Best Horror Movies of All Time

[payn]

I mean, when it comes to medical scenes and horror, I am immediately thinking of Cronenberg's Dead Ringers. Not sure I can fully classify that as a horror movie. But it certainly packs a wallop.

Huh, I realized I didn't include any Cronenberg films on my top 10, which is interesting because I did a ranking for him before!

Get Ur Body Horror: Cronenberg Films Ranked

June of 2022 will forever be linked with one thing- that's right, the release of David Cronenberg's new movie .... Crimes of the Future! And I am super excited for it. In order to get properly in the mood, I am suggesting that everyone, everywhere, watch a few of the Cronenberg classics. So...

www.enworld.org

So, I would say that from the Tier 3 (the classic "horror") I would probably choose The Brood.

And from the Top 5?
eXistenZ (1999). Not a horror movie.
Naked Lunch (1991). Not a horror movie.
Dead Ringers (1988). Horror enough.
Videodrome (1983). Oof.... kinda sorta?
Crash (1996). Uh......

 

[jdrakeh]

I watched Blood and Black Lace for the first time earlier this year, and that was a fantastic slasher movie.

It really is. Like all of the best giallo films, the lighting, cinematography, and direction is absolutely superb. Unlike a lot of giallo films, however, the plot makes sense and the denouement isn't completely bonkers (Bava knew how to stick the landing). Which elevates it above many other films in the genre, IMO.

 

[Autumnal]

And from the Top 5?
eXistenZ (1999). Not a horror movie.
Naked Lunch (1991). Not a horror movie.
Dead Ringers (1988). Horror enough.
Videodrome (1983). Oof.... kinda sorta?
Crash (1996). Uh......

Weird. I’d consider eXistenZ, Naked Lunch, and Videodrome as definitely horror, and feel fine classifying Dead Ringers and Crash as ones, too. Cronenberg movies I don’t think of as horror movies include A History Of Violence and Eastern Promises.

Of course I take an expansive view of horror, including David Hartwell’s argument that it’s a mode rather than a genre. Therefore, something is generally horror and something else.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Prince of darkness is my favorite, rewarch horror movie. The pacing is slow but it just cranks up the dread. The final scene is an awesome twist.

Poltergeist and The Fog did a number on me as a kid. A wall of unseasonal fog rolling out of the forest while I was watching the Fog home alone probably didn't help.

Another childhood trauma was Island of Terror. A 60s sci-fi/horror about baskerball-sized mutant snail-things that can suck the bones out of your body. It probably wasn't a great movie but a basketball in a dark room made me have flashbacks 15 years later.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

FX don’t stand up very well, and why is his head full of blood? Shouldn’t it be bone and grey matter?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Another childhood trauma was Island of Terror. A 60s sci-fi/horror about baskerball-sized mutant snail-things that can suck the bones out of your body. It probably wasn't a great movie but a basketball in a dark room made me have flashbacks 15 years later

With Peter Cushing? That was undoubtedly a great movie!

 

[payn]

FX don’t stand up very well, and why is his head full of blood? Shouldn’t it be bone and grey matter?

Im guessing the telekinesis pushed all the blood up from his body out of his exploding head.

 

[Guest 85555]

Im guessing the telekinesis pushed all the blood up from his body out of his exploding head.

Yeah, I have never seen a head explode in real life, so I have no idea how realistic that is (I quickly looked up 'doctor reacts to X" to see if any had reacted to that scene on youtube but could not find any). However this is a very iconic scene and I would say part of the reason for that is the effects were quite good (and what audiences would have expected from an exploding head at the time). Looking it up, the brain has 20% of the body's blood supply, and if you have ever seen footage of brain surgery, it is pretty red in there. Interestingly they achieved the effect by firing a shotgun into the fake head from directly below (they tried a number of other methods that just didn't work). I am guessing that is still more buckets of blood than would be in an exploding head, but I have no idea. And the point is really for the explosive gore of it (maybe you could make it more realistic, but would it have been as iconic if it were more subdued?). Personally I love these old practical effects when they are done well (I like them much more than a lot of modern CGI). Sometimes you watch an old movie and you think they could have been done better (as much as I love the terminator and think it is basically a perfect movie, the one thing I would critique is the prosthetic head of Arnold when he is removing his eye). But this scanners scene is one I don't think needed a do-over

 

[Clint_L]

There's a place for CGI, but well done practical effects are way cooler, IMO. But I'm old, so it's probably just my bias.

 

[Guest 85555]

There's a place for CGI, but well done practical effects are way cooler, IMO. But I'm old, so it's probably just my bias.

There are definitely films that do CGI well. I don't want to sound like too much of a crank lol. I think part of it for me isn't even the CGI itself, because when CGI first emerged, I remember being impressed in many instances. It is it is often used in ways that, for me at least, makes the movie look less aesthetically pleasing (some films it almost looks like the CGI department is intentionally thwarting the director or cinematographer with a muddy or disjointed color palette). It is less about the quality of the CGI than the overall look (I've seen movies with not great CGI but the color scheme fits, and it bother some less----I watch a lot of Chinese movies and shows with varying degrees of quality in the CGI and for me they often do a better job of choosing their colors). The other big issue, which I think a lot of people who grew up on practical effects share, is often the CGI lacks a sense of weight. I think this isn't inherent to CGI. I've seen plenty of CGI that gets weight right. But we all know of movies where you are watching an action scene and it doesn't feel believable because the objects and people don't feel tethered by physical laws, and don't seem to be interacting with the environment around them. Also there is something to be said for a car chase that involves real cars. But I have seen plenty of CGI where these things haven't been issues, and it added to the movies.

The other thing about practical effects, and this might tie to your point about being older and having bias, is I know how to appreciate them just by being raised on them. I have a better sense of how they are done, and I know many of the special effects people by name, so I have of a grasp of the artistry behind it. I find this allows me to enjoy even badly done practical effects sometimes (it is like I know what they are going for, what their challenges and limitations are in a general sense and the informs my opinion). It doesn't mean practical effects are better by nature. But I was raised on decades of movie built around practical effects and you learned to appreciate them the way you might appreciate a magician performing tricks on stage.