Your favorite slashers

Thank you.

Actual slasher films.

__________________
Do you know what a roller pigeon is, Barney? They climb high and fast, then roll over and fall just as fast toward the earth. There are shallow rollers and deep rollers. You can’t breed two deep rollers, or their young will roll all the way down, hit, and die. Officer Starling is a deep roller, Barney. We should hope one of her parents was not.

A slasher just needs to be a psychoman killing a lot of people.


Wait for it...

Pfft. So over simplified to call this a slasher.

Terrible.

Sorry you don’t get to say what a slasher film is.

It’s not a debate, there are established rules.

Just because you were born in this century

You don’t get to redefine a very small genre

Just because you want to

You’re the type of person who flips tables when someone calls 28 Days Later a zombie film, right?

Calls me childish and throws a hissy fit. Too angry to sense trolling.

Any attitude more purist than my stepdad's strict "hair metal" rules isn't worth considering. And unlike you, I haven't dictated anything. You're only posting so much as a desperate cry for attention.

Art evolves. Genres are reinvented. How we define these things invariably become fluid. Not seeing why slasher films, of all things, should be exempt from this.

I think it's worth discussing our "rules" for slashers if it means digging into how and why the different films work or how they build on past films.

But I don't necessarily think that there is a hard and fast set of rules. For example, we tend to think of the killer as being masked, and yet the killer in Peeping Tom is not masked (right? It's been a while).

I understand why some horror fans cite the requirement that the killer be an actual person and not a supernatural entity, and yet in one of the films that I listed as a favorite there is a distinct element of the supernatural/magic.

I'm honestly not sure I could put together much of a list of rules that wouldn't be broken by at least one of the films on my own list. I agree that I think of a single killer, usually an unknown (masked or otherwise anonymous), multiple victims, and usually centered in a very limited location (camp. school, sorority house, etc). It's kind of a vague set of requirements, which explains why other people might have their own variations on what they consider a slasher or not a slasher.

I mean, ultimately the best use of a thread like this is getting good recommendations for a genre you like.

It shouldn't. ANOES was a serious breakthrough for the slasher genre, and redefined it. In fact, would the later stages of Jason's story might not have happened without the supernatural slasher happening first.

I don't generally like slashers, but (presumably) drunken rants by a certain individual in this thread are rather amusing.

__________________

I generally like slashers, but I agree with you on the second part.

We’re dangerously close to quoting famous Wooley qualifying slasher, Se7en.

I'm personally against calling Se7en that because the killings happened offscreen, but it was the movie that introduced me to killer-central movies so I'll give it that.

Bayonets were used during WW1. This means that all WW1 movies are slasher films since these were used as weapons to slash people with back then. It's just science.

__________________
IMDb
Letterboxd

I didn't even think of Se7en when I made my list. Though it's certainly an atypical slasher film, since I included Lang's M, I don't see why Se7en wouldn't apply for my list.

The one doing the slashing in slasher movies is generally thought to be a psychopath.

Yeah, I know. I was just being goofy with that post.

Weren't there bayonette scenes in Platoon?

I don't remember, but if so, that's also a slasher film then!

There were bayonets in the PROWLER. It’s essentially the exact same thing.