Rant in A-Minor

Great read Alex. Definately do more of those.

Is that you in the photo?

"I am Omega"...?
Jesus wept.

I don't think its always been that way, it really started in the 90's, as far as I noticed. The video junk from the 80's was always fun, funny, gory, and occasionally scary but rarely as dull and cheap as the crap we have to wade through nowadays. I blame Full Moon, they started off making somewhat decent titles but quickly learned that quality didn't matter, and allowed their name to become a stay away mark on any video it adorned. The last 7 or so years has seen the rise in the dirt cheap video garbage, if I am going to be watching something shot on video, it had better make up for it in other areas, which they usually don't.

Alex--good writing, my friend!

As a budding horror filmmaker myself, I can vouch for the fact that some people at the top actually get turned OFF by a smart concept. It's disheartening to be turned away time after time because, in the end, one's ideas aren't dumb enough to make money.

And if this were 20 years ago, I almost could understand it.

At a low budget level, the paradox used to be that if a film was utterly terrible, production and distribution houses KNEW they could make money off of it and get away with it because the expectation of "good" simply wouldn't be there. They could fill it with gore and sex instead of characters or plot and the audience was either too dumb to care, looking for that very thing, or renting in hopes that it'd be one of those "diamonds in the rough" that they could tell all their friends about.

Of course, it never was.

Problem was, as soon as a company started producing or distributing a film with the slightest bit of aspiration to be more, there were expectations placed on it. Said film wanted to be good--great even!--but if the money or talent ended up not being there, the companies had the worst kind of bad movie on their hands--the completely boring bad movie. With no tits.

What I find most frustrating though, is that, now, even these cheap thrill films that everyone still seems to be clamoring to release don't offer ANYTHING anymore. Like you said, any jerk with a DV or HD camera can make a movie these days, and while there're benefits to that, the downside is the watering down of all low-budget product. Not only does EVERY RELEASE have the same visual aesthetics due to the overuse of bland video by talentless or inexperienced DPs, but the exploitative elements these titles promise don't even seem to deliver anymore! A mask, a bladed weapon and a few pop-cultural or self-referential remarks don't cut it! If you aren't going to stimulate me, titillate me, right?! Since when did slasher films stand for 50% of the deaths happening off screen? Or without a single drop of blood?

I'm curious, Alex (or anyone else who watches this stuff on a regular basis), if you find yourself utterly disappointed in not only the lack of imagination, but the lack of traditional 'horror' elements on display in low-budget cheapies these days.

Phew. ::End verbal diarrhea::

Great job, Alex.

It sounds like they are using the porn business model.

At least when a porn is titled "Men in Black (Who Like To Have Sex With Each Other)" you know what you are getting.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Alex Riviello again.

Nicely put. Finding those gems is a tough mission. That's why we gotta stick together, reccommend what's worthy to each other, and help weed out the garbage.

Both. I think this is due to the availability and convenience of being able to make a no-budget horror flick. Before, it took some initiative (and knowledge), and usually some sense of aesthetic to make a film (there's always exceptions). Now, anyone can do it because of editing software, etc.

EDIT: I've worked in the commercial art field since college and we always say that now any secretary thinks she's (or he) a marketing genius because she designed her own cute letterhead on a desktop publishing program.

No matter what art field you're in (cinematic or otherwise), it takes talent (inherent or trained) to pull off the individual elements. Film-making requires various disciplines. Some people can wear many hats (writing/directing/acting/camera) and those are the people that will go far with drive, but most people don't know the 1st thing about storytelling (and unfortunately, latex). If you lack the necessary abilities and you can't surround yourself with talented individuals, your flick is not gonna be worth my time (and in hind-sight, wasn't worth theirs either). Fortunately, I only spent a buck or 2 to find out, but you never get that time back. Thank God for the fast forward button.

I found that NY Times article to be surprisingly bloggy, considering their content. Good read, though. And yes, "Poultrygeist" is the shit.

Good stuff Alex.

We need a sticky thread where people can post one liners about films to avoid.

Having seen the abysmal "Dead Clowns" this weekend, I'm still trying to figure out how they could fuck up a story about undead clowns from a train derailment into a bay staring Brinke Stevens. Seems impossible, but they did.

The Problem

The problem is that you cant get throught the door if you have an original well thought out horror film. What people are saying here is true companies truly want crap and thus that is what they get. I have been looking for an outlet for the scripts I've written over the last 5 years and cannot find a descent studio to get them too. I love horror, not shit horror, not violent porn but fucking horror and that's what i want to do, but damn it aint easy when you have a brain and you want your horror to have more than just tits and blood.

There's also a seemingly endless supply of DTV distributors. Sure Lions Gate has quite the "lion's share", but there's plenty of DVD companies I don't even recognize when I turn the cover over.

