A Suggestion for Writers of Horror Movies

[Andara Bledin]

The most basic part of any work of fiction is the plot. If the plot isn't there, the rest is all just trying to make purses out of sows' ears. You can't build a house without starting with a solid foundation.

^-.-^

[AdminAssistant]

First, Plot. Then, Character, Thought (or Theme), Diction, Music, Spectacle.

Aristotle's Poetics. Far too many dramatic works reverse that order.

[Hyena Dandy]

The most basic part of any work of fiction is the plot.

*drive by argument* I DISAGREE!

I think the most important thing is a theme. In my RPs/RPGs (this explains why Kit never got off the ground) I find it best to start with a question or an idea that permeates the story. Then build a character to examine that question, and use the plot to do the same.

That said, that doesn't mean stories based primarily on plot or on character are BAD. I just think the best ones are built on theme

[guywithashovel]

The Family Video store around the block has a section of movies that rent for five nights at two for a dollar. Needless to day, a lot of the low budget horror movies can be found in that section. I've gotten some where I honestly think the director just got the actors together, turned on the camera, and said, "Okay, guys, just start doing stuff!"

[blas87]

Yes, yes, and yes, to that. Try out the After Dark Horrorfest films. That's where you'll find The Grudge 6 (or whatever one they are on now) and other stupid low budget horror films that are just....beyond weird.

[ExRetailDrone]

I used to work at that particular video store, and I definitely took advantage of my employee perks where I could sometimes rent movies for free. I saw this one called Dying God that was even worse than I had expected, and my expectations were really low. The character development was laughable. There were lines in there that had absolutely no purpose other than to explain why the character was doing what he was doing, and it wasn't even explained well -.- Plus, it was like the writers didn't even try to make the placement of those lines make sense, as long as they were there. Ugh. The acting was god-awful. The plot was beyond weird (I thought there was some vague promise strewn in there, but it would have needed way too much work to be worth it to try to make it decent), and not in a good way. And the budget was so low it was painful to watch. It also came out as a new release earlier this year (I think) at the store, but the date on IMDb is 2008... I saw other movies that had that discrepancy and all of those movies were some of the worst of the horror movies I saw while I was working there. But Dying God has to take the prize for one of the worst horror movies I ever saw, and that's saying a lot as I really enjoy watching bad horror movies My friends and I used to have bad horror movie nights, and they were great! But this one...it was so bad it wasn't even fun to make fun of it >.>

[Mytical]

Yes, theme is needed for a good plot. It is a critical element, but it is only one spice. Sometimes one spice can be good, at other times...not so much. The theme 'scary clowns' is a good example. Look at the various horror films that use scary clowns..Steven Kings IT..it works (of course that is because it has a plot and he is a master) - others...not so much. A few are so bad they are good (Killer clowns from outer space), but the rest fall flat.

Just like the Zombie theme. Zombies can be scary, fun to watch, and interesting. Or it can blow chunks. Want a bad theme (even with plot?) that just was a horrible idea? Zombies vs Vampires. I wouldn't insult dreck by calling it that. However, you can not have a good plot without a theme, and you can have a theme without a plot.

[Kheldarson]

The most basic part of any work of fiction is the plot. If the plot isn't there, the rest is all just trying to make purses out of sows' ears. You can't build a house without starting with a solid foundation.

^-.-^

*drive by argument* I DISAGREE!

I think the most important thing is a theme. In my RPs/RPGs (this explains why Kit never got off the ground) I find it best to start with a question or an idea that permeates the story. Then build a character to examine that question, and use the plot to do the same.

That said, that doesn't mean stories based primarily on plot or on character are BAD. I just think the best ones are built on theme

Actually....it depends on the story you're telling. Reason why I dislike Tolkien's works and can't read them? They're world driven. He's telling the story based simply on getting you from point A to B with the purpose of showing you everything in between.

A lot of modern fantasy is plot/character driven. Design a plot and a character and then watch how badly your character wrecks what you thought the plot should be.

But from whatever perspective you're writing from, that element at the very least should be strong. Telling a plot? That plot should make sense. Telling us about a character? I'd better like the character one way or another (Citizen Kane anyone?). Going with a theme? Make sure that theme is clear. And in the case of horror, sorry, horror is a genre, not a theme. Throwing the elements at me and saying "hey it's horror!" does not work.

Not that I can watch any horror movies without getting creeped out (I tend to overanalyze things and make them creepier than they are).

[RecoveringKinkoid]

I hate contrived plots. Contrived crap like what you're talking about will ruin a story for me.

I can believe that a ghost/monster/deranged hillbilly with a chainsaw is running around on a rampage easier than I can believe that some of these idiotic decisions get made.

Which I suppose is wrong of me, because I have spent enough time working with the public to know that some people's stupidity can never be underestimated. But there you go.

