#61
| ||||
| ||||
I have problems understanding how people can be "scared" by a film too. "Disturbed", yes, "chilled", perhaps, but scared? Don't get it. Not since I was about 10 at any rate. So, I wonder if this is connected to me finding Insidious a hollow and boring bit of fluff? |
#62
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
I don't normally scare easily but Insidious scared me a few times, along with REC and Paranormal Activity The ability for a film to make you jump by something appearing or a loud noise when you're feeling unsettled is called a 'scare' in my eyes
__________________ A Night of living terror led to a Dawn of false hope but nothing before will prepare you for the darkest Day the world has ever known Check out my wife and I's new travel blog www.wepackedourbags.com My entire Blu Collection for sale: https://www.cult-labs.com/forums/dvd...tion-sale.html |
#63
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
But that reaction to films like screaming or hiding behind cushions is something I do not understand in adults. The Daleks made me hide behind the sofa as a child, but I have not felt that feeling at TV or cinema since then. |
#64
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
Although to be honest all three of the previous films I mentioned scared me too in the sense that I felt very uncomfortable, hot and sweaty and felt genuinely scared.
__________________ A Night of living terror led to a Dawn of false hope but nothing before will prepare you for the darkest Day the world has ever known Check out my wife and I's new travel blog www.wepackedourbags.com My entire Blu Collection for sale: https://www.cult-labs.com/forums/dvd...tion-sale.html |
#65
| ||||
| ||||
Of course films have the power to scare. And of course there are those that don't have any fear to this sort of cinema, just as some veiwers don't laugh at comedy, regardless of how funny the film is. As for 'jumps' there weren't many times in insidious where 'jumps' were used, the window scene with the dancing boy, the loft scene, the photgraphs of the lady in black all were scary but none of them were about jumps. However all horrors try to scare at some level because thats the point, a horror movie that doesn't scare or unseattle is a comedy that doesn't make us laugh. Pointless. And everything from Halloween to Ratman has jumps in it. It's not a bad thing, but it has been over used in recent films. Insidious worked personally for me because it stayed with me long after the film was over. I didn't remember jumps. I remember being unseattled by the idea, by the voice on the babymonitor and by window scene. And lets not forget the scene were the camera slowly moves to the window, and nothing happens. The directors said they were infulenced by Argento's colour used and by films that didn't relay on jumps. I think they nailed it. |
#66
| |||
| |||
Quote:
|
#67
| ||||
| ||||
Watched this on BD last night and thought it was excellent. I haven't 'jumped' so many times in ages! It was very refreshing to see a movie that tried to scare you rather than gross you out. One of my favourite horrors of recent years. |
#68
| |||
| |||
Quote:
Imo the thing is, these days there's nothing that can't be shown with PC power and savvy cinemagoers know this. Therefore, when a horror film arrives which requires a cerebral approach over a visceral one then some spectators may well complain "Aw, the filmmakers mustn't have had the budget for proper FX." and the end result could potentially be disappointment for the viewer. Whether it's for the best or the worse, in cinemas CGI rules these days and i think it's what many or most audience members expect. Sad but most definitely true and a most bitter pill to swallow. I'm not exactly enamoured with this situation either believe me, but it is a fact. However, admittedly i do intend to give Insidious a chance to send the shivers up my spine sooner or later once the price comes down.
__________________ When the going gets tough the tough take the law into their own hands. |
#69
| |||
| |||
Quote:
Graphic violence can certainly get an audience reaction and will engage some people, but I'm disappointed that lots of directors seem to think they're scaring someone when they're just staging violence. As an old example, I thought the original Nightmare on Elm Street was nowhere near as scary as it could have been because it showed too much, and the violence in some cases (e.g. Johnny Depp's demise) destroyed any atmosphere of dread. Last edited by TyneBridges; 23rd October 2011 at 11:17 AM. |
#70
| |||
| |||
Quote:
The less-is-more element in TED refers to the film's 'Forest (wood, tree take your pick!) Demon'. We have plentiful POV shots of the relevant evildoer but we never actually catch sight of the creature during the movie's duration. The audience relys on Sam Raimi's legendary 'Shakey-Cam' footage and those unnerving demonic sound FX. Imo this approach appears to work in TED's favour. We see less of the forest's floating entity and i think such elusiveness makes the movie more suspenseful and heightens the horror. Just my two cents for what it's worth. Jaws plays the same game as we don't get a good look at the marauding seabound predator during the film's first half. Once again, the viewer's imagination takes over and seems to fill the 'Shark isn't working' gaps quite nicely.
__________________ When the going gets tough the tough take the law into their own hands. Last edited by Splatterdragon73; 25th October 2011 at 01:01 PM. |
Like this? Share it using the links below! |
| |