Wes Craven: A Sell-Out On Elm Street

[Loomis99]

I can't imagine I'm going to be too popular in stating this, but it is a sad fact that Wes Craven is the biggest sell-out in recent film history. What exactly happened to this guy? "The Last House On The Left" was incredible, filled with rage and post-vietnam poison, with "The Hills Have Eyes" he still showed what talent and raw energy he had in the early years of his career. Then along came the farce that was "A Nightmare On Elm Street" - A film that single-handedly managed to turn the genre into a living joke - Introducing latex special fx, comic amounts of blood, crappy one-liners and other elements that has precisely fuck-all to do with good horror. Anything else he has touched since then has been equally dissapointing. What about "Scream" you ask? What about a brilliant script job from Kevin Williamson? He's surely hit rock bottom now - Credited on some of the worst bargain basement stuff about - Producer on "Wishmaster 10: Please End It Now" and make-up assistant (or something) on "They". Whatever happened to my heroes? John Carpenter looks like he's lost it forever, Sam Raimi has moved on to other genres. Eli Roth looks like he's the only one with enough balls to remind us of how great the Americans once where at making horror movies. Christ, even we had "Hammer Horror" once!

[slasher]

I am going to have to agree with except for the very first Nightmare I have to say that wasn't that bad and the idea alone warrants him some credit even if you didn't like the movie. The rest though I have to agree with you. When came out I remember that so many people said it was sooo scary and the voice on the phone was soooo scary, when I finally saw it the only good part was the how the killer asked the horror question at the beginning to decide if he was going to kill the girl's boyfriend or not. After that I was bored. To tangent a little I also cannot stand when a killer is introduced in the beginning of a movie with a particular way of doing things like in scream he asked the horror questions and then the next time they kill someone they change how they do it and it is not used again. It pisses me off when there is no consistency to the movie.

[avenger00soul]

Hell yeah Loomis. I may not agree with you but it takes balls to come on here and argue your point. I will say that Craven hasn't made a film that has been as important to the genre as his early efforts. But here's to hoping.

[Loomis99]

So if we have to bid farewell to Craven, Carpenter, Hooper and Raimi (?) The guy has to finish the Evil Dead Trilogy, has to - What does the future look like for the horror film in America? I've already mentioned Eli Roth, please tell me there are a few more pioneers out there... I really wish I could say there were some shining examples in the UK. There are some huge english directors in Hollywood right now: Christopher Nolan, Sam Mendes, Anthony Minghella, Ridley Scott, but none that have touched the horror genre. The only thing horrific about the industry right now is the involvement of random people like Michael Bay (flashy, fast-cut, MTV friendly) and those endless hacks churning out wretched shit like "Jason vs The Rest Of The World". This is going to sound harsh - But to get rid of all this fairground shit you need a world that reflects real horror. You watch any number of examples from the 1970s and early '80s - Emotions of fear, hatred, anger, shame - A country shellshocked by the Vietnam War - These are the breeding grounds for the film director. In this era of global terrorism we are seeing another roll-around for the genre. They may not all be first-class examples, but the belief is back, the monster has returned to the closet.

[Tony]

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that Craven's last great film was Wes Craven's New Nightmare. The film definitely did wonders for the NIghtmare series without bothering with any continuity.

[avenger00soul]

As far as new filmmakers go, I'm also expecting wonders from Eli Roth, as well as Lucky McKee, Richard Kelly (for a different kind of horror), and actor-turned writer/director William Butler. Don't forget that we still have some oldies but goodies. Coscarelli is still working miracles from what I hear and Stuart Gordon has not lost his touch. That man only gets better with age.

[Loomis99]

OK, I'm filled with a little more hope - I had neglected Stuart Gordon - "Reanimator" certainly had bite to it and blended humour very well with visceral gore. Would I be right in thinking that Richard Kelly is the guy behind Donnie Darko? I believe both he and Eli Roth are setting up a studio together with the express aim of getting low-budget, creative horror films "out there". I'll step out on a limb here and say that another real auteur, David Lynch, has dabbled with staples of the genre in alot of his features - Though I haven't seen it, apparently "Eraserhead" has some very dark stuff in it, "Fire Come Walk With Me" has got a great horror icon in "Bob" and some of the imagery in "Wild At Heart" is just off the scale. Now, if someone could tempt Sam Raimi back to the game after wrapping on "Spiderman 2"....

