HorrorMovieFans.com

Jason wrote:Should The Exorcist be considered a horror film?

Yes. Not even just for the supernatural element. All the drama is based on the horror and trauma going on, it's the basis for the plot. So yes, horror. Don't sell out on us and start using "horror" like it's a dirty word for prestige pictures

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:Should The Exorcist be considered a horror film?

what would push it out of the genre, for you?

I don't know. It definitely feels like it's closer to the line, though. Some people consider Seven and Silence of the Lambs to be horror. I probably wouldn't put either of those there. I think the Exorcist is more horror than the other two, though. So I'm definitely leaning horror with the Exorcist.

zombie wrote:https://www.ranker.com/list/what-your-f ... n-breeding

as a horror fan, do you find yourself to be intellectual and reckless (or defiant) ?

Seems like a load of bullshit. I am neither an intellectual nor reckless. I am also not an extrovert, which is mentioned in the blurb. I'm also a huge fantasy nerd. According to the article, I should be good at "retaining information". I can't remember simple fucking words half the time. Of course, I may be an outlier due to my unstable mental health, but generalities such as this tend to be nonsense.

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Jason wrote:Should The Exorcist be considered a horror film?

Yes. Not even just for the supernatural element. All the drama is based on the horror and trauma going on, it's the basis for the plot. So yes, horror. Don't sell out on us and start using "horror" like it's a dirty word for prestige pictures

I feel like the demon being a clear character in the movie makes it horror. If they danced around the idea that was only in her head for the whole movie, it would cease to be horror.

I read that the original score for The Exorcist was thought to be too scary for audiences, so Friedkin tossed them out, literally in a dumpster.

Jason wrote:Should The Exorcist be considered a horror film?

The older I get, the more I get like mikey, and question whether or not a film is horror. There are plenty I'd say aren't horror now, that I would have easily labeled horror ten years ago. That said, the Exorcist is horror. It may not be the only genre involved, but it's definitely the one leading the story.

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:Should The Exorcist be considered a horror film?

what would push it out of the genre, for you?

I don't know. It definitely feels like it's closer to the line, though. Some people consider Seven and Silence of the Lambs to be horror. I probably wouldn't put either of those there. I think the Exorcist is more horror than the other two, though. So I'm definitely leaning horror with the Exorcist.

well, as someone who considers both of those other films to be horror, i feel a little bit slighted.

the exorcist definitely feels like a film that intended to scare the audience, above everything else.

how many other movies do you have to call into question, if you are on the fence on the exorcist?

Jason wrote:

DancesWithWerewolves wrote:

Jason wrote:Should The Exorcist be considered a horror film?

Yes. Not even just for the supernatural element. All the drama is based on the horror and trauma going on, it's the basis for the plot. So yes, horror. Don't sell out on us and start using "horror" like it's a dirty word for prestige pictures

I feel like the demon being a clear character in the movie makes it horror. If they danced around the idea that was only in her head for the whole movie, it would cease to be horror.

I read that the original score for The Exorcist was thought to be too scary for audiences, so Friedkin tossed them out, literally in a dumpster.

Nah, I'd still feel it towards a horror if they pulled the "all in the head" thing. I would feel cheated, and pissed, but I still would label it horror.

I know Billy Friedkin was not keen to call it horror, but he was one of those thinking the word was as dirty as porn. It was like, if it's labeled as horror, it wouldn't be taken seriously.

zombie wrote:how many other movies do you have to call into question, if you are on the fence on the exorcist?

Those were the only two I could think of that I wouldn't consider horror.

Also why I'm cool about Jonathan Demme, because he had no qualms admitting Silence of the Lambs as horror lol. But he came from the Roger Corman universe, so he didn't see it as a dirty word.

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:how many other movies do you have to call into question, if you are on the fence on the exorcist?

Those were the only two I could think of that I wouldn't consider horror.

the main movie that i struggle with, knowing some consider it to be horror, is wait until dark.

The older I get, the more lenient I guess I am. I find it incredibly silly to keep micro-slicing shit. Metal fans really burned that for me over the years.

Ancient peoples especially pregnant women would wear Pazuzu symbols because of their fear of an even more dangerous demon Lamashtu. Lamashtu fed on newborns but was afraid of Pazuzu

Demonology is pretty interesting stuff I would like to read some books on the subject

more discussion about horror themes and tropes, please? we can debate and discuss other things into the ground. bet we could have a lot more fun discussing horror film into the ground!

Ranking criteria for a top 100 horror list...

Jason wrote:Ranking criteria for a top 100 horror list...

that is so personal to the horror fan doing the ranking. what is the way into a discussion?

I just want criteria ideas thrown at me. I wanna make one while I have time, but don't know how to begin to rank.

well, take it on personal enjoyment and interest in the film. do a top 10. then 20. and so on? don't let the differences in execution and intent, between films, hold you up?

zombie wrote:well, take it on personal enjoyment and interest in the film. do a top 10. then 20. and so on? don't let the differences in execution and intent, between films, hold you up?

I don't know how. :p