Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror.

Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror. (https://www.horror.com/forum/index.php)
-   Vintage Horror Movies (https://www.horror.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   "bad" classics (https://www.horror.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33620)

James Whale 05-29-2008 08:24 AM

I appreciate and actually enjoy classics.
 
I think the point being made here is "Do we pretend to like old classic films to get credibility?" No, I don't. I love THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN and appreciate it. Some of the younger fans only need a little prep. Someone who has a knowledge of classic horror giving them hints of what to look for.With a little study, even someone who is very young can do way more then "appreciate" a classic.; they can truly enjoy it! It's important to put a classic in context. For example , the classics of the 50's were made during a time of paranoia about communism and the atom bomb. Many of these films had mutated monsters created by exposure to radioactivity. Many of these films also had people who looked like everybody else but were actually pod people. These films were examples of the paranoid McCarthy era. Someone could look like your best friend, but could actually be a communst spy! Putting these film in context can make watching them way more then an academic exercise. Context can make watching classics FUN! These films are not something that you should feel obligated to watch. They are time capsules of frights and flights of fancy.

urgeok2 05-29-2008 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Whale (Post 702253)
I think the point being made here is "Do we pretend to like old classic films to get credibility?" .



just to touch on this :

I am the 1st to admit (to a very harsh audience) that I do not love the old classics as much as other people do.

I appreciate them
I dont mind them
I aknowledge their place in cinema history
I know they are very beautiful and atmospheric ..

but they dont speak to me as much as you'd think they would - especially me being an older guy. (i saw them before anything else)


to me the old universal horrors were atmospheric - definately - but that was their main strength.

i dont think the acting was as satrong in general. the music didnt grab me, the pacing was oft times too slow - even for me.


i love stylish films, but i like to forget i'm watching a film when i'm watching a film..

movies like Session 9, the Others, Hardware, Ju-On, Phantasm, etc ... have the ability to suck me in far more than the old classics.

Like anything, i believe there are people who truely like them, i also believe there are some people who say they do for the credibility - whatever - thats human nature.

we each have our own concious or subconcious criteria for what films grab us.
I won't pretend to understand it .. and i wont deny it.

i likes what i likes ...

Darryl Mathe 05-30-2008 11:13 AM

Question: Why did Blair Witch rip off Cannibal Holocaust and get away with it?

Ferox13 06-12-2008 01:04 AM

Quote:

Question: Why did Blair Witch rip off Cannibal Holocaust and get away with it?
No sure what that has to do with any thing but I kinda think BW ripped off THE LAST BROADCAST more.

Elvis_Christ 06-12-2008 02:38 AM

Halloween II is a dope flick. Heathen motherfuckers! :D

I'm down with what Urge said too... my "classics" are different than the classic era of horror.

The Blair Witch didn't rip off Cannibal Holocaust it's part of the same subgenre and uses the standard conventions of it to tell it's story.

illdojo 06-12-2008 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elvis_Christ (Post 705393)
Halloween II is a dope flick. Heathen motherfuckers! :D

I'm down with what Urge said too... my "classics" are different than the classic era of horror.

The Blair Witch didn't rip off Cannibal Holocaust it's part of the same subgenre and uses the standard conventions of it to tell it's story.

Ditto
Ditto
Ditto

crabapple 06-12-2008 10:04 AM

I liked Hallyween II, too.

colubrid660 06-13-2008 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neverending (Post 688014)
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.

Thats a pretty rigid way to describe "classic". A classic should be any movie that had an effect on how later movies were made. Just because movies like Halloween and Alien aren't in black and white, doesn't take away the impact it had on later horror films.

I just think for the purpose of this thread, this is the definition we are using.


Quote:

And though I'm a fan of Cronenberg the original Fly is so much better than his confused remake it's laughable.
The original Fly was alright but come on, Cronenberg's remake was a completely different style of movie and had completely different meaning.

neverending 06-13-2008 04:23 PM

This is the classic horror forum. If you want to discuss bad modern horror movies, go to the modern horror forum.

How much simpler can it get?

I didn't define modern & classic eras that way- that's the accepted genre breakdown industrywide.

Zero 06-14-2008 10:41 AM

Daughter of Dracula - oh my was that awful!


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:36 AM.