MoFo Top 100 Horror Movies: The List

→ in
Tools    





Who want's to live forever? Well not Louis.. Interview with the Vampire was one of the first movies for me that really captured the concept and the curse of 'immortality'.
Favorite scene is when vampire Louis sees a sunrise in the movie theater for the first time after centuries. (never seen the movie 'Sunrise' he's watching)

My list so far:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9. Bram Stoker's Dracula (# 50)

10.
11.
12. Event Horizon (# 49)

13. Train to Busan (Did not place)

14.
15.
16. Interview With The Vampire (# 44)

17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23. The Babadook (# 63)

24.
25.



Welcome to the human race...
Interview With The Vampire... this gives me hope that The Lost Boys might make the countdown.
The idea that it could crack the top 40 while Near Dark doesn't even place actually makes me hope it doesn't happen.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



Thursday Next's Avatar
I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
Two films from my list, I love when that happens!

Interview With the Vampire was my #4. I really loved the book when I was a teenager (haven't read it in years) and the film is one I've watched several times and always found something to enjoy or admire. I don't know how it's any less of a horror than Dracula or Nosferatu. There are some really chilling moments in it, and it raises interesting questions about the nature of evil and immortality.

The Haunting was my #12. It's one of the last films I watched 'for the list' and while I wasn't sure at first, I ended up being captivated by it. The scary parts are largely conveyed by loud noises which ought to be silly, but is actually effective because the purpose is the effect on the characters, not just the audience. They are changed by their experiences, they wonder whether it is real or whether they are going mad and in the end I'm not quite sure either. There's also plenty of subtext, symbolism and implied lesbianism.



Today, it's that time, We get a certain rogue Entertainer for the next film. There's a chance I won't get to the second film today due to holiday plans tonight. In that case I'll get three up tomorrow. Have a great time!!!

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	jsbody5.jpg
Views:	110
Size:	12.0 KB
ID:	53447  



Count me as a fan of Interview with the Vampire, though I've only seen it once years ago it's one of those few movies that staid with me. It's themes are more powerful than the usual vampire movie. I'm in need of a rewatch.

The Haunting, A really cool atmospheric film with Julie Harris doing a slow descent into madness. Who's time spent with James Dean on East of Eden seems to have strengthened her already finely honed acting skills. A solid film and another that I need to rewatch.



Welcome to the human race...


"Yes, it is I, Dr. I. R. O'Quois, who has pre-recorded this message on videocassette to be transmitted in the event that one of my main picks for the MovieForums Top 100 Horror list actually earn the dubious honour of being on the final list. As you can probably guess, that pick is David Cronenberg's 1983 technological terror Videodrome. While one can argue its place not just within the horror canon but also within Cronenberg's filmography (I'm sure many will argue that The Fly is his main masterpiece), there's no denying its status as a horror classic. It would be simple enough to credit it all to the extremely visceral displays of body horror that Cronenberg, ever the master of the form, manages to conjure in order to properly render the sheer ugliness of television's negative impact on the individuals who consume it as a blithe acceptance of witnessing televised torture eventually gives way to increasingly deranged hallucinations.



"However, the true horror of Videodrome isn't just to do with the pulsating television sets and newly-grown abdominal orifices - it's to do with how cable television's permissive attitude towards extreme content doesn't merely contribute to a moral rot in modern society by itself but is also capable of being weaponised by sinister forces that we may or may not be able to comprehend through our media-addled minds. It's certainly a concern that bothered Cronenberg (enough so that protagonist Max Renn comes across as an avatar for Cronenberg to use in questioning his own role in creating and perpetuating violent entertainment) and it's one that holds up only too well as cable television has not only fortified its influence over the years but has had its same basic tenets expand to new technologies like the Internet. Dr. Brian O'Blivion is a character who only ever appears through television screens and speaks of how we will all have "special names" in the future - a media prophecy that has well and truly come to pass as we type to each other (or at each other) behind avatars and usernames. Another character describes the nebulous Videodrome of the title as having a philosophy that makes it more dangerous than your typical late-night programming. That is where Videodrome derives its true strength - its concerns about the intermingling of humanity and technology still ring horribly true even as cathode ray televisions and Betamax cassettes become obsolete, and that is what makes it as horrifying as any knife-wielding boogeyman.



"The kicker? When I first saw this film, it was on cable TV."


42.


