
Is horror the most disrespected genre? - open-source-ux
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20180614-is-horror-the-most-disrespected-genre
======
olliej
I think part of the problem for “elevated”, “art house”, etc horror films is
that the majority of “horror” films these days are more torture porn than
drama/plot, and more “jump scare” than tension.

I feel like the original “cube” ushered in the realization that you could make
a “popular” movie that was not a block buster actually be profitable if you
kept the costs close to zero. So we get movies that don’t require well known
actors (the star is the fx) with few sets (cube essentially had two).

I thought I had a point but now I don’t know what it was, so I’ll leave this
comment half way done, just like my old high school essays :)

~~~
paxys
That isn't really an argument though. There are shitty films in every genre.

~~~
zaarn
There is a unique problem though.

If you have a shitty action movie, it'll still have action. Some fantasy movie
will still have some fantasy and story telling, no matter how shitty. Even the
shittiest B-movies manage to tell a story and have some action, which is fine
for the genre, you get some of it.

But with horror the problem is that if you fuck it up, you don't get horror,
you get torture porn or reflex training (jump scare). If you don't nail the
horror, it seizes to be horror.

~~~
boomlinde
I don't think it's a unique problem. An action movie that fails to instill a
sense of action is just as bad as a horror movie that fails to instill a sense
of horror.

For example, I tried going through some of the later Steven Seagal flicks
lately. The way they're cut and the pacing make them absolutely boring. The
stories they tell aren't cohesive, and the action is the closest thing to
stills of Seagal's limbs you'll get before you'd have to call them slideshows.
Those are _bad_ action movies, and I suspect that what you call bad action
movies are actually just campy/shoestring/"so-bad-they're-funny" yet
entertaining action movies.

Same for fantasy. If your fantasy film is utterly mundane, unoriginal and
uninspiring it'll fail to deliver the fantastic. Not to mention comedy. If
your comedy is not funny what's left is often a really thin plot revolving
around unrelatable characters under unbelievable circumstances. Drama film has
no drama if you don't care about any of the characters.

I'd still call these horror, action, fantasy, comedy and drama films,
respectively. As much as I think it's bad, the intent is obvious, and a bad
genre film is just one that was really bad at achieving it.

------
timoth3y
It's pretty clear that porn is the most disrespected genre.

I mean, it's not even respectable enough to be considered in the discussion of
the most disrespected genre of film.

~~~
busterarm
Exploitation films are probably even lower on the totem pole than porn.

At least porn has awards shows.

~~~
chme
Is 'Exploitation films' even a classical genre?

I mean if we go down that totem pole, then 'still image movies' are even
further down.

~~~
busterarm
Considering that exploitation films are a superset that includes several
genres of horror movies, yes.

------
__david__
The arguing about what genre these movies fit in sounds like metal or
electronica fans arguing about which band is in which sub-sub-genre. I
personally think of genres as tags rather than exclusive silos. The best stuff
often doesn't fit neatly into a single genre.

As for "Intelligent Horror" demeaning "normal" horror—I'm not sure I've ever
heard people complaining about IDM[1] vs EDM[2].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_dance_music](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_dance_music)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_dance_music](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_dance_music)

~~~
plorkyeran
Er, straight from the wikipedia page you linked:

> The term "intelligent dance music" has been widely criticised and rejected
> by artists associated with the style, including Aphex Twin and µ-Ziq, as
> elitist and derogatory towards other genres. [...] In 2014, music critic
> Sasha Frere-Jones observed that the term "is widely reviled but still
> commonly used".

Half the page is discussing the backlash against the term on the exact same
grounds.

------
rm_-rf_slash
It wasn’t always this way. Films like Rosemary’s Baby, Night of the Living
Dead, and pretty much the entire Hitchcock collection were some of the most
iconic films of their times.

In my opinion, the popularity of the late 70s to 80s slasher films (Friday the
13th, Nightmare on Elm St, Texas Chainsaw Massacre to name a few), combined
with studios’ ever-shrinking tolerance for risk, resulted in a particularly
bland few decades of mainstream horror, with the well-known Saw franchise and,
to a lesser extent, the somewhat satirical Final Destination series as typical
examples of the era. Personally, I’m partial to the Evil Dead films, Army of
Darkness most of all. Groovy.

Horror can be excellent when done well, and pathetic when done poorly. It is
easy to go for cheap scares and bloody massacre scenes. There is a lot to
dislike about modern horror films that can turn off audiences looking for more
than jump scares and blood splatter. If I hadn’t dated a girl in college who
was super into the horror genre, I would have never gotten into it.

Horror is best when it floods you with an emotional high that lasts long after
the initial shock. For a most masterful example, try playing Silent Hill 2, if
you dare.

