The Problem With Horror Movies is...

[Dave]

So, I was watching The Hitcher starring Sean Bean last night and a thought struck me. Now, it might not be too prevalent a point in ALL horror movies but for this one and other ones I have watched in the last few days, but it certainly does come into play in some of the most famous horror movies in history. That point, I hear you ask? Well, it is simply this:

“How does the killer know where the people are going?”

Seriously, The Hitcher really got me thinking about this and I have come to a conclusion that this is a massive plot hole in every single movie that employs a killer that is not capable of human thought. I know that people want examples, so why not give you them. Huh?

Well, last night, in The Hitcher, Sean Bean plays a fucking lunatic that seemingly kills people for fun. However, the plot aside, his character just did not make any sense to me. Not only did he stand out in the middle of a road in the middle of the night to cause an accident, he also had no idea where people were going. There is a scene where out protagonists are running from a police station but our crafty killer already knows which direction they are heading in and has enough time to get a car on top of a fucking cliff to push down in front of them! Are we actually supposed to believe that he is some omnipotent being that knows things before they happen? My main issue with this is that, what if they had gone in the other direction? Would our killer be pissed off that his elaborate plan had gone awry? Also, how did he get his car on top of the cliff? The main give-away for me, would have been the heavy winch system that he would have needed to employ.

Now, that may just go for The Hitcher, which itself was a pretty decent movie (If you get the chance). However, things like this have been going on for decades now. How does the killer know that you are hiding in the bathroom or under one bed in an apartment complex? Well, I guess most people will put it down to the fact that they see the clues and follow the tracks of their pray.

My main issue with that is how no one thinks to move abroad. In no horror movies have I seen someone move abroad and still be at war with the same faceless killer that has been plaguing them for the last 5 years. How far would Michael Myers have gotten if Jamie Lee Curtis had hopped on a plane and flown to Senegal? Yeah, I can really see Michael Myers checking his ticket on the airline and taking his seat next to a crying baby. It is bullshit!

Then again, not all killers have the facial deformity of Michael Myers. Some of them have the ability to move amongst the crowd with ease. Take Scream for example. Sidney Prescott moved to a new state, changed her name, started working under and alias and the killer still found her! Could it be that the killer is hiring private detectives to do their work for them? For me, it is just a massive plot hole that is always prevalent in these types of movies. How does the killer always manage to be one step ahead of his pray.

Now, I am not or have I have been a victim of a serial killer but I am pretty sure I could outsmart one if I was. Without telling anyone, I would just move away to another country. It is not like anyone is going to miss me since all of my family has no doubt already been hacked up into small manageable chunks.

Does anyone else see a flaw here...?

 

[LilacFray]

I sure do see a flaw. I've never thought about this before..

And now it's making me laugh!

I mightn't have thought about it before because the horror movies I watch are related to spirits and demons.

But about the serial killer and all, seems like he's got a massive organisation world wide. Lol.

Watching us. Watching the victim's every move.

And about moving abroad, you're right..

I haven't watched a horror movie where the victim goes abroad and yet the killer still follows..

I only know of moving houses or being on the move and still being followed..

And thanks to you Dave, from now on I'll never enjoy a horror movie

because whenever the killer successfully finds the victim, I'd keep thinking about this flaw XDD

 

[Dagger Dias]

The killers only "know" where people are going because the script writer(s) had decided for that to happen. In real life things could go differently. The chances of a victim fleeing the country to hide on the other side of the planet, only for the killer to show up a week later or something like that are next to nothing. Could it still happen? Sure. However, movies are mostly fictional. These horror films aren't meant to be realistic. They are just meant to entertain and possibly scare you. For example, let's look at Saw. If you've watched any of them and are paranoid about getting abducted to "play a game", then it did its job. It's meant to scare you, not be realistic. I don't see these issues as unrealistic plot points. I see them as entertaining moments of films that have a much higher chance of scaring the audience. They make the films much more fun to watch.

I don't see that as the problem with horror movies these days. The problem instead is that they aren't scary enough and some are just dumb. Then again, that could just be due to me being an adult and much less likely to be frightened by a movie compared to my younger self from 10 or 20 years ago. Nostalgic inflation can make a horror film from when we are younger seem much scarier than modern ones just simply from it being scary when we were little. Kids today could be going through the same thing with the very same films we are claiming suck or aren't scary.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Most of the main stream horror movies today just aren't that scary. The early ones aren't really scary either unless you have never experienced them before. The only thing the can shock most of us is filming something taboo and going there. Watching crazy French and Japanese Indie horror flicks definitely cross the line that American filmmakers don't cross. Of course their movies are so graphic that it is very hard to find them in theaters in the states.

