I've been pondering this question during my morning commute, and the answer I have arrived at is a typically lawyer-esque: it depends.
In an earlier thread I posted, we railed against overused hack bits in movies, such as the girl falling while running from the chainsaw wielding maniac. Some of the things people mentioned were specific types of jump scares (such as the cat falling out of the closet, the person appears behind the hero(ine) when they close the mirrored medicine cabinet, the creepy-neighbor-that-isn't-really-the killer, etc.). I think based on how often & how poorly we've all seen these & other variations done, it's beyond question that the jump scare CAN be a hack bit.
But is it always?
I think sometimes it isn't. A good example I can think of is one from 'The Abandoned", one of After Dark's 8 Films to Die For from last year's horrorfest. i'd like to think that after having been a horror fiend as long as I have, I can usually spot a jump scare coming. I should've seen this one coming, too, but for some reason, I was completely fooled. They got me GOOD. Not only did I not see it coming, but the imagery revealed wasn't what I expected either. It definitely wasn't one of the hack bits outlined above. That, IMO made it a valid device; the heroine was in a situation where, if she had really seen what was revealed when her flashlight beam played over it as we saw on film, she probably WOULD'VE jumped. We were, quite emphatically, made to share in that experience. I liken the "You're going to need a bigger boat" appearance of the shark (or the brief appearance of what was left of Ben Gardener's corpse) in "Jaws" to this kind of scare. The 1st time you saw either of those, they caught you a little off guard, because they weren't what you were maybe expecting (you were maybe expecting Hooper to get attacked, not for Ben Gardener's remains to float gruesomely by, or Chief Brody to continue arguing w/ Quint, not bounce some chum of the shark's oversized nose).
More common, but none the less valid, I think, is a jump scare that pays off. It really IS the killer, or the monster, and not some fucking cat or creepy neighbor thrown in to artificially build tension. the director catches the audience napping, just like the killer catches the hero, and there's a really good startling 'Gotcha!' moment, that actually maybe contributes to the story (and if you're lucky, may pay off w/ a good kill). Unfortunately, I can't think of a good example of this kind of scare, but I know they're out there. I think you know what I mean.
Does anyone agree w/ me? Does anyone think I'm full of shit, and the jump scare is always a hack bit used by lazy filmmakers, or do you love 'em to death, can't get enough of 'em, wish they'd make a movie that was nothing but jump scares for 2 hours?
In an earlier thread I posted, we railed against overused hack bits in movies, such as the girl falling while running from the chainsaw wielding maniac. Some of the things people mentioned were specific types of jump scares (such as the cat falling out of the closet, the person appears behind the hero(ine) when they close the mirrored medicine cabinet, the creepy-neighbor-that-isn't-really-the killer, etc.). I think based on how often & how poorly we've all seen these & other variations done, it's beyond question that the jump scare CAN be a hack bit.
But is it always?
I think sometimes it isn't. A good example I can think of is one from 'The Abandoned", one of After Dark's 8 Films to Die For from last year's horrorfest. i'd like to think that after having been a horror fiend as long as I have, I can usually spot a jump scare coming. I should've seen this one coming, too, but for some reason, I was completely fooled. They got me GOOD. Not only did I not see it coming, but the imagery revealed wasn't what I expected either. It definitely wasn't one of the hack bits outlined above. That, IMO made it a valid device; the heroine was in a situation where, if she had really seen what was revealed when her flashlight beam played over it as we saw on film, she probably WOULD'VE jumped. We were, quite emphatically, made to share in that experience. I liken the "You're going to need a bigger boat" appearance of the shark (or the brief appearance of what was left of Ben Gardener's corpse) in "Jaws" to this kind of scare. The 1st time you saw either of those, they caught you a little off guard, because they weren't what you were maybe expecting (you were maybe expecting Hooper to get attacked, not for Ben Gardener's remains to float gruesomely by, or Chief Brody to continue arguing w/ Quint, not bounce some chum of the shark's oversized nose).
More common, but none the less valid, I think, is a jump scare that pays off. It really IS the killer, or the monster, and not some fucking cat or creepy neighbor thrown in to artificially build tension. the director catches the audience napping, just like the killer catches the hero, and there's a really good startling 'Gotcha!' moment, that actually maybe contributes to the story (and if you're lucky, may pay off w/ a good kill). Unfortunately, I can't think of a good example of this kind of scare, but I know they're out there. I think you know what I mean.
Does anyone agree w/ me? Does anyone think I'm full of shit, and the jump scare is always a hack bit used by lazy filmmakers, or do you love 'em to death, can't get enough of 'em, wish they'd make a movie that was nothing but jump scares for 2 hours?
