Jump to content
Josh Delagrange

Old Horror Films Vs New Horror Films

Recommended Posts

The simple fact most new films are missing the core element of suspense much like good ole practical effects are being less used in favor of CG render blood CG render animals and even in some but rare cases of serial killers.Not all CG is bad but the problem most of the time if I can't tell you what I see as a giant blur  and I am supposed to be scared of a monstrous blur.So tell me your thoughts of old horror films vs new horror films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would agree ... most new horror films look and feel too slick and shiny, if that makes sense.  Often times its the CGI, other times they're just too polished. 

Maybe its just because I have a soft spot for late 70s / early 80s horror when things looked a bit less polished and a bit 'scratchy'. Its not impossible for modern horror films to recapture that ... It Follows had the same feel as a classic from back in the day and was a great modern horror.

And yeah, give me practical effects over CGI any day of the week.  I guess CGI is the cheaper option for a lot of films these days though which is a shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm...i like some of both.The only recent horror movies i followed were the recent remakes of Friday The 13th,Nightmare on Elm Street,the Chucky movies(Though i still need to get Cult of Chucky) and the Resident Evil movies.Most of the horror movies i have are older ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree on the film quality not feeling as "gritty" as something like Texas chainsaw Massacre or Cat in the Brain. I think CG effects are ruining most films. I am a huge subscriber to practical effects.

Problem also lies in how most modern films capture the close head while showing behind to predict jump scares. Jump scares are cheap camera tricks that have gotten old. Putting one in is fine, but with horror, it should be more shocking subject matter or an ending that leaves you unnerved and wondering "what if", or what did i just watch?! Few films have that any more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheHansonGoons

I think I've mentioned before but I really enjoy jump scares. They create an uncontrolled reaction in the audience. There isn't much I find scary in films anymore. I'm desensitized. A good jump scare still gets me every time though.

On the main topic, the biggest thing missing from newer films is definitely practical effects. Things feel fake and cartoony nowadays. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TheHansonGoons and @bewareofbears I have to agree with you both on the value of practical effects. Check out this video on the 2011 The Thing prequel, and you will see the awesome practicals that were done, and then removed in favor of bad CGI because of studio intervention. I don't hate CGI, I think it can be a valuable tool and there is a place for it in movies. It is when it is overdone that I begin to have a problem. The video I linked is a perfect example of that. 

As to the original question...I enjoy horror films from every decade, beginning in the 1910's. Of course, the 70s and 80s have the most nostalgia for me, since they were the first horror flicks I watched as a kid. There have been some recent(ish) horror films that I enjoy, even some remakes that I believe deserve respect. The Hills Have Eyes, Dawn of the Dead, and the first Texas Chainsaw remake were all pretty good in my opinion. But, for every one of those, you get The Fog, The Amytiville Horror, and Psycho shitfests.

We all have the Golden Age of Horror to thank for bringing these kinds of movies to the forefront. The Hammer Films were also very influential. No horror discussion can be had without acknowledging Giallos, Foreign (to the United States) horror genres such as Jhorror, Khorror, French films, and central/south American flicks. As well as those from other countries.

The slasher craze will always have a soft spot in my heart. I grew up on slasher flicks. And while they almost never did well with critics, the public usually ate them up.

For me, I believe that it shouldn't be a Vs thing. I enjoy the films for what they are, an attempt to put people in a state of unease. While I know that I will never recapture that "Oh shit! I think I just peed a little in my Scooby Doo pajamas" moments that I had as a kid, I can appreciate what the genre has given me over the years. I just hope that, moving forward, some of the people who have unique ideas are able to get their projects created. That is what the Horror Community needs now, a fresh shot in the arm. There have been a few in recent years, and I hope to see more of it.

TL;DR: I like horror movies. Good ones, bad ones, cheesy ones, and really old ones. It's in my blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rexfellis and @bewareofbears I do enjoy the Slasher films a lot, mainly because of growing up in the 80s and 90s. A guilty pleasure for me is Dr Giggles. 

