Horror Show

[Steve S]

Dead of Night (1945) is an excellent film, and a little creepy and unnerving, but I wouldn't call it really scary. It's absolutely a great watch, though, and I highly recommend it.

Don't confuse it with a later film of the same name.

One of my favourites............

[Scorpio]

One of my favourites............

I don't think the horror movie, as i would recognise it, existed in 1945. With the exception of the Frederic March version of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, I mean horror movies that were linked to the permissive society in there depiction of violence and adult themes.

[RivkahChaya]

I don't think the horror movie, as i would recognise it, existed in 1945. With the exception of the Frederic March version of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, I mean horror movies that were linked to the permissive society in there depiction of violence and adult themes.

You'll have to give me an example. There was lot of violence, and "adult themes" in silent movies, because people assumed no one would be taking children to them, since the intertitles had to be read, and we written for an adult vocabulary and reading ability. There was nudity, lopping off of heads in battle scenes (both the "Fall of Babylon" sequence in Intolerance, and the battle sequences in Birth of a Nation), the horrific chariot race in Ben Hur, homicides, suicides, rapes, some things in Lon Chaney films that were just bizarre (The Unknown is quite unsettling), and lots of female breasts, although some of them got edited out in rereleases, so we just have stills.

The reason the Hays' Code came about in 1933 was that sound films meant people started taking children to them.

Have you seen Hitchcock's early films? He made a film version of The Lodger, which is awfully good, and some suspense films that can blow your mind when you are watching them. Hitchcock never introduced supernatural elements, and by the time the films were resolved, the scary stuff had usually beat a retreat, but when you are in the middle of the film, and don't know where it's going, pretty creepy.

[kensei]

Would like to give a nod to one special sub-genre of horror films, the "killer animal" movie. There are so many of them, and I would venture to say that only rarely has it been done really well without any level of cheesiness. Two that spring to mind are "Jaws" (of course, but none of its sequels), and "The Ghost and the Darkness" with Val Kilmer and Michael Douglas, which is a true story about two maneating African lions. "Jaws" is a true classic that was nominated for the best picture Oscar despite its mechanical shark that barely worked and looked just scary enough for that time, and though many would place it in the "thriller" or even "drama" category I do usually see it in the horror section in the video store. There were just seconds of real shark footage included in the movie. In "The Ghost and the Darkness" we get to see plenty of footage of real lions, which are of course much more trainable than sharks, and it is mixed with animatronics for some of the extreme close-ups that are almost indistinguishable. Plenty of great suspense in both films, and both end with right up to the last second confrontations between man and beast where either could end up the winner.

One of my guilty pleasures is perhaps the first big "Jaws" rip-off movie, "GRIZZLY," which is of course about an impossibly large maneating bear terrorizing a national park. I first saw it when I was about 10 and I'll always be proud of the fact that my best friend at the time who was with me bailed even before the half way point, while I stayed until the end. It starred Christopher George, Andrew Prine, and Richard Jaeckel. Picture idyllic scenes of people enjoying the great outdoors that are SUDDENLY cut short by horrendous roars, quick shots of a clawed paw swinging through the air, and human bodies coming apart and gushing blood in various ways. It also featured a horse being beheaded by that same paw swipe, with a straight cut that looked like the head had been removed with a saw. Yep, I sat through that at the tender age of 10. The acting by the three stars- who are a reflection of the three men in "Jaws"- is actually quite good, but surrounded by extreme cheese. The ads for the movie described the bear as "18 feet of maneating, gut-crunching terror," but in the movie he is described as being only 15 feet tall, and when we finally get to see him portrayed by a real trained bear rather than just the fake swinging paw on a stick, he looks- surprise surprise- about the size of a regular grizzly. I don't know how many bullets the bear absorbs throughout the movie but it is many. Why won't he die? Just because he's big? It's wonderfully silly, and he is finally blown to smithereens with a rocket launcher, and how forest rangers come to be in posession of one of those is anyone's guess. Aaaaah, "Grizzly." My favorite guilty pleasure.

