tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post4777196541871601039..comments2024-03-23T22:07:37.938+00:00Comments on NUTS4R2: Horror - 333 Films To Scare You To DeathNUTS4R2http://www.blogger.com/profile/08450069327397561514noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-56689707933812479982012-06-23T14:03:04.630+01:002012-06-23T14:03:04.630+01:00Thanks for this. You've got me, it so happens...Thanks for this. You've got me, it so happens, in a dead reading zone where I've burned myself out on histories, bored with classic fictions, dipped my toes back into Jack Kirby and the Ditko CREEPY-EERIE periods, and was pondering crime fiction. ANNO DRAC, it is. <br /><br />Genres are a terrible subject - it's definitely akin to arguing politics. One dividing point has been "Is the filmmaker entitled to his Genre, or is the audience entitled to theirs?" Since I'm The Audience, I tend to side with "Audience Rulez!"<br /><br />Then again, when's the last time I bought a ticket and expected to lead myself by the nose thru a film? I've seen few Perfect Films, but those few have the filmmakers making perfectly clear their intents and goals, and then delivering on those promises. If the swelling music jerks tears, well, then they've gone a pretty good job of it. <br /><br />I'm not sure "people vs people" though dilutes my notion of Horror out of CHAINSAW and your Poe-Hammer films comment wiggles this argument further. Good stuff.Buffalo Chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04396753470835290493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-8710044856042776342012-06-23T08:15:30.289+01:002012-06-23T08:15:30.289+01:00HI again Chuck,
Well if we took the perceptions o...HI again Chuck,<br /><br />Well if we took the perceptions of the protagonists to their situation to be a basis for "calling the director out" on the genre of a film then thee would be no science fiction films made... because those world which look so inhuman to us would be perfectly natural to the inhabitants of the majority of those movies. Does that mean they are not genre movies? No it doesn't.<br /><br />Similarly, the teenagers perception of their plight in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre does not necessarily make it a horror movie... and it's my feeling that it's not. It's all just people versus people.<br /><br />As far as your comment about it not being a thriller... well... all I can say is I've seen a fair few thrillers (and I'm sure you have too) which might have better been labelled "snoozers".<br /><br />Yeah, the original The Vanishing is a great film... but I would never have lumped that into horror territory anyway. Although, I guess there could be an argument made that it's trading in the same currency that Edgar Allan Poe used to.<br /><br />I'm reading Kim Newman's excellent Nightmare Movies at the moment (on the rare occasions I get the time to open the damn thing) and he completely and cleverly sidesteps the notion of horror movies in a way that the argument doesn't even come up in it. Newman also co-wrote the above book but I suspect his involvement in it was less than half.<br /><br />By the way Chuck, if you're into fiction, I'd heavily recommend Newman's Anno Dracula trilogy. It's loaded with rferences for readers like you and I.<br /><br />Again... thanks for reading.NUTS4R2https://www.blogger.com/profile/08450069327397561514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-55702534313154104402012-06-23T03:38:32.278+01:002012-06-23T03:38:32.278+01:00A couple of months later...
TEXAS CHAINSAW (1973...A couple of months later... <br /><br />TEXAS CHAINSAW (1973) is a thriller? <br /><br />I'd argue this point. I think thrillers are based on tension-from-chases. Cops after outlaw families, or an escaped convict on the run. Bank robberies gone bad, hostages, threats of more, hopes for escape. <br /><br />In CHAINSAW, this family isn't being sought at all. Instead, they're making BBQ and pumpin' gas on a county road - where's the thriller tension from that? <br /><br />There is a horror of a family that's had a long history of murderous cannibalism, and I think an argument could be made that "history of cannibalism" is a big step into the Horror genre. <br /><br />Here's a group that collects victims and then hangs them up on meathooks, or stuffs their carcasses into freezers, chases down a wheelchair and chainsaws Franklin (finally!) and wonderful Marilyn Burns. Tension, sure. Thrills, yes, but do these brief few scenes make this a Thriller? <br /><br />These seem overwhelmed by the horror of having victims in someone else's now very-foreign and deadly world. Of seeing friends strung up on meat hooks, in the freezer. The house of bones. Skin for lampshades. <br /><br />The supper scene - where Granddad is going to show the family he can still de-brain the next victim. Not a lot of tension or thrills in that, but it does show a history of murder and cannibalism. <br /><br />Thriller? Not Horror? <br /><br />There's the comment about needing an inhuman monster for a horror film, but I'd argue that when victims are put into an alien-to-them world that's murderous and brutally gory, then these films are Horror entries. <br /><br />But a film like SPOORLOOS (THE VANISHING) has an incredible amount of tension, and there is a huge thriller aspect to this film. To me, these overwhelm the horror that this film also delivers: that the Human can be most monstrous of all. <br /><br />It's great to have James write in, and thanks much for the review and setting off my fuse again! Always enjoyable. Every time I dig thru these older entries, I keep finding your treasures.Buffalo Chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04396753470835290493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-83773426027503484102012-04-20T20:05:38.150+01:002012-04-20T20:05:38.150+01:00Hi there James.
