|
Post by kevin on Jun 20, 2018 9:32:03 GMT
Does anyone have a good explanation for the divisiveness of horror movies, especially the last years? It seems like most horror movies with fantastic reviews are slammed by many moviegoers, who say they are boring, slow etc. There is only a very select group of horror movies that get both audience & critical praise.
If you look at Metacritic and IMDb, there are actually only 3 horror movies since 2010 that have a Metacritic rating over 70 and an IMDb rating over 7.5. Those are A Quiet Place, Get Out & Train to Busan. But even among those movies the highest rated one, A Quiet Place, 'only' has a 7.9, which makes it the #92th highest rated movie since 2010. Just think about that. The most acclaimed horror movie of the decade isn't even in the top 90 movies of the decade. And it gets worse, a lot worse, when you look at many horror movies that received universal critical acclaim. Just look at the list below:
Hereditary - 87 MT - still reasonably high at IMDb, but now already at a 56% RT Audience The Babadook - 86 MT - 6.8 IMDb The Witch - 83 MT - 6.8 IMDb It Follows - 83 MT - 6.8 IMDb The Love Witch - 82 MT - 6.2 IMDb Annihilation - 79 MT - 7.0 IMDb It Comes At Night - 78 MT - 6.2 IMDb We Are What We Are - 71 MT - 5.9 IMDb
Only looking at Rotten Tomatoes percentages, the difference gets even bigger. Movies like We Are Still Here (95% critics, 48% audience) & Willow Creek (86% critics, 33% audience) have even bigger differences. I could go on and on, there are so many recent examples of this. Surpringly, a few of the only acclaimed movies with reasonably positive audience reviews are foreign language horror movies like A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night & The Wailing. What's also interesting to see is that most highly rated horror movies this decade on IMDb have Metacritic ratings between 60 and 70. For example I Saw the Devil (7.8 IMDb, 67 MT), Tucker and Dale vs Evil (7.6 IMDb, 65 MT), It (7.5 IMDb, 69 MT), The Conjuring (7.5 IMDb, 68 MT), The Conjuring 2 (7.4 IMDb, 65 MT), Split (7.3 IMDb, 62 MT).
So what is going on? What I see is that most movies with the highest audience ratings have Metacritic ratings between 60 and 70, indicating okay/generally positive reviews. This means that not many people may think they are amazing, but they're usually also safer movies than the ones that get more acclaim. They give the audience what they expect to get and while there may not be many people that love movies like that, there are also not many people that hate those kind of movies. That's why they get pretty good average IMDb ratings. Exceptions aside, most movies that get critical acclaim receive mixed to negative audience reception. Is it because we're living in the time of instant gratification and people don't like 'slow' (horror) movies anymore? Do people only think that fast-paced jumpscares equal true horror and reject everything that doesn't fit that description? Are directors not giving what the audience wants or expects to get? Or are they just bad movies?
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jun 20, 2018 9:40:13 GMT
I'm not a big horror fan so I will just comment on the only film of your list that I saw: The Witch.
I loved The Witch but I can understand why the movie was not that well received by the audiences. The movie is slow and it's horror comes from the creepy atmosphere instead of cheap jump scares. For the most part the film relies on a feeling of tension that is never released in a bombastic way and that might turn some people off. It's far more about the relationship of a family in the face of supernatural threat than the threat itself.
|
|
|
Post by theravenking on Jun 20, 2018 11:52:04 GMT
Well, The Babadook wasn't really a horror movie. It was a drama about a depressed mother masquerading as a scary movie. I can't believe Friedkin called it the scariest movie he had ever seen. I thought it was tedious, boring, at times unintentionally funny. Essie Davis' acting was so over-the-top I wasn't sure whether I was watching a parody. This is the sort of movie that only gets made so film students can have hour-long discussions about it afterwards.
The Witch had some great cinematopgraphy, but I was disappointed they didn't take us deeper into the woods. Almost the whole movie took place around the house and I really wanted them to explore the haunted forest.
It Follows was interesting, eerie, dreamlike, unsettling. I'm not sure whether the characters were deliberately kept so flat and vague, you barely got to know them, and I thought this took away from the effectiveness of the movie.
If you look at some horror classics like Rosemary's Baby or The Changeling, those really gave you food for thought and were genuinely scary as well, and I don't think any of these new critical darlings are on the same level. They are weird and slow and a bit too artsy for their own good. I think audiences can sense it, when the filmmakers have this elitist, intellectual air about them. It seems they are more interested in pleasing critics than the average audience member.
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Jun 25, 2018 13:14:39 GMT
I recently came across this list of A24 horror movies. I haven't heard of a few of these, probably because of the fact that they are limited releases and (as described in this thread) often have a bad word of mouth. I actually haven't seen that many A24 movies, horror or not, now that I think of it and I love almost every A24 movie I've seen so far. I looked at their list of movies and there seem to be many possible hidden gems by the looks of it. I should really catch up on them, they seem to be one of the best production companies around.
