It's so good, it's delicious!

I used to be a big fan of the horror genre when I was a kid. I ate up the Friday The 13th, Nightmare, and Halloween franchises. I'd take Freddy and Jason over Batman and Bond any day. But then I grew up, my taste became refined, and I realized that a lot of movies I loved as a child are actually pretty bad. I still have a soft spot for the original slasher flicks though. The horror genre, in general, just doesn't produce very many quality films.

I actually did some research on the top horror movies of the past decade a while ago and after watching a number of them I feel like Cabin In The Woods (oh, but it is a horror movie), The Conjuring, and The Descent are quite easily the top 3.

This rant was sparked because I'm actually excited to watch It Follows. I don't think I've seen a legit horror movie in theaters since Scream 4.

Not a horror buff myself, but Antichrist was quite an experience.

I thought the first Insidious was a lot of fun

Why do 90% of Loungers look down on horror films? Like all walks of cinema, there are good ones and bad ones in the bunch. Not an attack on you TDK as it seems you're optomistic for horror films.

So this isn't just a rant, you're doing horror wrong if you haven't seen these recent films: The Babadook, We Are What We Are, You're Next, Kill List, Sightseers, American Mary, Big Bad Wolves, Beyond the Black Rainbow, Grabbers, Spring (just came out, highest recommendation), John Dies at the End, The Innkeepers, The Sacrament and It Follows.

Watch those films and try tell me you aren't into horror films.

thanks for that list, spring looks wild from the trailer

Under The Skin was one I saw recently and rather enjoyed. I do like horror though.

Not a fan of horror.

I've liked the classics like The Exorcist and ones with comedy like Evil Dead 2, but for the most part I haven't liked horror.

I don't think it's dumb to like it though.

I saw It Follows a few weeks back. I found it ambitious, but it would have worked better as a short imo. It also left a few loose ends.

If you've a soft spot for 80s slashers, I'd recommend the Maniac (2012) remake, although I personally wouldn't consider Maniac a slasher. It's a really gritty take on the original with Elijah Wood being surprisingly kewl as the psycho protagonist.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2103217/reviews-8



There's some great horrors out there, contemporary and retro, if you hunt about.

Really enjoyed it follows. Very unique monster, cool implications

Just watched Predestination,dealing with the same theme of time travel.

Its one of those movies that strikes me as good when its over,but after ruminating about it,becomes ridiculous.

On the good horror pictures in recent history, I gotta go with Sinister,actually had scary moments for me.

I dont necessarily dislike horror... as I have gotten older, I really feel great discomfort and experience very uncomfortable negative residual effects in my mind after experiencing high intensity negative imagery.

finally saw interstellar........just lol at the last 30mins.

Thanks for the list... I haven't seen any of those movies.

I watched The End of the Affair earlier today on TCM, the 1955 version with Van Johnson. Based on the Graham Greene novel obv. I find this strange plot very compelling somehow. I saw the modern remake a few years ago with Fiennes and the great Julianne Moore, and I think I prefer the remake to the original. Van Johnson wasn't that great an actor imo and was a little overmatched by the material here imo.

Maniac 2012 is pretty great

Ya I gave it a passing grade after seeing it but with distance it's easily one of the worst endings in decades if not ever. Unforgivably terrible.

Many of those films are available on Netflix Instant Watch, I believe The Babadook is coming sometime soon on Netflix. I'm not a fan of every film on that list but they're all worth watching.

I don't think it endorsed it, and I've stated several times here that the message is deliberately ambiguous.

But as far as the second thing is concerned, we're given all kinds of cues to believe it's true. Scenes of abuse followed directly by scenes of masochistic practice sessions. Fletcher tells him the Charlie Parker cymbal story and then Andrew repeats it to his family. The entire arc is Andrew trying to win Fletcher's approval, all the way until the final shot of the film.

Sisyphus: Rock :: me: railing on Whiplash's message

That original was bad, and I'm a big fan of 50s melodrama, and not just the Douglas Sirk films. Agreed on Van Johnson, too. How did he get this lead? Deborah Kerr can generate chemistry, but not with this milquetoast.

The remake is good. I love the scene when Moore is having an orgasm, Fiennes worries her husband might hear them from the other room, and Moore says "he wouldn't recognize the sound." So cheesy and literal, but it totally plays.

Fun fact (I think): A History of Violence was the last film to be produced on VHS tapes. All films since then (2005ish) were released on DVD instead. It's a fun little movie. I just saw it on TV the other day and hadn't seen it since the theater.

I love this movie. Did you listen to the "Director commentary" or whatever they call it at the end? It makes it even better. The movie is such a fine line between reality and surreality. (Is that a word?)

Its surrealism

From a caring stall to a murderous cusack in about 6 seconds...

CLOVIS STRIKES AGAIN!

no, just watched it on netflix, so they didnt have that available (i dont think). yeah, i thought it was a real smart criticism of hollywood, up there with Day of the Locust, movie version even superior