And I don't know how you could ever find one of the best horror movies of the past 20-30 years "boring and cliche." Its atmosphere is intoxicatingly claustrophobic, the characters are attaching, and its exorcism finale is far more intense and malicious than The Exorcist's, and that's a goddamn feat. I was never convinced that The Devil/Legion/Pazuzu/whatevs was ever a legitimate threat to anyone's life, let alone Reagan's, and that's what killed that movie for me. The buildup is great, but the otherworldly threat is impotent at best and incompetent at worst. This is essentially the same problem Insidious had, and I love the hell out of Insidious.

As for The Thing, well, let's be honest--after the first viewing, its only replay value comes from looking at the practical effects. It relies hard on you not knowing where the creature is at any given time, so naturally there are diminishing returns on the chill factor of the movie. It doesn't maintain its creepiness over multiple viewings. It also doesn't help that MacReady is really the only likable character, while everyone else is largely disposable (whatever their names were). Good movie, very creepy the first time through, but after that there's no point to ever watch it again.

So yeah. The Conjuring sticks out as the superior film to me for its malicious atmosphere and climactic intensity. Is it as influential as those other movies? Nah. Does it owe a lot to them? Sure. Do I think it's better than the others? If being more engaging, intense, and unsettling are markers of a good horror movie, then fuck yeah, I do.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and James Wan is a goddamn hero for not pandering to mouthbreathers who want a bunch gore and tits.

Wan seems intent on repelling the legacy of Saw from his body of work, as everything he's done since that series morphed into what it became has been high on suspense and atmosphere and very low on, if completely lacking, gore and boobs and 60+ uses of "fuck" and other things that the casual horror viewer likes.

Just saw Elysium. It was pretty decent. Basically District 9 meets Neuromancer. The characterization felt pretty thin but it was less than two hours long so I guess I can't complain too much. I'd put it on a pretty similar level as something like Oblivion, which was far prettier and more atmospheric but was lacking some of the grit and violence Elysium has. My only real complaint about it is:

Yep, but it isn't impossible to make things scary again. Basically when you grow up you learn what exists and what doesn't, what looks real and what doesn't, through the reasoning of logic you can determine what can be and what can't, this alone takes a huge equation out of the mix. Added to this when you see something horrific enough times, you lose the shock value and gradually became desensitized. To make things scary the makers of a movie need to push the right buttons, to get inside the viewer's head psychologically through the use of visuals or whatever else necessary. Music shouldn't be used in horror movies as it takes the viewer out of it's submersion of believability. To a lesser extent overblown sound effects need to be dropped also. To believe what's occurring on the screen is real is a key element in making things scary again, that's why so many people are suckers for a movie based on a 'true story', it makes them sit back for a moment because they think it could be real.

I couldn't agree more. Modern horror film-making is virtually all rehashed rubbish that lacks all of the spirit and originality of the films that helped define and redefine the genre.

The Infamous Bastard, If you're looking for horror films that are effective in whatever it is they are trying to horrify the viewer with then I'd recommend the following off the top of my head:

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (raw, relentless violence without any Hollywood glitz);
Cannibal Holocaust (a challenging masterpiece that will undoubtedly turn your stomach);
The Brood (an eerie and mildly atmospheric flick with a unique premise from Mr. Cronenberg);
Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer (an ugly, nasty and visceral film based off of a period in Henry Lucas' life);
Black Sabbath (the old woman is still one of the most harrowing sights offered in horror cinema);
Nekromantik (a lo-fi masterpiece exploring the depths of perversity and despair but good luck finding a copy until next year when it's supposed to be re-released on blu-ray);
Jacob's Ladder (not a straight horror picture but it still has more than enough of distinctive and horrifying imagery);
Carnival Of Souls (a film that was way ahead of its time with some beautiful and eerie cinematography);
meh, there's so many more but these are a few that come to mind at the moment anyhow.

I can't tell you your wrong about what you personally find scary, but I dunno dude, nothing in The Conjuring was remotely unique. There was nothing in that thing that hadn't been done a billion times in Exorcism of Emily Rose, The Possession, The Last Exorcism, all of those lame movies that owe their existence to The Exorcist. Obviously I can't change your mind about finding it "malicious" or "intense," however I didn't see any of that. It was just another cliche exorcism movie - snore. And how is not pandering to "people who want gore and tits" something to be lauded? Plenty of better films and better filmmakers do that, both now and then. He isn't pandering to those people; he's just pandering to the horribly tired cliches of an over-saturated genre for a cheap dollar.

