Horror Films (General Discussion) - Movies & TV

Tha1ChiefRocka
Yeah, well hey, I'm really sorry.

Location: Kansas

I just want to mention that "Wish Upon" should be a 4 out of 5, because it's one of the best comedies of 2017.

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

Tha1ChiefRocka wrote:

I just want to mention that "Wish Upon" should be a 4 out of 5, because it's one of the best comedies of 2017.

You're absolutely right. Let me fix that...

For real though, if you see a film rated 0.5 to 1 star from me, unless it's a very recent watch, I likely don't even remember anything about the movie outside from remembering that it sucked. Most of those are so poorly written that I just spend the entire movie shaking my head at the stupidity. The only thing I remember is that it had Ryan Phillippe in it, which was funny because I thought he was dead.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

cestuneblague
Edgy to the Choir

Location: MA/FL

I'm a slut for a good "Wish Upon" discussion

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

Another film that I've questioned as horror in the past, I no longer question. That film is Salo, and even though I haven't watched it since my Criterion binging like 4 years ago, in the last year I've come to accept that it is indeed a horror film.

Another one, Deliverance. Not considered horror by hardly anyone. Why not? This I keep asking myself. How is that not scary? It's backwoods survival horror, not much different than The Hills Have Eyes or Wrong Turn, just less gory and over the top.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

CA Dreamin

Gender: Male
Location: LA

badseed wrote:

Under the Skin, no pun intended, gets under my skin. I'm open to the idea of it possibly not being horror (it's a film that can be interpreted in different ways), but I'd need a paragraph or two of very reasonable convincing to convert me on that one.

Under the Skin isn't a horror film in my book because it's not very scary, and lacks a clear antagonist. Sure there is some creepiness and some disturbing imagery, but they're not frequent. The scene where the guy gets sucked into a wormhole is pretty unsettling but that's about it. At the same time, horrors almost always have a clear villain, usually a psycho human slasher, an alien or monster, or some kind of supernatural evil. But who or what is the villain in Under the Skin? The only logical answer is the alien played by Scar Jo, who at the same time is the one character we feel any sympathy for.

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

StreetSpirit wrote:

Under the Skin isn't a horror film in my book because it's not very scary, and lacks a clear antagonist. Sure there is some creepiness and some disturbing imagery, but they're not frequent. The scene where the guy gets sucked into a wormhole is pretty unsettling but that's about it. At the same time, horrors almost always have a clear villain, usually a psycho human slasher, an alien or monster, or some kind of supernatural evil. But who or what is the villain in Under the Skin? The only logical answer is the alien played by Scar Jo, who at the same time is the one character we feel any sympathy for.

Off the top of my head, here's a list of horror films with no antagonist:

...

Damn. You might have sold me on that. I mean I do feel Scarlett is the villain but like you said, it's not like any sympathy is built towards anyone besides her. Maybe that baby. That part haunts me something savage...

<LAST MINUTE PLOT TWIST>

How about a movie like Repulsion. Does Catherine Deneuve's own mental health play the villain?

What about Carnival of Souls? Spoiler alert: There's ghosts but they aren't "bad guys"

The thing those two films have in common is that they're psychological horror films in which the horror lies within the mystery behind the main character. I feel like Under the Skin falls into that category. Just because she isn't human doesn't take away from the psychological aspect. There are times where she appears to be so lost and detached. It's basically Carnival of Souls except *spoiler alert* she's an alien instead of a ghost.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!

PurpleHazel

To me Johansson and her motorcyclist accomplice are the antagonists. She lures men to their deaths and it's not because of their behavior toward her. In some ways she's like the Julia character in Hellraiser. Just because an antagonist elicits a little sympathy doesn't mean they're not an antagonist. Michael Moreland, the man who takes her in, is the most sympathetic (adult!) character.

CA Dreamin

Gender: Male
Location: LA

Okay, so if she's the antagonist, then who is the protagonist? Nobody, cause there are no other developed characters. And I would say she elicits more than a "little sympathy." It's clear that she's an outcast on her home planet. As badseed said, she was quite lonely, lost, and detached. Yes, she lures people to their deaths, but not because she enjoys it, but because it's her duty, a duty she starts to resent around halfway through the film. Thus I don't see Under the Skin as a story of good vs. evil, with clearly defined good guys and villains, as we typically see in horror films. In addition, it lacks scariness, the body count is pretty low, there's no gore...there just aren't enough horror elements to earn the genre tag in my book.

PurpleHazel

StreetSpirit wrote:

Okay, so if she's the antagonist, then who is the protagonist? Nobody, cause there are no other developed characters. And I would say she elicits more than a "little sympathy." It's clear that she's an outcast on her home planet. As badseed said, she was quite lonely, lost, and detached. Yes, she lures people to their deaths, but not because she enjoys it, but because it's her duty, a duty she starts to resent around halfway through the film. Thus I don't see Under the Skin as a story of good vs. evil, with clearly defined good guys and villains, as we typically see in horror films. In addition, it lacks scariness, the body count is pretty low, there's no gore...there just aren't enough horror elements to earn the genre tag in my book.

I wasn't actually arguing it's a horror film. I'm pretty ambivalent about some of these SF films being horror. But I do think she's an antagonist who turns into a protagonist toward the end of the film. Not every film has a protagonist -- if protagonist is defined as someone who's more good than bad. She didn't elicit sympathy from me till near the end.

Quote:

As badseed said, she was quite lonely, lost, and detached.

Badseed didn't say she was lonely. Of course she's detached -- she's one of two and then one of her kind on an alien planet.

Quote:

Yes, she lures people to their deaths, but not because she enjoys it, but because it's her duty

A lot of horror "antagonists" kill because they have to or can't control themselves. Zombies eat human flesh because that's their sustenance -- they're not usually capable of emotions like enjoyment. Frankenstein in the original film kills out of either fear or not knowing his own strength. In a lot of monster and "animal attack" movies, the killing or violence comes from creatures following their instincts. If the animals are mutated then the only evil is nuclear bomb testing, pollution or experimentation, not the creatures themselves.

As badseed pointed out some horror movies don't have an antagonist, like Carnival of Souls, or the main character embodies both, as in Repulsion. I think Deneuve starts out as a protagonist and at the end of the film becomes an antagonist, but she can't help it because she's damaged from trauma.

Last edited by PurpleHazel on 07/12/2019 23:47; edited 1 time in total

badseed

Gender: Male
Age: 35
Location: FL

One thing I think we haven't taken into account is the surrealism of the movie. Surreal films can be borderline because they're basically just confusing art movies. Take Eraserhead. Definitely a conflict but not good vs evil. But due to the overall weirdness of the situation it's horror. Then again, Un Chien Andalou. Not horror, just as weird and creepy as Eraserhead, which I (and general consensus) believe is horror. Basically you take these kind of movies, imagine if they were a dream. If it's more like a nightmare than a dream, it's horror. If it were hard sci-fi I might argue differently but with that lack of certainty and familiarity, you basically have either sci-fi adventure or sci-fi horror. It's not an adventure film, thus it fits the genre to me.
_________________
Hey! I made a country music chart. Check it out!