Scariest movie of all time

Yeah...The Blair Witch Project is the only movie that actually creeped me out a lot...

__________________
that's the way it happened

I just thought that I had some light to shed on the situation at hand and I knew I couldn't do it by lying about movies that I haven't seen.

The argument was that Asian horror movies were in all ways superior to American horror. And I said that famous Directors like Lynch, Hitchcock, Craven were all widely respected as the best in what they do. Which is horror on many different levels.

I countered and said I didn't see the asian movies, but I still felt like I conveyed a worthwhile opinion.

So, if you found my opinion wanting, I apologize. But I don't care what you think, so, good times .

__________________

I am not sure that they, all, are superior, even if you don't care what I think

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

So then, you would make a case that NU asian horror films are better than North by Northwest, Psycho, and Rear Window?

Considering you yourself claim to have not seen any you really need to stop nitpicking with arguements.

Asian films as a whole are largely different than the Western world's so to compare Hitchcook to something of the Pang Brothers, Takashi Shimizu, Takashi Miike, Fruit Chan, Ji-woon Kim or anything produced by Takashige Ichise is foolish.

Firstly, North by Northwest and Rear Window barely classify as horror even by Western standards, so why you brought them up is a little confusing.

Secondly, Asian horror is much more spiritual, much more in cohoots with the individual and the natural environment. Western horror is about the horror of people, Asian horror is about the unseen horror that surrounds you.

Now if you want to nitpick and bring up Hitchcock films that aren't horror then you might as well contrast them to something comparable of the Asian "NU" (your word) wave...

Something like Audition, Memories of Murder or Sympathy for Mr. Vengenace, films from different directors which may not carry the same Western weight as the name Hitchcock does, but that are certainly just as strong pictures as, if not better than, several of the Hitchcock standards.

And finally, since you've brought up the new wave of Asian cinema, the best of the best can without question go toe to toe with the best of the best coming out of America. These films kill because they simply wouldn't/couldn't be made - from conception to execution - in the US.

Please educate yourself in the filmographies of Chan-Wook Park, Pen-Ek Ratanaruang, Takashi Miike (argueably the most staunch auteur working anywhere today), Ji-woon Kim, Wong Kar Wai and especially Kim Ki-Duk. Pick up anything that was lensed by Christopher Doyle or anything that has Tadanobu Asano or Takashi Kitano in it. I highly recommend checking out this thread as a good deal of us already have a nice starter list for people to check out.

And as for this:

What a bunch of arrogant bull****. American horror is by no means whatsoever advanced. How you can even begin to make that claim considering how daftly formulaic nearly every American horror film is simply astonishes me. For it to be advanced it would have to be ahead of something. What exactly is it ahead of, pretell?

You're judging movies that are told in a language you're simply ignorant of. I'm not talking literally, I'm talking the entire style of Asian horror is wildly different than American horror. It builds upon common superstitions about the other worldly that are almost exclusively absent in American culture. The same goes for Mexican and Spanish productions that are established out of cultural fears that are normal to have.

We have no such fears in Western culture. Say the word Bigfoot or Jersey Devil in America and people will laugh, go to Mexico and say Chupacabra and people will be appauled.

Another problem I see you're having is that you can't distinguish between the subcategories of horror. You're comparing something like Ringu, a ghost story, to Psycho....

If you want to compare horror films about the horror of people, Audition absolutely punishes Psycho. And, I will go on the record that Audition is a better Western horror film than 99% of Western horror films.

And if you want to compare ghost pictures...Asia can completely nail it when they want to. The scares created in an Asian ghost story are unparalled in any equivalent ghost flick of the American studio system.

Now don't get me wrong, I do not unconditionally praise Asian cinema. Korea is a powerhouse of films these days, but they make a lottt of crap as well. J-Horror can scare the pants out of you one minute, but chances are incredibly good that even if the movie is scary as hell the plot will fall apart in the last reel - rent a Tale of Two Sisters for a shining example of this, it has some of the scariest scenes I've ever seen, but the movie makes no sense. It sure is pretty though.

Oh, and Gothika is trash.

__________________
Horror's Not Dead
Latest Movie Review(s): Too lazy to keep this up to date. New reviews every week.

What OG- said

I felt I had something to say. I've let it be known my opinion and what I have and haven't seen. I certainly did not want to invite such damnable criticism, however, and for that I apologize.

