28 Days Later

[Gold Trumpet]

Silence of the Lambs is not a horror movie. It's based on personality, acting, atmopshere, and tension. Probably one of the truest thrillers.

Likely a good indication of what I think of the potential of the horror genre in general then. Call it my own belief that horror is a pretty thin genre because of how it rests so much on things too much for the purpose of its own genre only.

The fact that there are repetitive attacks in a consistently cold atmosphere makes 28 Days Later specifically incompatible with a thriller format, and a perfect canvas for philosophy.

How so? I only see it compatible for a horror film.

With every infection, with every lunge at the neck, with every human betrayal... the point is driven home.

It may be driven home, but with little interest. The plot is too thin in many areas and exploitive in the attacks and how often they are. The drama outside the horror is just juvenile to me in storytelling.

~rougerum

[Jeremy Blackman]

I only see it compatible for a horror film.

Likely a good indication of what I think of the potential of the horror genre in general then. Call it my own belief that horror is a pretty thin genre because of how it rests so much on things too much for the purpose of its own genre only.

Genre movies aren't bad, but with other points, this is me saying '28 Days Later' is a bad scary/thriller/zombie movie.

What the fuck have I been talking about the entire time?

[Gold Trumpet]

Every single point taken way out of context because they rest on what was said before or after in explanation.

To put it all together: The horror film is a pretty thin genre, but doesn't mean it is necessarily bad to begin with. When it trying to be something like 28 Days Later and about things on a larger level, it usually falls face first because the requirements of the horror, the large amounts of violence and intense focus on those things first don't allow for anything else to be shown in any meaningful manner. The horror film can exist at just being a horror film and being an actual good one that is well made and actually scary. Even on that level, 28 Days Later is not.

~rougerum

[Jeremy Blackman]

If the quotes were taken out of context, how were their meanings altered? Don't you still believe in those ideas?

You have yet to show me that you don't have a grudge against horror.

Do you really think that all it can do is "scare" you?

[Gold Trumpet]

Taken out of context because in the middle of a paragraph with much more said, just one sentence was quoted. Many were done like that to the useful effect to show me contradicting myself.

For the given moment, the horror genre seems pretty limited to the level of scaring someone and other minor variations of that effect.

~rougerum

[Jeremy Blackman]

Taken out of context because in the middle of a paragraph with much more said, just one sentence was quoted.

GT post reduction is not a new concept. I'm not going to quote your prose... I'm only interested in your ideas.

Many were done like that to the useful effect to show me contradicting myself.

It was useful, to encourage you to better organize your thoughts. So we can get somewhere.

For the given moment, the horror genre seems pretty limited to the level of scaring someone and other minor variations of that effect.

See? What did I say? Now how long did it take you to admit this?

[Gold Trumpet]

Like i've said, I'm still learning.

~rougerum

[©brad]

Straight up -- Golden Trumpet blows. You really don't have a clue what you're talking about. I suggest you go read a book or jerk of to the porn you keep bringing up.

now now, lets keep it below the belt, as much as we would like to beat the living shit out of eachother sumtimes, remember its all in good fun and we're all here to discuss our love and passion for movies and eachother.

u see there, gt? i just defended u. i expect sum serious ass kissing or ill get angry and beat u up myself.

[mutinyco]

I'm not angry. Just be careful beating up yourself. Maybe you could do that to one of GT's pornos...

[Mesh]

For the given moment, the horror genre seems pretty limited to the level of scaring someone and other minor variations of that effect.

...And this whole thread has been an attempt to show you that, even if the above statement were true (and it's not...not even close), 28 Days Later would be a terrible movie to use as evidence, because even the least sophisticated viewer can see that it deals in ideas and concepts as lofty and important as those dealt with by the stodgiest of art films.  It may not dwell upon those concepts for long or provide answers or offer in-depth, detailed analysis of them, but what good film does?

Now, damn it, other than Silence of the Lambs, name me a true Horror film that does more with concepts and ideas than does 28 Days Later.....

