Older horror films vs modern audiences

[Cyclonus]

Tonight, I just watched Rosemary's Baby for the first time. I checked it out because it was supposed to be a great horror classic or something. As it turns out, I couldn't really get into it. It just seemed to go on and on at times. Thankfully, it had a pretty interesting ending with the new spawn of Satan and all. But overall, it didn't pull me in.

I had a similar problem with The Exorcist, but I remember liking that one better. Still, the first part made me wonder if I rented the wrong movie or something :o, though the final act was terrific.

I don't know how to feel. Am I just too used to today's "thrill-a-minute" slashfests, and can't appreciate a more deliberate approach? Puzzling, seeing as how I cherished Kubrick's 2001, though that isn't a horror film.

[Romero&Juliet]

This should get things up and Running again!! I'm going through Schmoe-withdrawl!!

There's always going to be a little bit ofa gap... sitting through some of the outdated classics can painful, so I try as best I can to keep all of the hype surounding the movie in the very back of my head.

Re. The Rosemary's Baby vs. Exorcist.... Id have to say that it was Ellen Burstyn's INCREDIBLE performance that sold me..

[countchocula]

I just bought Rosemary's Baby yesterday. Once I view it, I'll be able to tell you whether or not I was desensitized to it. Cyclonus, I doubt that you've grown accustomed to "modernized" horror. After all, you've listed A Clockwork Orange as one of your favorite films of all time. Many have debated that film's dated shocks, so it's apparent that you're still intrigued by older fare. We all frown upon certain "classics." I loathe Friday the 13th, but I love Black Christmas. I feel that this has less to do with their age and more to do with the way they were crafted. Both slashers are outdated and slow-paced, but one offers style, suspense, and a truly psychotic villain. The other does not.

[Michael_myers]

yes, quite. I loathe Candyman, Silence of the Lambs and Hellraiser. But some people criticize me for being an avid Psycho fan. Psycho, now theres a classic that will never go outta style. (except for the money increase over the years)

[Cyclonus]

Okay, this situation leaves me with a difficult choice. How am I going to handle this film when I review it in the video capsules forum? Should I go ahead and criticize it, giving it a 6/10 rating (**1/2)? That's a mild thumbs-down, which is sure to make some people unhappy. Or should I wuss out and give it a somewhat more favorable review? Better yet, maybe I shouldn't review it at all?

I'm still not sure if I just don't get it here. Regarding other horror films, I consider Psycho a very good thriller, even if it's not one of my personal favorites. Maybe it was a bit slow to start with, but I remember the pacing was a lot more steady. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre easily makes my "best of horror list." Again, it might take a while to get going, but the second half more than makes up for it. The ending, in particular, is still painful to watch. Finally, as I've made clear, I don't think that Halloween is an unqualified masterpiece, but I still respect it (good but not great).

[countchocula]

Don't give it a favorable review if you didn't care for the film. Regardless of its "classic" status, your job as a reviewer is to express your opinions of the film. If you loved it, give it a shining 10/10. If you despised it, give it a loathsome 1/10. You should take Rosemary's Baby's time of release into consideration. Had you been born a few years earlier, you might have enjoyed it more, but you weren't, so don't let that affect your rating.

[rushmore beauty]

I know what you guys mean about horror classics. The first time i watched The Shining, i gave it a 7/10 tops, but I now own it because i saw it at a store, unwrapped for $3 and I couldn't resist. It's now a 9/10. The first time I saw The Exorcist I wasn't scared and I'm still not (i give it a 8/10 for interesting story, but not enough scares for me).

[VicVega]

Well, I am among the few people that I know of (besides on these boards:D) that enjoy older, more thought-out horror films than, like someone said, "thrill a minutes slashfests". A friend of mine said that "The Omen" was one of, if not the worst movie he has ever seen. It was mainly due to the fact that the film is very slow paced. So fucking what? I think it builds character and suspense. Same thing with "The Exoricst". My brother went with his girlfriend to see this movie when it was released a few years ago and he said that it was horrible. How can someone call The Exorcist horrible? If you think it's bad, say "It was bad". It's far from being "horrible".
People these days are so used to Jason-style hack-'em-ups that they could never appreciate some of the true classics of horror.

