Current Horror Movies

User avatar
sugarpuss
Posts: 116
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 12:57 pm
Location: Western New York
Contact:

Current Horror Movies

Post by sugarpuss »

I'm not sure if this is the right place to rant about this, but here goes. I went out to dinner tonight with some friends--this was mainly last minute and by default, because they wanted to see the new Harry Potter movie (I didn't) and since it was sold out, decided to get something to eat instead.

So I go out and we start talking about the other movie that was released today: Captivity. Has anyone read the reviews for this piece of garbage? I read a fully detailed review over at a site called Pajiba and nearly threw up. It's beyond vile. In fact, vile doesn't even begin to describe it. I'm not going to go into detail here, but suffice to say that if you know about it, you know how gory it is. Long story short: a popular model is kidnapped and tortured and that's putting it lightly. Of course, at the end she gets her revenge, but you have to go through about 80 minutes of hell to get there.

My problem is this: How desensitized are we as a nation, that someone could make a movie that basically glorifies torture and rape AND finds a studio that's willing to unleash it onto the public? It makes me sick to know that there are people out there who would willingly see this and think, "Well that sounds like fun! Let's go see it!"

I do think that the majority of horror movies being released today are way too disgusting (the "Saw" trilogy, those "Hills Have Eyes" remakes, etc.), but shouldn't there be a line drawn? I know there are always people out there who love horror movies (and I admit my guilty pleasures are zombie movies), but I guess I'm posting this because I'm just disgusted. I'm disgusted with one of my friends who told me "lighten up, it's just a movie" and with the movie studios in general who think releasing such a piece of garbage is something that's cool and fun. It's NOT. It's horrible. It's sick. As a woman and a human being, I'm fearful that some nut will get some ideas from watching this movie and think, "Hey, that sounds like fun!" Or that another studio will release another movie that's even worse than "Captivity"--you know, bigger and better. Ugh.

I don't know. Maybe I spend way too much time watching the classics. Maybe it's just me, but I had to get this off my chest. It's late and I apologize if I'm not making much sense.
"Some of the best parts of life are frivolous." - Arthur Kennedy in A Summer Place
-----
The Roadshow Version: A Modern Take on Classic Movies
MikeBSG
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Post by MikeBSG »

Dear Sugarpuss, I agree that while I like many horror movies, a lot of the ones today seem pretty dismal. "Hostel," for example, sounded like just a lot of torture, an assault on the audience instead of trying to scare the audience by using the filmmaker's tools.

This didn't just happen overnight. It has been building since the Seventies. When I finally saw the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," I was dismayed that it was mostly about a young woman screaming as she is being threatened for the last half-hour of the film. I thought it was far more misoginistic than the original "Friday the 13th" for example.

How we get out of this situation, I don't know.
User avatar
Moraldo Rubini
Posts: 1094
Joined: April 19th, 2007, 11:37 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Movie Lite

Post by Moraldo Rubini »

"Lighten up, it's just a movie." drives me crazy. Movies are a reflection of our society. It's awfully difficult to get a picture made today. If a film maker is able to jump all the hurdles, to get studio backing, to get a distributor... They all have to agree that there's an audience for the film. The movie itself is less frightening than the notion that all agreed there's an audience for this flick.

But then I'm not desensitized to film violence either. I've always been at least 10 years behind in this. As for the horror genre, it's hard for me to get past 1968, the year of The Night of the Living Dead; though I loved The Shining and have enjoyed Carrie. Gore for the sake of violence sends me searching for other fare.
User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Post by mrsl »

Hi All:

I know I'm always ranting about today's horror films and what they might do to our youth, but as Moraldo said, "Movies are a reflection of our society", and they are also an ingredient to our make-up. Why do you think we all have basically the same ideals and preferences? We were raised on them, not only by our parents, but society in general. The movies we watched in the 40's and 50's, and even the early 60's subliminally taught decent ethics and moralities. These so-called entertainment things have gotten worse and worse in the past 40 years. The newspapers are full of abuse of women yet we PAY to see movies about exactly that subject.

I know I'm an old fogie, and I've been told that we didn't hear about this stuff in the 50's although it was going on, because the news bureaus weren't as free as they are now, but is that so bad? Is it better to give ideas to crazy people or keep them in the dark?

Russia is pulling out of the discussion for halting wmd's but the main story on Chicago's news yesterday was that there are new clues in a 17 year old mystery of a college girl who went missing, and the second story was a mother who has been missing for quite a while now. I feel for both the families of these ladies, but I do think WMD's are a heck of a lot more important for people to know about than old clues or missing people. If that sounds harsh, I'm sorry, but I want to know that my life, and that of my family and town I live in is in possible jeopardy. If that makes me a Brick, then so be it!

I don't know how to stop it, but I do take the responsibility for the escalation. As much as I tried to keep my kids from seeing these movies when they started out, I missed a few and my kids are now in the age bracket (40 yrs.) that raised the kids who now thrive on this junk. So somehow, my generation failed in passing along decent morals, but it's too late now, I just get laughed at for complaining. "Oh, gramma, they're just movies". Uh-huh!