I mean, I love Supernatural, but it's contrived. It's not contrived enough to make me not want to look at Jared Padalecki, but it's contrived enough I find myself going "Really, assholes? Didn't you end up in the hospital the last several hundred times you decided to split up into groups of one?" an awful lot.

I saw Paranormal Activity the other day and while it's not going to win any awards, they at least managed to keep the bad contrivances down to a tolerable level. There's no point at which you're going "why don't you idiots just leave the house?" Evidently, the writers thought of that after watching every OTHER ghost story in existence and fixed that plothole. But they never did explain why the woman in the story would tolerate living with such an incredible shithead of a boyfriend (although that's not really contrived. That happens all the time.)

[HYHYBT]

Reason why I dislike Tolkien's works and can't read them? They're world driven.

Right... but that doesn't make them bad, just not to your taste. There are good stories told (whether books, movies, television, whatever) based around worlds, or plot, or character... but no one of them absolutely *has* to be done well for the work to be good for its kind. For example (and yet another thing I only find out about after everyone else is sick of it) I've been watching Are You Being Served? lately. The plots usually barely deserve the name, but that's OK because it's not *about* the plot anyway. The plot is just an excuse for silliness.

And yes, I do realize that's not a horror movie.

[Kheldarson]

^ That was kinda my point. I don't like Tolkien cuz they're world driven, but they're still well written, for what they are. Most horror movies try to go with a theme...but theme to a horror movie writer seems to be "blood, guts, and scary looking monster" which kinda defeats the purpose of horror when you think about it, right?

[Ginger Tea]

I think the remake of a Nightmare on 'Elm Street would have been better if he wasn't a child molester, just an innocent guy burnt to death by a witch hunt vigilanty mob who's children collectivly made up tales not knowing what what they were saying really meant.

I know the original one was a child kiler, but after a few movies no one cared what he did, they just wanted to watch him kill teenagers and quip one liners.

But the spirit of an innocent man out to kill the children who's tall tales got him killed, far more compelling a motive than "hey I fiddled with you when I was alive, I'm gonna kill you now I'm dead."

Paranormal activity
most if not all but one of the 'scares' happened during the night with the timelapse slowing down, then it was a case of guess the jump scare
A> loud noise
B> door slaming
C> and so on

They left the camera on when they went out why? It#s been a while since I've seen it, but all it was for was to show the Ouija board get used and set on fire by unseen hands.

The mock buster Paranormal entity handled it better by having more than one camera, but still established one scene the wrong way
it starts with him filming himself at the pc, the camera is on the table and we see the door and part of him typing away.
Who actually films like that when doing a fly on the wall thing, "I'll record every second incase something happens."?
Granted it established that his sister and mother were leaving for the night and not so long after they go his sister calls out to him and he finds no one in the house, then has an experience.
The same scene sans the goodbye were going out for a bit, could establish that he tells whomever is watching the tape at a later day that they had gone out of the house and he was all alone, I would buy that more than what was shown.

Paranormal Activity 2 was better than 1 as it used CCTV filming fluff and important scenes 24/7 none of this "if I don't film it it never happened." crap as with PA1, again the only genuine jump I got was on the cut I saw (iir this scene wasn't in the alt cut) they are awake talking and something smashes upstairs and its a photo of them smashed, as it happened when we were not expecting to see/hear something, it came out of the blue, especially as it had been an endless loop of shit happens at night and the day time is just them filming themselves watching the nights recordings.

[Mytical]

Not sure I agree about Nightmare on Elmstreet. I mean Freddy was obviously a bad guy, so having him an innocent killed just doesn't seem to fit. Now I could see if they had him innocent of the child molestation, as long as there was something he WAS guilty of. Because the monster that came in the dreams could not have been an innocent soul out for revenge. Not only because once the ones guilty were gone he would stop, but because he didn't only kill his victims..he toyed with them and tortured them in most cases. Not the work of a somebody innocent imo.

Of course Jason (of Friday the 13th fame) was an innocent, so ... what do I know?

[Ginger Tea]

The way I see it, if I was Kruger and killed as an innocent man re my alternate write of it, I would come back and kill you, your family your friends and everyone you hold dear.

It's bad enough to be falsely accused of something
Even worse to not have a trial and be executed for something that was a lie
So yeah, supernatural being offered me the chance to reek havok and revenge, I'd be all over that.

Enjoy finding your baby brother staple gunned to the kitchen wall
Love Freddy

[Iseeyouthere]

In my opinion... a horror movie that relies on blood and gore for its horror is doing it the cheap way.
Yeah, yeah... girl/guy falls into woodchipper... horrifying...

What they need is a good horror movie that really screws with the mind...
Like... a paranormal based setting where there is NO paranormal activity. Its all in the person's head... its all the audience can see.. but they don't know that.