[FeydRautha]

I checked this thread coz you mentioned "older" horror classics, then chuckled when you mentioned "Rosemary's Baby" and "The Exorcist". Yes, classics, but not OLDER horror classics, if you catch my drift. (I come from the black&white old school.)

I've always thought Rosemary's Baby was one of Roman Polanski's better horror efforts. ("The Lodger" tops it in terms of thrills & chills, if you want to look that one up.) Aside from that silly piece of horror comedy fluff he did - "Fearless Vampire Killers" - he's always been a top-knotch thriller director.

I agree with VicVega, who could knock "The Omen" or "The Exorcist". These kinds of films get under your skin, whereas the slashers they're pumping out today don't. But mindless teen-scream-slashers seem to be what the major audience wants, so that's what the studios will keep providing (more's the pity).

[Toxferatu]

i think alot of people just have no attention span, i'm serios. it seems like they only like constant action and if there's plot development then its boring. seems obvios its an attention span problem.

i love the exorsist because i feel that build up is very needed for the finaly, it just builds you up for one of the greatest scenes in horror history. if they just showed that scene the movie would suck, the build up is needed.

[Jason Voorhees]

Originally posted by Toxferatu
i think alot of people just have no attention span, i'm serios. it seems like they only like constant action and if there's plot development then its boring. seems obvios its an attention span problem.


Yeah, a lot of people seek instant gratification; but good things come to those who wait . I'm one who rarely uses the B-word (You know what I mean), because that is the only mistake a film can make, in my opinion; bad script, bad acting, I don't care, just don't be bor- well, you know what I mean.

Also the ''MTV'' style of directing has become prevalent over the past decade, fast editing, quick cuts, the like. Doesn't bother me but is probably a big reason for people's lack of patience with slower paced films.

[radikill]

I agree that it's MTV style filmmaking that makes the older films seem... well, dull.

I was into horror from an early age. When I was a wee lad, I absolutely loved flicks like Scanners and The Fury. When I watch them again as an adult, I find myself getting impatient as I sit through long exposition scenes and the gradual build-up of suspense.

I didn't mind it at all as a kid, because back then that's the way films were made. Hell, Scanners was practically a roller coaster ride in comparison to a lot of films in that era. But in this age of information overload, we've become accustomed to taking in as much information as fast as possible and moving on. We just don't take the time to stop and smell the roses - or decaying corpses in the case of a horror flick.

[SwimFan87]

most of today teenagers always find old movies a sh!t but im not like that! But Rosemary's baby sucks is so boring but i have to admit that i like to see it sometimes when they show it on tv but i would never buy it!

[Michael_myers]

people think that Norman Bates' PSYCHO character was crap because he wasn't invinsible, and it wasn't by the numbers. Psycho was still good.

[Cyclonus]

I wish to further clairify my position: I consider Fritz Lang's silent classic Metropolis one of the finest genre films ever made, and that was in 1927!

Other old movies I loved were Paths of Glory (1957) and (again) 2001 (1968).

[Hans, wihout Franz]

For a quick example take Rosemary's Baby vs. the Exorcist. The Exorcist would probably be better for the more modern audience because more stuff happens and is not on a more psychlogical note that Rosemary's Baby is. I enjoy them both however I would recomend the Exorcist over Rosemary's Baby.

[spacemonkey]

I agree with the fact that people today dont have enough patience to sit through a slow paced film.

I guess it also depends on how much you appreciate a well crafted story that just takes it time to unravel. I love a good slowburner. I do. I guess most of you have realized that I love films that take their time...stuff like The fog, The Changeling, The Legend of Hell House, Psycho, I really love stuff like that, just as long as it has a good pay off. Like that scene in the cemetary in Italy, and the decapitation scene in the film The Omen. That was well worth the wait.