Much like Anime is, much like all the movies from Asia I've seen that have either been fantasy, surrealist drama, or horror. I believe you used this post a springboard to let us all know how in depth your fantastical knowledge of how great Asian cinema is. Not to mention that you were rude and disrespectful in the process. But, I suppose, I've earned no better.

Fritz Lang's german expressionism survived (somewhat) in Hollywood. I'm sure that some directors could survive the transition into Hollywood regardless of their styles. I mean, if a person so smart and knowledgeable as you were to like these clear cut masterpieces then surely SOME of America would pay for something similar to that coming out of Hollywood.

I have seen two of Wong Kar Wai's movies, as well as numerous other asian films. I can surely vouch that his is the most overrated foreign breed I've seen as of late. I appreciate his style and the fantasy that goes into his films, but I don't appreciate people telling me how much better he is than everyone else. Because, quite frankly, he isn't that good of a director besides his fantastic vision and poetical circumstance. Sure, he may grow on me, but I don't like him as of now.
Advanced in that the three directors I mentioned set the standards. Hitchcock for suspense and character depth with psychological nods. Wes Craven created the formula you trash. And David Lynch is about as completely random and suspenseful as anything I've seen recently. I wasn't talking about the next Valentine, my friend, or all of our movies. I was merely talking about how, at least in America and Europe, these directors have hit a passionate chord.
I resent this, two of my favorite movies of all time are in a foreign language, one in Korean. I understand culture differences and what different films mean to different cultures. But don't you dare call me ignorant of the asian "language" of films. I respect all mediums in every light possible. I know that because our cultures conflict in certain ways that that automatically builds up different cinema.
So, while I haven't seen your pretentious list of film makers, I can certainly vouch that I'm not ignorant of films just because of the culture difference. In this post you seem to want to group me into the western idiot holier than thou college student who loves Harold and Maude fixture. That is offensive, I was not insulting asian film makers or what they do. I like what I've seen of Asian cinema (especially anime and attgs) and I can plainly see the differences compared to western culture.
Chupacabraaaa. Chu Pa Cabraaa. CHU PA CA BRAAAA.

And I practically live in Mexico.
Well you ****ed up my post completely. I was not trying to compare horror genres and which was better or worst and what each horror film meant. I was merely stating that three directors all set original standards from the United States in horror. They are respected from Europe to America for their works and they are immensely popular and well-liked.

My post was never to come out and trash Asian cinema. Merely to defend, from the standpoint of knowing people who like the movies who are respected throughout the world (read: film critics and snobs). I was there to express disbelief that Asian horror is so much better than our horror. We have/had three original thinkers who made great movies that are respected by people who view films from everywhere. And, as a result, saying something so flippant as Asian horror is 100% better than American horror is quite odd. However, note that I said that because I haven't fully viewed your pretentious list of movies that I cannot properly induce reason. I said it was my uninformed opinion from the git go, but you decided to turn it into an education lesson for someone who didn't need the education.

So, before you go snobby and start preaching to me the healing effects of Asian cinema, know that I view movies with an open eye for the culture and time period. It's why I can respect M despite it's apparent absurdity in today's standards. Why you felt compelled to blast me with your rhetoric is obviously out of some complex you have created to snuggle with your opinion. But I didn't need it, and you should be content in knowing that I vew films openly and I'm not a western pig as everyone outside of the US and in the US views anyone who is not over 20 years old.
Your opinion, I was scared every moment of gothika.

Actually, I know very little about Asian cinema - I just watch a lot of it. There are much more qualified posters around here (linespalsy) and other sites (Twitch Film) who are far more knowledgeable about Asian cinema and Asian culture than I am. Oh, and don't confuse confidence with me being rude or disrespectful - I will call bull**** irregardless of who's mouth it is coming out of. I go for the throat.
I don't think this is entirely what you're saying, but that first sentence implies that "if they're so great, surely they should come to Hollywood and make a movie", which is just silly. Many directors, not limited to just Asia, don't want to come to America to make movies. Some of America would pay for something similar (why you would need something similiar when you can go to the source is yet again confusing), but that same group already pays to see it from that source. Oldboy did incredibly well at the box office at a per screen rate and did even better on DVD.

