Why are even older horror films such as - Halloween (1978) Discussion

[–] dave626 7 years ago

Because of the people involved making it. Hitchcock by then was the Master of Horror for the era, nobody disses Hitchcock, not even today. Janet Leigh, Anthony Perkins, even Martin Balsam and John Gavin were serious actors and respected at the time and even now. Halloween was a low budget, goof laden, 20 day shoot by a bunch of kids and rookie filmmakers. And it shows. Black and white films are always taken seriously, especially since it was a relatively bloodless suspense thriller and not a knife picture. Halloween was a popcorn movie. Psycho had warnings for the faint of heart and actually had people bothered by it. TCM was the same way.

Just the way the movies presented themselves.

"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN

reply

[–] Mysteriously_Eerie 7 years ago

Lots of people still laugh at Psycho. It is not above reproach. The psych evaluation at the end is giggle-inducing for an audience today, and the shower scene isn't effective either. The angle of the knife isn't right for the kinds of injuries it's supposed to be causing, and the way the knife keeps getting raised high before each supposed blow is more cute than horrifying. I'm not even a fan of the music in that scene. The blu-ray shows that scene without the music, and it is far superior in my opinion. The sound of the cuts unmasked by the music is much more agonizing.

Now, I love Psycho, so don't get me wrong, but it does have its flaws too.

Where Psycho betters Halloween is in the drama. In Halloween, the drama is pretty trivial: dating life, sex life, complaining about responsibilities, making a Jack-o-lantern, etc. It just isn't compelling. The drama in Psycho has gravitas. It feels transcendent. We become invested in Marion's and Norman's plights. And the drama is performed by veteran actors, unlike in Halloween, where the actors are mostly new.

And as another poster pointed out, Halloween was made on a pretty steep budget, and the corner-cutting shows. That makes it feel somewhat quaint today.

As a result of all this, people have a hard time experiencing the drama because it is further removed from reality for them. However, if they were to watch more horror films from the '70s, they would be more likely to capture the spirit of the film again.

reply

[–] cjh8504 7 years ago

I've never heard anyone complain about Psycho like you're doing. The iconic murder scene, he doesn't like the iconic music that is apart of popular culture. Get a load of this guy. People can complain about Casablanca, and the Godfather too. Doesn't make them right. Psycho is far more respected than Halloween even by today's horror fans.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

reply

[–] memayse1701 7 years ago

I don't think Psycho is Hitchcock's best movie. It's even far more removed. I think HALLOWEEN is pretty realistic until the end. Audiences at the live screening sure think it's hilarious and I don't know why.

reply

[–] cjh8504 7 years ago

Me neither, Mem.

Movie Theater: Young Frankenstein 10/10. RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time.

reply

[–] euro4569 7 years ago

Probably because there aren't umpteen sequels and two remakes of Psycho.

reply

[–] cjh8504 7 years ago

Well, but there are 3 sequels and one remake.

RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time. RIP Robert Vaughn

reply

[–] The_Stranggler 7 years ago

Time doesn't change a good film.

reply

[–] dave626 7 years ago

Yes it does. Absolutely it does. Our perception of it. Psycho is almost 60 years old. Halloween almost 40. They were made in simpler times with simpler methods. Now it's all short attention span, CGI, splatter, etc. Complex. Times change and so do a lot of things. Which is why people find said movies boring. Admittedly, even in my youth I found TCM boring. They didn't have all the toys, bells and whistles they have now. They didn't need instant gratification. I can't even watch black and white horror movies ex. Psycho.

Time changes everything. The more you're exposed to, the more things change the less interesting the older becomes. Tell me, in your time on Earth, having seen a movie hundreds of times, did you ever find one boring? Or I've seen this so much I can't see it again? That's time changing things.

"He came home." - Dr. Sam Loomis from the original HalloweeN

reply

[–] cjh8504 7 years ago

I agree 100%, David.

RIP Gene Wilder. One of the funniest people of all time. RIP Robert Vaughn

reply

[–] simest 7 years ago

Time doesn't change a good film.

Agreed.

For me personally, time does not change a good film one iota.

It's not as if movies made today are any better conceived, developed or executed than they were decades ago. Technological advancement only goes so far and does not a good movie make.

Story, characterisation, atmosphere and technique remain today - as they have always - the core elements in creating a solid work of film..........and for me, those elements have actually suffered more in the modern era than in generations past.
So I lean toward the feeling that in general, older movies are superior to their modern counterparts since they worked harder to perfect these core elements because they couldn't instead spoonfeed audiences the visual (but often superficial) wonders and delights that are often relied upon today to entertain. They simply didn't have that option.

No, for me time does not depreciate a good movie or change it. Some peoples perceptions may change but I'd say that's more about them than the movie.