And I'd like to give honorable mention to the movie "Orca," which came out at around the same time. The cast had real clout- Richard Harris and Charlotte Rampling were the stars of this killer whale adventure. Bo Derek played Harris' daughter and got her leg bitten off. Harris played a fisherman who tried to capture a killer whale alive but ended up accidentally killing a pregnant female, which resulted in its mate vowing revenge against him. It's a classic case of "Gee, if I change careers and just stay off the ocean for the rest of my life this will cease to be a problem, but of course I can't do that." Pretty good flick though in my opinion. My favorite scene is where Harris goes to speak with a priest, and in wonderful Irish accents they have this exchange:

"Father, is it possible to commit a sin against an animal?"
"Oh, my son, it is possible to commit a sin even against a blade of grass."

And it's old enough and obscure enough that I don't mind giving a spoiler: The whale wins.

[Scorpio]

Would like to give a nod to one special sub-genre of horror films, the "killer animal" movie. There are so many of them, and I would venture to say that only rarely has it been done really well without any level of cheesiness. Two that spring to mind are "Jaws" (of course, but none of its sequels), and "The Ghost and the Darkness" with Val Kilmer and Michael Douglas, which is a true story about two maneating African lions. "Jaws" is a true classic that was nominated for the best picture Oscar despite its mechanical shark that barely worked and looked just scary enough for that time, and though many would place it in the "thriller" or even "drama" category I do usually see it in the horror section in the video store. There were just seconds of real shark footage included in the movie. In "The Ghost and the Darkness" we get to see plenty of footage of real lions, which are of course much more trainable than sharks, and it is mixed with animatronics for some of the extreme close-ups that are almost indistinguishable. Plenty of great suspense in both films, and both end with right up to the last second confrontations between man and beast where either could end up the winner.

One of my guilty pleasures is perhaps the first big "Jaws" rip-off movie, "GRIZZLY," which is of course about an impossibly large maneating bear terrorizing a national park. I first saw it when I was about 10 and I'll always be proud of the fact that my best friend at the time who was with me bailed even before the half way point, while I stayed until the end. It starred Christopher George, Andrew Prine, and Richard Jaeckel. Picture idyllic scenes of people enjoying the great outdoors that are SUDDENLY cut short by horrendous roars, quick shots of a clawed paw swinging through the air, and human bodies coming apart and gushing blood in various ways. It also featured a horse being beheaded by that same paw swipe, with a straight cut that looked like the head had been removed with a saw. Yep, I sat through that at the tender age of 10. The acting by the three stars- who are a reflection of the three men in "Jaws"- is actually quite good, but surrounded by extreme cheese. The ads for the movie described the bear as "18 feet of maneating, gut-crunching terror," but in the movie he is described as being only 15 feet tall, and when we finally get to see him portrayed by a real trained bear rather than just the fake swinging paw on a stick, he looks- surprise surprise- about the size of a regular grizzly. I don't know how many bullets the bear absorbs throughout the movie but it is many. Why won't he die? Just because he's big? It's wonderfully silly, and he is finally blown to smithereens with a rocket launcher, and how forest rangers come to be in posession of one of those is anyone's guess. Aaaaah, "Grizzly." My favorite guilty pleasure.

And I'd like to give honorable mention to the movie "Orca," which came out at around the same time. The cast had real clout- Richard Harris and Charlotte Rampling were the stars of this killer whale adventure. Bo Derek played Harris' daughter and got her leg bitten off. Harris played a fisherman who tried to capture a killer whale alive but ended up accidentally killing a pregnant female, which resulted in its mate vowing revenge against him. It's a classic case of "Gee, if I change careers and just stay off the ocean for the rest of my life this will cease to be a problem, but of course I can't do that." Pretty good flick though in my opinion. My favorite scene is where Harris goes to speak with a priest, and in wonderful Irish accents they have this exchange:

"Father, is it possible to commit a sin against an animal?"
"Oh, my son, it is possible to commit a sin even against a blade of grass."

And it's old enough and obscure enough that I don't mind giving a spoiler: The whale wins.