This is not a knock at American intelligence - I'm not saying America isn't smart enough to make or understand some of the stuff coming out of Asia, I'm saying that it simply would not be made to begin with. It probably wouldn't make it past the pitch meeting. It is incredibly rare that Hollywood endorses unique vision (until one becomes a hit of course). It is a money game now and you place your bets on the standard winner. 3-Iron is not a standard winner. Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance is not a standard winner. They most likely could get independent funding and be made in America, no question, and people would still see them because the American independent film market is on a boom these days. But we're talking Hollywood and Hollywood doesn't run that race.
First, I've never said that Wai is any degree better than everyone else and I don't think anyone else here has so I must assume that you're refering to someone elsewhere. So, aside from his style, his fantastic vision and poetical circumstance, why isn't he a good director?

Setting a standard does not imply that something is advanced. The wheel is not an advanced machine, yet it is the standard. I never trashed the formula and you will be hardpressed to find a genre supporter around here or anywhere that praises and craves the genre with more unrequited love than I do. I'll never trash the genre. Hell, I own the domain horrorsnotdead.com.

Those directors hit a passionate chord in the 70s and 80s and were neutered in the 90s since. Wes Craven, John Carpenter and Tobe Hooper have all had their films completely washed over and dulled by the Hollywood system. I doubt you'll contend this.

You are ignorant of the asian language of films. So am I and so is almost everyone else on this site (unless there are some Asian posters I'm unaware of).

So wait, you came out to defend film critics and film snobs? The very people you've expressed hate for across these boards? I'm guessing you ment to defend against such a group...

Wow, I'm honored. Really, I am. That is the first time me telling someone else about film has ever been called pretentious.

So, you're uninformed but don't need the education? That is the very reason I and others wrote that list of recommended Asian films. Reread my words, I didn't say "let me teach you about..", I said "You need to educate yourself". You can take that education wording as some kind of blow to imply you're stupid if you want, but that wasn't the case. Would you have liked it more if I said "uninformed"? Nah, I guess you'd of liked it more if no one bothered to reply to your "defense" in the first place.

Clearly you don't use that same open eye when reading posts, because the last chunk of mine said that I don't unconditionally praise Asian cinema.

But hey, let me go back on the record again since apparently it wasn't clear last time. I don't think Asian cinema is better than American. I don't think Asian horror is at all better than Western horror. I've yet to see any Asian horror film which can best the fervor, humor, fun and horror of Cabin Fever. I think Asia is far off from creating something that can topple the early works of John Carpenter (and since we're on record, my favorite director of all time), George Romero (again, for the record Dawn of the Dead is my favorite film of all time), Wes Craven (Last House on the Left is a landmark) or Tobe Hooper.

And oh man, if you think that post (or even this one) was rude, I'd love to see the reaction (from anyone) to a post in which I actually am rude.

I wasn't that scared, i thought it was a bit predicable and working up to a sequel

So basically we agree.

Except for Cabin Fever, which is trash.

You still have yet to answer why you think Wong-Kar Wai is a bad director.

I find his style interesting, but he focuses more on the visual than the actual story. They are supposed to be almost melodiously dramatic as in 2046. But, I just thought it was romance with curly cue smoke rising from the ciggarrette. Almost homage to certain elements of film noir and mystery.

I just didn't find substance in his movie, 2046. I suppose I was suspecting something besides what it was, and that's partially my fault, but I just felt as if it wasn't a whole picture. Just the style and romance that flies in the face of my personal consideration of logic.

A good counter example would be The City of Lost Children, I believed that had a wortwhile story and still managed to be romantic and different while setting apart certain standard elements of movie.

I might grow to like him, but as of now, I don't like his movies. They are good in their own ways, but not special under any circumstance.

Hey thanks, but I wasn't talking about The Ring, I was talking about the lame comment you made in this post:

Basically, you were grouping a bunch of people you don't know together, bashing them a little bit, while at the same time, spelling Korean with a C. My comment was a somewhat sarcastic, and not so subtle retort to said comment. So, I was sort of stating that if you want to call out the intelligence/ignorance of an entire people, you may want to learn to spell the names of countries properly, or at least the word creepy.

As for the Ring and Ringu, I am well aware that Ringu was Japanese, as I have seen the film. I was commenting on Corean, not The Ring, or Ringu.

__________________

Hey, thanks for noticing my mistake but was it worth spending ur time on that? i am not a native - language speaker so i may mistake sometimes as in my language it is with C and not K.

Right, I figured that when you tossed out a blanket statement about American's having a lot to learn, which was the point of my original post. We all have a lot to learn, American or otherwise. That was the point of my post. Just a little jab at the new person, when they needed one.

