Horror

[talonmalon333]

So recently, I have gotten around to watching all the Nightmare on Elm Street movies (some of which I had previously seen, some of which I hadn't). I figure I'll just quickly post my thoughts on them.

The original is still a classic and a great horror film. One of the best slasher films ever made. Of course Freddy Krueger is great here and works very well at being scary, but I think Nancy doesn't get as much respect as she deserves for being the lead. She's overall a better and more cunning character than someone like Laurie from the Halloween series.

Nightmare 2: Freddy's Revenge isn't nearly as bad as people made it out to be, but at the same time, it has faded into the realms of forgettable-ness ever since I saw it. It has some interesting ideas, but it also lacks great dream segments, and the method of overcoming Freddy is pretty bad.

Nightmare 3: Dream Warriors is certainly the best of the "sequels" (at least, as far as the movie continuity sequels go). And that can be attributed to Wes Craven back as the director and Nancy back as the lead, as well as some nice special effects and comedic touches. The concept of dream powers is also a nice idea for a change, though it's not nearly as interesting as Nancy's careful planning and traps from the first movie. They really could have ended the movie continuity here.

Nightmare 4: Dream Master is where the series starts to truly go downhill. The characters and acting are weaker (with the exception of the lead, Alice), the pacing is too rushed, the creativity is dumbed down, and the movie as a whole feels more like a formulaic slasher.

Nightmare 5: Dream Child takes it lower. The movie has some nice gothic and creepy sets, and it manages to surprisingly build up atmosphere at times. But the story is too ridiculous, and the comedy is incredibly overdone.

Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare is the last in the movie continuity, and it's by far the worst. I knew it would be bad when I went into it a week ago, but it ended up being worse than I expected. Nothing about this movie works. The story makes no sense and is hard to follow, the acting is bad, the characters are bad, the movie is very predictable, and the comedy is so overdone to the point of making Nightmare 5 look like a serious film. Plus, it's honestly shocking how forced and gimmicky the 3D effects are (lead female literally puts on a pair of 3D glasses). However, the movie is so bad that it can be entertaining, so it's not unwatchable. Plus, I have to admit Freddy has some really funny lines.

Wes Craven's New Nightmare is the last of them, though it's not actually part of the movie continuity. I always thought this and the original movie were the best, and I stand by that. It puts a great spin on the series' concept which was already unique and interesting. And it's great to see Nancy's actress back. I also think this might be the movie where Freddy is at his best. His makeup is great, and I really like the coat he wears (though I wish the hat wasn't such a bright green, but at least he doesn't wear it often). It's also nice seeing him be serious again. Really, it's almost surprising seeing how quickly this movie redeems the franchise, after it spent multiple movies simply deteriorating.

Overall, I'm glad I finally got around to watching every movie. However, I think that the original movie, 3, and New Nightmare are the only ones I'll ever have a desire to go back to.

[talonmalon333]

So upon rewatching it, Alien is still one of the greatest horror movies of all time. Feel free to discuss this fact.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Alien = greatest sci-fi/horror film of all time

Aliens = greatest sci-fi/action film of all time

There were no other films in the franchise after that. No video games were made, either.

This is all indisputable fact.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I will say that John Carpenter's The Thing is actually a match for Alien in the sci-fi/horror department, so to take back my previous statement, it's a tie between those 2 films.

[Daikun]

I've watched all the Elm Street movies years ago and I largely agree with talonmalon.

What I find surprising is that this franchise has some pretty decent sequels. When I watch other horror movie franchises, they usually just have the original good first movie and a bunch of unwatchable garbage that they try to pass off as sequels. Robert Englund has a lot of fun as Freddy and his kills are enjoyable and sometimes even creative.

[talonmalon333]

I will say that John Carpenter's The Thing is actually a match for Alien in the sci-fi/horror department, so to take back my previous statement, it's a tie between those 2 films.

While I prefer Aliens, I recently rewatched The Thing and it was much better than I originally gave it credit for. In addition to those phenomenal special effects, it's also very suspenseful and dripping with atmosphere.

I've watched all the Elm Street movies years ago and I largely agree with talonmalon.

What I find surprising is that this franchise has some pretty decent sequels. When I watch other horror movie franchises, they usually just have the original good first movie and a bunch of unwatchable garbage that they try to pass off as sequels. Robert Englund has a lot of fun as Freddy and his kills are enjoyable and sometimes even creative.

The sequels I mainly like are 3 and New Nightmare. With the exception of Freddy's Dead, none of the other sequels are downright horrible, but they also aren't memorable. I didn't especially mind 2 at first, but now, it just feels all wrong. As far as horror sequels go, which ones are you referring to? I tend to compare the Nightmare series with Halloween and Friday the 13th, because those are the horror slasher franchises that directly competed with each other. The Halloween sequels are bad but they were kind of doomed by merely existing (I've talked before about how making a sequel to Halloween doesn't work with its themes). Friday the 13th's sequels are bad but at the same time the original was bad, too. They consist of pieces of garbage that are fun, and pieces of garbage that are just pieces of garbage.

[Daikun]

Yeah, pretty much Halloween. The original was great and I surprisingly liked H20. The fourth movie was okay. The rest are awful.

