MovieChat Forums > The House of Usher (2006) Discussion > This is what's wrong with 'horror'movies...

This is what's wrong with 'horror'movies today


This movie is just about the epitome of what's wrong with horror movies today. First off, it's a remake of material no one was asking to be remade. Second, they have "modernized" it because today's audience apparently just can't deal with period pieces (that or they're just too cheap to spring for costumes). Third, they do an unnecessary gender switch with the protagonist, perhaps out misguided efforts at feminism. Fourth, they sabotage any efforts at feminism though by casting a sexy bimbo instead of a someone who can, you know, act. Fifth, they manage to squander said bimbo by not giving her any nude scenes (in fact, this movie suffers from what I call "gratuitous non-nudity"--there's no nudity even in bathtub scenes, sex scenes, ect. where there really SHOULD be). Finally, they cast an MTV hunk instead of anyone remotely scary in the villain role (in this case, a role once performed by Vincent Price).

This movie was obviously made for giggly teenage girls who don't know who Edgar Allen Poe (or Vincent Price) is. Who want to see cute boys and attractive girls modeling clothes (but never taking them off). I guess there's nothing wrong with that, but "horror" movies like this ought to come with some kind of warning for the rest of us,so we don't waste our time.

reply

I think it was just intended to be a new spin on an old tale, nothing more, nothing less.

And, btw, it's Edgar *Allan* Poe ;)

reply

they sabotage any efforts at feminism though by casting a sexy bimbo instead of a someone who can, you know, act. Fifth, they manage to squander said bimbo by not giving her any nude scenes

You are sabotaging feminism by being alive.

reply

It isn't a remake and did not claim to be; it was a re-imagining that drew some elements and a partial title from Poe's tale.

It wasn't supposed to be about feminism; they can't sabotage an attempt that was never made or an intention that never was.

And since when does a movie, horror or otherwise, need nudity to be good? This is not one of my favorites but it was mildly interesting.

Some of the best horror movies had no nudity and very little blood and gore... it's psychological horror... technically this movie falls into that category.

Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense.

reply