Regardless, you are correct to a point, in that SOME Americans could stand to broaden their horizons when it comes to films shot and produced in other countries. But, then again, so could a lot of people from other countries, as well. No need to attempt attaching that particular deficiency to just America.

My whole course of discussion here, was that those who live in glass houses, should never throw stones....I was just attempting to avoid cliche...

Re: Wong Kar Wai - I think he is a great director, but I also see Obi's point, to some extent. Also, If I had only seen 2046, I would probably be calling him overrated as well.... I found 2046 to be a bit too disjointed and, well, pretentious. Now, once I saw In the Mood for Love, I changed my tune drastically. He was clearly going for a totally visual narration in that film, as well, but he pulled it off with flying colors. He manages to be mysterious and intriguing, while maintaining his auteur style, yet he delivers clear ideas with his visuals.

I feel that 2046 took two (minor, but still harmful) missteps. The first was the inclusion of the sci-fi story sections in the narrative. While I loved the visuals of the futuristic setting, and I "got" the idea he was trying to get across with the sections, they disturbed what was an otherwise elegant period piece with a bunch of ham fisted android and train metaphor. I know he felt it was needed for the proper development of the writers psyche and to justify some of his actions, but, cinematically, it just didn't work for me.

Second, was the expansion of the main love story themes to three characters. To me, after seeing ITMFL, it seems like Wong was trying to sort of remake In the Mood, while expanding on it and adding some extra characters and themes. While it sounds like a good odea, The main reason I loved ITMFL so much, was the clear and lonely narrative thread of the two main characters. I just don't think a director of this style needs to make his narrative more complex. He will add the complexity to his work when he puts it together visually, as that is what he does. ITMFL laid out an extremely simply storyline, then went to work on lush visuals, fantastic acting, and mood you can feel seeping out of the screen.
My 5th grade teacher used to say "Show me, don't tell me" when we would do our creative projects, and I feel like Kar Wai was in amazing form on ITMFL, but then he tried to tell us what was happening in 2046, instead of just showing us. The result was just sort of a almost-there rehash of the previous story, with a few added twists here and there.

Check out ITMFL Obi, and I think you may change your opinion on the man....

Thank you.

I'll check out in the mood for love.

Ah, I was under the wrongful impression that Obiwan had seen both In the Mood for Love and 2046, given that the latter is the sequel, but I guessed wrong. So yah, I understand a little more now that you've felt somewhat ambigious to the man. It isn't that ITMFL will make 2046 make more sense or anything, it doesn't really change the quality of 2046, but the two are very closely related despite ITMFL being the far superior film.

Though I still harshly disagree with, "They are good in their own ways, but not special under any circumstance." I could understand that if you're blind, but clearly you saw the visuals of 2046 and how that doesn't qualify for being special under any circumstance baffles me. Christopher Doyle is a god and it bums me out that that was the last picture he'll do with Wai.

I did like the visuals, they were fantastic and poetic. Almost a tribute to various elements of noir, mystery, sci fi, and of course, romance.

I by no means dismiss the awesome smoke curly coes, they are awesome, just so we make that clear.

But, something I've always wanted to know about the cinematographer. Is it that person who determines the shot of the movie? I was under the auspice that it was the writer who wrote what to shoot and how to shoot it, and how the director translated it. The cinematographer was just a person meant to convey the opinion of the writer and director, no more than a man getting a paycheck for something the writer or director made him do. Instructions verbatim, such as (bad and rude example) telling a dog to sit.

Please, enlighten me on my baffling ignorance.

I think it is very rare that a writer writes the specifics of a shot. The only time I can imagine it happening is if the writer knows they are the director or if it is an incredibly visual piece, such as anything written by Charlie Kaufman, and even then I doubt the writer had much say at all in the shots themselves. The director ultimately dictates the shot, but depending on the director will collaborate greatly with the cinematographer on coming up with those shots. Then of course, the cinematographer is the person who executes it.

That's about the extent of my knowledge on the situation, at least. Someone else could probably shed some more light on it. I should really learn more about cinematography, not just for personal use (because I could sure use it), but because over the past year I've developed a great respect for the people behind the camera and it is hypocritical for me to praise a cinematography so (such as I do with Christopher Doyle - but he is also hilarious and sounds like a badass in interviews) and yet not really know the truth of it all.