Movie / Rotten Tomatoes
2014 - 2015 Under the Skin - 84% Life After Beth - 43% Tusk - 42%
2016 The Witch - 91% Green Room - 90% The Monster - 80%
2017 - 2018 The Blackcoat's Daughter - 72% It Comes At Night - 88% The Killing of a Sacred Deer - 80% Hereditary - 90%
Upcoming movies (2018 - 2019) Slice The Lighthouse (by Robert Eggers) Bodies, Bodies, Bodies Midsommar (by Ari Aster) Climax
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 25, 2018 14:53:27 GMT
Clearly it's the studios paying off the film critics.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jun 25, 2018 16:35:37 GMT
Annihilation was horror? Either way it wasn't any good. Waste of a solid cast, too.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Jun 25, 2018 16:40:39 GMT
There are two kinds of horror fans. Fans who watch horror movies for fun and fans who watch hoping to see something that transcends the genre. As a horror snob I will tell you 99% of horror is superficial crap. We almost never get nice things. But the fans that just want fun dumb horror don't understand movies like The Witch. I'm not really a horror fan but I agree with this 100%. Most of the horror trailers I see are filled with lame CGI nonsense and mindless jump scares. I can only assume generic 'horror fans' want this every time out, hence the proliferation of these films. True aficionados will appreciate a film that aspires to something greater than simple torture porn or jump scares.
|
|
|
Post by darkknightofgotham on Jun 25, 2018 17:27:17 GMT
It Comes At Night got bad ratings from audiences because it wasn't actually a horror film.
They were mislead by the trailer thinking it was going to be about a monster coming at night, but that's not what they got.
It wasn't necessarily a bad film, but definitely a misleading one, which explains the bad ratings.
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Jun 25, 2018 21:49:11 GMT
Horror movies used to be the cheapest kind of film to make and the critics ignored them unless they were big studio ones (The Haunting) or socially relevant (Night of the Living Dead). So it was the most traditional and direct relationship between audiences and filmmakers.
These days all the so-called indie horror films are in fact made by the same corporate system. It's moving into the same direction that visual art did when abstract took over and the critics were paid to tell people why it is good.
|
|
|
Post by James on Jun 25, 2018 22:49:53 GMT
I guess it all just depends on the people that use those websites that give them different scores overall. I know that Curse and Cult of Chucky both have ratings in the 5-6/10 range on IMDb, but on Rotten Tomatoes, they both have a score over 80%, making them the best Chucky films. Agreed on Curse, not so much on Cult, albeit the latter still being pretty good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 26, 2018 0:10:51 GMT
It Comes At Night got bad ratings from audiences because it wasn't actually a horror film. They were mislead by the trailer thinking it was going to be about a monster coming at night, but that's not what they got. It wasn't necessarily a bad film, but definitely a misleading one, which explains the bad ratings. One of the grossest misrepresentations of a movie, ever.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Jun 26, 2018 0:30:43 GMT
Movies like these are often very depressing and attempt to make audiences think about stuff they just aren't comfortable thinking about.
Then there are the people who just don't understand these movies and many people don't like what they don't understand.
There are then the people who understand the movies but simply don't agree that they are good. There are people who love The Witch and hate Under the Skin and so on.
I think those are the basic three reasons these movies are divisive with audiences.
|
|
|
Post by fartyfartsalot on Jun 26, 2018 1:15:08 GMT
Trump supporter moviebuffbradley's always been a bit of a putz.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jun 26, 2018 3:37:26 GMT
Trump supporter moviebuffbradley's always been a bit of a putz. I love fan fiction.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jun 26, 2018 11:28:33 GMT
I have seen seven of the movies the OP listed but I only liked... -The Witch -The Conjuring -The Love Witch -Annihilation (but I don't really see this as a Horror movie. but with that said, it is a bit weird but at this point I like it enough to see again. but Ex Machina (7/10) is clearly superior which is the directors best movie) I did not care for The Conjuring 2(5/10)/It Follows(5/10)/Split(4/10). like The Conjuring 2 was decent enough for a one time viewing but ultimately is not worth re-watching unlike the first movie which is worth re-watching. Winter_KingI agree The Witch is better than most Horror movies but I think you summed it up well why many might not care for it due to the slower pacing and it seems like movies with atmosphere can have limited appeal in general but for me, when a movie pulls off a solid atmosphere, that noticeably raises it's chances of being a solid movie for me even though not many do it all that well. theravenkingYeah, I think the general atmosphere carries the movie. but I do feel that movie had real potential to be at least a 6-6.5/10 for me but in the end I only gave it a 6/10. still, better than most Horror movies. JamesI think all of the Chucky movies are roughly the same all around level of enjoyment for me. but with that said, I do like the more recent direction of those two most recent movies because it's a bit more serious where as lately, prior to those, seemed to be a bit more comedic. p.s. I do like the addition of Fiona Dourif (who's the daughter of the guy who voices Chucky in real life) to the series. Rey KahukaAgreed! although ill add... not only Horror fans but I think people who want more from movies in general. those cheap jump scares simply don't have lasting appeal (I don't get why people like that so much). for those who only watch a movie once, that might be okay for them, but when I watch movies my ultimate goal is to find movies ill re-watch from time-to-time as the years pass as that's where movies are ultimately made or broke. p.s. in terms of Horror movies there is only a very small amount that stand out from the pack for me (as in 7/10 or higher(even counting 6-6.5/10 or higher does not add much to my total)) even though there is a fair amount I mildly like (as in 6/10). I don't see it as Horror either. but I did like the movie overall even though it does get a bit weird later into the movie. ill have to see if it holds up on a re-watch eventually. p.s. but Ex Machina(7/10) is the directors best movie. onethreetwoGood point. I don't mind watching some for fun etc as I still like some here and there. but at the end of the day... very few stand out from the pack.
|
|
|
Post by James on Jun 26, 2018 13:24:16 GMT
mslo79You make a good point. The two new Chucky sequels were more serious than the last two (Bride and Seed), which I appreciated a ton more.
|
|