I don't know about your criticisms of the older flicks either; I certainly felt more dread in The Exorcist for Regan and Chris than I did for any of the featureless and bland cardboard cut-outs in The Conjuring. There's no comparison; the Exorcist had real, fleshed out characters and a story that was about things. It had a point. It's the changing tide of the times: in a time when religion is being questioned and dissected more often, The Exorcist shows us that yes, the old Biblical-style horrors are still a force to be reckoned with. In a modern world of science and increasing atheism and progressive thought, The Exorcist shows us people who have no other solution but to go to a fucking priest for an exorcism - that's far more terrifying on an intellectual level than any of the films it inspired.

It wasn't always go-for-the-throat scary, but it had a message, a clear direction and it was so disturbing at times that it became otherworldly. Its implications and the time frame in which it was made, made it scary. The Conjuring isn't about anything. It's just "hey, if you didn't find exorcisms and possessions scary the other 1,345,399 times, how about another one?"

As for The Thing, again, no clue where you're coming from there. Amazing characters, amazing setting, and it was scary as shit - there's your replay value right there. The Thing is blood curdling, primordial horror of the unknown. It is the fear of something totally alien to us and something that can BECOME us. That's fucking terrifying to me, especially with the great direction and way the film pulled that off. It put you in the moment and made you feel what the characters felt. That's horror to me.

Giving a thumbs up to everything LongLiveTheNewFlesh recommended, those are great movies!

I'd like to add the parts of The Last House on the Left that don't involve the parents or bumbling cops to the pool of genuinely unsettling, scary movies. The only thing keeping that movie from being a horror classic for me was its insistence on inserting completely out of place comedy between the scenes of the girls being abused and fucked with by Krug and his mooks in the form of cake baking, party planning from the parents, and those fucking bumbling cops. Last House is really one of the few horror movies I can say with certainty that the remake did a LOT better, as not having the comedy inserts helped the pacing of the movie so much, as well as keeping the same mood throughout without being distracted by chicken trucks and cursing hippies.

Thanks!

Haha, again, I couldn't agree more here. Films like The Exorcist and even The Omen helped bring biblical ideas into horror and they were done with a certain level of innovation, freshness and legitimate inspiration that is just absent from these cash cows in the form of The Conjuring - it owes its existence to The Exorcist and it rips it off on so many levels it's disenchanting. I saw it at the theater with my fiance and we both felt like it was some arduous three-hour mind-rape due to its poor pacing, acting and decadent unoriginality. I don't know, everyone has a right to their tastes obviously but I have a hard time stomaching the idea that any new horror picture is better than what so clearly inspired it. The Exorcist also explored the implications of faith from both the believer's and unbeliever's perspective which, considering the film's concept and content, is pretty daring and intellectually provoking as it forces you to take a seat on the side that's in opposition to your own beliefs. Hell, even if The Exorcist doesn't scare its viewer it demands a certain level of respect for what it did for horror cinema all together.

The Thing is a masterful exploration into the unknown and it is so meticulously put together that nothing can really even compare to it - whether you're talking about the raw visuals (those prosthetics are incredible) or the philosophical ideas behind the film, it's just a through-and-through masterpiece. I mean, really, who hasn't jumped right out of their damn seat with a skipped heart-beat during the blood-testing scene? I have seen The Thing at least twenty times and I never tire of it.

Thanks for the recs. The fact that so many people were praising The Conjuring as the best horror movie ever had got me highly expecting the thrill, and I was disappointed. I'm intrigued to watch The Thing now after this discussion.

It's not the best horror movie ever (hi, The Exorcist), but godDAMN is it great. James Wan just needs to keep making movies like that and Insidious and I will be very, very happy.

The Thing isn't scary, it's more weird and strange than anything but it's a good horror film none-the-less. That should be mandatory.

Conjuring was fun to watch, but far from scary. It's really saying something when people call it the scariest movie in YEARS. Seems all Hollywood is doing now is milking the hell out of Paranormal Activity. Hell, the only horror movies this year that haven't been shit are Conjuring and Insidious 2.
Of the ones Ive seen:
Texas Chainsaw, shit.
Purge- Lots of potential, but turned to shit 20 minutes in
You're Next- I thought the whole thing was really stupid.

If there's any one thing The Thing was best at, it was the effects. That movie was proof in the pudding at how amazing practical gore effects are and can be when enough care is put into it.

Heh, that's an interesting comparison, I can see why you'd make it. Loved District 9, was mostly bored by Neuromancer, but I liked Elysium, it's a fun, tight adventure and nothing deeper, really.

Also what the fuck did they do to Sharlto Copley? Haha, I didn't even recognise him in his first few scenes. And that overblown(?) South African accent? Hilarious. I don't quite comprehend why, but this almost cartoonish character somehow worked out.

PS: I kinda want a ChemRail rifle.

/raise hand

It's just another dime-a-dozen jump scare.

I will defend The Conjuring to the death, but...Insidious 2? Probably the first legitimately bad movie James Wan has ever made, if you ask me.

