I thought that movie was just jump scares

I've seen it a couple times and don't remember it being heavily dependent on standard jump scares -- meaning, the cheap type that merely startles you with a loud noise and a jumpy visual. I do, however, remember a lot of -- for lack of a better term -- "gasp scares," meaning basically a less jumpy reveal that's supposed to spook the viewer, like, in the Conjuring, the body hanging from the tree, or when they showed the ghosts that only Vera Farmiga's could see. To me, these don't come off nearly as cheap as a jump scare, but still are a pretty cliche, especially in Hollywood horror films.

I could be wrong though. Maybe there are a bunch of jump scares I'm just not remembering.

I saw a video recently that spoke about what's wrong with horror movies and one of the biggest issues was jump scares. They did happen to mention James Wan's movies though and spoke about how the jump scares he utilized were fine because they were earned and they were actual scary things that would make you jump. So even though there were jump scares in The Conjuring, they were done well.

While I acknowledge the jump scare usage as well, it's not like it was *all* jump scares. I actually felt it was quite atmospheric. True, slightly wooden actors, but hey...never really a good point for horror.
Though I'd say if you didn't like this one, definitely don't see Annabelle.

Agreed. It wasn't.

There was maybe about 6 jump scares in the whole movie. (Just saw it to be sure)

I tend to call all jump scares cheap, but I see what Giganticface is sayin, that there are different levels of cheapness in jump scares. James Wan is certainly at the lowest levels as he actually DO try to make an effort and often tries to make long build-ups up to each jump scare.

That being said, I still think all jump scares are cheap, as you can have the audience watching two people having a conversation, a girl sleeping or a freakin tree, and suddenly BAM!!!, cut to a little cute bunny accompanied by loud music or noise, and you have yourself a successful jump scare, coz People's brain doesn't expect that. In my book that's just too easy and I'm honestly really tired of the overuse. It's like all creepy atmospheric build-ups has to end with a jump scare nowadays. Heck, a guy like James Wan has made it his trademark.

I agree jump scares today are way over done.The remake of woman in black was nothing but jump scares.

Well said. It's true James Wan has made this his trademark, which is too bad because Saw was so much the opposite.

The best example I can think of of a non-cheap jump scare is the hospital hallway scene in The Exorcist III. I personally wouldn't call it a jump scare (like I described in my last post), but I could see how some would since it lulls the viewer with atmosphere and then gets a rise out of them. I think most of James Wan's jump-ish scares fall in this category too, without coming close to as good.

I totally agree that, regardless of cheapness level, the tactic is way overused. I think horror films have reached new levels of dependency on the worst types of jump scares. So many films use crappy CGI with a loud noise to startle us with some demon, creepy kid, or ghost. And even worse are the found footage (especially of the paranormal variety) totally-quiet-then-everything-goes-haywire scares. Paranormal Activity 2, the scene in the bathroom, is a good example.

Surprisingly though, the technique is nothing new. I can't tell you how many old horror films I've seen where a cat jumps out, or bats suddenly fly out of an attic door, or a bird flies through the window -- even many of the great classics. My dad is always making fun of this, and I think it's one of the reasons the genre gets a bad rap. Because it really is cheap.

Say what you will about Rob Zombie, but I found Lords of Salem, which was pretty creepy without a single thing resembling a jump scare, to be refreshing. Unfortunately, that's not what sells at the box office.

I for one don't think all jump scares are cheap.

I have seen some amazingly expertly setup & timed 'jump scares'. I think of some of the very first T-hit car crashes in films -- I think the first I saw was in The Forgotten. In that one, it lends to the sense that she's unaware she's gonna get hit by 'them'.

And lots of others, like in Raiders of the Lost Ark, the guy who leaves Indy in the cave & gets spikes through the head. It caps the release of the tension of Indy climbing out of the pit & getting under the door.

But I do agree, I got tired of the overuse of jump scares in films. I think it peaked in the 80's with some films a steady repetition of boobs, jump scare & gore, as if all viewers wanted a quick crack hit. I guess some did, or do, but I don't.

Okay, I'll agree it IS possible to make a non-cheap jump scare. A perfect example is actually from The Conjuring. The scene where the mother is sitting at the top of the stairs to the dark cellar, lighting one match after the other, and you expect something to come up the stairs from below, but instead two arms comes out of the darkness behind her and clap its hands together. Nice.

What makes a jump scare cheap in my book, is when the movie uses fast-cutting loudness. Which is the case in most movies.

Jump scares get a bit of a bad rap these days, because they are overused, derivative and synonymous with bad directing, but most of everyone's favourite horror movies probably have a good jump scare or two in there.