Underrated Horror Films?

[thenammagazine]

You are a very cynical person aren't you? Always looking for the "underhanded" in everyone.

If the makers of 28 Days Later or Quarantine were only interested in ridding the coattails of what you bless with the label "zombie movie" they could have chosen to write them as undead, but that would have made for a less interesting story. The illness part of the story is part of what drives the plot, but the antagonists are still essentially zombies for the reasons I have already stated.

Your saying "agree to disagree" does nothing to address my points about the various origin stories for vampires, or the fact that originally zombies in movies WERE NOT UNDEAD!!!

The false marketing was admitted to as "necessary" to gain fandom. A neat little comparison. I think Quarantine was change from the original conception of demon possession to illness to capitalize on some of the same hype as 28 Days.

As for vampires, don't get me started. That entire genre has been raped and completely diluted with trash like Twilight and the numerous "EMO" television crap. As for zombies, I hear ya. And that's a yes and no. 1936's Dead Man Walking, starring Boris Karloff was one of the first to feature a "zombie" as a man who was hung and came back to life to avenge his death. It's also the first mention of a "headshot" being the means to kill the undead. Though Romero's version would up the anny to a completely new level and really "define" the modern definition of the term "zombie."

 

[karamazov80]

Well in the uk anything that is not mainstream is closetted off and becomes a cult classic.
I've seen naked lunch a long time ago and liked it but did'nt understand it at all,liked the dirtyness of it but way too abstract for me at the time.

You should re-watch it. The older you are, the better it gets IMO. It is a bit out there, as you would expect when you mix Beat poets with Cronenberg, but a very interesting film. Unsettling in many ways, but again, that's par for the course with this guy.

 

[Maglor]

As for zombies, I hear ya. And that's a yes and no. 1936's Dead Man Walking, starring Boris Karloff was one of the first to feature a "zombie" as a man who was hung and came back to life to avenge his death. It's also the first mention of a "headshot" being the means to kill the undead. Though Romero's version would up the anny to a completely new level and really "define" the modern definition of the term "zombie."

Never heard of that one, and had a little trouble looking it yp as the name I found it under was The Walking Dead.

John Elman (Boris Karloff) has been framed for murder by a gang of racketeers. He is unfairly tried and despite the fact that his innocence has been proven, he is sent to the electric chair and executed. But Dr. Evan Beaumont (Edmund Gwenn) retrieves his dead body and revives it, as part of his experiments to reanimate a dead body.

Looks like an interesting, movie but without seeing it, I'm not sure I would classify it as a "zombie movie."

Are we to say that all movies that feature the re-animating of the dead are zombie movies? Would Frankenstein be a zombie movie.

Again, I am less concerned with origin (dead coming to life) than behavior. If the antagonists behave like a mindless zombie than, for me, it's a zombie movie.

As for vampires, don't get me started. That entire genre has been raped and completely diluted with trash like Twilight and the numerous "EMO" television crap.

What about Daybreakers? Never saw it. What was the Vampire origin in that one?

Didn't get the impression it was "emo".

 

[thenammagazine]

Are we to say that all movies that feature the re-animating of the dead are zombie movies? Would Frankenstein be a zombie movie.

I would say absolutely. Same with the later 13th films. The "flesh eating tendencies" is a subgenre.

 

[Maglor]

Interesting. Then are debate is indeed a semantics debate.


For me mindlessness is a must. One exception I would make is Land of the Dead, where the zombies were starting to display some intelligence.

But language takes it out of the zombie category for me. Frankenstein's monster would therefore not be a zombie imo.

 

[thenammagazine]

Interesting. Then are debate is indeed a semantics debate.

For me mindlessness is a must. One exception I would make is Land of the Dead, where the zombies were starting to display some intelligence.

But language takes it out of the zombie category for me. Frankenstein's monster would therefore not be a zombie imo.

I see no difference between Bub and Frankenstein's monster other than, of course, diet and a higher level of speech and thought. One could argue that if Doc had had a bit more time with Bub, he very well could've been at the same level. Motor function was near identical

 

[ArmoredFoe]

People might hate on me, but Im going to say 30 days of night. I really love that as a vampire movie and yet I never really hear anyone talk about it. I always thought Fright Night was a good vamp movie also.

I'll also add the burning...fantastic slasher in my opinion but doesnt get any credit.

As for zombie flicks what about The nights of Terror aka Burial Ground, i love that zombie movie and yes while really corny just something about it is awesome to me and not to mention the awesome tit bite scene with that creepy kid man, lol. I'll also agree that Diary of the dead is way under rated. I liked it more than Land of the dead.

 

[thenammagazine]

People might hate on me, but Im going to say 30 days of night. I really love that as a vampire movie and yet I never really hear anyone talk about it. I always thought Fright Night was a good vamp movie also.

I'll also add the burning...fantastic slasher in my opinion but doesnt get any credit.

