinda creepy.... LMAO

[blackdragon6]

"Supernatural Thriller" is a euphamism for "Horror without balls."
thats basicly what thrillers are

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

i always wondered if a horror movie is actually scary will it do good at the box office?............do people really want to be genuinly scared or disturbed when watching a film especially one with a downer ending?

[Royal]

i always wondered if a horror movie is actually scary will it do good at the box office?............do people really want to be genuinly scared or disturbed when watching a film especially one with a downer ending?

See EXORSIST, THE

[DDM]

i always wondered if a horror movie is actually scary will it do good at the box office?............do people really want to be genuinly scared or disturbed when watching a film especially one with a downer ending?

Halloween has a "downer" ending with Michael Myers still free. The Omen was a successful film, yet it too has a "downer" ending with both the mother & father getting killed, but Damien is still alive. Night of the Living Dead has an apocalyptic ending with the lone survivor being mistaken for a zombie & killed. Yes, if the movie is good enough, a downer ending will suffice.

[Crinos]

Tell that to THEM

http://www.showbusinessweekly.com/images/197/feature/shining_twins.jpg

oh god I still get shivers looking at those two...

[G. Wayne]

what i find amusing is that buffy and angel are classified as "horror" on tv guides.

house of 1000 corpses sucked, because it just sucked. not because of the ending.

darkness (http://www.411mania.com/movies/reviews/article.php?reviews_id=4036)*, don't know what happened there. it's supposed to be the editing, but sweet jeebus, my dead cat could put a better movie together.

hollywood does seem to be scared of doing a real horror movie (heh). i can't think of anything of the top of my head, but you may want to go for independent or original foreign stuff.

"Supernatural Thriller" is a euphamism for "Horror without balls."

:D


*there's supposed to be an "AVOID" at the beginning of "the 411..." at the end of the review. blame the editor. i put it in there, he omitted it. honest.

one to go.

[DDM]

what i find amusing is that buffy and angel are classified as "horror" on tv guides.

house of 1000 corpses sucked, because it just sucked. not because of the ending.

darkness (http://www.411mania.com/movies/reviews/article.php?reviews_id=4036)*, don't know what happened there. it's supposed to be the editing, but sweet jeebus, my dead cat could put a better movie together.

hollywood does seem to be scared of doing a real horror movie (heh). i can't think of anything of the top of my head, but you may want to go for independent or original foreign stuff.



:D


*there's supposed to be an "AVOID" at the beginning of "the 411..." at the end of the review. blame the editor. i put it in there, he omitted it. honest.

one to go.


In the late 90's, horror became parody with the Scream & I Know What You Did Last Summer movies; furthermore, most directors were more distracted with special effects with sad remakes of House on Haunted Hill & such. 28 Days Later, Dawn of the Dead remake brought horror back to its lifeblood. George A Romero's Land of the Dead should be frightfully good as well.

[Rabid Trekkie]

I was watching the remake of House on Haunted Hill and I turned it off after fifteen minutes. Usually I get a little scared when something pops out of nowhere, I don't know why I just do. That is the only movie that didn't do it when that skeleton popped up from the fireplace or whatever. I saw it coming from like 100 feet away.

Why are they always trying to remake good old horror movies?

[Dreadstar]

You know what pissed me off recently? 13 Ghosts. No I wasn't pissed because it was a remake of a good (not great, but decent) horror flick. No I wasn't pissed that the "twist" was obvious from 20 minutes in. No I wasn't pissed that the SFX were kinda just a little "enh." I wasn't even pissed that the acting was poor to non-existent (which I expected with the inclusion of Lillard).

I was pissed because for the first 10 to 15 minutes, it promised an excellent possibility for the flick to come. And then didn't deliver on it.

What I mean was, it started off like "What if Ghostbusters wasn't a comedy?" And man, that's a premise I'd pay good money to see, yes indeed.

And THEN the thing ignored the premise and turned into slasher flick.

ARGH!

[Doug Strange]

You know what pissed me off recently? 13 Ghosts. No I wasn't pissed because it was a remake of a good (not great, but decent) horror flick. No I wasn't pissed that the "twist" was obvious from 20 minutes in. No I wasn't pissed that the SFX were kinda just a little "enh." I wasn't even pissed that the acting was poor to non-existent (which I expected with the inclusion of Lillard).

I was pissed because for the first 10 to 15 minutes, it promised an excellent possibility for the flick to come. And then didn't deliver on it.

What I mean was, it started off like "What if Ghostbusters wasn't a comedy?" And man, that's a premise I'd pay good money to see, yes indeed.

And THEN the thing ignored the premise and turned into slasher flick.

ARGH!Holy crap, I thought the very same thing! I was really excited by the beginning of that flick. I thought, "Is this actually going to be good?"

And then I thought, "Why hasn't there been a Ghostbusters 3? This would be THE perfect opening."

And then about thirty minutes later I thought, "Wait, why did I pay money for this?"

And then I thought, "Oh, yeah. Jessica Biel."

[Bakema NL]

Real horror isn't made anymore, it's all about laughs now. Nothing scary anymore, only slapstick. Such a shame.