However, the Eurohorror and Video Nasties, as well as some Grindhouse classics are what my weakness is. I sometimes watch some of these and wonder why I enjoy them so much, but then see the effects and brutality and I remember. 

For the 2000s, nothing beats some of the Asian and French films. Inside(probably in my top 5 horror films of all time), Frontier(s), High Tension, Martyrs are some excellent films in my opinion. Takashi Miike, Park chan-wook, and Fruit Chan each delivered excellent films on 3 Extremes and have had some great films, especially Miike.

And yes, remakes are typically the worst.. I rarely enjoy a remake. Have 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheHansonGoons said:

Inside(probably in my top 5 horror films of all time), Frontier(s), High Tension, Martyrs are some excellent films in my opinion

Did you see that they did a VOD Americanized version of Inside? It was horrible bro, they completely missed the point. Frontiers was awesome, High Tension was great, an Martyrs was one of those "Well fuck! I need to take a shower after this" films. Just like [rec], I'll stick with the original.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rexfellis said:

Did you see that they did a VOD Americanized version of Inside? It was horrible bro, they completely missed the point. Frontiers was awesome, High Tension was great, an Martyrs was one of those "Well fuck! I need to take a shower after this" films. Just like [rec], I'll stick with the original.

I saw that version... absolutely terrible. They did the same with Martyrs... not as good.. though I hate using the word "good" when talking about martyrs with how... dark, it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheHansonGoons said:

I saw that version... absolutely terrible. They did the same with Martyrs... not as good.. though I hate using the word "good" when talking about martyrs with how... dark, it is.

I agree. And, I know what you mean about Martyrs. I call it the pussefied, watered down, Hollywood version of Martyrs. ;) The original made me feel...dirty. Like I needed a shower, or maybe scrub my brain with steel wool. The remake was just, blah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Rexfellis

I didn't know that about the prequel Thing- thanks for passing on that link. It would have been such a better movie. I enjoy it but the CGI takes me out of it. I'm going to watch Harbinger Down soon- I'm a fan of Gillis and Woodruff, Jr.'s stuff and it looks like a good homage.

@Ahab

That's an amazing photo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, bewareofbears said:

@Rexfellis

I didn't know that about the prequel Thing- thanks for passing on that link. It would have been such a better movie. I enjoy it but the CGI takes me out of it. I'm going to watch Harbinger Down soon- I'm a fan of Gillis and Woodruff, Jr.'s stuff and it looks like a good homage.

@Ahab

That's an amazing photo.

Yeah man. I had seen the film before I saw the video. It actually upset me, because I was thinking how much better that movie could have been if they would have stuck with the practicals. I mean, Heijningen and the rest of the film makers were so meticulous about re-creating everything about Carpenter's classic remake, and it was a shame that the studio stepped in and made those changes. Harbinger Down catches a bad rap from sites like IMDB and RottenTomatoes, but it gets some love from the horror community. It is in no way a perfect film, but I think you will appreciate it.