~~~
baddox
I’m a bit skeptical of the author’s claim. It seems like things are _still_
that way. There are lots of recent critically-acclaimed horror movies. The
genre seems to be a great way for smaller indie studios and filmmakers to
experiment. I suppose it’s true that there aren’t many big horror blockbusters
on par with Hitchcock or Rosemary’s Baby, but I’m not convinced there were
ever a _lot_ of those.

~~~
29galoseats
I think there are ups and downs with genres. I think horror is currently in a
new golden age (not the only one--there have been others in the past), and
actually think the article is part of this trend. It's easy to suggest that
the current wave of outstanding horror reflects a kind of "backhanded
compliment" when it was preceded by overworn cliche films, for decades.

This is recognized within the horror fan community as well. There are lots of
people on various forums talking about the cornucopia of great horror at the
moment, and my guess is a number of fans will spend years catching up on their
expanding lists of films to see and rewatch. It's really remarkable.

There's a broader context that I think the author is missing, or at least
ignoring: film and visual arts critics don't care about genre, they care about
film. Genre tends to create a comparative context that doesn't necessarily
exist if your scope is film at large. So, horror films exist to cater to a
horror film fan base, romantic comedies exist to cater to that, superhero
films cater to that, science fiction, fantasy, and so forth and so on. If it
is a backhanded compliment, my guess is the same could be said of any genre to
some extent.

------
gitgud
It seems its hard to be original in the horror genre. Every horror movie uses
the same tropes and cliche's.

    
    
        JUMP SCARE
        Violin screech
        Creepy little girl
        Research history in library
        Running in a house
    

When every new horror movie uses these, it's hard to respect the genre.

~~~
AstralStorm
1\. Sparingly.

2\. No, it's outdated.

3\. Not unless you're making another Ring. This is bad and you should feel bad
as an author.

4\. It is a common framing device, also used in fantasy.

5\. The better horrors take place in a bigger area than just a house. They may
have some related scenes like that.

Most importantly, this tells more about the kind of horror movies you're
watching.

Common creepy stuff like darkness, contrast and claustrophobia are obviously
used. They are generally scary.

~~~
gitgud
I enjoy horror movies, but I think it's probably the hardest genre to make a
good original movie, without using predictable cliche's.

Just curious, what horror movies would you recommend?

------
al_ramich
Let's not forget the legendary Blair Witch Project. Horror, as a genre, if
done well can work incredibly well on a very small budget. Not sure many other
genres can achieve the same level of audience emotion on similar budgets.

~~~
mrob
Drama can theoretically succeed on an even smaller budget. Consider "12 Angry
Men", which is practically a stage play. Single set (with very minor
exceptions), minimal props, mostly just talking, and it's a critically
acclaimed film. And there are plenty of unknown actors and writers who think
they could be great if they got the chance, and they can't all be wrong. Maybe
someday we'll get something just as good made on a zero budget with phone
cameras and natural lighting.

~~~
AnIdiotOnTheNet
Also The Man From Earth, which also takes place almost entirely in a single
room and is just some people talking for 90 minutes, but keeps you thoroughly
engaged for every second of it.

------
ArtWomb
It's seen as facile within the industry. Hence the reputation and lack of
prestigious awards recognition. Easy to write, cheap to produce, and now in
the digital era, the jump cut scare tricks and camera effects can be inserted
by the dozen. See the trailer for Blumhouse's _The Nun_ to get a sense.

But with the blockbuster success of films like _It_ , _Get Out_ , and _A Quiet
Place_ we will see something never witnessed before in cinema history: the
coming of the big budget horror flick. I think _The Conjuring 2_ budget was
upwards of $40M. And it looked terrific. The upcoming _Venom_ and Shane
Black's _The Predator_ are no doubt deeply influenced by classic horror
tropes.

But for the real deal. Still nothing compares to the classics. I finally got
to screen David Cronenberg's _Videodrome_ the other night. Holy Guacamole.
They don't make anything quite like that anymore ;)

~~~
tptacek
I don't think _It_ really counts as "elevated horror". The book is
interesting; you might call it an elevation of pulp horror. But the movie is
just a garden-variety spooky clown movie.