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by Loomis99
Would I be right in thinking that Richard Kelly is the guy behind Donnie Darko? I believe both he and Eli Roth are setting up a studio together with the express aim of getting low-budget, creative horror films "out there". Now, if someone could tempt Sam Raimi back to the game after wrapping on "Spiderman 2"....

Yes, Richard Kelly was behind the genius that was Donnie Darko. I have heard that he and Eli Roth are writing a movie together based upon a Richard Matheson story. Raimi, along with Rob Tapert, has also started a production company targeting the low budget horror scene. I don't know if he plans on getting involved himself or not though.

[AUSTIN316426808]

I TOTALLY AGREE EXCEPT FOR THE FIRST NIGHTMARE. AS FAR AS ANY OTHER FILM SINCE THEN I AGREE THAT HE HAS SOLD OUT. EVERYTHING FROM FREDDY'S REVENGE HAS BEEN SUBPAR. I WAS GOING TO MENTION SCREAM BUT YOU CLEARED THAT UP I HONESTLY DIDN'T KNOW THAT SOMEONE ELSE WROTE THAT. AND AS FOR CARPENTER THIS IS MY OPINION AND I MIGHT GET ALOT OF BAD AFTERMATH FOR THIS BUT BESIDES HALLOWEEN HE'S NEVER DONE ANYTHING TO IMPRESS ME.BUT BACK TO THE NIGHTMARE FILMS I TOTALLY AGREE THAT AFTER THE FIRST ONE HE BEGAN TO SELL OUT THE GENRE BY MAKING THE ELM STREET SERIES INTO AN ALL OUT COMEDY.PEOPLE GETTING TIED TO BEDS WITH TONGUES,THOSE LAME JOKES,AND THOSE HORRIBLE FX. NOW I HAVE TO ADMIT AS A COMEDY THIS IS A GOLDEN GLOBE WORTHY FILM,BUT AS FAR AS HORROR GOES ITS A DISGRACE.

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by AUSTIN316426808
I TOTALLY AGREE EXCEPT FOR THE FIRST NIGHTMARE. AS FAR AS ANY OTHER FILM SINCE THEN I AGREE THAT HE HAS SOLD OUT. EVERYTHING FROM FREDDY'S REVENGE HAS BEEN SUBPAR. I TOTALLY AGREE THAT AFTER THE FIRST ONE HE BEGAN TO SELL OUT THE GENRE BY MAKING THE ELM STREET SERIES INTO AN ALL OUT COMEDY.PEOPLE GETTING TIED TO BEDS WITH TONGUES,THOSE LAME JOKES,AND THOSE HORRIBLE FX.

Craven didn't have anything to do with Freddy's Revenge. Craven directed the first and last Elm Street films and co-wrote the third one (and IMO the only films in the series worth watching). He had nothing to do with the other films in that series. However, Vampire in Brooklyn is an unforgivable sin.

[Sean1605]

Originally posted by avenger00soul
Yes, Richard Kelly was behind the genius that was Donnie Darko. I have heard that he and Eli Roth are writing a movie together based upon a Richard Matheson story. Raimi, along with Rob Tapert, has also started a production company targeting the low budget horror scene. I don't know if he plans on getting involved himself or not though.


Yeah Rich and Eli are co-writing The Box, with Eli in the director's chair. But that's after he does his teen comedy for Universal.



I can't wait for Knowing, Richard Kelly and Eli Roth are my two favorite up and coming directors.


I didn't enjoy May on the same level I did Donnie Darko or Cabin Fever, but Lucky McKee is another person to really look out for, The Woods, or In The Woods, whatever it's called with Bruce sounds like it'll be great.

[Loomis99]

OK, the more I hear, the more optimistic my outlook. This film "The Woods" sounds good stuff - Filled with the sort of elements that make up classic horror. Apparently, Roth is also teaming-up with Scott Spiegal (those evil dead boys just can't let it go) with the aim of gettting three hideously foul horror features out each year. As for John Carpenter - Halloween may well have been his highlight, but I thought "The Fog" was an exceptionally good chiller. I'd site it in my top ten, purely because of all those old creepy staples that it plays with. "The Thing" I think was also a solid remake and an example of gross-out effects being employed to good effect .(Craven take note) On our TV network right now, (Channel 4) they are counting down the 100 most scary moments in horror. One comment made by Michael Madsen stuck with me as regards that ear-cutting scene in Reservoir Dogs - He suggested that the sequence was far more effective, more shocking due to the fact that the camera moved away at the key moment - What is left to our imagination is always far worse than what we actually see. That ladies and gentlemen, is what every director who cares a jot for the genre should have tattoed onto their heads and that is what gives me hope for the future.