[markums2k]

No.

Yes.

No.

Yes.

No.

Yes.

Hi.

No.

Yes.

Is this still going on?

[Pubrick]

no but i appreciate the time u took to properly space those quote boxes.

[Gold Trumpet]

Now, damn it, other than Silence of the Lambs, name me a true Horror film that does more with concepts and ideas than does 28 Days Later.....

Like JB and I were talking about, it doesn't seem like Silence of the Lambs is even a horror film. Much more a suspense film with elements of the horror genre included. To get back to repeating myself, I just don't buy any serious ideas from a true horror film. For me, the horror genre is best used when more of a background situation of influence. The horror genre itself smells like porno too much to be taken serious.

And thanks cbr, gotta love you man for it. And to all the people I argue with, its all in the name or arguing and nothing more. Nothing personal.

~rougerum

[mutinyco]

There are 2 things we need to understand about where GT is coming from, because they're both weak positions.

First, his declares that 28 Days Later is short on ideas and they aren't well presented. This is fundamentally incorrect. The very fact that everybody is talking about the ideas is proof that they exist and resonate with people. How often does a movie genuinely provoke discussion of its ideas?

Second, GT is declaring the horror genre to be a poor genre, and one inadequate at conveying ideas. What he's really trying to do is explain his own emotional reaction to horror by attaching them to grander intellectualized arguments. (Just say you don't like the violence and leave it at that.) But to try to mount an argument as to why it doesn't work is silly. It does. It wouldn't be as popular if it didn't. And I'm of the belief that The Silence of the Lambs didn't work. 3/4 of the film was essentially a drama about a serial killer being tracked (liked that), then the 3rd act reverted to more traditional suspense/horror elements -- complete with the bad guy's POV and Clarise killing him at the end. It would've been better if he was captured JUST LIKE EVERY SERIAL KILLER IS, instead of that stupid night vision shoot out shit. Demme was out of his league with that crap.

Furthermore, good movies don't stop the drama to pontificate their ideas. They don't take entire chapters to offer exposition like a book does in abstracted form. Movies are about motion. All of your ideas should come forward through the action of your plot. I think you were so turned off by the violence of the attacks that you couldn't put them in perspective, and looked at them as nothing more than exploitation. The film is about a small group of people trying to survive and find some type of civilization again. It's either kill or be killed. When Jim kills the kid it isn't about gore, but showing that the rage virus is amoral. If he hadn't killed the kid the kid would've killed him. Same thing when Selena kills her partner early on -- she hacks him immediately before the audience is even up to speed. Yes, it's jarring. It's intentional.

Your assertion that it should've been more of a suspense film with the hint of attack about is just plain wrong. This film would not have worked in that mold. This is a film about survival amidst the collapse of society. How once you strip away the mechanisms of society all you're left with is a base individual who acts more on instinct than anything else -- whether it's the army guys wanting to rape the women to procreate or Jim's descent into natural rage. The point is that it's already inside each of us. It's just a matter of the circumstances bringing it out.

The fact that this small film is making money and stirring debate is proof that your accusations are false.

[SoNowThen]

Ease off boys. This movie is not that fucking great. It's a zombie, world ends, quick little semi-action film that, as usual in every great plotted set-up in our fine times, fizzles to a stop. It was decent. I enjoyed it. But for fucks sakes, GT has some great points.

And to talk about digital for a sec... I'd say 35% of the shots were annoyingly shitty. Digital still sucks ass. Highlights it cannot handle. Man, I wanted this to look so good, and it just let me down. I'm pissed that I own a DV camera. Fuck. If this would've been on film, it woulda been so much more enjoyable. As usual, quick cutting masks over whatever is lacking. Hmm. But I will say this for the movie, at least there were no scenes I had to cringe at the cheesiness of. That's nice in a new movie of this type. But I was more psyched by the Cabin Fever preview than by this. A so so effort.