"Scary Movies" Last Night

First, let's review the films, since me doing that gives some glimpse into how I see them. I thought The Grudge was uneven. It sometimes has great scares and sometimes laughable ones. I quite liked the ghosts. The bad scares though, I did not like at all, since it kinda took me out of it. I realize it is supposed to be a kinda schlocky film but why put effort into some of the others? The plot unfolding was alright, nothing special. It was a nice balance of tone, since I watched The Ring a while earlier and felt that film was more like Silence of the Lambs in being a mystery film rather than horror (I can see why critics were wanking incessantly to that). The acting was painfully unexpressive most of the time which made no sense to me. Visually, it was actually pretty great, though the cgi parts were often lacklustre. Pro-tip from Lucas and Spielberg, don't use cgi for foreground stuff. 8P Cat makes me wanna give a 10/10. Overall, it was a pretty decent, if kinda trashy, ghost story.

Now, It Follows. I've heard nothing but praise so I was actually kinda interested, since I usually roll my eyes at the thought of movies made in the last 15 years. It was great for the cinematography. I was looking in the background a lot in The Grudge, and here that was made into a sport, aiding the paranoid nature of the plot. Also didn't detract from the foreground either which is a definite fear you can have doing that. Though there was one scene where my eyes hurt from the 360 rotation, but that's a jab at me, not the film, it was a very nice scene. There were a few scenes that were pointless or strange, but it's not like they didn't have purpose. I read the director wanted it to have "nightmare logic", but the rules established do kinda ruin that, giving it more of a fairy tale feel, which I think it probably a better way of looking at the film. The characters were stock, I guess, but realistic and helpful, all acted pretty well though not perfect I feel. It's not epic or anything, but it's pretty good for what it is.

Now, I use the term "scary movie" for the title of this journal, and I personally don't like this term. For a lot of people, this is synonymous with "horror film". I did use the term "scare" to describe certain scenes in The Grudge in particular, it's not a bad descriptor for those scenes, exactly, but it's not entirely satisfactory either. I was not scared, and don't care to be during such movies. I tend to find being scared an annoyance rather than a fulfillment. Not that it can't be, but it's hard to do. I've only been scared once or twice from films, and the only time I can recall, was certainly a magical experience looking back. I was scared shitless of killer shrews gnawing at the walls about to get at me, and I was kept up all night. I was also 6 or 7 years old in a much bigger house than the tiny hovel I'm in now. I don't think that will ever really happen again, and it's not something I'm really looking for either. Why I don't like the term "scary movie" to define horror films is that I don't really care to be scared by them, that's not the primary purpose for me. I'm just genuinely more interested in those stories than other ones, excepting fantasy and fairy tales, themselves being almost always part-horror in the first place. 

Of course, classic gothic horror is what tends to throw a wrench in the equation, since those films are almost universally agreed to not be very scary these days, yet are still considered horror. But why? Is it just legacy, that Nosferatu and Frankenstein were horror, but aren't anymore, but don't fit into other categories so it's merely "outdated" primitive horror, like a troglodyte compared to an AI? I don't like that, since I hate the idea of stories being "outdated" in quality, just like I hate the idea of music being "relevant". I believe every piece of media has to stand on its own, and can be enjoyed in any context. I do think gothic horror is always horror, and I remove "scariness" from horror. Any kind of film can be "scary". Horror films are horror, scary or not. Neither does "scariness" have anything to do with effectiveness, like some say it's horror, but it's bad horror if it isn't scary. No, scary scenes and movies can be of any genre. I'm sure there's a comedy film out there, no horror at all, nothing supernatural or disgusting, that is terrifying. Maybe something by Adam Sandler..lol. I won't try to define "horror" here, but it's an annoying cliché that people throw around. It's fine to look for that in a film, but I feel it corrupts the idea of horror with how seriously people take it these days.

I don't quite know where and how to put it, so I wanted to go over two other topics related to, but here unconnected with, the above. First, I don't give a shit about spoilers. A movie can be entirely spoiled for me and it doesn't change a thing. Knowing is knowing. Experience is experience. 8P Also, watching horror in the day or night doesn't matter. So long as I can get a time without screaming and smashing doors, I can get engrossed. I consume horror content a lot at 3am, 3pm doesn't change much. I'm not saying these two things apply to everybody, but not to me. 

Of course, you can just think I'm a pussy bitch. I need to sleep all day and spend my life watching only the most scary "scary movies", at 3am only with no lights or cats or anything, move to an abandoned house to watch on my phone, etc. to regain my not-bitch cred. Also, I'm no expert, but who is?