[moonsorrow]

ouch, that stung...on a personal level, how can you talk down on such a great series? freddy was suposed to be a little comical, with all his great one shots and all the blood, il respect your opinion though... as long as you dont start talking down on friday the 13th, then your a dead man

[Loomis99]

OK, I appreciate that Wes Craven did set up quite an icon in Freddy Krueger and the first movie wasn't all that bad. It's just a shame that the thing kind of strayed away from what horror is supposed to be about, you know? I'm all for laughs and scares sharing the same space in a movie - Sam Raimi managed it brilliantly in "Evil Dead II", as did Eli Roth in "Cabin Fever". As for Jason Vorhees and the various sequels he's starred in, well, I'm glad someone found them frightening.

[moonsorrow]

no one said they were frightening, just entertaining...now the ring on the other hand...THAT is frightening

[Loomis99]

Yep, "Ringu" was spot-on. Even the remake was pretty good.

[bluesboy]

A film that single-handedly managed to turn the genre into a living joke - Introducing latex special fx, comic amounts of blood, crappy one-liners and other elements that has precisely fuck-all to do with good horror.

Are you saying latex special FX, comic amounts of blood, and one-liners don't have anything to do with good horror? I'm not saying good horror NEEDS those elements, but need I remind you that Cabin Fever had plenty of those elements and you herald Roth as a great director...

I'm personally a fan of the original NOES because Freddy is at his most violent in that film in my opinion. After that he became the stuff that sells kid's cereal.

Frankly, the only way I can see us being scared again, or at least making us feel the way we want to feel at a good horror movie, is to keep an eye on independent directors. Carpenter was one, Craven was one, and even Raimi and Cunningham. They all made their best movies that way...independently. Add a big studio, name stars, and a soundtrack featuring the latest and greates in rap metal bands and you have a recipe for disaster when it comes to horror...but lots of ticket sales unfortunately which is why they'll be around for a long time.

We need people like Roth, McKee, and even Miike to show us the different sides of horror and to give us something fresh to feast on...not leftovers or reheated remakes that do not taste anywhere near as good as the originals..

[Loomis99]

Spot-on - I personally am very optimistic about the future of the horror film. Despite the amount of bad examples it cannot be denyed that audiences consistently support this type of genre. Its development would seem to be cyclic and we've been seeing a return to a higher quality in recent years.
As regards CF, you're right, it does contain alot of gore. But a point I made earlier as regards the way Carpenter used FX in his remake of "The Thing" is valid here - I didn't think it was comical. I found the effects in that picture revolting and in that way, the movie worked for me. The same with CF - The sight of that girl slowly rotting, the fact that it was based on a real illness. Yes, it was a little far-fetched at times but compared to the circus that was "A Nightmare..." - Phones sprouting tongues, fountains of blood - I found it to be far more effective.
You're right about the independents though - The 1970s was such an exciting time in American Cinema, not least because of the apparition of the Vietnam War, but there was much more of a hands-on approach to film-making. It was Sean S Cunningham who gave the money to Craven to shoot Last House. Carpenter invented the "steadicam" in making "Halloween". Even in the early '80s, Raimi pushed the envelope with "The Evil Dead".
It's high time we had a new set of pioneers like that.

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by Loomis99
It's high time we had a new set of pioneers like that.

I'm optimistic, but what if those pioneers don't come along? You guys ever feel like maybe you've seen every great horror film?

"There's nothing to do anymore. Everything decent's been done. All the great themes have been used up--turned into theme parks."

[Loomis99]

I think that concept alone would make a good horror film - No more horror left and all we can do is watch girly flicks starring the olsen twins. I don't think you've got too much to worry about, provided the world keeps throwing bombs at one another, we will always have horror films

[bluesboy]

I agree with you Loomis...I love that hands-on approach to filmmaking. Cabin Fever showed signs of it...to me it had that essential quality that all good independent films have. That slightly rough, unrefined appearence that can't be defined, but you know it when it's there.

