Horror in 2004, a year to remember,or a year to forget?
Last year a slew of horror films hit theatres, and while some were enjoyed, others weren't so lucky. Some were even hated. So in this article, I will explore the question, was 2004 a year to remember, or forget? When it comes to the horror genre. Last years theatrical releases included "Resident Evil 2","The Grudge","Saw","The Village","Seed of Chucky","Anacondas","AvsP" "Exorcist:The Beginning","Blade:Trinity","Open Water", "The Forgotten", "Shaun of the Dead", "Dawn of the Dead 2004", and "Darkness". Of that list, the ones that were much anticipated by horror movie fans were "The Village", "RE2","AvsP", "Saw", "The Grudge", and "Blade Trinity". You could also make a case for "Seed of Chucky", and "DOTD 2004" despite it being a remake. The question is, were most horror movie fans pleased with their much anticipated films, as well as the others that were released that year? Well, it depends on whom you talk to. Some liked "Resident Evil 2", others didn't. The same with "Blade:Trinity","Saw", and "The Grudge". Most despite it being based on it's survival horror video game predecessors, still don't consider "Resident Evil" to be horror. But more along the lines of horror action, or just action with horror elements included. Then again, some you talk to didn't consider "Saw" to be horror either. But more along the lines of a sadistic crime thriller. I for one enjoyed "RE2" more than "Saw". Maybe because "RE:A" didn't hype itself up as the scariest movie of the year and utterly frightening like "Saw" did, but yet didn't turn out to be either of those things, atleast in my honest opinion. "Saw" was a unique film indeed, with a unique antagonist, but unless you were one of the characters in the film, there was nothing truly frightening about it. "The Grudge" despite it's PG-13 rating,boasted a pretty creepy ass female villain. A girl similar to Samara in look, but with large black eyes, the ability to contort her body in weird ways, and of course that ever so familiar gurgling sound she made. "The Grudge" albeit not truly terrifying, was damn sure creepy IMO, and a pretty good horror movie (save the acting) overall. Then we come to "Blade:Trinity". Some felt the film had abandoned it's story, and just became mindless action trying to get oohs and ahhs from the audience. I felt "Trinity" was an awesome third installment. Especially when you consider that most series start to fall apart around part 3, and nowadays even part 2. Sure the guy who played Dracula looked like he strolled in from a nearby rave party, but all in all, "Trinity" was a solid movie. When it comes to these 4 films, you have your haters here and there, but a good portion of the horror community enjoyed these 4 films respectively. All four were box office successes as well, and 3 held the top spot at the box office at one point, while the other (Trinity) took the second spot in it's opening weekend. "Shaun of the Dead" didn't make a huge amount of money, but was liked by many horror movie fans, myself not being one of them. I guess there really is a place for silly zombie film humor in the genre after all. Now we drop down into the second category, the *break evens*, as I like to call them. In this category, we have "Seed of Chucky", and "Dawn of the Dead 2004". "DOTD 2004" did make a killing at the box office, but some felt it was an unnecessary remake, and was too action based. While others thought despite it being a remake, it was a pretty good zombie movie. I myself, thought it was just a decent flick. The acting by a few people turned me off to it for the most part, but the zombie action was definitely a plus. Wouldn't have hurt if they had explained more about where the zombies came from though. Which is another thing I thought hurt the movie.
