![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
trinityvixenSo last night ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
moonlightalice and I watched The Thing, which she was watching for the first time and I was rewatching in anticipation of that "we swear it's not a reboot" prequel coming out in a couple of weeks. She liked it, as only someone with good taste would, but she said something that really made me think. She said she only liked science-fiction or supernatural horror. Considering this angle, I found I could only agree.
Now, there are exceptions--I enjoyed (no, really!) the first two Saw movies, and however ridiculous they were or were not, they were not supernatural. (I put the first one as almost a noir, what with the focus being on two guys in a room with a dead body.) But even the largely reviled slashers are mostly supernatural, Nightmare on Elm Street undeniably so, but Halloween and Friday the 13th were (or became), supernatural, too. Torture porn stretches credulity on occasion, but most of that is non-supernatural, and, mostly, I do not like it. High Tension wasn't technically supernatural, though it pushed the line a bit, and I did like that. But those are two examples and I watch a lot of horror.
Anything with zombies is automatically science-fiction, if it's not outright supernatural, and that makes up a chunk of the horror I watch and enjoy right there. After that, what else is there? Ghosts? Vampires? Unkillable killers like Freddy, Jason, or Michael Myers? Is it because we classify anything that features the flesh-and-blood killer antagonist, no matter how gruesome or scary the movie might be, as "thriller" rather than horror? I wonder.
Speaking of horrors, though: Friendly's is going bankrupt. This isn't horrifying in and of itself, really, though I do have some sadness at the loss of something I used to enjoy going to. It was terrible for you and the food wasn't always great, but I remember, fondly, going to Friendly's as a treat growing up. My mother liked the salads there and she and sometimes Mrs. D would go with me to just chat. Really what saddens me is what has already happened as a result of the stores closing: the Friendly's just up the block closed. There was a man there that I remember working there for all of my life as far as I was aware--so, easily, 15+ years. It was always a little sad to see a grown man working at a food joint (for reasons that are prejudicial based on class, I do realize), but it's even sadder to think he doesn't have a job now.
moonlightalice and I watched The Thing, which she was watching for the first time and I was rewatching in anticipation of that "we swear it's not a reboot" prequel coming out in a couple of weeks. She liked it, as only someone with good taste would, but she said something that really made me think. She said she only liked science-fiction or supernatural horror. Considering this angle, I found I could only agree.Now, there are exceptions--I enjoyed (no, really!) the first two Saw movies, and however ridiculous they were or were not, they were not supernatural. (I put the first one as almost a noir, what with the focus being on two guys in a room with a dead body.) But even the largely reviled slashers are mostly supernatural, Nightmare on Elm Street undeniably so, but Halloween and Friday the 13th were (or became), supernatural, too. Torture porn stretches credulity on occasion, but most of that is non-supernatural, and, mostly, I do not like it. High Tension wasn't technically supernatural, though it pushed the line a bit, and I did like that. But those are two examples and I watch a lot of horror.
Anything with zombies is automatically science-fiction, if it's not outright supernatural, and that makes up a chunk of the horror I watch and enjoy right there. After that, what else is there? Ghosts? Vampires? Unkillable killers like Freddy, Jason, or Michael Myers? Is it because we classify anything that features the flesh-and-blood killer antagonist, no matter how gruesome or scary the movie might be, as "thriller" rather than horror? I wonder.
Speaking of horrors, though: Friendly's is going bankrupt. This isn't horrifying in and of itself, really, though I do have some sadness at the loss of something I used to enjoy going to. It was terrible for you and the food wasn't always great, but I remember, fondly, going to Friendly's as a treat growing up. My mother liked the salads there and she and sometimes Mrs. D would go with me to just chat. Really what saddens me is what has already happened as a result of the stores closing: the Friendly's just up the block closed. There was a man there that I remember working there for all of my life as far as I was aware--so, easily, 15+ years. It was always a little sad to see a grown man working at a food joint (for reasons that are prejudicial based on class, I do realize), but it's even sadder to think he doesn't have a job now.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-10-05 04:31 pm (UTC)On some level, despite the explosion of the torture/gore-porn genre in the US, I think we still require some level of fantastic in our "horror" films which we really don't in "thrillers", IMO. I think we want our "thrillers" to be primarily about sensationalizing everyday life, while we want "horror" just like SF/Fantasy to be primarily escapist (even though just about all good horror reflects on the same themes of everyday life like thrillers).
no subject
Date: 2011-10-05 06:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-10-05 08:08 pm (UTC)