I see what you mean about the FX. However, I'm not trying to sway you here, but let me offer you another perspective on the NOES effects. I think it should be taken in the context of the movie...here you have a movie that exploits dreams and the use of them to kill someone. Weird crap happens in dreams and I think they wanted to show that when they could. Could they have done it a better way? Perhaps. But the essence of that movie revolves around the dream state and they played that up which I don't think is a bad thing. And I don't think they overdid it either. Again, it's all a matter of opinion and I respect yours, i just wanted to provide a different view.

All in all, it is a cyclic genre. Just when you think it's dead and gone, there is a rebirth. Horror is neccessary in this society, whether fundamentalist Christian groups, concerned parents, or anybody else may like it or not. Good or bad, it will always be here.

[avenger00soul]

I think our expectations are so high right now that we may miss these pioneers altogether. It's simply impossible to please horror fans (myself included). I mean, when was the last one? When did the last pioneer of horror emerge?

Think about it. When you say horror, certain names come to mind: Carpenter, Hooper, Romero, Raimi, Barker et al. None of these names emerged during the 90's. They are all filmmakers of the 70's and 80's. What the fuck happened in the 90's?

[Loomis99]

The 1990s was a dull era full-stop - No major wars to speak of - The world has become a far more dangerous place to live in the last few years and what goes in a society reflects on its film culture. The era wasn't entirely without merit though - Carpenter showed half a return to form with "In The Mouth..." "Candyman" was a good little chiller. "Se7en" was awesome - I'll go out on a limb here and say that even "Fight Club" had some roots in horror. (If you can call "Psycho" a horror film then I think you could argue the case for FC) "Scream" wasn't entirely bad. Rounding the decade off with "Blair Witch" the 90s ended on a bit of a high. The decade was also a bit of a bonus for UK audiences because it saw the theatrical releases of "The Exorcist" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". (re-released after a lengthy ban by the BBFC) On a change of note, am I the only one who thinks that David Lynch is something of a horror buff - "Fire Come Walk With Me" was twisted enough to call itself a horror flick - Any thoughts?

[avenger00soul]

Originally posted by Loomis99
The 1990s was a dull era full-stop - No major wars to speak of - The world has become a far more dangerous place to live in the last few years and what goes in a society reflects on its film culture. The era wasn't entirely without merit though - Carpenter showed half a return to form with "In The Mouth..." "Candyman" was a good little chiller. "Se7en" was awesome - I'll go out on a limb here and say that even "Fight Club" had some roots in horror. (If you can call "Psycho" a horror film then I think you could argue the case for FC) "Scream" wasn't entirely bad. Rounding the decade off with "Blair Witch" the 90s ended on a bit of a high. The decade was also a bit of a bonus for UK audiences because it saw the theatrical releases of "The Exorcist" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". (re-released after a lengthy ban by the BBFC) On a change of note, am I the only one who thinks that David Lynch is something of a horror buff - "Fire Come Walk With Me" was twisted enough to call itself a horror flick - Any thoughts?

I agree with everything you said, but no luminaries of the genre appeared in the 90's. That's all I was getting at.

As far as Lynch goes, his movies are as fucked up as they get. I'm still trying to figure Mulholland Drive out. I know I loved it, but I don't know why. Lost Highway was also weird as balls, and Blue Velvet was great. I've only seen pieces of Fire Walk With Me so I can't comment on that (only the gunshot to the head was damn fantastic). I don't know if he qualifies as horror or not, but he scares the hell out of me.

By the way, if anyone has any thoughts about Mulholland Drive that could help unravel the mystery, PM me.

[Loomis99]

I haven't seen Mulholland Drive, but its supposed to be a real headshrinker. What I love about Lynch is the way in which he melds so many different cinematic styles into his work. I hadn't seen anything like "Twin Peaks" before - The series had me cracking up laughing or scared witless - With heavy doses of surreality in between. NB. I've just heard word that a Cabin Fever 2 is in the works. It's not the most exciting thing I've heard all day, but you can't win them all.

[Sean1605]

Originally posted by avenger00soul


By the way, if anyone has any thoughts about Mulholland Drive that could help unravel the mystery, PM me.


Whatd'ya wanna know? PM me with questions, I've watched it a few times, and read quite a few articles on it and interviews with Lynch so I have a lot of thoughts on it.



Interestingly enough, Eli Roth worked for David Lynch and he was sort of his psuedo-mentor.

Eli said that he did some animation for his website, but he used to always have Eli come up to his house in the Hollywood Hills, and they would fill dummies with raw meat and intestines and stuff and then film the wolves that live on his property attacking them. He said that's just the stuff he does with David. lol