Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

What kind of horror are you into the subtle, pacing type or the in your face, gorey type?

Personally i prefer the gory kind because let's face it, horror isn't really about character developement. I want to see gore and slicing and dicing and slitting....you know the good stuff. what do you guys think?

In your face. Just bring it the **** on, because there aren't enough studios taking risks these days..except for the always reliable Troma.

Which reminds me, I bought "Rabid Grannies" the other day.

i think the asian horror really brought that subtle movement over.

J-Horror is all about ghosts. We've had ghost stories for ages.

They're both good for different reasons.

Subtle horror is generally more powerful, emotional and more expertly crafted. Usually a subtle horror film will have far more going for it then simple mindless gore and horror fluff.

However, a good stupid gory film can be extremely fun at times. Though if that's all you watch then you're missing out on what's truly some great horror films.

Subtle horror has a deeper, more prolonged impact on the viewer and will usually stay with them, while stupid gore flicks will get a big kick immediately but may get forgotten an hour after viewing.

I agree I like both

I like both but prefer to watch subtle horror/psychological horrors.

I like subtle horror because at the end it can be truely disturbing.

you saying tcm or last house on the left isn't truly disturbing?

i don't think exorcist or the shining will ever out disturb those two movies.

the problem i have with subtle horror or psychological horror is that it try to take itself too seriously. However, at times it do work but most of the time it doesnt't. Let's take rosemary baby, the director did well with the build up and the feel of dread but ultimately it fail because the final surprise was nothing more than a goblin of sort(yeah i know it's suppose to be the anti-christ) but come on "he has his father's eye" wtf. the point is that it take itself seriously with the psychological factors but it was nothing more than a creature feature of sort.

both have a time and a place, although i love gore

I never found TCM or LHOTL disturbing, just violent. There is a small difference. As for the Exorcist and the Shining, yes they were more disturbing because the movie wasn't based on imagery

Originally posted by beta-wolf_101
I never found TCM or LHOTL disturbing, just violent. There is a small difference. As for the Exorcist and the Shining, yes they were more disturbing because the movie wasn't based on imagery
i have to respect your oppinion but how is tcm and lhotl not disturbing?
you are right there's a different between violent and disturbing but i'm not just talking about the violent but the idea and concept were also consider when i said it was disturbing.

i prefer movies that combine the disturbing psychological aspects with all out balls to the wall gore and violence,these sort of movies get under your skin and stay there
stuff like
cannibal holocaust
last house on dead end st
last house on the left
tcm
mothers day

etc

of course i also love a mindless gore for the sake of gore fest every now and then
ie-braindead,story of ricky and bad taste

i agree doomsday the original tcm and last house on the left are disturbing indeed,they certainly shocked the shit out of me on first veiwing and have lost none of their power to shock in my opinion

Rosemary's Baby is a classic, and the end scenes are disturbing ones, especially the face on Mia Farrow's character when she sees the baby. Excellent film.

Nope I never find TCM or LOHOTL, I've seen worst in real life.

In-your-face is much more entertaining to me, because I like to see a bunch of body parts flying and blood spraying and all that good jazz, but the majority of subtle horror, IMO, has more depth and story to it, which I also want to see. So I say both are equally important, but there nothing like seeing a teenage girl being hung on a meathook. yes

Originally posted by beta-wolf_101
Nope I never find TCM or LOHOTL, I've seen worst in real life.

what!!? The scenario of these movies are what nightmare are made of. You've never had a nightmare where you're chased and the only thing in your mind is to escape. Well that is the beauty of these two movies. To an extent you can relate to it. It is disturbing because it is able to capture a certain dimension of fear.

Originally posted by Impediment
In-your-face is much more entertaining to me, because I like to see a bunch of body parts flying and blood spraying and all that good jazz, but the majority of subtle horror, IMO, has more depth and story to it, which I also want to see. So I say both are equally important, but there nothing like seeing a teenage girl being hung on a meathook. yes

very true. Especially when they choose to split up and run into the woods. lol.

Originally posted by MildPossession
Rosemary's Baby is a classic, and the end scenes are disturbing ones, especially the face on Mia Farrow's character when she sees the baby. Excellent film.

I understand it is labeled a classic but i still don't know why. I don't even get the underlying theme of the movie. Maybe because it was somekind of commentary on the baby boom era or something but i really don't think this movie was as great as everybody say it is. "He has his father's eyes" wtf. That was funny. Not even as dark humor but a "wtf!!" kind of humor.

I think Rosemarys Baby is a good film, it has dated slightly, but it has an excellent story.