And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7402) 5 years ago

Some people younger than me (I'm about to be 33 at the end of this month) today do not like older movies. A few years ago I had my young cousin's 16 year old friend dis Ghostbusters and insist the very idea of it is stupid. I guess because of the types of movies that have come out since 2000 some people born around that time just can't appreciate older films.

reply

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

I think because Halloween has been 'done' too many times. It has seven sequels (counting Halloween 3) and two remakes. It's been done to death. Anything to do with the walking dead would probably get the same reaction. Something that hasn't been done to death like Amityville (I only count 1, 2, 3, and the TV movie as even existing), The Omen, The Exorcist, etc would still scare people today. Believe it or not, I watched The Exorcist II last night and felt a bit anxious before going to bed.

reply

[–] ccr1633 (1415) 6 years ago

Anyone who can't disassociate seminal masterpieces like Halloween and The Exorcist from their inferior sequels really isn't worth talking to about great films. If you're talking about the jaded herd just out for a modern visual sensation, then yeah, sure, I think you're right. Me, I don't think there's been much worthwhile in the horror genre since Scream, which from the get go should have been a one trick pony.

reply

[–] hurricane (1908) 6 years ago

Who laughs at Halloween?

It's still considered an iconic movie, isn't it?

reply

[–] macken74 (613) 6 years ago

Seen it tonight in a packed cinema and the crowd laughed at the death scenes , and when the bodies started popping out when laurie was upstairs !

reply

[–] lordbishop34 (1442) 6 years ago

Its a different style, at the time it was released that was shocking. Today with people used to far more extreme content and more realistic looking death and gore along with the tide of slashers films released since Halloween its not quite as impactful. I watch films with the understanding of when the came out so even if they are a bit dated to me now I still get much of the same enjoyment I did when I first saw it.

reply

[–] hurricane (1908) 6 years ago

Yeah, I see what you're saying. I had the same experience when I watched A Nightmare On Elm Street at a cinema screening a few years back.

I don't think that means that either film are a laughing stock though. Both are considered classics in the horror genre. Lots of old movies look dated when you watch them now. Doesn't necessarily mean that they're bad.

reply

[–] MaximRecoil (4070) 5 years ago

"Seen it tonight in a packed cinema and the crowd laughed at the death scenes , and when the bodies started popping out when laurie was upstairs!"

The solution is to refuse admittance to anyone under the age of ~40, i.e., no Millennials or Millennial v2.0s allowed.

reply

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

I have a theory about why some people laugh at horror films. I am not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, but I have read articles concerning people's different reactions to horror films. Why some people have nightmares after seeing a horror movie, and others laugh.
According to what I have read, laughter is a psychosomatic release for inner terror. Some people who laugh at horror films are not laughing because it is funny to them, but to release their fear, induced by the images on the screen.
Horror films are a good way to release tension, they also help us confront the idea of death in the safety of the motion picture theater. We all know that one day, we will die. Watching a horror film can be a relaxing catharsis.

reply

[–] Starman (412) 6 years ago

There might be more to that, it is deeply related to arrogance of an ego, a complete disconnection from the feeling and sensitivity of the body itself, from any subtlety of the touch of hands. Try to numb your senses as much as possible, some of your first reactions are going to be laughter or apathy even to naturally shocking things happening in life, not just in film. Numbing senses can come from eating too much heavy food, alcohol, drugs, anything toxic including bad air that is killing your cells in the body. There is a reason why it is usually older people who laugh, and why little kids would be scared to death. It's a matter of sensitivity of the body itself. Cleansing our body completely changes our reactions, to the point of seeing ghosts and spirits around us. When I was fasting on water for 40 days or dry fasting for 12 days I couldn't watch any horror film, even the terrifying sound was pushing me to a state of shock, our senses have an ability to be extremely sharp. A film like Halloween could even kill us if there was no protection to the energy coming at us, and it doesn't matter that we know it is just a film, try to say that to a 5 year old child, it's a matter of palpable energy affecting our electromagnetic field of an inner body, mental, emotional and spiritual. Many people's senses are almost completely dead though, so they may not even have a capacity to comprehend what I am saying.

reply

[–] hurricane (1908) 5 years ago

I think it's just a generational thing.

A lot of the slashers from the late 1970s and early 1980s look dated now, and that's partly what people laugh at.

Also, generations are used to different things. You don't get many slasher movies now, especially not big blockbuster ones. The more mainstream horror movies now are often supernatural, occasionally found footage. The only time you get slashers appear at the cinema are when they're remakes/reboots/sequels to old ones.

Young people now are just not accustomed to slasher movies, and are more tech savvy. So seeing a young girl in 1970s clothing, run away from a guy with a machete is more likely to make them laugh. Especially if the effects are somewhat dated.

I don't see that as a criticism of the movie itself. Just that a certain demographic will see it as something from a previous generation.

reply

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

The only people who don't take Halloween seriously are people who don't understand what it is. They're too young to realize how influential this movie is. They weren't alive to see how freaked out a lot of people were when they left the theater after watching this back in 1978/79. It's also "hip" to crap on classics because the young generation today hasn't produced anything of lasting value.

reply