I particularly remember ' Zoltan:Hound of Dracula ' and ' Night of the Lepus '
( mutant rabbits ) making an impression.

[Robert]

"The Birds" is a kind of horror film. You don't expect sparrows and suchlike to suddenly turn on you.

[Scorpio]

You'll have to give me an example. There was lot of violence, and "adult themes" in silent movies, because people assumed no one would be taking children to them, since the intertitles had to be read, and we written for an adult vocabulary and reading ability. There was nudity, lopping off of heads in battle scenes (both the "Fall of Babylon" sequence in Intolerance, and the battle sequences in Birth of a Nation), the horrific chariot race in Ben Hur, homicides, suicides, rapes, some things in Lon Chaney films that were just bizarre (The Unknown is quite unsettling), and lots of female breasts, although some of them got edited out in rereleases, so we just have stills.

The reason the Hays' Code came about in 1933 was that sound films meant people started taking children to them.

Have you seen Hitchcock's early films? He made a film version of The Lodger, which is awfully good, and some suspense films that can blow your mind when you are watching them. Hitchcock never introduced supernatural elements, and by the time the films were resolved, the scary stuff had usually beat a retreat, but when you are in the middle of the film, and don't know where it's going, pretty creepy.

I guess i am referring to a horror sub-genre which began with ' Peeping Tom ' and ' Psycho ' . It's a genre that owes little to the supernatural, but had more contemporary themes. I think Wes Cravens early stuff and John Carpenters ' Halloween ' seemed to be informed by these movies.

[kensei]

I particularly remember ' Zoltan:Hound of Dracula ' and ' Night of the Lepus '
( mutant rabbits ) making an impression.

Yes, "Night of the Lepus"! Can you believe DeForest Kelly from "Star Trek" was in that?

[Scorpio]

Yes, "Night of the Lepus"! Can you believe DeForest Kelly from "Star Trek" was in that?

A lot of recognisable faces in horror movies . William Shatner was in some strange Demon flick;It was called The Gargoyles or something.

[sdreid]

There were always man vs. lion movies and such but I think the first "killer animal" horror film like we are speaking of here was The Naked Jungle from 1954. I was 7 or 8 when I saw it first run at the theater in 54 and it scared the crap out of me.

Regarding The Ghost and the Darkness, it was a sort of remake of Bwana Devil which I also saw IN 3-D at the theater when I was 5 or 6 in 1952.

Before we got a TV in 1955, we would see 4-9 movies a week at both drive-in and indoor theaters.

[RivkahChaya]

I guess i am referring to a horror sub-genre which began with ' Peeping Tom ' and ' Psycho ' . It's a genre that owes little to the supernatural, but had more contemporary themes. I think Wes Cravens early stuff and John Carpenters ' Halloween ' seemed to be informed by these movies.

Have you ever seen Mystery of the Wax Museum? it was a reporter-as-detective film when it came out in 1932 (and an early color film, using a 2-color process, before technicolor was invented). The reporter-as-detective was very popular in the 1930s, as newspaper reporter was a very romantic (or, romanticized) sort of occupation (my paternal grandfather was actually a newspaper reporter during the depression, and had the crime beat for a while). Part of it was probably the fact that reporters always had a lot of work during the depression, and back then, it was a career you could get into with just a high school diploma (although, that meant more then), and a lot of determination.

Anyway, MWM gets classified as a horror film now, mainly because the remake (from something like 1960) with Vincent Price, called House of Wax, is classified that way. But it's a about a serial killer, with a really gruesome MO, and a really twisted motive, and also a climax that must have been a real shocker to audiences in 1932, who hadn't seen anything like it before. It's been copied so many times, that the original now seems a little hackneyed, which is unfortunate (something a lot of old films, like 42nd Street), go through).

But, as far as animal attacks, the 1933 King Kong was still pretty scary when I saw it in the 1970s. Now, of course, the lack of motion blur makes the giant ape less convincing next to CGI dinosaurs and dragons, but as far as what it is about, it's practically a Faustian story, and is certainly about hubris, and being hoist by your own petard. Given that an awful lot of people in 1933 were looking for a magic way to make a fast buck, the film was very topical.