You guys defending movies like The Conjuring and Insidious (1 and 2) speaks volumes about how shitty horror films are today.

Anyway, do truly scary films really exist?

Man, that movie was hilariously dumb. I especially enjoyed the "KILL THE HOMELESS SWINE!" bit. Yep, moviemakers, I definitely did not know before this that some people in America had cruel views toward the lower class; thanks for enlightening me.

Also, if these rich people have these massive home defense systems already, why don't they include some kind of camera controlled turret? They could have picked off that mob in 5 minutes.

So the dime a dozen jump scares in The Conjuring are fine, but not a legit good one like that blood testing one?

So aside from that, I rewatched There Will Be Blood last weekend for the first time since it came out. I like it. I think PT Anderson's got a better film in Punch Drunk Love, but TWBB is really great on its own. It's a bit arduous at times, but overall very sweeping and majestic, as well as a very dark character study. It's a film about the American lust for power and the downfalls of that power. And it's all been said before, but damn does Daniel Day Lewis own that role. I'd give it 4.5/5.

No Country for Old Men I also watched again, a masterpiece - love the intensity of everything going on, the seedy Western setting, etc. It's a movie driven by a very simple thing, money, which becomes a much larger theme of evil - pure, inexplicable and undying evil, and the chaos that befalls decent, average people. It's the changing of the times - the passing of the gauntlet between generations. I always fall asleep for a little bit after that fight scene in the motel though, I don't know why. It's exhausting to watch I suppose.

You notice in that scene there's no music, it's completely dead quiet except for sound effects of the blood being tested. Plus the actors are all believable, that's why is works so well.

I simply don't understand how someone can not like The Thing or think of it as a weak effort, but then again this thread has proven to me that there's a hater for every movie. Who cares if R.J. MacReady is the only likeable character? Just like Snake Plissken is the only likeable character in Escape from New York, his character is badass and he alone is enough to keep people entertained.

The horror film I've enjoy the most lately wasn't even particularly scary (aside from maybe one notable scene)- Lake Mungo. It's a mockumentary about a family dealing with the death and apparent haunting of a daughter and aside from having great pacing and a great re-working of the fairly played out found footage genre, it actually had an emotional core to the film. It really dealt the family grappling with loss and the idea of mortality within the context of a creepy movie, rather than being a vapid movie going for a bunch of cheap scares.

I just finished watching The Caller. Probably not the best choice but since halloween I've watched a number of recent horror films on Netflix not expecting too much from them (The Conjuring, Insidious, The Shrine- all of them were varying degrees of okay to blah). It did show some promise; though I'd make the usual complaints of shallow characterization and cliche scoring/filmography it did have a good concept coupled with a realistic fear of a menacing, abusive ex-husband. It created tension and could have gone to some interesting places with the setup. The first 2/3 of the movie drew me in more than I expected but then it just shrugged, threw in the towel and any attempt at coherency or respectability to play for a big spectacular finish.

Seems to be a problem with a lot of horror films these days. The final act tries to be really intense but goes off the rails or overtop in a way that undermines anything that was done well throughout the build up. Really too bad, The Caller could have been an interesting film but ended up turning into a complete car wreck in the vain hope that people would stop long enough to gawk at it.

Hey guys, what are your thoughts on Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas? I enjoyed the book well enough, but I'd like some second opinions regarding the film adaptation, especially because I'm having some difficulty with the idea of Johnny Depp playing bloody Hunter S. Thompson, of all people.

It's awesome and the two leads do an awesome job.

The Conjuring is decent.....much like Wan's Dead Silence and Insidious...but he always overdoes it. He gives you too much. And it's always his cliche old woman ghost/demon thing. He needs to stick with the 'empty room' uneasiness and never show you any spirit. The truly insidious nature of a haunting is that you never see anything and don't know what is against you. That's terror and no movie ever gets it right because the nature of film is to lead to some violent climax.

Coming back in after I suppose the debate on The Thing has more or less passed over, the thing that always kills me is the timing of everything. None of the scares are gratuitous, none of them happen *quite* when you expect them too, and none of them are spoiled by the goddamn DVD menu scream (I'm looking at you, [rec]!). On the unlikeable / disposable characters, I only partly agree. Part of the interchangeability is a huge asset to the movie. I am a huge fan of the film, seen it several times, but I can never remember how each guy meets his fate. One or two are super memorable, but it's the kill rather than the face, and I personally find this adds a tonne of suspense to re-watchings: even if you know which guy makes it to the end, you don't necessarily know the order and sequence the others go out. I think it has great rewatch value personally, and yes the effects are incredible.

