New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wes Craven

post #1 of 18
2/26/05 at 4:41am
Thread Starter 
Why is the man given a "Master of Horror"-esque title and generally included among the genre's best directors?

Sure we have four "classics":
- The Last House On The Left
- The Hills Have Eyes
- A Nightmare On Elm Street
- Scream (all opinions aside, it is a landmark horror film)

And we have a couple other good/decent efforts:
- The Serpent & The Rainbow
- The People Under The Stairs
- New Nightmare
- Swamp Thing
- Scream 2


But then there's this wretched bunch...
- Stranger In Our House
- Deadly Blessing
- Invitation To Hell
- Chiller
- The Hills Have Eyes Part 2
- Casebusters
- Deadly Friend
- Shocker (although this does have a mild following)
- Night Visions
- Vampire In Brooklyn
- Scream 3
- Cursed


He (like Tobe Hooper) has given us some good ones over the years, but on the whole his works are horrible. I look at Cursed initially and am surprised at how dumb and awful the film is coming from someone like Craven. But then when you think about it more thoroughly and glance at the man's filmography, is it REALLY all that surprising? We all should have seen this coming from the day the project was announced, way before all of the later production problems. It also really makes one look upon his upcoming August release, Red Eye, very cautiously.
Reply
post #2 of 18
2/26/05 at 5:15am
Quite honestly, LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is a lame rip off of Bergman's VIRGIN SPRING with laughable acting, HILLS HAVE EYES, on a recent viewing, didn't hold up nearly as well as I recall and felt like a made-for-TV movie, and SCREAM was the horror film equivilant to a band like Creed or Hootie and the Blowfish ...

Which leaves NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET, a decent 80s horror film, nothing more, and SERPENT AND THE RAINBOW which, like so many of his other films, hasn't aged too well ...

PEOPLE UNDER THE STAIRS heads the next phase of the list of films that range from bad to embarrassing ....

Wes Craven, you are found GUILTY in The Royal Court Of Elmie . . . You are sentenced to death by sloppy penis ... May the beating begin . . .

.

.

.
Reply
post #3 of 18
2/26/05 at 7:07am
Some comments of mine in another post that apply to this subject:

I'll step in and try to defend some of the movies on that list . . .

Summer of Fear (aka Strangers in Our House), Chiller, and Invitation to Hell were TV movies, if I'm not misaken. They shouldn't be compared to A Nightmare on Elm Street or Scream. I haven't seen Invitation to Hell, but I've seen those other two TV movies; and for TV movies, they're not bad. Not great, but not bad. They're simply average. (Note: Night Visions was TV work, too, but I haven't seen it . . .)

I'm only vaguely remembering Vampire in Brooklyn, but I seem to remember it being more comedy that horror. I don't think Casebusters is really horror, either.

I've been meaning to see Deadly Friend And Deadly Blessing, so I cannot comment on them. As for Shocker, it was certainly a misfire. I personally enjoyed it as an interesting rip-off of his own A Nightmare on Elm Street. It's a fun "B" movie, but I'm biased because I grew up with--and loved-- A Nightmare on Elm Street, and I'll always give Craven at least a chance because of it. Now, to Cursed: I saw it and I didn't like it. I laughed at some dumb things here and there. Although it wasn't good, it wasn't painful for me to watch. (Maybe that's because I saw it right after seeing Boogeyman, which was torture.)

I look at Craven's The Last House on the Left, The Hills Have Eyes, A Nightmare on Elm Street, New Nightmare, and Scream (the first one is good), and I cannot help but at least wish for the best for his movies and give them a chance. You cannot deny his impact. Compared to a lot of other directors in horror, he can be included as being a "masster of terror." At least at one time . . . and, people, it's possible he can make a good horror movie again--New Nightmare being an example.
__________________
Reply
post #4 of 18
2/26/05 at 7:15am
One more thing . . . don't completely blame Cursed on Craven. To hear people in the past give Dimension a lot of hell for how they deal with horror films, and with good reason, and especially considering how much the studio might have effected this one, it isn't fair to place the blame completely on the director. It's troubling that the script for a fairly large budget movie (compared to indies) wasn't ready by the time shooting began.
Reply
post #5 of 18
2/26/05 at 2:23pm
Quote:
But then there's this wretched bunch...
- Stranger In Our House
- Deadly Blessing
- Invitation To Hell
- Chiller
- The Hills Have Eyes Part 2
- Casebusters
- Deadly Friend
- Shocker (although this does have a mild following)
- Night Visions
- Vampire In Brooklyn
- Scream 3
- Cursed


Dont forget about Mind Ripper!
Reply
post #6 of 18
2/26/05 at 3:23pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Writhing Walt
One more thing . . . don't completely blame Cursed on Craven. To hear people in the past give Dimension a lot of hell for how they deal with horror films, and with good reason, and especially considering how much the studio might have effected this one, it isn't fair to place the blame completely on the director. It's troubling that the script for a fairly large budget movie (compared to indies) wasn't ready by the time shooting began.
True, that definitely applies for the first version of the film. But the production was completely shut down so that Craven and Williamson (who is a BIG part of the blame) could rewrite the whole thing. Granted we don't know how much time they were given, but still. He did always have the option of saying "Alright Bob and Harvey, either give me more time or I'll quit". From what I gather, he was only doing Cursed so they would let him do Pulse (which he is no longer doing anyway). Miramax kept shooting down his ideas for another film for them (Pulse, American McGee's Alice) and either he or they decided to pair him up with Williamson on a werewolf project in an effort the "recapture the magic" of Scream.

