Under the Silver Lake

Tools    





WARNING: "Hereditary" spoilers below
Here are the jumpscares according to wheresthejump:

14:29 – A bird flies into the window of Charlie’s classroom however we see the bird flying towards the window beforehand which substantially reduces the impact.

37:50 – We see a decapitated head on the road crawling with ants (not a jump scare but some viewers might find the image disturbing).

1:08:50 – As Annie drives home from the seance she is startled by the tongue-clicking noise that her daughter makes.

1:18:19 – After the seance at home, Peter starts to freak out however this is interrupted when a glass cabinet suddenly breaks.

1:18:29 – Shortly after Annie says “Charlie, what’s wrong?” the candle on the table flares up.

1:27:58 – Peter thinks he sees Charlie in the corner of the room but it turns out to be a ball that drops and rolls across the floor. After a short pause, an arm suddenly grabs Peter around the head.

1:49:47 – Peter hears a loud noise from upstairs.

1:53:22 – During a very tense scene, Peter sees a naked man in the doorway. He then looks up to the ceiling where Annie previously was but no one is there. Suddenly, Annie rushes at him from the corner of the room.

That's quite a few (not counting the ant one as noted that's not a jumpscare), not as much as most modern horrors but it still prevents me from praising it for not having jumpscares. Think the 1:53:22 one with Collette running out from an unexpected place very quickly with booming music and the last part of the 1:27:58 one with the hand certainly come at you, the glass cabinet and bird too actually.

The idea of the sleepwalking scene is scary but i thought Collette looked ridiculous and the son barely conveyed terror, he sounded more annoyed than scared, that may be down to the actor who was pretty weak but still. The fire scene was absurd to me we disagree there, especially Collette's face that just came across as overacting to me.


Yeah, to each his own we don't agree on this but it's just personal reactions not anything fundamentally wrong with the film. I did quite like it i just didn't think of it as a horror masterpiece, gave it 3/5.

WARNING: spoilers below
I'll give you the bird. The clicking noise I also don't consider a "jump scare" as I saw that as a natural process of the story. As are the others, which is why I disagree about calling them jump scares. When I talk jump scares I mean those instances where the loud noise or sudden occurrence isn't crucial or beneficial to the story in any way and it's only there to get a sudden shock/scare. That's just my personal take. I'm talking about the cheap jump scares basically.


I'm not saying the movie is perfect, but the good far outweigh the bad and it does what a Horror film is supposed to do. At least it did for me.



WARNING: spoilers below
I'll give you the bird. The clicking noise I also don't consider a "jump scare" as I saw that as a natural process of the story. As are the others, which is why I disagree about calling them jump scares. When I talk jump scares I mean those instances where the loud noise or sudden occurrence isn't crucial or beneficial to the story in any way and it's only there to get a sudden shock/scare. That's just my personal take. I guess you can say I'm talking about cheap jump scares.


I'm not saying the movie is perfect, but the good far outweigh the bad and it does what a Horror film is supposed to do. At least it did for me.

WARNING: "hereditary" spoilers below
Think most movie jumpscares can be argued to be beneficial to the story if you're explaining some of those away with that, none of them had to be done that way so in my eyes they were jumpscares. They used misdirection, sudden movement and an increase in tempo/score in an attempt to surprise you.

Obviously you're defining it as something else but i honestly think jumpscares in most movies you have a problem with could be explained in a similar way. All the hand scene did was increase the sons fear/paranoia in a vulnerable moment for example, there was no need for the hand other than to try and get a shock scare out of you, the same could be said of most movie jump scares. Didn't see much difference in the majority of the ones in Hereditary,


Anyway we disagree on that, fine.



WARNING: "hereditary" spoilers below
Think most movie jumpscares can be argued to be beneficial to the story if you're explaining some of those away with that, none of them had to be done that way so in my eyes they were jumpscares. They used misdirection, sudden movement and an increase in tempo/score in an attempt to surprise you.

Obviously you're defining it as something else but i honestly think jumpscares in most movies you have a problem with could be explained in a similar way. All the hand scene did was increase the sons fear/paranoia in a vulnerable moment for example, there was no need for the hand other than to try and get a shock scare out of you, the same could be said of most movie jump scares. Didn't see much difference in the majority of the ones in Hereditary,


Anyway we disagree on that, fine.

WARNING: spoilers below
True, there tends to be a fine line. But there are those that I'd consider more as just taking advantage of the element of surprise. I mean it is Horror, so while they all go for that surprise factor, some do it better than others. With that is where you have the difference between a cheap jump scare and an unexpected surprise. It's all a matter of execution.

The hands coming out scene is part of the latter. It went for the element of surprise while progressing the story. It wasn't just there for the hell of it, in fact I thought it did a fine job in playing up the son's own turmoil. Also, a lot of the scenes have layers. There are times where we see the perspective of one, when we should really be paying attention to another for the real horror to manifest. Again, that might just be me.
But, yeah, I think we're going in circles now. But I dug the discussion.