Is there some sort of way to "self-publish" DTV flicks or something? An online DVD-pressing service?

EDIT: Of course there are. Duh.

Alex, after reading that article, I think it's time I stopped dragging my feet and finally procure funding for Propeller: The Movie. You want in?

Propeller: The Movie is probably better than 2/3 of the stuff that gets greenlit for DTV. It's odd, because there's 1000's of interesting horror shorts that have no shot at a large scale production, so can't be that expensive to get permission for a screenplay/film adaptation. Why they continue to insist on heading down the road with nonsensical or poorly written ideas is beyond me.

There's also plenty of brilliant horror fiction that's public domain at this point to use as a skeleton or inspiration (with name recognition!), if you can't come up with anything original. Or hell, there's non-horror public domain classics that could be twisted into a horror flick.

Seems like slashers or zombies are the easiest go-to subject matter for no-budget (and probably most popular genres).

See, there's the problem. Why dream of making a shitty horror movie? Why not a good one?

But why can't a cheaply made horror film with blood and tits also be good? Is it really the lack of an original premise and low budget, or is it the talent behind the camera that ultimately dooms horror films these days? Let's not forget that a good number of classic horror films were made on the cheap.

I undersstand the reason these crappy movies get made (quick, easy cash). But larger studios have to know tht if they put out a quality product, they stand to make infinitely more. We as horror fans would probably pay to see evena crappy movie (since that very often seems to be all that's available), but John & Jane moviegoer, who maybe don't wade in the horror movie pool w/ us, but only stick their toes in if a horror movie is supposed to be REALLY GOOD, would fork over money to see something worthwhile. It's got to be worth the studios' time to do that more often than they do.

I know exactly what you are talking about Alex. About a year ago, a theater near me showed the remasterd Nightmare on Elm Street and I was totally psyched to see it in the theater. As we were waiting in line, I was checking everyone out, and they all seemed like diehard horror fans. I was ecstatic. The lights went down, and right away we had people laughing and yelling stupid shit at the screen. Totally ruined the mood. Now sometimes yelling things out is warranted and sometimes can be funny, but the whole movie was treated like a Mystery Science Theater episode. It was a total let down.

What shitty experience, Alex. I've been through similar ones, so I can sympathize. As a general rule of thumb, new horror films will get taken seriously by the masses. Anything older than a few years will be laughed at because they are so familiar with the movie it doesn't frighten them anymore. Only actual horror fans will act respectful in a theater.

Exhumed Films in Philly hosts old horror movies every month or two. It's attended mostly by hardcore fans. I'm talking guys with Fulci tattoos. Even with that in mind, for the benefit of the newbies they tell the audience before each and every show not to make MST3K jokes or they will be beaten, removed and beaten again. And I've seen "funny" people get literally dragged out of the theater.

Conversely, when I saw The Descent the audience was anything but quiet. They didn't make jokes, though. They were actually screaming and running up and down the aisle after a scry part. One guy stood up and announced he was leaving because "This movie is scary as hell!"
I considered that a great movie going experience.

I'm thinking part of the problem might also be a generational one.

Characters like Freddy Kruger, Jason Vorhees, and Michael Myers, even Alien, scared the hell out of us growing up because they were new and more homicidal then previous generations' monsters like Dracula, Frankenstein, Wolfman, etc. Those monsters scared the hell out of our folks and grandparents back then, but despite our love for them as cinemaphiles, the sight of a Bela Lugosi style Dracula probably wouldn't freak our generation out too much (probably remind us Halloween is coming up in a month or so).

I'm assuming (yeah, yeah... I know) the crowd you went to see Nightmare with was probably younger than you and your friends. The audience already had Jason, Freddy, The Shape ingrained into them via cable reruns (edited probably) as they were growing up, so they probably wouldn't be as scared as if they were catching this back in the '80s when it first premiered.

I'll wager the same audience was more freaked out catching Hostel or Saw when they premiered; those are this current generations horror touchstones.

Familiarity breeds fearlessness is where I'm going here.

EDIT - Double post (my first!)

I would've been pissed too. Last year my buddy and his wife came over, and she had never seen Nightmare before. It was late so we turned off all the lights, cranked up the surround sound, and proceeded to be scared shitless. It was a blast, and the fact that the film still could scare me after all these years made me thrilled.

I quit the theater for horror films entirely, mostly because by my current wife refuses to watch them (or most other films for that matter), and I refuse to be that guy who goes to the theater alone.

The 1080P HD Samsung and Dolby 6.1 home theater setup also makes it rather unnecessary.

Great article, Alex, and I really feel for you. Sorry you had such a shitty experience.