Anne
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
User avatar
sandykaypax
Posts: 490
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:15 pm
Location: Beautiful Ohio

Post by sandykaypax »

Hubby and I were just lamenting about this current trend in horror films the other day. I don't usually watch horror films, but my husband loves them. He calls this newest crop of films like Saw, Hostel, Captivity, etc., "torture porn." I don't know if he made up that phrase himself or if he got it from someone else, but it seems to sum up the sub-genre pretty well. Where is the suspense? Where is the story? It's just an excuse to show as much violence as possible.

We also talked about the mistake that many modern horror films make when they show the "monster" too often. I believe that Clive Barker said that gets the audience accustomed to the monster and takes away the suspense and thrills.

Like I said, I'm too chicken to watch most horror films, but my hubby and I always discuss the films that we see, even the ones that we see separately. Perhaps some of the sci-fi/horror fans can add more to this discussion. I do agree that this desensitization to violence is common in our society. I know people who think that it's cool to see someone get shot in the face.

Sandy K
User avatar
sugarpuss
Posts: 116
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 12:57 pm
Location: Western New York
Contact:

Post by sugarpuss »

sandykaypax wrote:Hubby and I were just lamenting about this current trend in horror films the other day. I don't usually watch horror films, but my husband loves them. He calls this newest crop of films like Saw, Hostel, Captivity, etc., "torture porn." I don't know if he made up that phrase himself or if he got it from someone else, but it seems to sum up the sub-genre pretty well.
Sandy, that's the description that's been thrown around in the media. If you do a search on Google, there's tons of articles about it and all the different films that fall under that header. The problem with the torture porn genre is that it's supposed to be "sexy" since the female victim is "hot", which is disturbing beyond belief. It's a pretty misogynist view. The main problem with Captivity (which bombed!) is that the girl is tortured in order for her captor to have consensual sex with her! That's sick. It's bad enough with roofies. I may sound a little crazy, but as a woman, it's a big frightening to go by yourself anywhere these days. Movies like this don't help.

Mike, perhaps the misogyny of the current "Torture Porn" movies started with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Although I don't think there was a lot of gore in the first version (I fully admit that I've never seen it. I'm chicken.) In the Friday the 13th series, everyone was fair game. Girls, guys--as long as you were trying to have sex, Jason was ready to kill you! Those movies (to me) weren't about being artsy and hip--just a good scare to the system.

Anne, you mentioned "Is it better to give ideas to crazy people or keep them in the dark?". That's something I've always wondered about. Take a show like CSI, for example (I used to be a HUGE CSI junkie. Now I just watch Miami sometimes for the comedic laugh value)--they basically show you how to commit a murder and what NOT to do so you don't get caught. It's as though violence has slowly sneaked up and now the general public is desensitized. A little murder isn't enough: there has to be more blood and more gore. Add that to the growing fact that everything needs to be sexier as well. Torture porn is like peanut butter and chocolate for some people = violence and sex in one package.

Moraldo, you've actually named some of my favorite horror movies! I absolutely love Carrie. Those final scenes at the prom were amazing. Movies like that and The Shining have actual plots. There's a reason for the madness and not just Carrie killing for the sake of it. She was ostracized by her classmates, had a crazy mother and had the power of telekinesis. Wouldn't you go insane after someone dropped a bucket of pig's blood on your head too? And on Prom Night, no less!

I'm not a big fan of horror in general, but I fully admit to loving zombie movies. I loved the remake of Dawn of the Dead. I've seen it countless times, and although there were really gross parts, I just loved it. There were good characterizations, good guys, bad guys--and I know it's not up to par with the original, but it was a good movie. I loved Shaun of the Dead as well. A little gory, but so funny.

The thing is, I'm in my late-20's. I'm at that prime age where I guess I should be enjoying things like the Saw trilogy, but I don't. I recoil in horror from movies like that. Just reading the descriptions make me sick to my stomach. I can understand the need for horror movies, but do they have to be gory and misogynist? Does the lead character have to choose between shooting herself or her dog? What is the point of it? What do people get out of movies like this? Is it just for guys to see a woman getting "put in her place"? I'm not sure. It's really disturbing and I'm just surprised that it's disturbed me more than I ever thought it would.
"Some of the best parts of life are frivolous." - Arthur Kennedy in A Summer Place
-----
The Roadshow Version: A Modern Take on Classic Movies
Mr. Arkadin
Posts: 2645
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:00 pm

Post by Mr. Arkadin »

The Horror movie genre has not really had any great films for over 30 years because they don't have any original ideas.

Classic horror uses the viewers intellect and mind--not gore and sleeze. Most of the good films also present some understanding or sympathy for how things have moved to the point of where our film begins.

When Peeping Tom, Psycho, The Haunting, Repulsion, Don't Look Now, and the other great films of the last great era came out, they presented masterful acting and not a lot of gore. Fear was manipulated in the mind. That's why those films have continued to work and stayed fresh.