"Seed of Chucky" was the 5th adventure in Chuckys blood soaked little life, and pretty much bombed at the box office, with some horror movie fans panning it as ridiculous, too comedical, and thinking that the series should've ended with "Bride of Chucky". Despite that though, there were some who liked the movie, myself included. I thought it stayed on the dark humorish pace that "Bride" set very well. Also, had some of these people seen part 3, they would've noticed the series showing signs of heading in the horror/comedy direction. Then theres the laws of movie reality. How long can one take a killer doll seriously as an on screen villain anyways?Lastly, we have our bottomfeeders. The ones hated by pretty much everyone and their mothers. "The Village", "Exorcist:The Beginning", "Anacondas", "Aliens vs Predator", "The Forgotten", "Open water, and "Darkness".Lets start off with"The Village". What was wrong with this movie? Take your pick from the long list. Predictable ending, predictable revelations, predictable everything. To top it all off, the film had very little entertainment value, was mainly a love story and not a horror movie as it was advertised as, and really, how long can we take watching the amish who are by nature not very charasmatic, on screen unless it's in a "children of the corn" sequel, and they're wacking people in the name of their corn god he who walks behind the rows, all the while spouting religious psycobabble. This movie was greatly anticipated because it was directed by M. Night Shamaylan, who was responsible for "Signs". Personally, a film which I thought was subpar and doesn't deserve the praise it gets even to this day. However, by a very large portion of the horror community, "The Village" is disliked. Then theres "Darkness", which sat on the shelf for a large amout of time before Dimension decided to release it on christmas day of all times, but not before hacking it to pieces, and releasing it under the dreaded PG-13 label (face it people only "The Ring" can work under this rating). I for one liked the movie, which I thought was a unique ghost story, with a very nice twist ending. However, most disliked the film, mainly because it was cut so much and some key story elements as well as effect scenes, went missing. Then theres "The Exorcist:The Beginning". One would think that the studio would've known by now that horror fans are all 'Exorcisted' out after the redux version. Still, in a sad attempt to milk the already milked to death cash cow, they released a prequel anyways. The film didn't do very well, and came and went pretty quickly. Horror fans for the most part didn't care for it, mainly because it wasn't the original version, which was done by Paul Schrader, and was much more graphic. Rather it was Renny Harlins watered down version. The film was pretty much branded from the get go thanks to that little ingenius decision from the studio that released it. "Open Water" made good money, but was mostly hated. Some horror fans called it boring, while others called it a low budget rip off of "Jaws". Some people actually liked it, myself not being one of them, but hardcore horror fans panned the film. Mainly because it lacked any true scares, and revolved around 2 people in the water for almost 2 hours, which is why I passed on it until it hit DVD. This film does show the evils of great trailer cutting. The trailer attracted alot of curious georges, but the film is mostly disliked in alot of genre circles. "The Forgotten" was just that, "Forgotten". It took the top spot at the box office for a week or two, and once again curiousity won out in the end. But horror fans didn't really care for the movie, mostly. Why? well Julianne Moores acting for one, and the numerous plotholes the film left behind. Although it's overall story was quite interesting."Anacondas" was the sequel to the 1996 killer snake pic which starred Jon Voight, Ice Cube, and Jennifer Lopez. Too bad Voight died in that movie, and Cube and Jlo weren't in the sequel, because boy did this movie suck. The main reason why many genre fans hated it? Well, 50 minutes till any anacondas (who by the way are the title characters in the movie) show up is the biggest reason. When you title a film "Anacondas" plural, you need to deliver them before the films 40 minute mark, not 10 minutes after that. For crying out loud, the first film had one giant pissed off snake, and was 10 times as entertaining as the sequel which suggest 2 snakes are involved.Lastly on our bottomfeeder list, is one of the biggest disappointments in horror movie history,"Aliens vs Predator". A film which was the second most anticipated versus movie after "Freddy vs Jason',which did deliver in the eyes of most horror fans (myself included). "AvsP" however, did not. It's PG-13 rating suggested that it was doomed from the get go, and moviegoers found that out first hand when the film opened in August. I felt more upset at the fact that the film had unlimited potential, yet grossly disrespected the material, and both fan bases respectively, with such an amateurish outing. Which was filled with bad one liners, bad acting, and pretty much an overall lack of action which is what you don't come to expect when two of the baddest species in the galaxy are at war with one another. That pretty much wraps up 2004, so how would you say it went? More bad than good, more good than bad? I for one, say it went as expected. A few hits, a few misses. Pretty much the same as every year. If anything changed, it's that the potential for a ton of hits was there, unlike in the years before 2004. But some just couldn't deliver.
Note this topic is also posted in the genre board of the HM&S forums.Visit the forums to comment on this topic.
| | | | | | | |