Now I do believe there is such a thing as old films that are considered classics that are boring as hell and just plain bad, you cant deny that.
But to tell you the truth I just think it boils down to the movie being good or not.

[peepnklown]

Cyclonus – I understand. I heard praises from the heavens about The Exorcist and Rosemary’s baby. I really couldn’t get into them. I felt cheated at the fact that I couldn’t view these movies through their (the people who loved these films) eyes.
I remember watching The Exorcist (the uncut special shown in theaters) and I watched people around me getting so scared while I laughed out loud. I think the movies of the past (the classic movies) were shown to a more religious and closed generation. I really don’t think that I am being un-fair and I don’t think I am not able to appreciate a good classic. I believe that they were focused on a different kind of mindset and now they are hardly scary or shocking. They never got under my skin. I don’t think I am knocking these movies but I am just saying that they really did nothing for me. I can admit that I am impatient but I have liked a lot of so called drawn out movies. I think in this age of technology the audience demands more and demands it fast. I am probably rambling on so I will close for now.

[Lord Crumb]

Good thread. Many of you make good points. It's hard to say, really, why old(er) school movies don't sit well with the new school.
For instance, I had never seen WICKER MAN. I heard all sorts of great things about it, and finally got the chance to see it when Anchor Bay released it the other year on DVD. Well, I was rather disappointed. Christopher Lee wasn't even all that great in it. HOWEVER. I could APPRECIATE the fact that the twist ending could have been very well-received back in the early 70's (like The Sixth Sense was received in '99). But nearly 30 years later, WICKER MAN did not hold up for me. I simply was just NOT AROUND when it was in it's prime. That's no one's fault.
Not, when it comes to films like "The Omen", "The Shining", "The Changeling", etc., those films relied on content and atmosphere, which creates a very involved (and effective) movie experience. The viewer has to be able to appreciate the aformentioned, in order to enjoy the film. If a teenager goes out and rents one of these classics in hopes of lots of grue and a fast-paced story, they'll be very disappointed. Today's audiences have become addicted to the style-over-content type film. They want CGI, a fast-paced story and brand name performers, and, unfortunately those are NOT the ingredients for a classic.
Now take the Exorcist. When it was rereleased the other year, I went to see it with an audience full of teenagers. And guess what they did throughout this masterpiece? They laughed. They thought it was a hoot. Why? Because A) The Exorcist has been parodied for so long that it has become a joke to them, and B) with shows like South Park and the like, the idea of a young girl cursing and being violent is no longer terrifying, it is FUNNY.
So, there are many reasons why these films do not have the same impact on the younger crowd as they did with the older.

[spacemonkey]

Just give younger viewers a chance.

When their need for substance kicks in, and IT WILL (cause hey I remember a time when all I ever cared about were the special effects I could see in a film) THEN they will give a chance to movies that are a bit slower in terms of the fx and action yet are heavier on atmospehre and story. Their need for something more than just the way a film looks or how many cultural references they make, will kick in.

[Corpse Candle]

The problem is that it seems people look to rely on other people's opinions of a film to tell them weather it is good or not.
Use it as an indicator certianly but not a deffinate promise of a great film.
The person who liked a certian film and recomends you to watch may like other films you like and may have a intelgent view on horror but that does not mean you will always share the same opion about every film.
Reamber you can't feel cheated because there is no such thing as a promise of a great film.

[Cyclonus]

I hope no one thinks I'm some MTV-jaded youngster who can't appreciate quality horror. I admired Halloween, Night of the Living Dead, and The Exorcist, despite their faults, and all would get a 7/10 from me. I also regard Alien, Dawn of the Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and Silence of the Lambs very highly (8/10). Remember that I was one of the few who found value in TCM 2.

Finally...I'm a closet Alien 3 fan. :o

[Toxferatu]

thank you corpse, i am sick of people asking "is this worth watching?" or "is this worth renting?" I DONT KNOW WATCH IT FOR YOURSELF, here's an amazing new idea MAKE YOUR OWN OPINION!!!!

