"bad" classics

[neverending]

Classic horror, as defined in the forum title is horror films from the 1960s and before, so regardless of whether you regard crap sequels from the 80s or 90s as "classics" they are not from the classic era.


And though I'm a fan of Cronenberg the original Fly is so much better than his confused remake it's laughable.

[Lord RawK]

When I read this topic I thought of it in the terms like neverending described. That being said, when a movie is considered a classic, it doesn't have to be from 50 years ago. So this really could go either way. The only problem is, it is in the "Classic Horror" section which says 60s and before. If this was in a different board in the forum, then we could go the other way on this subject.

[Marya Zaleska]

Originally Posted by The_Raven

Halloween II?
Dawn of the Dead?
Friday the 13th?
Leprechaun 3?

classics?

Poor Boris and Bela might have turned in their graves. :rolleyes:

I agree. The real classic are from the 1960 back ( even in the silents).

The best classic stars were Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, both Lon Chaney Senior and Lon Chaney, Junior, Peter Lorre,Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Ingrid Pitt and Vincent Price to name a few.

Though some of the earlier sound films may seem quite hammy, they are still superior to some of the trash being made today.

However, I am not saying all modern horror films are trash. There are many, many real quality films still being made after the 1960's like The Howling, The Exorcist, Silent Hill, The Omen, The Gathering, The Skeletal Key, Sleepy Hollow, House On Haunted Hill( new version), The Gathering, The Others, The Entity, Poltergeist, Arachnaphobia, Jeepers Creepers and Species.

I have never seen The Hills have Eyes. I think I will treat myself today to that film along with a few beers!

The Countess:)

[Ferox13]

The best classic stars were Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, both Lon Chaney Senior and Lon Chaney, Junior, Peter Lorre,Peter Cushing, Christopher Lee, Ingrid Pitt and Vincent Price to name a few.

LOL - one of these ppl are not like the others :-)


Just kiddin' Marya Zaleska - i prolly have a more similar taste to yours than most on the board... I'm a huge Karloff fan and even the rest of your list are my horror heroes too (well except pitt but i know its ur fetish)

[crabapple]

There is an "I Love Vincent Price" shirt for sale on Amazon and I have been considering getting one. Vincent was the ginchiest!

[CopperShark]

I'm not familiar with most classic horror if indeed classic horror is defined as anything before the 1960's. I'm young (24) so for me movies from the 60's and 70's are old though a distinction can clearly be made between them and the old B&W movies. Some of the classics are good and I certainly appreciate them but they just aren't my taste. Movies like White Zombie are deadly boring for me; say what you will. With that said some older movies that I think are overrated but aren't necessarily bad include Phantasm and Poltergeist.

[neverending]

If you don't like Classic Horror then why are you posting in the Classic Horror forum?

Think before you answer.

BTW- Poltergeist & Phantasm are not Classic Horror.

[CopperShark]

Originally Posted by neverending

If you don't like Classic Horror then why are you posting in the Classic Horror forum?

I did not say I didn't like classic horror. I said I appreciate it and there are some films that I like but generally they aren't my taste. Besides is not this thread specifically about "BAD horror"? Does this not imply an allowed discussion on the classics we don't like? I believe it does and since I did say that "White Zombie" was deadly boring I'm completely on topic.

BTW- Poltergeist & Phantasm are not Classic Horror.

I referred to them as older movies, not classics specifically to avoid negative feedback from individuals like yourself. Even still the subject on exactly what a classic is seems to be under debate on this forum, even if it is specifically outlined under the forum description.

Think before you answer.

Read before you reply.

I came here wanting to share my opinion, nothing more. You could have just read what I had to say and left it at that since you already made clear what your opinion was prior to my post but instead you decide this needs to go on further, muddle up a decent thread and instigate and nitpick my post. Awesome.

[The_Raven]

Originally Posted by CopperShark

Even still the subject on exactly what a classic is seems to be under debate on this forum, even if it is specifically outlined under the forum description.

There is no debate.

It is a silent and mutually understood and respected fact between all members of HDC - Night of the Living Dead is taken as a milestone of distinguishing between classics and modern horror. And since NotLD was made in 1968, it is pretty obvious which ones are actually classics by the exact definition of the word.

As I pointed before, the person who started this thread needs to learn what a "classic" movie actually is, before even going to the area of "good" or "bad" classics.

They need to distinguish right, before deciding on making a thread and vomit their useless verbal diarrhoea into it. At least it will save the forum server some space.

[CopperShark]

Well I have been a member of HDC for how long? And have what...19 posts? Sorry I don't quite understand this "silent and mutually understood and respected fact" yet. What a warm friendly bunch of people we have here, truly. Whatever a classic horror movie is or isn't I still don't feel my reply was off topic or necessary to bitch about. Horror snobbery at its finest I guess.