HorrorMovieFans.com

you're saying that halloween had less influence than amityville horror?

i think insidious and the conjuring (as franchises) are probably the most influential recently. saw, paranormal activity, final destination all seemed to do pretty good box office-wise. i don't know which metric you wanna use, as you mentioned both influence and box office.

zombie wrote:so, then there's no problem, in comparison to superhero movies. let the general public do what they want, we know what the best genre is.

also the 2000s and 2010s have quite a few good/great flicks. wanting everything for all time to live up to the 70s and 80s is a little bit far fetched.

Perhaps if the general public were more like us, horror would still be great...

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:so, then there's no problem, in comparison to superhero movies. let the general public do what they want, we know what the best genre is.

also the 2000s and 2010s have quite a few good/great flicks. wanting everything for all time to live up to the 70s and 80s is a little bit far fetched.

Perhaps if the general public were more like us, horror would still be great...

i can name a lot of greats from the past 17 years. (as that is the span that the superhero movie started to become what it is today)

zombie wrote:you're saying that halloween had less influence than amityville horror?

i think insidious and the conjuring (as franchises) are probably the most influential recently. saw, paranormal activity, final destination all seemed to do pretty good box office-wise. i don't know which metric you wanna use, as you mentioned both influence and box office.

Amityville was a HUGE mainstream hit. Halloween itself was a big hit, but Amityville damn near doubled it just a year later.

Halloween's influence was felt in a different way, in that the formula was easier to replicate, so it spawned more imitators, who in turn had varying levels of success.

In that moment in time, Halloween was the equivalent of Get Out. Amityville fits between Psycho and Silence of the Lambs/Alien.

Think about that for a minute. Huge movie.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you're saying that halloween had less influence than amityville horror?

i think insidious and the conjuring (as franchises) are probably the most influential recently. saw, paranormal activity, final destination all seemed to do pretty good box office-wise. i don't know which metric you wanna use, as you mentioned both influence and box office.

Amityville was a HUGE mainstream hit. Halloween itself was a big hit, but Amityville damn near doubled it just a year later.

Halloween's influence was felt in a different way, in that the formula was easier to replicate, so it spawned more imitators, who in turn had varying levels of success.

so, you're talking boxoffice with halloween and amityville? and that supernatural ghost flicks are very easy to replicate as well. i would argue that there are more ghost supernatural movies than slashers too. but still halloween is more influential as a film. no one replicated amityville horror (outside of the sequels and remake), even though ghost films are more numerous than slasher movies.

Foo wrote:In that moment in time, Halloween was the equivalent of Get Out. Amityville fits between Psycho and Silence of the Lambs/Alien.

Think about that for a minute. Huge movie.

i think you're really overselling the influence of amityville. (or underselling halloween maybe)

quick question, how many of you would include halloween in a top 10-20 horror films? how many would include amityville horror in that same span of ranking?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you're saying that halloween had less influence than amityville horror?

i think insidious and the conjuring (as franchises) are probably the most influential recently. saw, paranormal activity, final destination all seemed to do pretty good box office-wise. i don't know which metric you wanna use, as you mentioned both influence and box office.

Amityville was a HUGE mainstream hit. Halloween itself was a big hit, but Amityville damn near doubled it just a year later.

Halloween's influence was felt in a different way, in that the formula was easier to replicate, so it spawned more imitators, who in turn had varying levels of success.

so, you're talking boxoffice with halloween and amityville? and that supernatural ghost flicks are very easy to replicate as well. i would argue that there are more ghost supernatural movies than slashers too. but still halloween is more influential as a film. no one replicated amityville horror (outside of the sequels and remake), even though ghost films are more numerous than slasher movies.

Again, the movie going public saw Amityville at a much greater clip. Like 80% more. Amityville was bigger than Silence of the Lambs in its time. If you make a big 3, it Is The Exorcist, Jaws, and Psycho. Amityville is a clear cut number 4, and considering the tone of Jaws, some might kick it from pure horror,

I am pretty sure putting a guy in a mask with a knife is about as easy technically as it gets. Filming haunted house stories are harder than you think, because the house itself is a character and becomes an expensive set piece, plus effects are likely to be more complicated. Especially back then, it was much harder with real film.

Obviously Amityville aged like shit. Not arguing it is better or I like it more, but it was a huge movie for straight horror.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you're saying that halloween had less influence than amityville horror?

i think insidious and the conjuring (as franchises) are probably the most influential recently. saw, paranormal activity, final destination all seemed to do pretty good box office-wise. i don't know which metric you wanna use, as you mentioned both influence and box office.

Amityville was a HUGE mainstream hit. Halloween itself was a big hit, but Amityville damn near doubled it just a year later.

Halloween's influence was felt in a different way, in that the formula was easier to replicate, so it spawned more imitators, who in turn had varying levels of success.

so, you're talking boxoffice with halloween and amityville? and that supernatural ghost flicks are very easy to replicate as well. i would argue that there are more ghost supernatural movies than slashers too. but still halloween is more influential as a film. no one replicated amityville horror (outside of the sequels and remake), even though ghost films are more numerous than slasher movies.

Again, the movie going public saw Amityville at a much greater clip. Like 80% more. Amityville was bigger than Silence of the Lambs in its time. If you make a big 3, it Is The Exorcist, Jaws, and Psycho. Amityville is a clear cut number 4, and considering the tone of Jaws, some might kick it from pure horror,

I am pretty sure putting a guy in a mask with a knife is about as easy technically as it gets. Filming haunted house stories are harder than you think, because the house itself is a character and becomes an expensive set piece, plus effects are likely to be more complicated. Especially back then, it was much harder with real film.