Don't get me wrong, I do not hate the man at all and I absolutely love some of his films. We Craven is on, he is ON. You are also perfectly right in saying that he has made a huge impact on the genre, and I do give all of his films a chance. I'm not one to usually judge a film before it is released. I was just pointing out the fact that TV movies or not (and you CAN make wonderful TV movies), his output as a whole isn't that great. It seems that when his heart is completely in a project, it turns out very well. I'm guessing that at least halfway through the filming of the second version of Cursed, he stopped caring. I guess I really can't blame him for that, because I would have too. The whole project is a mess. He isn't a bad director, he has just made some really bad and/or odd choices in his career (same goes, for Tobe Hooper). Some films he has even admitted to not caring about at all (Hills Have Eyes Part 2). Cursed has just caused me to re-evaluate my anticipation for future Craven projects. When one looks at the works of other horror greats (Carpenter, Romero, Cronenberg), while they each have a couple of rotten apples in the bunch, as a whole their filmographies stack up better. Will I be looking forward to future Craven projects? Of course, but somewhat cautiously at the same time. Will he ever make another great horror film? Probably, at least one can hope.
Reply
post #7 of 18
2/26/05 at 3:26pm
Landmark or not, SCREAM is still shite.

I think A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET is his only real great movie. THE HILLS HAVE EYES is still a pretty fun and savage movie, but I can't stand THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT.
Reply
post #8 of 18
2/27/05 at 11:52am
now that I really think about it....Craven really wasn't that good of a director....and has only gotten worse......unlike Carpenter, who was a great director, then turned to shit.........I believe they should both retire
Reply
post #9 of 18
2/27/05 at 5:08pm
Wes Craven was never a Master of horror imo and really hasn't ever done anything that ever interested me much. I hate Nightmare on Elmstreet. He's too mainstream to be a horror maistro. He'll probably do very well in this age of the PG-13 horror movie though. Not that he'll make anything worthwhile.

John Carpenter should not be brought into this discussion. He is the Prince of Darkness and noone can take that title away from him. I hope he makes many more movies and hope to hear something about him soon.
Reply
post #10 of 18
2/27/05 at 10:13pm
For Wes I liked Nightmare on Elm Street and Deadly Friend and Sceam. Every director has had some bad movies but still he has come up with some good ones.
Nightmare on Elm Street
Deadly Friend
Don't Look Down
WishMaster (1)
Swamp Thing
Freddy vs Jason(Producer)
Scream 1 & 3


This Cursed movie does not look intresting to me, for some reason it's going to look like crap. I see the preview and shake my head on how bad it's going to be. Well just have to wait to see posts on people who went to see it. You know you are going to get both sides, so only way is going to see it for yourself but for me I will wait for a rental.
Reply
post #11 of 18
8/29/05 at 2:30am
I thought the first two SCREAM films were inventive, lively, intelligent portraits of the very genre they successfully spoofed.

With the right cast and script, Wes Craven is more than capable of churning out a gem.

He's also been on auto-pilot more times than I can remember, which is a shame, since his talents as a director still seep through today. RED EYE is one of his best.
Reply
post #12 of 18
8/29/05 at 7:33pm
Scream 1 great flick and kept you wondering what was going on in the movie.

Scream 2 (i thought) Crap utter Crap. I thought this one sucked in the triology

Scream 3 was alot better then 2 and had some cool death scenes as well.
Reply
post #13 of 18
8/29/05 at 10:04pm
I personally think he had one really good film (Nightmare on Elm St.) and four pretty good films (Serpent and the Rainbow, The Hills Have Eyes, The Last House on the Left and People Under the Stairs.

The rest of his films start going down from the there.

The Scream movies were terrible imo. And Deadly Friend....damn, it's hard to admit that I spent money on that one in the theaters.
Reply
post #14 of 18
8/29/05 at 10:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randolph Carter
Dont forget about Mind Ripper!

Or Music of the Heart!
Reply
post #15 of 18
8/29/05 at 11:22pm
I haven't seen MUSIC OF THE HEART, but I've read that Meryl Streep gives an amazing performance.

For such a cross-changing genre, it seems like Wes Craven pulled off the film admirably. At least the film didn't get critically-lambasted:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/music_of_the_heart/
Reply
post #16 of 18
9/1/05 at 10:49am
Man, if anything, RED EYE proves that the guy is still relevant and he can still shoot. RED EYE, faults aside, is the work of a pro behind the camera, efficient, crisp filmmaking.

Wes Craven is a master, yo. NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET is instant free pass, if anything else.
Reply
post #17 of 18
9/1/05 at 11:30am
Yeah I'll give Craven a chance on anything because of Nightmare on Elm Street, but if you really think about it - how much of Nightmare's appeal was because of Craven and how much of it was because of Robert Englund? This may be a discussion for another thread but how much credit should be given to Craven for Nightmare? Just curious what everyone else thought about that.
Reply
post #18 of 18
9/1/05 at 11:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler
Yeah I'll give Craven a chance on anything because of Nightmare on Elm Street, but if you really think about it - how much of Nightmare's appeal was because of Craven and how much of it was because of Robert Englund? This may be a discussion for another thread but how much credit should be given to Craven for Nightmare? Just curious what everyone else thought about that.
I think the original ELM STREET is pure genius. The way it's shot, lit, stylized...the tension that Craven so seamlessly melds...the line between reality and fantasy is blurred with pure aplomb and affection.

So to answer your question, I believe the film's success has EVERYTHING to do with Craven. Don't get me wrong, Robert Englund does a fantastic portrayal of a demented demon, but the environment and atmosphere he's got as a playground to work in is all Wes Craven's doing.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Creature Corner Main