First of all, thanks for stopping...Hi there James.<br /><br />First of all, thanks for stopping by and reading this post. I'd forgotten all about this one. It's an honour to have you visit this blog.<br /><br />My opinion? Well I've not seen The Hills Have Eyes so I can't comment on that but The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, although somehow often lumped in with horror by many people... is basically a thriller.<br /><br />Slasher films? No I wouldn't consider them horror films unless they have an INHUMAN monster (as opposed to just a serial killer) or they have a supernatural element. They may be HORRIFYING to some people... but I wouldn't personally say that this is what HORROR is about. <br /><br />I think the more useful of the artificial genres created for film like HORROR, SCI-Fi or WESTERN certainly are not limited to what amounts to a literal translation of the word. Otherwise, for example, any film shot in the US would be a western.<br /><br />They allow for specific generic markers and films about humans stalking other humans are certainly not in the horror category in my book. Also, the more solidly defined genres are pretty strong in getting everyone to know what you're talking about. John Carpenter's Ghost's Of Mars, for example, can be simply labelled a sci-fi film for some of the audience... but I'm pretty sure most viewers would be hard pushed to disagree with the fact that it's actually an out and out Western more than it is any other genre.<br /><br />Tenebrae is a giallo, pure and simple I think. There's no way I would ever to be able to think of it as a horror film. Argento hasn't actually made THAT many horror films.<br /><br />I don't mean to single out horror as a genre here. CULT MOVIE, for example, is a completely useless and muddleheaded term which people mistake for a genre term quite often. The term cult, however, is defined by having a small following. What do you define as small? Are there really any movies made which are seen by, say, less than 2000 people, for example?<br /><br />And what about something like Blade Runner which flopped on its first release and then developed a reputation as a cult. Would you call it a cult movie now? It's hugely popular... so does its "genre" title shift as a result of the fact that it's now been lionised by a large group of people.<br /><br />So yeah, I think Horror is a much more useful definition than something like that, for instance.<br /><br />Ha! I'm waffling now, aren't I?<br /><br />But, as to your last thing about Irriversible and Van Helsing. Well Van Helsing has all the qualifications needed to pitch it firmly in the horror camp... whether you liked the movie or not. Irriversible? No, I didn't find it particularly disturbing or confrontational... it's just a movie with various different kinds of violence shown - physical, sexual and psychological. It's really not a horror movie and if terms like "disturbing" and "freak you out" need to come into play... well everyone's response to things are different to everybody else's. We're all individual snowflakes... nobody's going to find the same things disturbing (in my experience of people) and so I don't think you can hang a genre definition on it.<br /><br />For example, I find the last minute or so of Bonnie And Clyde extremely disturbing. It shocks me everytime I see it. But I wouldn't turn around to someone and start telling them they've got to go and see this fantastic horror movie starring Warren Beatty and Faye Dunnaway. That's just nuts. But it still disturbs me.<br /><br />Okay, I don't want to bombard you. I am looking forward to reading whatever you come up with next. I think this one must have just hit a nerve with me.<br /><br />Once again, thank you for coming on here and reading my thoughts on your book and I especially appreciate you taking the time to comment. You honour me with your presence sir.