Hollywood execs think the more they sicken us the better the film will be. :roll: Also, the trend has basically stayed in the faceless serial killer mode for the last 30 years. There have been a few experiments outside of that idea, but not many.
User avatar
mrsl
Posts: 4200
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Post by mrsl »

Mr Arkardin:

What you say is true, but I do think Jaws should be included in that list of movies that use the intellect rather than base blood and gore. Through much of that movie, we never saw the shark although because of advertising, we knew what it was, however, not seeing it for the first few deaths made our apprehension grow and grow until we saw that scene of Scheider tossing out the bait. That scene alone made quite an impact and does even to this day. I've seen Jaws countless times, and seeing the size of that shark under Roys' arm is till a shocker. Even if you're not a Spielberg fan, credit should still be given for his direction of Jaws. In it he used many of the hints he's talked about in various bios I've seen with and of him, including Ford's idea about horizons, and Hitchcocks' idiom of 'fear of the unknown' being more frightening than any visual scene can demonstrate.

Anne
Anne


***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *

]***********************************************************************
Mr. Arkadin
Posts: 2645
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:00 pm

Post by Mr. Arkadin »

I totally agree with your asessments Anne. Jaws is not a favorite of mine, but I think you are dead on in each of your points about the film.
MikeBSG
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Post by MikeBSG »

I find it interesting that no body has really mentioned M. Night Shamalyan as an alternative to the trend to cruelty in today's horror film. Does he even fit in the horror film, or do we think of him as working in some other kind of genre?

Personally, I think the traditional horror film (centered on some kind of "cursed outsider" played by Karloff, Lugosi, Price, Lee or Cushing) died in the mid-Seventies. What we have today is a new kind of film that has little to do with the old model.
User avatar
CharlieT
Posts: 403
Joined: May 7th, 2007, 8:28 pm
Location: Warren G. Harding's hometown

Post by CharlieT »

MikeBSG said:

I find it interesting that no body has really mentioned M. Night Shamalyan as an alternative to the trend to cruelty in today's horror film. Does he even fit in the horror film, or do we think of him as working in some other kind of genre?

I find that his work is definitely classical horror. As noted previously, classic horror keeps the nature and physical appearance of the "monster" hidden until late in the film in order to increase the tension. Classic horror also has a hero or heroes to save the day. M. Night Shamalyan succeeds in keeping these techniques in his films without the blood and gore that is so prevalent in today's so-called horror genre. They are the ones who should be listed in an alternative genre, IMHO.
"I'm at my most serious when I'm joking." - Dudley

Don't sweat the petty things - don't pet the sweaty things.
benwhowell
Posts: 558
Joined: April 16th, 2007, 3:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas
Contact:

I see dead people...

Post by benwhowell »

I agree with you, CharlieT. Shyamalan is a master at "classical horror-"delving more into the psychological aspects of ordinary people encountering "monsters." I've seen my share of "gore" and it can be fun sometimes-especially the creative special effects, but it doesn't "scare" me...just the occasional jolt. Shyamalan's movies have characters you care about...and they always make me feel their trepidations...with mystery and apprehension. Shyamalan really knows how to punch my angst buttons! :shock:
User avatar
sandykaypax
Posts: 490
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 3:15 pm
Location: Beautiful Ohio

Post by sandykaypax »

sugarpuss, I am also disturbed by the extremely misogynistic bent of the torture porn films. Torturing a woman so that she will have sex with a guy? HUH? I don't get the appeal.

I would consider some of Shyamalan's films to be horror, especially The Sixth Sense, which is a really good ghost story. Horror doesn't have to be gory.

Sandy K
feaito

Post by feaito »

Alejandro Amenabar's "The Others", in my opinion, is also excellent horror & suspense. And I agree with all that's been said in relation to gore films and current horror movies. I don't like them at all.
MikeBSG
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Post by MikeBSG »

The only Shamalyan film I've seen is "The Sixth Sense," which I liked. However, the second time I saw it, I wasn't sure it was really a horror film. My reasoning was that while the supernatural element was frightening, the ghosts never did anything hurtful (they were stuck in re-enacting how they were hurt) and only the "living people" did the bad things. There is a big difference between that and "Dracula," for instance.

I watched the 1931 "Frankenstein" today. Karloff is, of course, great in bringing pathos to the monster, but I also noticed, and liked, how the film suggests that the Monster is doing stuff that Dr. Frankenstein seems to want on some level (like disrupting his impending marriage and killing his old teacher). There is an essay now on "Locus Online" about the enduring appeal of "Twilight Zone" which says that the appeal of TZ is that it is (often) tragic. To me, the more recent horror films tend to avoid making linkages between people and monsters (like Frankenstein) or acknowledging that there is a tragic side to life. They tend to be about the group of attractive young people under siege by an unknowable/non-understandable figure. Since the "monster" can't be understood, giving us the horror of recognition, the only way to frighten people is to show the body parts.
Post Reply