As for zombie flicks what about The nights of Terror aka Burial Ground, i love that zombie movie and yes while really corny just something about it is awesome to me and not to mention the awesome tit bite scene with that creepy kid man, lol. I'll also agree that Diary of the dead is way under rated. I liked it more than Land of the dead.

30 Days Night was a return to awesomeness for Vampires, but their awesomeness would be short lived and overshadowed by effeminate vampires who care about your feelings.

 

[Maglor]

I would say absolutely. Same with the later 13th films. The "flesh eating tendencies" is a subgenre.

Had this thought right after posting, but had to head out to work.

I agree that the "flesh eating tendencies" is a subgenre. Thus I don't think flesh eating is a requirement to be labeled a zombie. It really all has to do with intelegence and behavior.

You make a strong argument comparing Franks monster to Bub, but I still can't see Frankenstein as a zombie movie. I have always seen Frankenstein as sci-fi.

30 Days Night was a return to awesomeness for Vampires, but their awesomeness would be short lived and overshadowed by effeminate vampires who care about your feelings.

Just to be clear: I am not a fan of Twilight. But who's to say an author can't play with a genre, and do something unconventional with a horror archetype?

My favorite vampire movie is the remake of Nosferatu. A big part of the reason is that the Vampire in it is, although not friendly, a character you feel sympathy for.

 

[thenammagazine]

Had this thought right after posting, but had to head out to work.

I agree that the "flesh eating tendencies" is a subgenre. Thus I don't think flesh eating is a requirement to be labeled a zombie. It really all has to do with intelegence and behavior.

You make a strong argument comparing Franks monster to Bub, but I still can't see Frankenstein as a zombie movie. I have always seen Frankenstein as sci-fi.

I dunno, I've always classified Frankenstein as a monster movie with a subclass of undead/zombie. The great thing about the classics is they work on so many different levels, including, for it's time, SciFi.

Just to be clear: I am not a fan of Twilight. But who's to say an author can't play with a genre, and do something unconventional with a horror archetype?

Nobody's saying you can't. Unfortunately, IMO, overall, the vampire has turned from someone who's badass, using sexual prowess to entice his victims, into, say, the more modern preference of a "gay BFF."

 

[Maglor]

The great thing about the classics is they work on so many different levels, including, for it's time, SciFi.

Indeed.

 

[ArmoredFoe]

Nobody's saying you can't. Unfortunately, IMO, overall, the vampire has turned from someone who's badass, using sexual prowess to entice his victims, into, say, the more modern preference of a "gay BFF."

I totally agree, which is why Im not a huge vampire fan overall. Every film seems to showcase emo kids or go into the romantic goth vampire which I cant stand either. Which is why I love 30 days, it showed more demon like vampires and I also like that it gave them a back story such as the aspect of there language and such. Just fantastic, Im not hating on people who enjoy vampire flicks I just feel that the genre is over run with the run of the mill films set up for the more pop culture type vamp rather than the more demon like monster vamp...All though I do love Bram Stokers Dracula.

 

[thenammagazine]

I totally agree, which is why Im not a huge vampire fan overall. Every film seems to showcase emo kids or go into the romantic goth vampire which I cant stand either. Which is why I love 30 days, it showed more demon like vampires and I also like that it gave them a back story such as the aspect of there language and such. Just fantastic, Im not hating on people who enjoy vampire flicks I just feel that the genre is over run with the run of the mill films set up for the more pop culture type vamp rather than the more demon like monster vamp...All though I do love Bram Stokers Dracula.

30 Days put the "horror" back in the vampire genre. Too bad it was short lived.

 

[Maglor]

Again... any thoughts on Daybreakers?

 

[thenammagazine]

Again... any thoughts on Daybreakers?

Didn't see it in movie theatres when it came out and it's not on DVD yet so I don't know. First impressions are that it's in the vein of Blade 3, Vampires, etc..

 

[Maglor]

I got a kind of Matrix feel from the previews.
Seems like it uses a classic horror device to tell a sci-fi morality tale.

 

[LChinoz]

Just thought of two more:

Alice, Sweet Alice and Christine. Surprisingly I loved Christine when I saw it again (I originally thought it was so dumb). It is really underrated, and Keith Gordon was amazing!

 

[thenammagazine]

I got a kind of Matrix feel from the previews.
Seems like it uses a classic horror device to tell a sci-fi morality tale.

I kinda got that vibe too, hence the Blade 3 comparison. Unfortunately, it looks like it's relying too much on cliche which is probably one of the reasons there's little to no chat about it here.

Bright note, is that 30 Days of Night: Dark Days is in post, still scheduled for a 2010 release!

 

[ArmoredFoe]

As for Daybreakers, it looked ok, but I too got to much of the sci-fi vibe from it to take it as a serious vampire movie.

If Dark Days does come out this year that would be awesome. It will interesting to see what comes out around Halloween this year.

 

[fosing]

Again... any thoughts on Daybreakers?

more sci-fi than horror, IMO.

i barely remember if they had the agility, strength nor speed vampires poses. come to think of it...they were just blood sucking, gun wielding peeps that goes toasty with sunshine.