Old and New Horror

[Gangrell]

I heard that The Ring really was scary, but I hadn't seen it yet. Larry, is it suspenful horror or filled with gore?

[Epona]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: So, yeah, I like the old style. True gothic. Stoker's Dracula, Shelley's Frankenstein. Frankenstein, for instance, is more about the monster's internal struggle and realizations, as juxtaposed with those of the creator, than it is anything else. It is the horrible dichotomy of human existence, made vivid symbol in the ice and snow scenes (ice looks light and warm yet is truly cold and dark), that contains the horror of Frankenstein.

I agree with that. I thought Coppola's Dracula was very dark and brooding (and Gary Oldman was superb) and was very close to the book - which I would recommend to anyone who hasn't read it (It is available online here ). The Bram Stoker novel of Dracula is a good comment on the morals and fears of Victorian society - an older (in this case very old LOL) foreign and desirable yet dangerous man preying on young women, who are battling with their awakening sexuality and the upright morals of their society.

It is interesting that the book starts with the passages:

Jonathan Harker's Journal

3 May. Bistritz. Left Munich at 8:35 PM, on 1st May, arriving at Vienna early next morning; should have arrived at 6:46, but train was an hour late. Buda-Pesth seems a wonderful place, from the glimpse which I got of it from the train and the little I could walk through the streets. I feared to go very far from the station, as we had arrived late and would start as near the correct time as possible.

The impression I had was that we were leaving the West and entering the East; the most western of splendid bridges over the Danube, which is here of noble width and depth, took us among the traditions of Turkish rule.

I like the use of the phrase 'leaving the West and entering the East' which can be read in many ways - leaving what you know for something unkown, possibly an analogy for entering a new era, something previously unexperienced.

Of course if you've seen the film, you know which side wins the day - but not before the innocent Mina has been 'sullied' so to speak.

Shelley's Frankenstein is also, as TL rightly pointed out, full of the contradictions of its era. Mary Shelley was something of a 'new ager' and free spirit in her day - running round Europe with her friends and lovers, experimenting with drugs, etc etc. And the novel is quite an examination of morals, especially of the new scientific age. Frankenstein is also available online, here.

[Irongrinder]

I already mentioned it in the movie discussions that I liked The Shining a lot. In The shining is hardly any gore but it's more about the tention (note the close ups on Jack Nickelson's face, I live 'm) The simple gore movies are usually just plain bad, I only like Braindead for it because it's just totally nuts and I don't look at it as a horror, more like a gory comedy. So I guess I'm one of those tention lovers when it comes to horrors.

[quietman1920]

The Ring was OK...its out on DVD (which means its rentable). But that wasn't why I started to post today. A horror film should be one that 'speaks' to you...made in such a way that you can almost identify with the victim. The first of the 'new' generation of horror films did that for me.

Imagine a mentally broken teenaged Jamie Lee Curtis on the floor sobbing as Donald Pleasance (bless his soul) puts 6 rounds from a .357 magnum through the chest of 'The Shape'. Unable to speak clearly, you can barely make out J.L. Curtis' line 'He's the Booge Man..." to which Mr. Pleasance replies in perfect deadpan and reserve "As a matter of fact, it Was." Fade to Mr. Pleasance's face as he leeans over the balcony to look at the body: His eyes grow wide and you can almost See the blood drain away from his face before the camera cuts to the grass below, where there isn't a body; there's an outline of a body in the grass. To me, that was John Carpenter's finest Trick or Treat.