Janet Leigh was in Night of the Lepus, which is even weirder-- she must have lost a bet.

The worst part is that saying it's about killer rabbits is giving it too much credit. It's about killer bunnies. Fluffy little bunnies. The animal people can barely get them to do anything except sit around and sniff, and look like they're waiting to get pet. They have to resort to a really phony hand-puppet for the actual attacks.

I mean, there is a sort of scary type of lepus, if anyone has ever seen a wild hare. Their fur grows in all directions, they have a mean glare in their eyes, usually some notches in their ears, and I'm sure they have Harley-Davidson tattoos under the fur. They look like they smoke unfiltered Camels, and I wouldn't want to meet a 200 lb. one in a dark alley.

But I guess by the same token, no one has a passel of trained ones all cinema-ready. So instead, we got fwuffy, cuddwy bunnies, that no matter how out-sized the furniture, were cuuuuute!

[Scorpio]

I have vague memories of various beast movies from yore ( they don't seem to make them that much anymore ). Plagues of killer frogs, homicidal Baboon troops,hungry Piranha packs, and evil wild-pigs. The pigs are from ' Hannibal ', which is quite modern, and they constitute only a small part of the film.

[kensei]

Janet Leigh was in Night of the Lepus, which is even weirder-- she must have lost a bet.

The worst part is that saying it's about killer rabbits is giving it too much credit. It's about killer bunnies. Fluffy little bunnies. The animal people can barely get them to do anything except sit around and sniff, and look like they're waiting to get pet. They have to resort to a really phony hand-puppet for the actual attacks.

I mean, there is a sort of scary type of lepus, if anyone has ever seen a wild hare. Their fur grows in all directions, they have a mean glare in their eyes, usually some notches in their ears, and I'm sure they have Harley-Davidson tattoos under the fur. They look like they smoke unfiltered Camels, and I wouldn't want to meet a 200 lb. one in a dark alley.

But I guess by the same token, no one has a passel of trained ones all cinema-ready. So instead, we got fwuffy, cuddwy bunnies, that no matter how out-sized the furniture, were cuuuuute!

Many thanks for the huge laugh you just gave me. Wild hares are called "jack rabbits" where I live and yes, they are bigger and much less cute than their little cottontail cousins. As for "Night of the Lepus," it's all so outrageous that I want to describe how it ends. It's such an obscure movie that I doubt many are eager to go track it down and watch it, but just in case, SPOILER ALERT! If you don't want to know, stop reading now.

There are hundreds of lion-sized killer bunnies on the rampage. Someone notices that there is a railroad in their path and gets the bright idea of electrifying it. Every single rabbit then ends up crispy-fried as they hit the tracks, despite the fact that after a point there would be a pile of bodies that the ones in the back would just be vaulting over. Unless the current passes through the bodies enough to still be lethal? I don't know, it's been many years since I saw it. I just remember that it was absolutely hilarious.

[RivkahChaya]

"Killer bunny" has got to be an oxymoron.

Google an image of Night of the Lepus. The bunnies are all well-fed and groomed, and couldn't be more pet-like if they were wearing ribbons tied around their necks.

It's hard to imagine how this film got green-lighted in the first place, but now that I think about it, someone may have been dropping acid, and watching that already-trippy Paramount Alice in Wonderland, or maybe just reading Alice in Wonderland with the Tenniel March Hare. Maybe on the story board, it looked scary, but after they'd already done some filming, and paid Janet Leigh, they discovered that no one had any trained hares, only bunnies, suitable for pulling out of top hats.

I mean, I'm not going to say that the March Hare in the Tim Burton movie is the scariest thing ever, but he has that unpredictability of that crazy, little guy always spoiling for a fight, who was scary because he had no sense of self-preservation, and would risk his life just to give you a black eye.

[Scorpio]

Can anyone remember a movie called ' The warning '. I remember flying jelly fish of possible extra terrestrial origin landing on people. This movie dates from about 1980 and, along with a dire effort called Zombie Lake, is one of the first VHS horrors that i can recall.