MovieChat Forums > Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011) Discussion > Wth so many damn film "experts" I'd expe...

Wth so many damn film "experts" I'd expect...


..there to be so many good films out there. Seems like you are all experts in films and always know what is exactly wrong with a film each time. I wonder where all of your films are??? hmmmm

reply

Many of us are aficionados of horror movies and know the genre.

This movie had its good points indeed, but was overall a very bad movie. Except for the creepy opening scene, and the force and violence of a scene near the ending, this was basically a film for preteens and young teens. A lot of merchandising and marketing after this film came out was targeted to preteens and early teens. The "creatures" were more like a Disney Pixar film.

The 1973 film was pretty typical of Ghost Story format movies of its time. It has a cult following and left a lot to the imagination. Many people interpreted the film differently. But it left its mark on us.

Here's an exerp from Titans, Terrors and Toys (January 2012)

http://titansterrorstoys.blogspot.com/2012/01/dont-be-afraid-of-dark-a nd-gate-tiny.html


He says this about the original:

To be sure, the original version of Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark isn’t one of the best horror films
ever made. What made it memorable, though, is that it was made by talented people who
understood the significant limitations with which they were faced--especially in terms of a
meager production budget and the TV movie format--and successfully applied their skills within
those limits. In doing so, the movie not only kept the appearance of the monsters to a minimum,
but it also kept the details behind the monsters’ origin as vague as possible.

On the basis of what you see in the movie, you can piece together that the monsters were
probably summoned from another hell-like dimension through some kind of dark magic and then
couldn’t (or wouldn't) be sent away, although none of the characters say as much. You hear the
monsters much more than you see them, and what they say amongst themselves indicate just how
sadistic and obsessive they really are. By keeping the monsters vague--their origins, their
capabilities, and their intentions--the movie maintains eerie mood of tense uncertainty. Adding to the tension is how the presence of the monsters accentuates the growing rift between Sally and her husband Alex (Jim Hutton), all the way to the film’s grim, creepy conclusion.


The original film left much to the imagination -- and we horror aficionados have LOTS of imagination, even if we don't produce films.

Only inexperienced, incapable minds need a story spoon-fed to them, as this 2010 movie does. It spells out every detail and most of us could have thought better. The earlier film left the creatures origins and identities much more vague and ghostly. The creatures were not rat fairy things but foul and whispering creatures from the abyss which could only appear/exist in light for a few seconds. Light didn't merely "hurt their eyes" but their existence was defined by terrifying darkness. I don't think any of us thought of the ghostly, dark, goblinoid creatures from the 1973 film as talking rats from a children's cereal commercial. as this 2010 producer came up with.

A lot of us COULD make a better film than this, if we had the funds. Most of us have to work ordinary jobs to make ends meet. We didn't know anyone who gave us a Hollywood job. Our storytelling as camp counselors or in Role-Playing games is quite good, however.

I don't think this was the worst film ever -- it had some good imagery and artistic quality. But it was basically a pixar Goosebumps type movie with a few violent scenes -- nothing that you couldn't show a group of preteens at a sleepover. Goosebumps stuff.

reply

To be a great filmmaker takes more than being able to tell stories around a campfire. There's a lot of elements in every shot that can leave an emotional or psychological impact on an audience, which can make or break a film. Truly, every shot of Guy Pearce and his horribly fake hair dye ruined every scene in this movie with him. BUT there were scenes or shots that do redeem some of the bad things.

Look at the Psycho shower scene. The way it's shot and edited together is a PERFECT example of storytelling on film.

Get off your soapbox while I play you a tune on the tiniest violin.

reply

don't believe the guy above, i'm the only true expert, still the movie is crap.

reply

Grow up little child troll.

reply