Horror movies don't have to be full of gore to be successful. Sometimes too much gore ruins everything, like in the Saw movies. General suspense without blood splattering everywhere is much better.

If you think about the plot holes in movies like Scream where Sheriff Dewey is never to be found when the killings actually start. You would think that guy would positioned 24/7 in front of the next victim's house. You also wonder why all the killers stalled so long to kill Sidney and her friends when they had numerous chances.

Paranormal Activity 1 and 2 are ridiculous to me because the people never leave the house. Even if you don't believe in ghosts, if you or your wife is dragged down a flight of stairs, I'm pretty sure that wasn't caused by the wind. In part 2 the ghosts or "demons" did everything to the owners but kill them, and they still stayed in the house.

Finally, another flaw I always see is the victim never being prepared to kill their foe or even knowing how to kill him. Either bring a gun or knife with you everywhere you go, or chop the dude's head off. I'm pretty sure Michael Myers couldn't re spawn a head even if he was still alive.

 

[Blue Chipper]

Movies do not always follow logic, and that's a good thing. You propose that moving abroad would be the plausible reaction if a serial killer were after you. That's a good, logical thing to do. But, would that make for good entertainment on the screen? Would it be more enthralling for the protagonist to move abroad and escape the killer or for the protagonist to have dramatic confrontations with the killer?

Simply put, I'm a firm believer that logic and movies do not have to be harmonious if logic will decrease the entertainment value of the movie. Most horror films do not abide by sound reasoning and logic all of the time. And I'm glad.

 

[Dave]

You see, the thing is, I know how to separate fiction from non-fiction and perhaps this problem is merely from a subjective point of view. Let me put it to you this way. The absolute best horror movies I have seen are the original movies. I cannot remember a single sequel that I have enjoyed as much as the first and that is true of most movies and to just ones in the horror genre. The main problem I have is believing that what the protagonist is going through is actually real. Like I said, the best movies are the ones that can make you believe that the tribulations that the protagonist can be relayed unto you. I mean, I could be haunted by a poltergeist tomorrow and that would make sense. However, if I was hunted down by an undead nightmare that, after basically being nuked, was still chasing after me, I would have serious questions.

I think that the horror genre definitely need some work but that being said, I am sure that I am just watching the wrong movies lately. I mean, Hostel was one of the freakiest movies I have seen and it is because it relates back to the viewer in so many ways. I mean, who hasn't been travelling and seen something that they wish they hadn't? Or been in a situation that really takes them out of their comfort zone? To me, that is why this movie was so successful and still has somewhat of a cult following. Creep is another one that I like and it is because it plays on very real fears that could easily be true.

Maybe I should just try and immerse myself in the movie some more but shouldn't that be the role of the movie to do that? Shouldn't it take a little bit of give and take to get me more involved. I mean, I am watching the movie and I want to get involved but poor decision making and bad writing just takes me right out of the experience. Am I asking for too much here by asking for the writing to make more sense with horror movies?

 

[Dagger Dias]

The absolute best horror movies I have seen are the original movies. I cannot remember a single sequel that I have enjoyed as much as the first and that is true of most movies and to just ones in the horror genre.

I agree there. Other than Saw, the first movies in horror series have always been the best to me. Saw is the exception. #2 sucked and #7 felt rushed, but other than those, each was better than the one before it.

I could be haunted by a poltergeist tomorrow and that would make sense. However, if I was hunted down by an undead nightmare that, after basically being nuked, was still chasing after me, I would have serious questions.

Sometimes you just have to sit back and take it for what it is, a silly movie with a fake story that would probably never happen to you. Don't try to think about if it could happen to you, just let it entertain you. That's the point of going to movies, at least for me. Let it be an escape from reality. I totally see where you're coming from though.

Maybe I should just try and immerse myself in the movie some more but shouldn't that be the role of the movie to do that? Shouldn't it take a little bit of give and take to get me more involved. I mean, I am watching the movie and I want to get involved but poor decision making and bad writing just takes me right out of the experience. Am I asking for too much here by asking for the writing to make more sense with horror movies?

Honestly yes I think you're asking a little too much. Horror films aren't always meant to be remembered for their story. Some writers of film series are trying to get the movie as full of blood and gore as possible, while others just want to scare you. Even though there are a lot of horror films these days that are nothing to write home about, I think that you might enjoy them more if you sit back and just take them for what they are instead of over-analyzing the plot too much because movies are fake (mostly) and meant to be an escape from reality. I'm guilty of doing the same thing though to some movies by analyzing the plot afterwards and suddenly thinking it sucked. The more I try to ignore doing that, the more I enjoy movies.