Videodrome (1983)
Runtime: 1 Hrs 29 Mins
Production Company: Canadian Film Development Corporation
Distributed by Universal Pictures
Production Budget: $5,900,000
Box Office: $2,100,000
Nine Votes
116 Points (22, 20, 19, 17, 13, 13, 5, 5, 2)
High Voter: @Iroquois



Bright light. Bright light. Uh oh.
There's something about Cronenberg. He comes up with terrific ideas (just like Carpenter did for years) and then he seems to come to some conclusion long before you and I get there. I'm not sure if that means that Cronenberg is brilliant in his concepts yet unable to control or play out these ideas, but sometimes when watching his films I get that idea. Videodrome seems to have a perfect Cronenberg plot, and James Woods and Debbie Harry go along with it wonderfully, but once we learn that the concept of "Videodrome" is to destroy yourself, then it just seems to be a lot less significant than what it started out to be. I mean, it does play out the way it says things have to be, but it also seems like Cronenberg should have allowed the concept to take itself another step further. As it is, it's over and done with before 90 minutes.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page



I felt bad when I was unable to fit a single Cronenberg on my list. Top-50 would probably have two and Videodrome would be the lower of them. My favorite Cronenberg (at the moment at least) is Shivers. Good to have at least one of his films on this top-100.

Seen: 49/59
__________________



How Videodrome manages to de-program the viewer as well as being a sharply-cool viewing makes it one of the finest idea films. Definitely helps to have it written-up properly as well, by Dr. I. R. O'Quois. Max Renn (James Woods) is the owner of a not widely known television station specializing in offbeat programming. Max has been gripped by personality types who send out doctored telesignals that people who watch a show called "Videodrome" are scum, which causes bizarre hallucinations. Max pirates "Videodrome" after that, which turns out to be plotless and cheap snuff TV featuring extreme violence which turns out to not be faked. Cronenberg said this was his attempt to "make a film that was as complex as the way I experience reality." Swims in deep water, and it's as satisfying, mysterious, and conclusively as puzzling as reality. Pretty great movie that I gave a 10/10 when I watched it. This and Carrie were always very close by with the movies I chose, ended up getting some slightly more fun-type horror ones on in their stead.

Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	Videodrome1.jpg
Views:	110
Size:	183.9 KB
ID:	53450  



Well a couple more of mine have appeared. I had The Haunting at #7. I have it on my 100 so it was a shoe in for this set of nominations and, while there are films on this list which are higher but not on my 100, I had to place it highly. TBH, I'm a little disappointed it's this low. I was hoping for top 30.

Anyway, people have already spoken about this, but I'll just add that I love the understated way this plays out, with the house being the loudest character and Julie Harris perfectly plays the mentally fragile Nell and it's her expressions and presence which really sells this to me. Her reactions to what's going on around her, who's around her and her inner turmoil play out wonderfully across her face and in her eyes. I don't know if it's a truly great performance, but I do think it's the perfect performance for this part.

Interview With The Vampire was the next one to show. I had it at #19. Some of you might notice that that's lower than it is on my 100 (where it's top 10) but while I love the film, as a horror film there are quite a few films I think are better horrors and that's why it's so low on my list. But it had to be there someone because I just love it too much to leave it off. For years this was my favourite film, so I don't know that I'll ever not care for it, let alone dislike it, but I do have to admit that I've not watched it for about 10 years. Like TN, I loved the books (I even liked The Tale Of The Body Thief and Memnoch The Devil) and this film was almost everything I wanted it to be and it even had the bonus of a scene stealing Kirsten Dunst who played Claudia better than I could've hoped. Hell, she plays her better than she's written.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



Videodrome is another film I really need to see again. I don't think I've watched it since I was very young, so it'll be a completely different film the next time I watch it.



I voted for Videodrome!
__________________
Letterboxd

Originally Posted by Iroquois
To be fair, you have to have a fairly high IQ to understand MovieForums.com.



41.


The Birds (1963)
Runtime: 1 Hr 59 Mins
Production Company: Alfred J. Hitchcock Productions
Distributed by Universal Pictures
Production Budget: $3,300,000
Box Office: $11,400,000
Eleven Votes
116 Points (22, 20, 17, 15, 11, 10, 7, 6, 5, 2, 1)
High Voter: @Pussy Galore

They're coming! They're coming!
Introduced by Sir Alfred Joseph Hitchcock
Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	The Birds 41.jpg
Views:	77
Size:	74.5 KB
ID:	53464  



The Birds was the first Hitchcock movie I ever watched. I hated it and it made me very hesitant to watch any of his other films. Thankfully I got over that hesitancy and went on to enjoy several of his other films. Still have zero desire to revisit The Birds and did not vote for it.