@Ahab I want that picture framed, on my wall...NOW! Very, very cool photo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   Practical special effects and make up when well done can be incredible, but certain thing when shown for more than a second or three are obviously fake and look cheesy.  Camera angle and a good cinematographer are very important here. When I was younger I saw the work of Tom Savini in Dawn of the Dead and (having already seen graphic footage from wars and faces of death) I thought this guy must have seen a lot of horrible things in his life. Then I saw a documentary (can't remember the name of it) in which Mr. Savini spoke about his time as a war photographer in Vietnam and I thought, yup... he has seen a lot of horrible things up close. Always awesome work Mr. Savini!!
    There are many other greats from the old days. Lon Chaney Sr. the man of a thousand faces did awe inspiring work in the early days of film. Even more incredibly, he did all of his own make up effects on him self, by himself. Jack Pierce took things a step further in creating the iconic looks of Frankenstein's monster, the Wolfman and others, but his methods were lengthy and his appliances painful to remove. Sadly, he could not adapt and others improved on his methods, leaving him in the dust.
     Moving forward, Rick Baker received a well deserved academy award for his work on An American Werewolf in London and continued with an amazing career until CGI robbed us all of animatronic and practical make up effects. There are too many other greats to name all of them. (honorable mention to Dick Smith as well).
    CGI can be incredible as well, as we have all seen in numerous movies. At least when it is well done. Lighting is always a problem here. A minor adjustment of contrast or brightness immediately shows the (even minor) differences in lighting on the CGI compared to real background, real actors and real props. Even with the best CGI you can pick it out after seeing it only a few times. When CGI is used with practical effects it is at its best. The remake of A Nightmare on Elm Street is a good example. The make up on Jackie Earle Haley was augmented with CGI. Practical make up is built up over the actors face, but green patches were used where they wanted to detract from his face (impossible without CGI or surgery), making a concave effect on his cheek that looked incredible in the finished product.
   Sadly, CGI is overused, but it has been getting better over the years. It has however robbed us of more practical make up and animatronics which are quickly becoming a lost trade. 
   I forgot to mention the Thing (1982). The work of Rob Bottin and his team brought anitmatic effects to new levels with a limited budget. Incredible work is all I can say.
   I will always love the old horror movies, but I enjoy the new ones as well. We could not have a splatter fest really before the 70's, but Hammer films pushed the limits of censorship in horror throughout the 60's. Without these pioneers of horror we would not be where we are today both with story and special effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer old. My opinion of horror is my same as my opinion of country music: stick with the classics. That to me would be stuff from White Zombie all the way up to around 1989. After that, I can't cite very many worth watching. It's like it lost it's mojo in the 90s and started trends that the 2000s and 2010s built upon that just keeps getting progressively worse 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant wait for The Predator! It just might be better than the original! Also WTF is this?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2018 at 12:43 PM, bewareofbears said:

@TheHansonGoons

I think I've mentioned before but I really enjoy jump scares. They create an uncontrolled reaction in the audience. There isn't much I find scary in films anymore. I'm desensitized. A good jump scare still gets me every time though.

On the main topic, the biggest thing missing from newer films is definitely practical effects. Things feel fake and cartoony nowadays. 😕

I kind of like jump scares too, it's the same thrill one experiences with a good amusement park coaster. I think the reason critics and moviegoers tend to hate them now is that too many films have used the "false jump scare." Where it's never the monster, but rather a boyfriend sneaking up on the heroine for a hug, or the security guard, or a cat, etc. 

 I enjoyed "Halloween H2O" when it came out, but I rewatched it recently and like 90% of the film is just friends and family taking turns accidentally startling Jamie Lee Curtis. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, that was hilarious. But only if you get past the stupid. Surprisingly good criticism of modern horror. I really hope it is only a trailer and not a full movie, because I feel that if they actually made it, it would be incredibly dumb. @F134Ever86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my opinion, but I think jump scares are way too over-used and are cheap because they're littered everywhere in films. It's a lazy scare, but that's just me. But if being startled does it for you, by all means. I like tension, looming fear, that kind of intensity that draws on a situation. Not just the quick turn-arounds of false panic. I mostly blame Blair Witch for ushering jump scares into the norm, as though it's a necessity to have a horror film, which I don't think is needed.

My biggest complaint is the over-abundance and reliance of CGI. Granted we're in the modern era where film-making can be expressed more creatively because of technology, however I feel that older horror relied better on practical effects which was really part of their charm. Especially in just the filming itself; I really like the older films that have that grainy look to them. They seem more visceral in that aspect where you don't need Hi-Def/4K detail which can really be distracting at times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too many ghost films now a days.I feel more threatened by physical forces than spiritual forces.late sixties to 2010 is when Horror was Poppin to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im thinking of writing a screenplay, heres a quick pitch : scientists upload serial killers brain into a robot. Who would watch this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, F134Ever86 said:

Im thinking of writing a screenplay, heres a quick pitch : scientists upload serial killers brain into a robot. Who would watch this?

Basically FRANKENSTEIN? A.I. and transhumanism are both still hot topics and in the zeitgeist, so something along these lines might work, but would need another X-factor I think, so we feel like we're getting something new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×