The question of whether something is scary or not, well I always struggle with that. People say "this movie was shit, I wasn't scared at all" -- it's to do with entering into it. Watch Murnau's Nosferatu, or Wiene's Cabinet of Dr Caligari -- both on youtube I think. Compared to more modern movies they contain little in the way of shocks or jumps. But the atmosphere, the weirdness, the imagination of these films, is for me why they continue to chill and frighten decades after they came out. I think sometimes you almost need to let yourself be scared a little more

Dude, he NAILS it. Like, on a level that most character actors can't even hope to achieve. Go in with zero trepidations, it's a fantastic adaptation captained by stellar performances all around.

The Thing rules. It is probably the single greatest monument to practical effects in cinema ever, and while I think The Exorcist is the greatest horror movie of all time The Thing is definitely my favorite. I can concede that there is no movie out there above criticism but I really can't find any ground for critics of that movie to stand on. It's immaculate. From the effects, to the claustrophobic atmosphere, to the timing, to the characters themselves. Sure, the rest of the characters aren't as important or interesting as MacReady but that's typical for not only horror movies but most movies that center around a single main hero character, and each of the supporting characters has their own personality and provides the necessary support for the roles that they play.

What it boils down to is a testament to just how great a horror movie can be when done right.

Great point, I know some people that say no horror books/movies/games ever scare them, but it's the type of people who don't "leave their room" when experiencing art. They don't even try to go to the world that's being presented to them, they stay in their chairs and do not let themselves be taken in by the work. It's like being imagination impaired.

The Thing is an amazing movie, but it's been so long since I watched it that I can't really remember much aside from the atmosphere and a few bits and pieces. I'll have to revisit it sometime.

If The Thing is the peak excellence of horror movies when done right, then its prequel/remake is the peak failure of horror movies when done wrong. It's astounding how terrible The Thing 2011 is even when you don't compare it to Carpenter's movie.

Exorcist the best horror movie of all time? Please.
Also yes, The Thing could very well be a contender for my favourite. Such atmosphere, such tense moments, Carpenter at his prime, shit. It would be my favourite if masterpieces like the Shining and Rosemary's Baby weren't out there.
As for Fear and Loathing, for fucks sake Xlxlx, go watch it now. dontlivefastjustdie pretty much hit the nail on the head with that one. I'm not really a fan of Depp at all, but his performance in that one is impeccable. It helps that he was good friends with Hunter S Thompson.

For some reason I have always had the impression that the movie wasn't well regarded... I love the book a hell of a lot though, so maybe I'll track it down too and watch it for myself

Well, guess I'm watching Fear and Loathing next. Thanks for your thoughts, guys,

from a few sources, Johnny Depp and Hunter S Thompson were good buddies

They were. Depp hung out with Thompson for a long time, and not just to research the movie. Thompson was on set at the movie a lot and helped Depp get into character, look the part, etc.

Thompson has a short guest appearances in the movie too.

it is also in a documentary, the scene where Depp comments on Thompson's suicide..pretty deep stuff.. you can tell he nailed the part in Fear and Loathing..
Thompson IS in the film for a brief second- where he sees himself in the crowd at a gig thing

FYI, Depp got the part close enough that when Hunter saw a screening of it he actually relived the first hallucination in the theater as he watched it onscreen.

Glad to read all of the love and admiration for The Thing! John Carpenter is a master and has a number of classics under his belt.

The last movie I watched was American Psycho. I have seen the film a handful of times now and I do enjoy it a considerable amount although the book is, as to be expected, much better. Most of the film's dialogue (whether internal or external) is lifted straight from the novel which is part of why the film is successful although the "depth" of Bateman's character is not explored nearly as deeply in the film as in the book (as one would anticipate) which, oddly enough, adds to the film's overall quality and gratuitous mood.

If I could sum up Fear and Loathing for me, it would be with these two words: Funny, Uncomfortable. There are scenes in that which are just funny as hell, one of my favorites is at the very beginning when they're driving and visions of bats start happening. Also there's a lot of scenes that truly make me uncomfortable, like the scene with the waitress and the knife. But with both of these, I am glad I saw it. For sure recommendation from me.

I choose to believe it doesn't exist. Talk about a movie that didn't need to be remade, good god.


Haha I'm guessing by your statement you'd put The Shining or Rosemary's Baby above it? Both are fantastic, admittedly, but there's just something about The Exorcist that does it for me. Atmosphere for one but just there sheer evil exuded by that film is virtually untouchable. I love horror movies and has been stated before, most things aren't really scary anymore, but that film? Still gets under my skin to this day.

For the best horror film of all time I'd probably go with either Murnau's Nosferatu (although Herzog's interpretation is quite incredible also) or Romero's Night Of The Living Dead for their timeless quality and everlasting impact on the genre. The Exorcist would definitely be in a top ten list, however.