<br /><br />All the best to you.NUTS4R2https://www.blogger.com/profile/08450069327397561514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-29594853902639332432012-04-19T19:53:38.293+01:002012-04-19T19:53:38.293+01:00I wrote the bulk of this book and can shoulder the...I wrote the bulk of this book and can shoulder the blame for the films selected, which was entirely my choice. The reason why some films are reviewed that aren't well loved by the reviewers is that they're canonical films - the first Amityville film, for instance. The same goes for stuff like Saw and Hostel. I don't like them but they're influential horror films. I don't like [Rec] either but it's not such an influential film (more room for argument here) so it's not in the book. This is explained in the introduction: I wanted to cover milestones and mavericks. As for the exclusions - well, you can't please everyone. I was just happy to get reviews of stuff like Clownhouse and Horrors of Malformed Men out there.<br /><br />The idea that a film has to contain supernatural elements to qualify as horror is a bit limiting. What are The Texas Chain Saw Massacre or The Hills Have Eyes if they're not horror films? To say nothing of any slasher film - and if slashers are considered horror films (which they are by most people, as well as in industry terms) why not a giallo? Tenebrae works no less well as a horror film than, say, Friday the 13th.<br /><br />I appreciate that the book deviates from strict generic territory but - again as I say in the introduction - I think stuff like Irreversible qualifies more usefully as a horror film than something like Van Helsing, for all the latter's gothic trappings. It's disturbing and confrontational and designed to freak you out. Isn't that what horror's meant to do?<br /><br />So there it is. I'm sorry you didn't like the book, but its failings, such as they are, are mine rather than Kim's.<br /><br />JamesAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-15023080016036131522011-08-09T17:58:11.685+01:002011-08-09T17:58:11.685+01:00Hi Doctor Blood. Thanks for stopping by.
I'm ...Hi Doctor Blood. Thanks for stopping by.<br /><br />I'm going to have to defend Mr. Newman here a bit as he's only the co-writer here and, frankly, since each review was written by another contributor (of many), I was hard pressed to figure out which, if any, of Kim's reviews are in here. I don't think he's much to blame for the failings of this particular book.<br /><br />Secondly, although I personally disagree with most of Mr. Newman's film reviews (which can be found in magazines like Sight & Sound) they're well written and always worth reading.<br /><br />Thirdly... and this is the good bit, although I don't agree with his reviews... he's a brilliant writer of fiction. Seriously dude, his Anno Dracula trilogy is fantastic... you should definitely check it out. I've honestly got a lot of time for Kim Newman... just not this particular book.<br /><br />Looks like our definitions of horror are more or less in synch. ;-)<br /><br />Again, thanks for the words good Doctor!NUTS4R2https://www.blogger.com/profile/08450069327397561514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-17483346477703434372011-08-09T00:45:30.688+01:002011-08-09T00:45:30.688+01:00Good post. I've never been a fan of Kim Newman...Good post. I've never been a fan of Kim Newman and your review of his book confirms a lot of what I originally suspected. Years ago I noticed his website had about as many entries as the IMDb which I thought was quite bizarre and certainly stretched the definition of horror (or sci-fi) as much as possible. I'm working on a quick list of films which I don't consider to be horror right now which pretty much agrees with you. Basically, serial killers are "crime" movies not horror and a lot of movies with horror elements to them just aren't actually horror movies at all.Dr Bloodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17904860037603156527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2260387431722105524.post-89453633867890911522011-05-03T16:00:02.488+01:002011-05-03T16:00:02.488+01:00Shame. Alaways had a lot of time for him, especia...Shame. Alaways had a lot of time for him, especially after Anno Dracula. I heard Newman talking about this book on the Mark Kermode Radio 5 show. He cited both Texas Chainsaw and Halloween as key 70s horror movies - the bench marks for the modern horror movie. Not sure they would make your definition of the genre - although I suppose Halloween does have a supernatural slant (the indestructible killer). And he was rather dismissive of Rec. Arguably a derivative flick, but still very effective.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com