 

[Mustang Sally]

“How does the killer know where the people are going?”

Good thought. It reminds me of another continual piece of bad logic that seems to turn up in many horror films: When the girl-in-trouble discovers that the killer is in the house with her, she has a few seconds to escape before he gets her. But, instead of running out the front or back door, she immediately heads up the stairs, cutting off any reasonable avenue of escape......unless she plans to jump out a second story window.

Then again, if she headed out the door, she'd be out of trouble and we wouldn't have a horror movie, would we?

 

[Dave]

Good thought. It reminds me of another continual piece of bad logic that seems to turn up in many horror films: When the girl-in-trouble discovers that the killer is in the house with her, she has a few seconds to escape before he gets her. But, instead of running out the front or back door, she immediately heads up the stairs, cutting off any reasonable avenue of escape......unless she plans to jump out a second story window.

Then again, if she headed out the door, she'd be out of trouble and we wouldn't have a horror movie, would we?

Yeah, I guess that is the problem right there. If she was to head out the front door, then there would be no action. My main issue with the movie type is that it has to follow the same rules no matter what the plot is. For example, in Scream, you always see the killings follow the same turn of events and that is what bugs me the most. The sense of logic in these movies is something that bugs me and I find it easier to enjoy a movie that has the main characters have some sort of sense.

That being said, sometimes it is necessary to follow that chain of events to make the action become forthcoming. I do remember watching Scream and Neve Campbell addressing this point. I think she says something like "People who run up the stairs instead of running for the front door". Yet more proof that Scream is a parody of most other slasher movies.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

Interesting thread.

To me slasher films really aren't scary for just the reasons that you mentioned. The killer miraculously is one step of ahead of the victims. Some would argue, that is what makes them so scary but to me it's what makes it unbelievable. Plus, in some slasher movies, the killer is not some supernatural being like Jason or Freddie Krueger, just a person that is deformed or in costume. So, that being the case, why are they always "super human?" They never tire out, or they can lift heavy furniture, bust through a glass window with no injury, get shot and stabbed and still survive. I mean, in scream, the killers are people just wearing a costume.


I like more realistic scary movies. Movies, that I could believe, could really happen.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

Stupid characters usually annoy me in horror films. Recently I watched Road Kill. I thought this was a terrible horror film. The story was a mess, but the dumb mistakes the characters made towards the end of the film just drove me nuts. One of the female characters trusts someone who she shouldn't trust, and the this idiotic judgment call causes her death. We always see characters trust someone who they know they shouldn't trust, we'll see them leave a group, or we'll see them open doors they shouldn't open. I can't count the number of times I've sat in front of my TV screen, and screamed "Don't do that!" but deep down inside, you know the character or characters will make the costly mistake.

I think tension is necessary in any horror or slasher film, and there should be a few good spook moments here and there. There should be times where I'm on the edge of my seat, and I should be nervously awaiting the killer's next move. I also look for a nice amount of blood and gore. Although, there are times where bloody and disgusting moments can go way over the top, and it just becomes overkill after a while. The last few Saw films would be a prime example of this.

I just think a lot of mainstream horror movies are garbage these days. Most of the remakes of the popular franchises(Friday The 13th, A Nightmare On Elm Street, etc.) aren't worth remembering. You can just tell the studios are trying to capitalize on the name value of these popular franchises, because so many of these films can be generic and dull. Halloween 2007 was pretty solid and unique, because seeing the transformation of a young Michael Myers was something different. Although, Halloween II (2009) was a huge clusterfuck, and I can't defend Rob Zombie on this one.

The Blair Witch Project films and the Paranormal Activity films were supposed to be this generation's memorable horror franchises, but I think Paranormal Activity and The Blair Witch Project are highly overrated. Paranormal Activity 2 was slightly better than first film, because Paranormal Activity was pretty boring throughout, and things didn't pick up until the very end. The Blair Witch Project was just one huge steaming pile of horseshit. The film looked so cheap and shitty, the majority of the acting was bad, and the tension just wasn't there, and just like the first Paranormal Activity film, we really don't see anything truly creepy until the very end. Book of Shadows was also bad. At least you can give the first one credit for trying to do something different, but Book Of Shadows just felt like another plain and generic mainstream horror film.

A lot of mainstream horror films these days feel the same. The stories are usually bad, the acting is either mediocre or shitty, and EVERY twist and turn is so painfully predictable. You might stumble upon a gem every now and then, but this can be very rare.