I usually hate going to the theater these days, and it's all because of the douchebags who aren't there to actually see the film, but to hang out with their friends. However, there are exceptions, and, like Alex and Bob have said, it depends on the film. I had a great time seeing films like Grindhouse, Hot Fuzz, and Freddy vs. Jason (I kinda like it) at the theater because the crowds were really into it, and that created a great vibe that made the whole experience that much more fun.

On the other hand, movies that I actually wanted to WATCH like Gangs of New York, Batman Begins, Solaris (2002), Casino Royale, and several others were all soured by obnoxious twits who weren't actually there to see a movie. They just wanted to hang out with their friends, get out of the house, or take their infants out for an evening on the town.

I can empathize for you. That sounds like a horrible experience. I first encountered this in a 9th grade English class. We were watching The Birds for some reason, and when the birds attacked everyone started cracking up. The same people still laugh at movies that they think are dated. I think they're too uptight to allow themselves to get immersed into the movie. And I disagree with your optimism on going to arthouse type places - I think it would even be worse there.

Death Surge, your "current wife"? Do you have a spare one somewhere that you're not using right now who loves watching horror films?

I do have to admit seeing those flicks were great in the theater. Especially Freddy vs. Jason. The comradrie that was all around us during that movie made it better than it actually is. That theater experience was probably one of my favorites.

Ok, I can see what you're saying there. But I've seen ads for a Boston arthouse place doing a "Grindhouse" inspired double feature. Though it's not horror, I'd still kind of like to see it without having unfunny pseudo-intellectuals talking the whole time. I could tell just from reading the theater's write-up that they were inviting people to come in and be wise-asses and nudge each other's ribs the whole time. I'm sure that would have happened if they were showing a better known horror movie there too, but maybe not with the kind of stuff you refer to when you say you hunted it down.

This is #3 in the series (#2 was the only one who liked horror films).

Collect them all.

Bob's experience here reminds me of my favorite theater experience regarding horror films. When I went to see "Evil Dead" in it's first night/first theatrical release at a late night showing, The theater was packed. Right after the "Psychic card guessing" scene when the shit really hits the fan, the majority of the people started screaming and immediately left and/or were dragged by their significant others out of the theater. Myself and the buddy I went to see it with, and two other guys a few rows up were the only people left.

A decade latter, I started working with a guy who ended up being one of my closest friends ever since due to our mutual love of horror films. Recounting old stories, I found out he was one of the other two guys left in the theater that opening night.

Good times.

#3's Serial # of 36DD makes it more valuable though.

I've not posted at these boards in years (I've lurked for quite awhile, though), not since the Butane days, I think. But, after reading your rant, Alex, I had to come out of my little hole to make some remarks, particularly in regard to some of your final comments. I don't mean to argue or anything, I greatly sympathize and empathize, but...

Well, I have had my own experience of "audience thought it was a joke." The sad part was, it wasn't with a horror film, which is understandable and this rant (which was great, by the way) well explains the reasons for it happening with the genre - no, instead, this audience thought that The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly was a dumb, laughably bad piece of old filmmaking that warrants laughing at EVERYTHING and making fun of the music left and right. Yes, it has dated itself in parts, sometimes worse than some would expect. But these people were literally riffing the theme throughout the entire movie. Obviously stoned or drunk or both. And the house was packed full of not only these people, but just "hipster" types, with their neon-colored shirts, glasses they probably don't need, and some ridiculous fucking haircut that makes you want to puke it's so pretentious. (if you're into that, fine, but these people obviously are doing it for "social popularity" or to "look hip") These people didn't get the movie and more importantly, didn't want to. They took it in because it was "culture" that they felt would add some tidbit of trivia or something to help them get ahead in the social scene by being able to namedrop the following week (this was on a Saturday), "oh, so I caught that old western playing at the Cinema 21. Aren't I so with it these days?"

Now here's the kicker - this was at one of those arthouse type of theaters. While not all arthouse theaters are prone to this behavior, and it may just be that Northwest Portland just breeds pretentious fucktards, the point is, even then you'll find fucking nimrods who want to laugh and be in on some "joke."

Sometimes the arthouse theater experience helps people discover things. Seeing an audience first diss and bust out laughing at Master of the Flying Guillotine, then fall in love with it over the course of the Tournament sequence, and cheer at the finale - that was pretty cool. And The Wild Bunch definitely shut some jokers up.

So chances are, if you saw, say, The Beyond or Maniac (which is great in a theater), with a "good" audience at one of these venues, you'd see the audience go for it.

But I just want to throw out that sometimes even the arthouse theater can be a place for bull-shit.

Anyway. Alex - cool rant. And some of the other remarks here have been good to see. I'm glad that as usual, the horror "community" can empathize with something when one of the pack speaks up about some unfortunate event.

