- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Were the early Horror Movies Scarier than the ones Nowadays?
Posted on 6/30/16 at 5:38 pm
Posted on 6/30/16 at 5:38 pm
Me and my dad were talking about movies a few days ago and somehow Psycho and Alfred Hitchcock came up. He said those movies were probably scarier because, take the shower scene for example, you didn't have to (nor could you with the restrictions back then) see the actual stabbing. Your imagination took over and you imagined what happened to the woman. And your imagination is always gonna be more colorful than what they can show you. He said that absolutely freaked so many people out that they would hesitate to shower. I could see the validity in that assessment. Kinda like how after Jaws people were extremely scared to get in the ocean.
19
Posted on 6/30/16 at 5:40 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Yes/ thread
Posted on 6/30/16 at 5:46 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
This is why I thought the Witch was good. It left something to the imagination
Posted on 6/30/16 at 5:48 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Not really, and before people break out the pitchforks and torches... much like every other genre of movie when we think about older horror movies we remember the classics, not the turds.
Whether you show the monster, don't show the monster, show the monster taking a chainsaw to Linnea Quigley, or show Linnea Quigley taking a chainsaw to the monster most horror movies, like most movies over all, are going to suck. There is a vast horde of really bad old horror movies.
Get a good director, a good script, good actors, and as a few horror flicks have shown recently you can come up with a good movie.
Whether you show the monster, don't show the monster, show the monster taking a chainsaw to Linnea Quigley, or show Linnea Quigley taking a chainsaw to the monster most horror movies, like most movies over all, are going to suck. There is a vast horde of really bad old horror movies.
Get a good director, a good script, good actors, and as a few horror flicks have shown recently you can come up with a good movie.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 5:51 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
older horror movies are scarier because you were younger when you watched them IMO.
Scary movies today usually have something sadistic or torture involved which I'm not in to.
That's why I like the ghost/religious/possession type of scary movie more than Saw/Purge/Hostel stuff.
Freddie was in your dreams, Jason was in the woods, Myers was crazy and out for revenge. That was scary to me when I was young.
Some dude cutting your toes off in a room while Du Hast plays is just messed up
Scary movies today usually have something sadistic or torture involved which I'm not in to.
That's why I like the ghost/religious/possession type of scary movie more than Saw/Purge/Hostel stuff.
Freddie was in your dreams, Jason was in the woods, Myers was crazy and out for revenge. That was scary to me when I was young.
Some dude cutting your toes off in a room while Du Hast plays is just messed up
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:00 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
No but they were better.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:01 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Today's horror movies tend to focus strictly on shocking you with elaborate images and effects. Early horror movies focused much more on suspense, which takes time and skill. Early horror movies are usually more scary in my opinion.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:04 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I find horror movies today to be jumpy, but not usually truly scary. Some of the old ones don't hold up as well but the classics transcend time. The original Halloween, The Exorcist, Psycho, Nightmare on Elm Street, etc etc. Some of them were just really good movies, genre aside.
The lack of real scary ones makes the really good ones that come out today stand out like The Strangers, The Ring, The Witch, etc
The lack of real scary ones makes the really good ones that come out today stand out like The Strangers, The Ring, The Witch, etc
This post was edited on 6/30/16 at 6:07 pm
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:09 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:10 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
Were the early Horror Movies Scarier than the ones Nowadays?
As a huge horror fan, No.
Like any other genre, the stuff that's the best is often off the beaten path.
Horrors released in the last few years that are both scary and more "classic:"
The Conjuring
Insidious
The Others
It Follows
Woman in Black
The Witch
The Ring
28 Days Later
Mama
The Descent
Etc. Horror is fine and is still scary.
Even more underrated stuff:
Frailty
Splinter
Audition
1408
Also Etc.
And I'd add, you're probably desensitized or jaded as well. It takes a little suspension of disbelief/pure imagination to let horrors get to you. If you like them, but they still don't scare you, just try and let go of reality for a bit. Watch them with wonder rather than skepticism.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:11 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Suspense horror is always better than jump scare slasher porn
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:12 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
quote:
Kinda like how after Jaws people were extremely scared to get in the ocean.
You ever seen the numbers on caller ID sales before and after Scream?
Posted on 6/30/16 at 6:40 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
No, you were a child when you watched them.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 7:18 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
The old movies did a better job of building atmosphere, Nosferatu being a perfect example. The biggest difference is in the audience. Today's audience has seen it all. Movies like Dracula and The Mummy were horrifying to audiences in the 1930s but look a little corny today.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 7:30 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Older horror movies were better because they had to rely on acting/music/setting to generate fear rather than relying on special effects like today. These days we get absurd looking CGI monsters/ghosts/demons and jump scares.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 9:23 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
I think the problem with that question is that 'horror' isn't a monolithic genre. There are definitely edge-of-your-seat thriller/suspense where what's not seen is scarier than what is, but that approach really doesn't work with, say, a post-apocalyptic zombie movie, for instance. It can work for a portion of the movie, but nobody really wants to watch "Nightmare on Elm Street: Freddy's Really Embarrassed to be Seen in Public" or "The Shining and What Happened When Jack Decided to Head Home Alone Because the Hotel Was Boring Him."
And, honestly, some people are just as freaked out by visible, visceral horrors as others are at harmless jump-scares or shadow-puppets. The alien can be just as frightening as the unseen. Seeing somebody with his guts ripped out isn't subtle, but it is disturbing and can be every bit as horrific as just getting a hint of what happened. If these approaches didn't also work, those sorts of movies wouldn't get made because nobody would bother paying good money to watch them.
(And speaking of alien, 'Alien' is an excellent movie to make this point with. For a large portion of the movie, we don't get a clear look at it, though we did see the results. Had the movie stuck with that to the bitter end, it wouldn't be anywhere close to the acknowledged modern masterpiece it's currently considered. 'Jaws' did much the same thing, but it can be argued the approach used was perfect...for that movie. It's not safe to assume the same logic works for every movie.)
And, honestly, some people are just as freaked out by visible, visceral horrors as others are at harmless jump-scares or shadow-puppets. The alien can be just as frightening as the unseen. Seeing somebody with his guts ripped out isn't subtle, but it is disturbing and can be every bit as horrific as just getting a hint of what happened. If these approaches didn't also work, those sorts of movies wouldn't get made because nobody would bother paying good money to watch them.
(And speaking of alien, 'Alien' is an excellent movie to make this point with. For a large portion of the movie, we don't get a clear look at it, though we did see the results. Had the movie stuck with that to the bitter end, it wouldn't be anywhere close to the acknowledged modern masterpiece it's currently considered. 'Jaws' did much the same thing, but it can be argued the approach used was perfect...for that movie. It's not safe to assume the same logic works for every movie.)
Posted on 6/30/16 at 9:32 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Yes. They left things for the imagination. What you can't see and must imagine will always be far more terrifying than what you do see. Today's movies are too obsessed with gore and not about story lines or compelling monsters.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 9:43 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
No. There just wasn't as many scary movies then so the audience had not yet become jaded and cynical towards horror in movies.
Posted on 6/30/16 at 10:32 pm to TigerFanInSouthland
Yes, the acting was better
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News