Obviously Amityville aged like shit. Not arguing it is better or I like it more, but it was a huge movie for straight horror.

i don't think box office take necessarily means influential. titanic was the highest grossing for a long time. but it wasn't really influential as a film.

yeah, putting a guy in a mask and giving him a knife is easier. ghost/haunting movies are more numerous than slasher movies, regardless.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:you're saying that halloween had less influence than amityville horror?

i think insidious and the conjuring (as franchises) are probably the most influential recently. saw, paranormal activity, final destination all seemed to do pretty good box office-wise. i don't know which metric you wanna use, as you mentioned both influence and box office.

Amityville was a HUGE mainstream hit. Halloween itself was a big hit, but Amityville damn near doubled it just a year later.

Halloween's influence was felt in a different way, in that the formula was easier to replicate, so it spawned more imitators, who in turn had varying levels of success.

so, you're talking boxoffice with halloween and amityville? and that supernatural ghost flicks are very easy to replicate as well. i would argue that there are more ghost supernatural movies than slashers too. but still halloween is more influential as a film. no one replicated amityville horror (outside of the sequels and remake), even though ghost films are more numerous than slasher movies.

Again, the movie going public saw Amityville at a much greater clip. Like 80% more. Amityville was bigger than Silence of the Lambs in its time. If you make a big 3, it Is The Exorcist, Jaws, and Psycho. Amityville is a clear cut number 4, and considering the tone of Jaws, some might kick it from pure horror,

I am pretty sure putting a guy in a mask with a knife is about as easy technically as it gets. Filming haunted house stories are harder than you think, because the house itself is a character and becomes an expensive set piece, plus effects are likely to be more complicated. Especially back then, it was much harder with real film.

Obviously Amityville aged like shit. Not arguing it is better or I like it more, but it was a huge movie for straight horror.

i don't think box office take necessarily means influential. titanic was the highest grossing for a long time. but it wasn't really influential as a film.

yeah, putting a guy in a mask and giving him a knife is easier. ghost/haunting movies are more numerous than slasher movies, regardless.

Do you think movie studios make movies because they want to make money or because they want to influence others on how to make movies? Do you think theaters show movies to get the most people into the theaters or to expose people to fine art?

Foo wrote:
Do you think movie studios make movies because they want to make money or because they want to influence others on how to make movies? Do you think theaters show movies to get the most people into the theaters or to expose people to fine art?

you specifically said that amityville horror was more influential than halloween. if you want to argue more profitable at it's time, i'll agree with you.

And yes, from a business perspective, titanic was a highly influential film. It's success greenlit many other films that would not have been greenlit had it flopped or just broke even.

Look at Cameron and DiCaprio. Look at any historical film that uses Titanic as part of it's pitch that such movies can be marketed. Being able to point to that film makes a big selling point.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Do you think movie studios make movies because they want to make money or because they want to influence others on how to make movies? Do you think theaters show movies to get the most people into the theaters or to expose people to fine art?

you specifically said that amityville horror was more influential than halloween. if you want to argue more profitable at it's time, i'll agree with you.

Foo wrote:Looking at box office trends, you can kinda separate movies by tiers in terms of influence, It has been a long long time since horror has had a top tier influencer. For instance, Jaws and The Exorcist were cultural phenomenons. Amityville Horror was like Tier 2. Halloween was like Tier 2.5 or 3.

I suppose Split or Get Out would be the newest influencers in the genre, and they are probably Tier 3.

Now I feel like I should make an Amityville one of these.

The conversation was essentially a rehash of "Why isn't the horror we like in theaters?". My answer was that the horror we like is not a needle mover at the box office. The public does not show enough interest to make slashers and put them in theaters.

Also, saying Halloween is a Tier 2.5 or 3 is not disrespecting it. That is still influential from a business standpoint. F13 was probably tier 4 and still spawned theatrical imitators.

Jason wrote:Now I feel like I should make an Amityville one of these.

That is awesome. Amityville would probably be as boring as the movies are. :p

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:
Do you think movie studios make movies because they want to make money or because they want to influence others on how to make movies? Do you think theaters show movies to get the most people into the theaters or to expose people to fine art?

you specifically said that amityville horror was more influential than halloween. if you want to argue more profitable at it's time, i'll agree with you.

Foo wrote:Looking at box office trends, you can kinda separate movies by tiers in terms of influence, It has been a long long time since horror has had a top tier influencer. For instance, Jaws and The Exorcist were cultural phenomenons. Amityville Horror was like Tier 2. Halloween was like Tier 2.5 or 3.

I suppose Split or Get Out would be the newest influencers in the genre, and they are probably Tier 3.

fair enough. paranormal activity, saw, final destination, scream, insidious, the conjuring. all did very well at the box office. but i would, personally, separate box office take and influence as a movie. and i think that if you're gonna go by box office, you should better than what you chose.


http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/mo ... -1.3245901 <-- according to newsday the 2000s and 2010s did pretty decent. and no amityville (or halloween).

Foo wrote:The conversation was essentially a rehash of "Why isn't the horror we like in theaters?". My answer was that the horror we like is not a needle mover at the box office. The public does not show enough interest to make slashers and put them in theaters.

Also, saying Halloween is a Tier 2.5 or 3 is not disrespecting it. That is still influential from a business standpoint. F13 was probably tier 4 and still spawned theatrical imitators.

then you're ignoring the success of movies from the 2000s and 2010s to try to make your point about horror in theaters.

https://wheresthejump.com/highest-gross ... ox-office/

How many straight horrors did more than Amityville? Again, think about that for a moment. A horror movie that people are seeing in those kind of numbers. I am 40 and there is not one in my lifetime that more people saw in theaters.

For Halloween, there have been quite a few at that level.