[Jason Voorhees]

Ya, I see your point Tox. I personally use recommendations to gauge priority, then form my own opinion upon seeing the recommended film.

Although, to be quite honest, I rarely give recommendations. Mainly because I'm afraid that the person in question might not enjoy what I recommended..

[Lady Summerisle]

CYCLONUS, you are not alone in your liking the campy, vampy, fun TCM 2. I found L.G.'s devotion to Stretch heartwarming.

I love the older, slower films. Remember, before turning into a hack John Carpenter did the slowly simmering ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, PRINCE OF DARKNESS (which had the main set-up mingled with the title), and THE THING, which is atmosphere.

NEAR DARK is a slow film that gains momentum with the character build-up, and it took me a while to appreciate the pacing.

I, too, was at a time when FX were all I cared about, but then I gained true appreciation of the genre with experience. Maybe we should give the M-TV addled brains a chance.

[Cyclonus]

Dare I ask your opinion of Alien 3?

[FeydRautha]

Originally posted by Cyclonus
Finally...I'm a closet Alien 3 fan. :o

Is there room for one more in that closet? To the detriment of my fellow sci-fi-loving friends, I've always thought Alien 3 was a pretty good film. Charles Dance was particularly good in his role, and Signourney Weaver rocks as always.

A lot of my friends claim it looks "too much like a pop video"; since David Fincher had just graduated from a career of pop-promo directing, that's no surprise to me. It doesn't detract from the look for atmosphere of the film as a whole.

The only criticism I'd give it is it suffers from "Too Many Cooks" Syndrome; too many people at the writing table tried to add too many plot aspects when just one or two would have done. Apparently the script was in re-writes for years before Fincher got a crack at it.

Back on topic, I have to agree with Lady S. when she says "Give the MTV addle-brains a chance". Older films might not be scary any more, but can be appreciated for their directorial style, story-telling style, innovative (for their time) SFX, acting talent and mood-setting. And shoot me but Todd Browning's "Freaks" still scares the crap out of me.

[APzombie]

Originally posted by Cyclonus
I wish to further clairify my position: I consider Fritz Lang's silent classic Metropolis one of the finest genre films ever made, and that was in 1927!

Not trying to head off topic here but i recently checked out Fritz Lang's M, a 1938 potraite of a child serial killer as well as Langs first film to have sound. It is truely a remarkable piece of art, it depicted killing as a psychological desiese rather than an act of murder... and this was told before psychology was brought let alone thinking mass murder was a problom due to a psychological desiese! It was amazing but i regret watching it with a friend who thought it was boring... he didn't realize that there was nothing like that 70 years ago but it has been used again and again ever since, that sort of apprieciation is hard with todays audience...

Rent Fritz Lang's M!

[Lady Summerisle]

Yes, CYCLONUS, I thought ALIEN 3 was a grubby, grimey mess of a sci-fi/horror that belongs in the good books of the ALIEN legacy.
Charles Dance, Dutton, Weaver (who, if you watch the EVOLUTION bio on BBC, had control of her character by then), and Lance H. all give strong performances.
Way too many cooks, though. The feel is real, and you wouldn't want to room with these blokes in any situation.

FEYD, Freaks is a master at scary, since the rainy conclusion is chilling, and all we see are the after effects of what the freaks did to Cleopatre. I actually felt so awful when Cleopatre was yelling "Freaks!" to the performers during the wedding feast.

P.S. I cried very hard at the conclusion of ALIEN 3. It really did wrap things up neatly., but left me feeling for Ripley and her consequences for being a survivor. This installment detailed her lonliness very well, since she even loses Bishop (the good one).

[Cyclonus]

*Alien 3 ending revealed here*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
That last shot of Ripley falling into the molten lead was fucking awesome wasn't it? :D

[Lady Summerisle]

HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF MODERN IGNORANCE:

THE VANISHING is on a list of best DVD's to give, one woman is "That's the movie with Kiefer Sutherland, where his girlfriend goes missing." NOOO! There was an original, you know, Foreign, Dutch, scary.

