Define "Horror"

[joy_division]

over the years, what classes as a horror movie, has become very blurred. Nowadays, any old film can pass as a horro film, wheras back in ye olde days, the ones that made you shyte in your pants are nowhere to be seen(probablly due to the rating system)

so, in your opinion, what defines a horror film?

[patrickwm68]

The line between true Horror and Suspense Thriller is very thin.

Take Friday the 13th vs. American Psycho, or Nightmare On Elm Street vs. Silence of the Lambs.

[joy_division]

I'd watch the latters any day. Most Slashers don't do anything for me at all

[protector2814]

Horror, for me..has to do with the supernatural on some level. Some Coo Coo with a torture chamber in his basement having people saw chunks of themselves off doesn't fall into my personal criteria for a horror movie...just too real for me, too depressing in terms of creator and spectator. However, a demon who happens to collect eyes and persues folk to get their peepers..well, to me that's horror. Something fantastic and fun and frightening.
Guess it has somethinig to do with imagination and myth and dark forests and things that go bump in the night. Give me ghosts, demons, monsters, backwoods, ancient forests, kids that have the ability to see spirits, pissed off fairys, werewolves,
pacts, broken promises, etc...

[bat_collector]

I think Saw I and II are horror movies. I think the 'torture porn" label is very dismissive of the two movies. And I must say very hypocritical to levy it against these movies but somehow embrace body count movies such as the Friday the 13th series. And lets not act there were plenty of movies that pushed the envelope in the 70's, from Cannibal Holocaust to I Spit on Your Grave and Last House on the Left. Those movie have cannibalism and extended rape scenes.

[Black Cat]

horror is something that makes you jump out of your seat and when it's time for bed then you have a hard time sleeping. Nothing in today's world does that anymore. I miss that so bad

[Brru]

And lets not act there were plenty of movies that pushed the envelope in the 70's, from Cannibal Holocaust to I Spit on Your Grave and Last House on the Left. Those movie have cannibalism and extended rape scenes.

And thats why nobody today watches those movies. I think what we call horror today is more based on how our normal lives work. Freddy was creepy to late teens/early twenties because of the upper experience in the 80s. 70's psychopathics because of Vietnam. 90's I cant say cause I dont remember any worthy horror movies at all, so maybe life was really good and nothing scared us heh.

[Sgt Taz]

Scariest movie ever that raised the hair on my neck the most is Excorsist 1.

[RichBamf]

I've always found a decent thriller far more scary than most recent horrors.

I can't remember ever being scared of those horror films like Nightmare on Elm Street or Exorcist. I remember being a young boy at a birthday sleep over and wondering what the fuss was all about-it was always so unbelievable that I could normally detatch myself from them.

[Spatial.Archite]

Defining "horror" is amazingly simplistic, but completely lost on most filmmakers. Horror is a goal, not a type of movie, and I think that's where it loses people. Basically you're trying to scare people through a movie, and that's all there really is to it. What we often get is filmmakers who say, "This is how horror movie "A" did it and then horror movie "B" also had this, and if I add something from movie "C"..."

That's the problem with horror movies, they assume they need to create a movie within a predefined set of standards that fans expect. Instead they should say, "I want to scare people, and here's how I'm going to use my movie to do it."

What you find frightening personally is based on a lot of factors; society, upbringing, political events, religion, etc...

[joy_division]

Defining "horror" is amazingly simplistic, but completely lost on most filmmakers. Horror is a goal, not a type of movie, and I think that's where it loses people. Basically you're trying to scare people through a movie, and that's all there really is to it. What we often get is filmmakers who say, "This is how horror movie "A" did it and then horror movie "B" also had this, and if I add something from movie "C"..."

That's the problem with horror movies, they assume they need to create a movie within a predefined set of standards that fans expect. Instead they should say, "I want to scare people, and here's how I'm going to use my movie to do it."

What you find frightening personally is based on a lot of factors; society, upbringing, political events, religion, etc...I think it's actually to do with the box office. The PTB are afraid not to let too much gore in their movies to really shock us. More films should be NC-17. We have an 18 rating over here, what's the problem? Religious factions have too much power over what they deem what is ok for us to seem fit to be viewable

[protector2814]

I think Saw I and II are horror movies. I think the 'torture porn" label is very dismissive of the two movies. And I must say very hypocritical to levy it against these movies but somehow embrace body count movies such as the Friday the 13th series. And lets not act there were plenty of movies that pushed the envelope in the 70's, from Cannibal Holocaust to I Spit on Your Grave and Last House on the Left. Those movie have cannibalism and extended rape scenes.

Agreed. This is why in my post I took great care to say that type of movie didn't work for me, personally.
Never would I dismiss them. I'm all for whatever you enjoy. That's your decision and your perogative as a horror fan.