Clive Barker Knocks Eli Roth and Rob Zombie

[PR3SSUR3]

I think a lot of people are criticizing torture porn because it takes no talent, no talent whatsoever, to make it...no storytelling skills required

I completely disagree, since if we take this dubious term in its broadest sense (to include most explicitly gory comtemporary horrors) there are clear differences between say Wolf Creek (brilliantly acted, constantly surprising, alienating and alarming in equal measure), House of 1000 Corpses (bit of a smartarse fanboy misfire aimed at gothic teens) and The Hills Have Eyes 2 (bad all round, possibly redeemed slightly by OTT gore).

If you're saying it takes no talent to make say a Wrong Turn 2 then I see where you are coming from, but the likes of Hostel and Saw are driven by intriguing, dastardly storylines and good perfomances. That they happen to feature extreme violence might just be the icing on the cake.

My conclusion about those who deride the so-called 'torture porn' subgenre is that they believe themselves too intelligent to be insulted by such apparently straightforward graphic titillation - after all, they just seem to be out to shock... where is the pandering to their values and sense of 'purpose'?

This discomfort should be all part of the fun. Remember there are bad films in every genre, but the desired complexities are there to be found even in 'torture porn' if you want them.

[Disease]

Both Roth and Zombie have made 3 features each in the last 5 years.... I think they have done pretty well with their contributions to horror so far.

Why don't you just wait ten years and see what they churn out! Then it might be an interesting debate to come back to.

[knife_fight]

Originally Posted by crabapple

I think a lot of people are criticizing torture porn because it takes no talent, no talent whatsoever, to make it...no storytelling skills required. And I put most of today's sadistic "horror-like" movies in that category because the payoff to people who see these things is the long, protracted killing scenes. It comes to the same.

H. G. Lewis, now, that guy did his thing forty years ago, more or less, and while it was certainly not artsy, it was a bit fresher and more daring. Doing that stuff now is a refuge for people who don't know how to do anything else.

If you see a "horror filmmaker" who can't do suspense, you should take a good look at that "artist" and really question if their work has any merit at all. If you don't, you may very well be feeding your hard-earned money to an idiot who knows how to talk his way into a deal.

correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're saying that the quality of a person's art should be judged by their motivations to produce such art.

HG Lewis did some groundbreaking stuff, yes, but he wasn't setting out to be an acclaimed artist. in fact, he readily admits that his now-infamous "blood" trilogy was made purely to turn a quick buck. I mean, that's exactly why his films were dubbed "exploitation," b/c they exploited the public's sensibilities and turned over a decent quick profit by doing so. he wasn't setting out to make art, yet many (including myself) see them in that light now b/c we can see the direct line between his films and the current trend towards "torture porn" (and whoever came up with that term should be shot, but that's another tirade). Lewis's films were violent as hell for the day, but they also contained some very edgy sexual stuff too (once again, considering the time period), much like today's batch of filmmakers.

now don't get me wrong. I am upset by the state of horror films these days, and I hate the crap that is being churned out to the ever-hungry-for-more genre fans such as ourselves, but to completely dismiss all of these films with one sweeping blow does a great disservice to the genre, in my opinion. in this case, one apple should not spoil the whole bunch, is what I'm saying.

to me, the bottom line is that horror films are popular again, which means more money will be put into horror movies, which in turn means more horror movies will be made. if you look at it that way, it's inevitable that, even through just sheer chance, a good movie is going to be made every now and then. if we didn't have the money being spent at the box office on crap like remakes and Wrong Turn 2, good movies like the Descent (good in my opinion, but that's not the point) would never get made.
so the bad turn that horror is on right now is a two-edged sword, in that on one hand you get crap, but without the money the crap generates, you don't get the occasional gold that somehow, lucky for us, gets cranked out.

[crabapple]

Yes, just to keep my statements clear, I was not claiming that Lewis had any artistic motivations. I was saying that in my opinion his gore films were fresh and decidedly more original when they came out.

I am bored with current trends in horror because I don't see a lot of talent, and I see a reliance on going back to squirm-inducing gross-out scenes as a replacement for the suspense these modern filmmakers are incapable of creating/generating.

It's REAL EASY to make any audience squirm with a torturously violent situation. Anyone can do it, and that means it takes no talent. When I see a horror movie, I want to see the movie pull off a trick. I want a story, perhaps an outlandish story that I am made to believe via clever storytelling. I want suspension of disbelief. It's more than most of these current "horror meisters" are able to do.

[Disease]

I thought the story behind Hostel was descent... Do you disagree?

[crabapple]

Yeah, I guess I wasn't too satisfied by that one.

As far as recent efforts that I thought had some spark of creativity, I liked House of 1000 Corpses, and Cabin Fever, more than those directors' later efforts.

[Disease]

I'm not so sure. They where two movies that lacked origanality in story telling as far as I am concerned. Hostel took a simple part of life that so many people experience and put a twist to it that had not been done before.

Sure there has been plenty of Movies based in Hotels , but a Hostel is another world all together.

[ferretchucker]

There are some great horror films coming out, but there are also shitty ones. I think the majority of them are the same basic outline as they have for decades. Some teens travelling, big massacre, 1 or none survive. But they've changed slightly. They used to rely on atmosphere and suspence, now it seems to be "How much blood and swearing can we fit into these few seconds? How about a bit of sex on top?" That's just what it seems like to me.

[alkytrio666]

Thanks to the writers' strike, you can expect a lot more shitty horror in the near future.

[Disease]

Originally Posted by ferretchucker

There are some great horror films coming out, but there are also shitty ones. I think the majority of them are the same basic outline as they have for decades. Some teens travelling, big massacre, 1 or none survive. But they've changed slightly. They used to rely on atmosphere and suspence, now it seems to be "How much blood and swearing can we fit into these few seconds? How about a bit of sex on top?" That's just what it seems like to me.

That's nothing new....:rolleyes: