Is there a new direction for horror?

[Storyslinger]

I've just seen the first two Saw movies; it is not scary, it's sick.

And that is the truth...

Nods in agreement

[nods to the nod in agreement]

Nods to the nodding of the nods

[Jean]

since the quotation that raised all that hell of re-quoting belongs to me, and unexpectedly made it to both next page and the top of the said page, I would be greatly obliged to Storyslinger if he edits it the way 1) the core quotation is credited to me; 2) the typo is corrected. It's movies, of course. I already noticed elsewhere that I make approximately one typo a month, and that post is always quoted before I have time to correct it; but this time it's a real record of a typo being re-quoted.

[Storyslinger]

There you go Jean, did I catch it all ?

[Jean]

[Storyslinger]

[Jean]

have just watched The Blair Witch Project. It didn't really scare me, but it disturbed some part of my soul horror movies have no business touching. I wish I had never seen it.

[alinda]

Do not worry too much Jean, it is quite forgetable!!

[Storyslinger]

I heard Saw 4 is following the 'new' horror skeme

[Matt]

Pushing the grossness envelope are they?

[Storyslinger]

From what I've heard, yes. But, I heard there is a huge tie in

[Storyslinger]

have just watched The Blair Witch Project. It didn't really scare me, but it disturbed some part of my soul horror movies have no business touching. I wish I had never seen it.

That really messed with me too

[Darkthoughts]

Shan't ever watch any of the Saw films myself, but some woman caller came on Radio One today and "accidentally" spoiled Saw 4 in a major way

[Storyslinger]

Yep, I had a friend give me the whole run down, because I wouldn't see it till it came out on dvd anyways, pretty f'd up

[Heather19]

can someone tell me what happens? I refuse to see it because I thought the last 2 were so horrible, but now you've got me curious about what happens

[ZoNeSeeK]

Saw is the only movie even worth glancing at, it had an original horrifying idea, the rest are just sick fetish. Its a little disturbing when Saw II - IV, hostel etcare available in new release and R rated porn is kept in a restricted section.

[Jean]

anyone see Hannah House (2002, by Chad and Max Smith)? It's made like an old, poor quality copy of a black-and-white silent film of (I think) the early 20s. Extremely stylish, visually briliant, inventive, - especially if you fast-forward, or else it's way too slooowwwwwwww. But at least it doesn't look like any other horror movie I have seen as yet.

[Storyslinger]

Was it any good Jean?

[Matt]

can someone tell me what happens? I refuse to see it because I thought the last 2 were so horrible, but now you've got me curious about what happens

I'm interested in this too--totally morbid sure, but still interested.

[Storyslinger]

You want horror. It's right on this site.

The way O just beat me down for no reason, just horrific

[Jean]

Was it any good Jean?

hard to tell. I have no idea what happened. I am not sure there was any story at all. Anyway, there wasn't any talk (the movie was silent). But it was, at times, very, exquisitely beautiful in a weird way. If it was about 15 minutes long, it would be a masterpiece of photography, but alas, it's much longer. But if you like experiment, it's at least interesting.

[Storyslinger]

I may have to do just that

Thanks

[RUBE]

Saw is the only movie even worth glancing at, it had an original horrifying idea, the rest are just sick fetish. Its a little disturbing when Saw II - IV, hostel etcare available in new release and R rated porn is kept in a restricted section.

Yeah, I agree. Anything that is gory enough to classify as "torture porn" (a phrase a number of critics now use) should not be right down from the children's movies...

OR we should go the other extreme and just have all movies, including porn, right there on the shelf for anyone to see. I think the main reason it is the way it is now is because most Americans have such a complex about sex they avoid the conversation as long as possible with their children. Having a movie about sex visible on the shelf might mean a parent has to answer a question they do not want to answer. In the case of horror movies they can just say, "That is just make-believe, honey."

(Wow, I sound like I'm liberal.)

[ZoNeSeeK]

Yeah, its definitely a worry in a gun and violence saturated culture that sex is somehow something to protect people from.

Dont get me wrong, I love plenty of violent movies, but there's differences between edgy or gritty violence (thats an accurate representation of reality) and putting people in rooms and telling them they have to butterfly their own ballsacks to find a key to unlock a vice around their head which is going to show them endless repeats of Madonna's Swept Away if they don't. Thats just sick

[CyberGhostface]

I've just seen the first two Saw movies; it is not scary, it's sick.

And that is the truth...

Nods in agreement

[nods to the nod in agreement]

Nods to the nodding of the nods

Shakes head in disagreement

I've enjoyed the Saw franchise (at least up until the fourth one). Its certainly not up to Hichcock's standards but its much better than, say, the Friday the 13th films or the Halloween films (excluding the John Carpenter original of course). Granted, I'm not in favor of much of the rest of the "new wave" of horror like Hostel or Captivity, though.

[Jean]

Cyber: I see your position (although I personally didn't like Saw at all, from any point of view), but my point here was solely that it was sick as opposed to scary (it's in that other thread that I argued that it was pathetic). I have just watched Wrong Turn 2 and can say the same about it, - by the way, if someone wants a thoroughly sick entertainment, not overburdened with pseudo-existential snot, it is highly recommended.