I'm a year or so shy of 30 and Psycho bored me to tears, the original AND the re-make. Ditto Dracula (Lugosi).
I find zombie and cannibal films tedious, and don't like graphic depictions of violence and gore but that's because they lack what I find so delicious in horror films: the hair standing on the back of my neck, heart pounding, gripping the remote in anticipation, wondering if something, or somone, is behind me. Unlike Erik, I actually like the "PG-13 teeny-bopper" types of horror films. But I think they are much more violent than you think they are, certainly compared to the slashers of yesteryear. If they were released 20 years ago what kind of ratings would they have gotten? Restricted? You bet. We've just become so de-sensitised to it, we don't even see it (the violence) anymore. I have a younger brother 9 years my junior who also shares my love of horror films, and we have watched many films together over the years, agreed and disagreed, but he has largely been "schooled" in my generation of horror films (70s and 80s stuff). He bought home House of 1000 Corpses a while back, and we were agreed on that one, CRAP. But worse than that, it was mean spirited and quite frankly, nasty. Exactly when does art become pornography? Natalie Quoting Phil Edwards Cinema Arts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Well, it has to be noted (again) that FRANKENSTEIN, DRACULA, FREAKS, THE > MUMMY, ISLAND OF LOST SOULS, THE BLACK CAT, THE RAVEN and about a dozen > others in the 30s were then considered "extreme horror" with many states > attempting to cut and ban them (and we are talking the USA) with many > succeeding at both. > > The fact that Clark Gable said "damn" in GWTW was a major big deal > because of the censorship and moral climate of the day. > > Society is always looking for an external reason to blame for its ills. > It has been movies before. It has been comics, pulp magazines, movies > again, video games, television, movies again in the form of videotapes, > etc, etc. > > Erik's point is well-made (again). I'd probably choose to watch KANE > again right now rather than TCM. But tomorrow night I might prefer to > watch RE-ANIMATOR again than GWTW again. All four mentioned films > deliver what they promise to. > > A few weeks back, I showed PSYCHO to a 35 year old who had NEVER seen it > - ever - and had probably never seen another horror film. It still > worked, i.e. they were scared, they jumped, they were creeped out by > that last shot of Norman. > > In 1960, PSYCHO was considered "extreme" by many critics and many of the > public. The box office was huge. It was considered so extreme that > Australian censors made significant cuts for Paramount to even get it > released here with the then toughest rating of SUITABLE ONLY FOR ADULTS. > THE BIRDS also had cuts to get passed by the Australian censors. > > Just a few short years later, almost an entire sequence was eliminated > from TORN CURTAN (the murder in the farmhouse) to get a NOT SUITABLE FOR > CHILDREN rating (because SOA would have damaged the box office)... why? > Because it was considered TOO EXTREME. > > And the point is.... "extreme" is subjective. > > Phil > > > > > > > > Erik wrote: > > > People watch horror films the same reason some people ride roller > > coasters, > > or skydive, or watch a sappy tearjerker: it gives them an emotional > > stimulus > > they enjoy receiving. It's not for everyone. > > > > Tastes are different, and "positive contributions" may be one thing to > > you > > and another to I. I'll take Tobe Hooper's Texas Chainsaw Massacre over > > Citizen Kane any day of the week. Re-Animator trounces Gone With the > > Wind in > > my house. Am I supposed to feel somewhat less of a movie fan because > > of my > > tastes in cinema? Is the fact that I own Cannibal Holocaust supposed > > to make > > me a sick, depraved prevert, regardless of how "normal" my life is? > > I think not. What floats your boat may not work for me, bunky. Such is > > the > > beauty of choice. > > > > Cheers, > > Erik > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "JOHN REID Vintage Movie Memorabilia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 9:03 PM > > Subject: Re: [MOPO] HOSTILE TOWARD HOSTEL > > > > > >> I have never been able to understand the fascination with extreme horror > >> films or the motivation of those who make them. Perhaps it is just the > >> cheap > >> thrill or a perverted form of shock value but it is all a mystery to > >> me. I > >> believe that, despite what some sociologists might claim, there is a > >> direct > >> correlation between violence in movies and the many violent and horrific > >> crimes that seem to occur daily. I guess those who make these films will > >> make money from them but it is a pity that they cannot direct their > >> talents > >> into making films that can make a positive contribution. > >> > >> > >> JOHN REID VINTAGE MOVIE MEMORABILIA > >> PO Box 92 > >> Palm Beach > >> Qld 4221 > >> Australia > >> > >> Website: www.moviemem.com > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Phil Edwards Cinema Arts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 11:01 AM > >> Subject: Re: [MOPO] HOSTILE TOWARD HOSTEL > >> > >> > >>> Erik is correct of course, most most notably in his last two paras of > >>> his post. > >>> > >>> I probably won't see HOSTEL unless it's as a freebie on DVD down the > >>> track. > >>> > >>> I haven't bothered to see remakes of DAWN OF THE DEAD or TCM either. > >>> It's a matter of choice. I can think of a dozen movies that I would > >>> choose head of eitehr of these to watch given the amount of fre rtime I > >>> have to watch movies these days. > >>> > >>> But it has nothing to do with content, although perhaps subject matter > >>> is an issue in making a choice, preferring an "emotional adrenalin > >>> rush" > >>> to a more "visceral adrenalin rush". I like films that disturb me > >>> emotionmally and promote thought about "difficult" emotions over films > >>> that really just make me choke with a gag reflex.... > >>> > >>> but.... in past there were films like NOTLD DEAD, DAWN OF THE DEAD, > >>> TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, HALLOWEEN, NIKGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, etc, > >>> etc... and they all received similar commenatry at the time of their > >>> release as films like HOSTEL and SAW receive today. > >>> > >>> I'm re-reading David Skal's excellent book THE MONSTER SHOW.... > >>> essential reading for serious horror fans as are all of David's > >>> books.... and guess what? The contemporary 1932 critical quotes to > >>> FREAKS and MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE could almost be identical, just by > >>> replacing 'FEAKS' with 'HOSTEL'. > >>> > >>> So much of this stuff has to do with changing sensibilities and the > >>> need > >>> every few years for film makers to "revolt" against the kind of > >>> creeping > >>> conservatism that permeates through politics and society and into > >>> popular arts (like film). Why do you think American independent film > >>> makers did such a huge cage rattel in the late 1960s, apart from > >>> protesting another commercially-driven war? > >>> > >>> BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN and HOSTEL are likely coming out of the same school > >>> in some ways... the school of WAKE-UP film making. They may achieve a > >>> different aesthetic and through different means, but at least they are > >>> honest in their (quite diverse) intentions/methods, unlike something > >>> like THE PASSION, which was a gorehound movie masquerading as an > >>> uplifting spiritual experience. > >>> > >>> Phil > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Erik wrote: > >>> > >>>> I was in attendance at a screening with Eli Roth in Texas not to long > >>>> ago, and while I didn't care for Hostel (or Roth's work in general) I > >>>> for one am thankful that hard-core (not in the pornographic sense that > >>>> many attatch to the word) horror is making a comeback. > >>>> > >>>> I cut my teeth on the Golden Age of Slasher Films during the late 70's > >>>> to the mid 80's and as of late, the genre has become so PC, > >>>> watered-down and weak-kneed by catering to the PG-13 teeny-bopper > >>>> crowd (as the recent glut of crap with Kevin Williamson's name > >>>> attached to it attests) that I thank my bloody stars that a film like > >>>> Hostel is even seeing the light of day, much less getting national > >>>> distribution. This is nothing more then a drive-in flick at best, and > >>>> it's #1 opening was a welcome sight to this ol' gorehound's jaded > >>>> retinas. > >>>> > >>>> I'm not delving into the "bad movies/bad tv debate" as it's pointless > >>>> here. I'm outnumbered and will surely get trounced by those with more > >>>> time (and by those much wordier then I) to make their case. > >>>> > >>>> I'm also thankful *I* am the one deciding what I watch, and not > >>>> someone who thinks *they* know what's good or bad. > >>>> If it's offensive don't watch. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Erik Visit the MoPo Mailing List Web Site at www.filmfan.com ___________________________________________________________________ How to UNSUBSCRIBE from the MoPo Mailing List Send a message addressed to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the BODY of your message type: SIGNOFF MOPO-L The author of this message is solely responsible for its content.