I don't think any of the Friday the 13th movies are good.

[talonmalon333]

Yeah, pretty much Halloween. The original was great and I surprisingly liked H20. The fourth movie was okay. The rest are awful.

I don't think any of the Friday the 13th movies are good.

Looking them on their own, I actually didn't dislike II. I do think it's the "best" of the sequels and is better than 99% of cheap slashers.

[talonmalon333]

New top 10 horror movie list.

1. Psycho
2. Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979 remake)
3. Rosemary's Baby
4. The Exorcist
5. Nosferatu (1922 original)
6. Dawn of the Dead
7. Alien
8. Halloween
9. The Bride of Frankenstein
10. An American Werewolf in London

[gunswordfist]

No Jaws?

In no order, except the first: 1. The Thing, Halloween, Jaws, Dawn Of The Dead, Alien, Aliens, Night Of The Living Dead, DOTD Remake

[talonmalon333]

No Jaws?

In no order, except the first: 1. The Thing, Halloween, Jaws, Dawn Of The Dead, Alien, Aliens, Night Of The Living Dead, DOTD Remake

I can't bring myself to call Jaws a horror movie.

Also, from what I hear, Aliens isn't much of a horror movie, either. Haven't seen it yet, but that might end up changing tonight.

[gunswordfist]

Why not? Also, DOTD remake probably doesn't count but I had spots to fill. Also, I forgot to add Predator.

[talonmalon333]

Because Jaws is too much of a suspense thriller in my mind.

DOTD remake refers to Dawn of the Dead remake, right? Why wouldn't that count?

Also, if you're the type to count Alien as a slasher movie, Ripley is the best final girl in any slasher film (or, at the very least, she's tied with Nancy Thompson).

[gunswordfist]

I don't even get the difference between those genres.

I think Dawn Of The Dead remake could be considered an action movie with zombies.

[No-Personality]

Alien = greatest sci-fi/horror film of all time

Aliens = greatest sci-fi/action film of all time

There were no other films in the franchise after that. No video games were made, either.

This is all indisputable fact.

I'm with you on Aliens, but... have you seen Videodrome?

One of the reasons I always argue Jaws isn't a horror film is because Spielberg is a big "movie magic" guy. I absolutely adore Close Encounters of the Third Kind and the majority of that movie is scenes that take you out of any human story going on. So, he's actively abusing his power as a storyteller to play the Awesome Director game. Like Michael Bay does all the time, and I friggin' hate him for. Alien might be pulling a Gremlins and slyly luring audiences in by impressing them with post-Star Wars spaceship visuals, making them think this will be less intense than it winds up being, but it's an extremely slow buildup which I'm not sure adequately serves the film's atmosphere first.

Videodrome has a far tighter grip on story, character, acting, tone, etc. And is every bit as intense, shocking, and thought-provoking.

Whoops, I forgot about Carrie. I do like the movie, actually (the original; I haven't seen the remake), but I don't really consider it a horror film in the same way that I don't consider Don't Look Now to be a horror film. It's really only the last 10-15 minutes of those movies that make that transition into being horror movies, but the vast majority of those films are more about characterization and suspense.

Don't Look Now is a British horror movie, first and foremost. One of the reasons I limited my Top 100 list to films made after 1967 was that I am wildly ignorant when it comes to Hammer horror. They made so many damn movies and too many studios have a few pieces of their whole puzzle that it's difficult to actually see them all unless you invested in them at least a decade ago. Unlike Roger Corman's AIP (American International Pictures) Vincent Price / Edgar Allen Poe period costume-horror output, which MGM / 20th Century Fox co-own the entirety of outright (except for one single film- The Terror with Jack Nicholson and Boris Karloff). To me, Don't Look Now fits in the 1973 class-curve of horror very well, thanks to the influence of The Wicker Man. Which is another slow-burner that relies more on the horror of observation. And works thanks to gritty camerawork and a dark worldview.

De Palma's Carrie is a full-blooded horror film in my book, start to finish. First of all, it maintains a consistently permeating creepiness. Thanks in no small part to Piper Laurie and, of all people, John Travolta. I don't know if I'm alone here but some characters in a horror story (especially if they're teenagers) naturally remind you that the horror story focused on teenagers is often about how unforgiving life is on people who live like there's no tomorrow. That there are no exceptions for teenagers; if you're in a 70's or 70's-styled (i.e.: Tobe Hooper's The Funhouse, anything directed by Rob Zombie) horror movie- chances are already against you. The Grim Reaper is practically jealous of your youth and is just itching to make an example out of you. And as the Prom Massacre scene makes plainly obvious: no one in this movie goes down alone. When Carrie opens fire, you'd better already be in another town (this goes back to the book, if I'm not mistaken). Secondly, Carrie is one of the few horror movies that I give points to for trying to make commonplace everyday events a compelling source of horror. Horror today is all about "bad things happen" without any genuine creepiness, atmosphere, or visual flare that isn't in the big-budget slick cinematography. Today: any bad thing happens, it's horror. Any grave subject matter makes a movie horror these days. Which kind of means that war movies, documentaries, and some grossout comedies are now viable horror pics (I've heard some make this case with Freddy Got Fingered... I am not kidding).