First of all, you asked me two questions. You did not provide two answers.
Notice how I asked the questions of YOU and not of myself? Hint, hint...
Yes, you are INDICATING that Ginger Snaps was original, but you are not providing any evidence as to why. I don't remember anything very original in the film. Two girls are walking alone at night. One gets attacked by a wolf-like creature and begins to go through changes (a metaphor for puberty...like all werewolf films)...she discovers her sexuality, etc... Kinda reminds me of a little movie called An American Werewolf in London (and every other werewolf film made from the p.o.v. of the werewolf). So what's so original?
If your experience with the horror genre as of late has to do with a movie made twenty years ago and then you want to come to a discussion about modern horror films and why some stand out, try not to point out that your frame of reference is that twenty year old film. I'm not saying that is a bad movie, John Landis in fact made a revolutionary film with that movie, but when I make a statement about how Ginger Snaps is a breathe of fresh air during a time in which the air was stale, An American Werewolf in London doesn't belong in the conversation. Change London to Paris and you're in the game. Talk about any of Kevin Williams pictures and you're in the game. Hell, talk about anything that was released by New Line or Dimension and you're in the game, but not with John Landis.
As for what is so original. Aside from the marketing, as I've pointed out and though you may feel the marketing is indepedent of the film itself, I think the two are very connected as the actual production process these days cannot be neglected when looking at the merits of a film. The sister relationship was fantastic, something that hasn't been seen in a horror film as of late. Yes, it was rather generic and adolescent, this isn't Shakespeare here, but it was more complex and more emotive than any single relationship in any teen horror film of the past half decade.
That alone is enough for me to call it what I did, but if you want more go look at the creature effects in the film or the actual level of acting, which is far above that of its peers.
If you're not calling it revolutionary by saying that the film 'did SO MANY things right during a time in which EVERYONE thought EVERYTHING had already been done, etc'. What are you saying, exactly?
I'm saying exactly what I said the first time around. Ginger Snaps is an original horror movie that was made during a time in which originality was cast way the hell out the window. It isn't that Ginger Snaps is actually some godlike horror movie, it is simply that it is a horror movie that barreled through a crowd of crap to say "hey".
Wouldn't that make the marketing of the film original or at least functional, and not the film itself?
See above.