A funny story from a neighbor of mine who is 98, I believe. She saw the Tod Browning Classic Dracula on her wedding night. Her and her new husband had time to kill while waiting in NYC's Times Sqaure before getting on a train for Niagra Falls, their honeymoon spot. They decided to take in a movie and saw Dracula. She told me she was so terrfied that it "nearly ruined" her husband's wedding night. :-)

So I do think what is scary for one generation can become overexposed and softened before the next generation can sink their teeth into it.(hehehehhehehe, I had to)

That being said, Alex was dead-on in this rant. When watching a movie like this with horror fans, genre fans, whatever, you expect them to react in a more appreaciative way. Yes, the movie was made in the eighties and thus, they are wearing stupid shit.... get over it! Also, ANOES did not become a classic due to refined acting. I don't need a theater full of MST3K-bred idiots to repeatly make jokes so that I get that Nancy's mom is no Olivier. Believe me, I get it. Watch the movie for Wes Craven's incredible imagination, the birth of a horror icon, and Nancy's bare-back. And another thing , because it is a special screening and not a brand new movie doesn't mean you now have the right to sharpen your comedic timing and wit at the expense of everyone else. You are still in a movie theater. Shut the fuck up and respect the people who may want to watch the film with its original tool-free soundtrack.

Man, I saw The Good, The Bad and The Ugly play at the Ziegfeld here in New York, which is a great theatre... and I remember being peeved that in this massive theatre, with a chance to see an wonderful movie, a classic, on the big screen, the place was practically empty. It was still an awesome experience!

If I had your experience, I probably would have flipped. It really hurts my head to think about it.

Goddamn kids these days!

Weirdly enough, I've been having the opposite experience lately. I saw 1408 in the theater, and there was this gaggle of text-messaging teenage girls sitting in front of me, but once the movie started, they were terrified and screaming at every scare. It melted my cynical heart and actually enhanced my enjoyment of the film.

As a general rule, I avoid opening weekends and try to see most things at theaters with stadium seating. I also don't really mind if people laugh -- often times it's just a nervous reaction to being scared. Sometimes it's really just obnoxious, but I seem to be avoiding those experiences lately. I probably just jynxed myself.

It's pretty simple, really.

You saw these movies after they've been out for 20-something years with a theater full of hardcore fans who know every single scene and can recite every single line. Of course they're going to laugh at the "big" parts of the movie. It's a shared experience. Every single person in that theater knew exactly what to expect. Did you think they'd be scared of movies they grew up with? That they'd jump out of their seats for scenes they'd seen a hundred times?

Even if it was a genuinely scary new movie, laughter is a way of coping with fear. Anything I've seen in the theater that made people jump was immediately followed by laughter, because at the end of the day, everyone knows they're watching a movie, and it still scared them anyway, so they're laughing at themselves and getting relief out of it at the same time. And if that movie were to become a "classic", then twenty years later, audiences would laugh their way through the familiar parts, no matter how scared they were the first time they saw it.

And above all, horror is a ridiculous fucking genre. It's pure campy b-movie entertainment. A guy with a knife glove who travels through dreams should be taken seriously? Going to the movies is fun. I could understand getting pissed if people were laughing at a screening of Schindler's List, but slasher flicks aren't exaclty high art.

John Waters always said that an audience member puking during one of his films was a huge compliment.

Great article, though, and I totally agree with what everyone has been saying. However, it seems to me that it's not even limited to horror movies. Audiences are such shit these days to the point that I don't even like going to the movies anymore; if I really want to check something out I'll go late in the run at a time where I know I'll have the theater almost to myself.

But yeah, older horror movies are a tough sell to casual audiences in the same way that older foreign films are. In a class I had last year we watched Rashomon which is, of course, a brilliant film. And of course it got chuckles and giggles from people in the class that weren't used to watching something like that--the black and white, the stylised acting, etc. It takes work to watch something that you're not used to, work to actually put yourself in the mental mood to watch and appreciate the film on its terms. Unfortunately, most audiences are lazy, don't do the work, and tune out if something doesn't look and feel brand new.

[QUOTE=Scratch
And above all, horror is a ridiculous fucking genre. It's pure campy b-movie entertainment. A guy with a knife glove who travels through dreams should be taken seriously? Going to the movies is fun. I could understand getting pissed if people were laughing at a screening of Schindler's List, but slasher flicks aren't exaclty high art.[/QUOTE]

Horror is no more ridiculous than any other genre. In fact, I can find more truth and art in your average 80's slasher film than I can in almost every modern romatic comedy.

It is not pure camp and it is totally artistic. Watch Romero's Dead Trilogy for character and social commentary, Argento for cinematic creativity, Cronenberg for symbolism... there is so much art in horror, it is scary. It is too bad people like you tend to simplify and totally miss everything beneath the surface.