Big budget horror movies are nothing new; look at the _Alien_ franchise.

 _" elevator horror" is a funny term but I definitely meant "elevated horror";
edited._

~~~
p1necone
I would only really consider the first Alien to fit squarely within the horror
genre.

~~~
tptacek
If Prometheus and Alien Covenant aren't horror movies, there are other movies
that are indisputably horror movies that are, uh, disputable.

~~~
p1necone
Ah yes, I did forget about the more recent ones.

------
CosmicShadow
I'd rather see this label more often as my wife only watches horror, but so
much of it is beyond garbage that I won't watch it, but there are some really
good horror movies, so I want to have a better indication of which ones are
serious movies with plot that just happen to be horror, dark, psychological,
gore or whatever, but aren't just trash with no plot that's 100% predictable
or has so many things that contradict themselves.

Horror is like the genre where anyone with a video camera fresh out of
highschool can produce and somehow get in a bargain bin at any store. The
genre has some good stuff, but it's way too flooded with garbage that it's
hard to find the good stuff. Some people like the campiness of it, but I just
don't have the time to waste on it. In highschool I remember we rented a
horror movie because the first name on it was Ron Jeremy and we were like
"heh, heh, awesome"! He was in the first 1 minute as a bum, no lines, and
died, the rest of the movie was beyond horrible. Those kinds of tactics don't
help the genre either.

Yeah, lots of other genres have tons of garbage too, but somehow it doesn't
seem like it does to the same extent (just how I've seen things). Maybe it's
because Horror has the potential to be awesome, ridiculous or cool, even if
it's a shit tier movie, where as a drama just doesn't have the allure without
critical acclaim, big names, or notable nudity. There are way more cult
followings around horror movies than dramas or others it seems.

I can understand that nobody likes someone else coming into their "scene" and
scooping out the best stuff, giving it a respectable note/name, and calling
the rest of the baggage, history, and culty stuff garbage.

~~~
romwell
>where as a drama just doesn't have the allure without critical acclaim, big
names, or notable nudity

Naturally! Notable nudity notwithstanding, neutral narratives normally
necessitate nixing naivety.

------
projektir
Horror is one of those genres where it's one of my favorites if done right,
but it's rarely done right. Especially quality horror-sci-fi is a combination
that practically doesn't exist.

It sometimes seems to fare better as books (Stephen King) or games (Bioshock)
rather than movies.

------
GuB-42
There seem to be a hierarchy of genres.

Serious stories happening in a real historical setting are on top. And it goes
down as we deviate from this archetype. Fantasy and sci-fi are a step lower,
and comedy is rock bottom. Horror is often not serious or realistic, it is
meant to entertain, in its own way, so it is right down there with comedy.

Of course, that hierarchy is purely artificial. People enjoy "low tier" movies
a lot, and a lot of talent goes into them (to varying degrees of course). But
for some reason, you don't want to say it publicly.

I think it dates back to ancient Greece or maybe even earlier. So that's a
thing we have to live with I think.

------
olavk
Porn is more disrespected I think. The term "torture porn" is used disparaging
even by horror enthusiasts.

Movies catering to base physical reactions (sexual arousal, fear, laughter) is
considered less prestigious. Although intellectual comedy can be pretty
prestigious compared to physical comedy. And psychological horror is
considered more prestigious than horror based on gore and dismemberment. And
suspense is higher than horror I think.

------
rurban
More disrespected genre's: porn, filmschool apocalypse, butterfly effect.

Horror is actually a respected craft, porn not so respected, the other two are
no craft and extremely annoying.

------
aj7
No. Romantic comedy is. Romance is many things. But it it is not funny.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
"Love, Actually"

------
IAmTheAquabats
fan fiction is the most disrespected genre

------
IAmTheAquabats
the most disrespected genre... that would be fan fiction.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
But should that be counted? Any amateur, vanity version of any genre is almost
entirely worse. But is it a genre itself, or just unpublished junk versions of
the genre?