And ROSEMARY'S BABY is the top. There are other films other than that in the older section. THE CHANGELING? GHOST STORY? LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE? Anyone?

People are stuck on the same classic horror films with little room for deviation.

Now I know why most don't haVE A clue about what ROCKY HORROR or MOTEL HELL is about, the media addles them with ideas of what is the "best horror to give on..."

Maybe if they watched these other, forgotten films like FREAKS would they bother with real horror.

[spacemonkey]

Originally posted by Cyclonus
Dare I ask your opinion of Alien 3?

Cyclonus, I think that Alien 3 is great. I own it and re-watched it the other day, and I still think its excellent.

The thing with films like Alien 3 is that they are different. And because of that most people dont give it a chance and just dismiss it as "weird" or "bad".

Same thing with old films. To a younger audience, old films are something different something weird, that they are not use to seeing so they immediatly dismiss em as "boring" or "slow", with out really getting INTO the film and actually giving it a chance.

You know what they say we fear what we dont understand. :D

[Cyclonus]

I think Alien 3 is one of the most overlooked genre films out there. After the Scream era, it's great to look back and see a real horror movie. No annoying "hot young stars." No feel-good ending. In fact it's one of the most depressing movies I've ever seen. I could literally feel my heart ache when I saw it. It didn't even feel like a movie, but a dark, grim reality onto itself. One look at it and you'll see the new teen slashers for what they are: "powderpuff horror." Alien 3, for all its flaws, towers above both of them.

[Candyman'sBitch]

Media drills into your head just like with The Ring "This is scarier the the Excorcist or Sixth Sense" Who in the hell thought those
movies wee scary? I mean really...The Excorcist maybe.
Night Of The Demons, Texas Chainsaw Massacre,Hills Have Eyes, , The Last House On The Left, Hellraier and Candyman all these movies scared me. They hadlwer budgets Not too wel known character Not all Hollywood. Like these nw MTV/WB horro flicks. You can't tell Abandon from Halloween Resurrection the way its promoted ...But that's my opinion ...It's been 1

[peepnklown]

I can only speak for myself but I don’t think it’s a lack of substance in my case. I don’t need special effects to scare me or interest me. I can appreciate them but I cannot call them scary.
Candyman’sBitch said, “Who in the hell thought those movies were scary?”

Some people would ask the same question about the movies you said scared you.

I think the best way to go around these debates and discussions would be to explain your opinions.
Give examples and explanations to further your opinion.

Rather than attack, explain and respect.

[Jason13thh]

The periods, the decades don't bother me that's for sure.
I don't care about the date of release.
Jaws is my favorite film and I was not born.
I was born the 31st of august 1976 ( I am 26 )
I like Deep Red ( 1975 ) The Bird With The Cristal Plumage ( 1970 )
M ( 30's ) Les Diaboliques ( 50's ) etc ... I don't care about the years but it has to be good to please me.

[spacemonkey]

Originally posted by Jason13thh
The periods, the decades don't bother me that's for sure.
I don't care about the date of release.
I don't care about the years but it has to be good to please me.

I agree with what youve just said there. No matter when it was made what it all boils down to is if its good or not.

Good films are allways appreciated no matter when they were made.

It just has to do with the fact that people have been bombarded with fast paced, no story, fx filled movies. When todays modern audiences watch an older film its kind of like when a little kid who is used to eating candy with empty calories all the time is suddenly fed a well balanced and nutrituos meal. He wont like it at first but later on he will realize that it is in fact better for him.

[Hell Phantom]

I don't like really slow paced movies, like UNBREAKABLE (I did enjoy the movie, just gave me a headache) but I don't like really fast paced movies like XxX. I didn't care for that movie nor Fast and the Furious. I want some plot and build up with my action...THANK YOU!


P.S. Alien 3 kicks ass

[Hell Phantom]

BUMP