Scary Movie List

Writer: Giggles
Date: 11/5/03

“It’s not late; it’s just that this show is fucking disturbing.”

— The Discovery List

So, you might ask yourself, “So what! I’ve been to websites that list the greatest scary movies ever. Big flippin’ deal. Seen it, seen it.” And if you haven’t seen it just disregard that and skip down to the next paragraph… emhmm.

Well yes, and so perhaps we’ve all been here before. But what’s special about this romp through horror moviedom is our ability to CUT THE SHIT. Some of these movies are worse than others, and maybe some are personal favorites or maybe guilty pleasures, and maybe some are too “typical” for horror fanatics, but we’re not going to pretentiously pretend (ah, what amazingly awesome alliteration!) that this list is a movie-bible of any sort, nor is it some kind of list that people will refer to and thumb over for the truth. That’s why this list is also in no certain order, and this is primarily because nobody ever agrees with what is #1 or #20, or whatever. You won’t agree and we won’t.

The Short Version: if you’re a horror buff, lean back in that cobwebby chair of yours and just CHILLAX, manchile.

HALLOWEEN. The music, the mask, the Michael Myers. What can I write about these films that hasn’t been written and said countless times before? Well, they’re just plain good fun. Other slasher series have suffered far worse fates than the Halloween franchise. The Nightmare on Elm St. series withered into nothing: The Dream Child and Freddy’s Dead, though I haven’t seen either in quite a while, I do remember them thoroughly sucking penis. The innovative New Nightmare helped revamp the series, but that was out of the Elm St. universe and in our own, so it was one of those extraneous movies like Jason X, which to me made up for when Jason went to Manhattan and then subsequently to Hell.

So there were letdowns in both series mentioned. Big letdowns. But even the suckiest Halloween movie is still a load of fun.

First thing that has to be said. Michael Myers is a serious slasheroo. He doesn’t play mind games like Freddy and he doesn’t chop first and ask questions later in Voorhees fashion. He actually savors the process of killing in a silent reverie. He is a voyeur, who explodes into violence at the very last minute, and he is relentless in a different way than our other two super slashers. It’s is a rare moment indeed when Michael is NOT evil. He’s game for family, friends, relatives, dogs, and even children if given the chance. He chased his little niece through two movies and then killed her in Part VI and went after her newborn baby! Michael never goes for jokes like Freddy, nor does he balk at killing children and small animals like Jason does.

The origin of this movie series really has something going for it as well; Halloween was a masterpiece. John Carpenter, a great director and musician, assembles a very intense thriller. The scene where Michael casually strolls across the street toward Jamie Lee Curtis has been mimicked in other movies, even in other Halloween movies, because of how great its effect initially was.

Parts I & II always play out like one entire movie and so its hard for me to see them as any other way, and Parts IV, V, and VI, for that matter, seem to be a trilogy about Michael’s niece. H20 and Resurrection fall into a new category: Halloween Post Loomis.

In the final Loomis installment, the filmmakers made a decision to end the movie very abruptly. Dr. Loomis finally succumbed to Michael Myers… errr, we think. All we get is a shot of Michael’s mask and the sound of Loomis screaming. Donald Pleasance actually died during the filming, from what I understand, and so there was little else they could do, but all and all, Part 6 is my least favorite. I can still watch it and enjoy Michael’s exploits but this truncated ending is sort of unnerving.

The reason for Halloween 6 being my least favorite is due to a missed opportunity. We have this great cliffhanger at the end of Halloween 5 (Michael Myers is broken out of prison by these dudes in black leather coats and machine guns) and after all the waiting, we have Part 6, that will inevitably show us what happened. I didn’t mind the fact that these leather trench coat mafia turned out to be devil worshippers, but what I really wanted was an answer that might have connected to another quagmire in the Halloween series.

Halloween Three: Season of the Witch wasn’t that bad. I mean, it’s bad; donta gita me wrongo, but it really isn’t as bad as people absolutely WANT it to be. Nobody wants a Halloween movie without Michael Myers because the idea of that is absolute horseshit. It’s like Jaws 5 being about some diseased beluga whale instead of a great white shark… Hold on… No…. Wait…. That’s far too similar to make a good comparison. It’s like making Jaws 5 and having it be about Lawyers. The shark part of it is a loose association but where’s the bits of gristle and flesh dripping off those great white teeth?

Season of the Witch is set up to be like a cross between “The Twilight Zone,” “Night Gallery,” and Invasion of the Body Snatchers. It has the intensity of a Halloween movie and if there was a way of linking it to the rest of the films I think people would be more open to it.

Roachito and I thought a good tie in for the cliffhanger could have been a connective tissue between part III and part VI.

Follow me here: In Part III you have guys walking around in black suits who end up being androids that work for some crazy mask manufacturer. Why couldn’t the trenchcoat wearing cultists in Part VI turn out to be the same guys? That would have been a cool way to bring it together and that way Halloween III wouldn’t be so ostracized from the series.

There is, technically, something that would prevent this tie-in from actually happening though. In Halloween III people are actually watching the first Halloween movie on television, which would suggest that this movie takes place in a “real” world outside of the Myers Multiverse. Hehe. Roachito mentioned that maybe they had Michael locked up in their factory and they were putting his sweat inside the masks to make them evil. I think he missed the part where they found the tiny microchip in one mask, but hey, it was an interesting thought. A high thought but nonetheless an interesting one.

For those of you who’ve always wondered what Michael Myers does for all the rest of the year, the 364 days that aren’t Halloween, we at Youngmanridge refuse to jip our readers…

But really, I could go on for days about these movies and there’s really no good reason for it when there are plenty more Horror movies to list. However, before we move on there is one thing you’ve got to learn from Halloween 5, and maybe it’s the one thing you should take with you from the entire series…

MICHAEL DIGS NICE CARS!

For further proof of this check out the special features on Halloween Resurrection. There is a hilarious deleted scene of Michael “arming” his alarm for his car when he rolls up to his house.

And if you like, check out what the sportsguy Bill Simmons has to say about Mr. Myers: “One Killer Sports Century.”

THE EXORCIST is one of those movies that always irks me when people on the Internet start talking trash about it. These people, most of whom are people sub-Youngmanridge age group (under 26) are blinded by naivety. That’s probably too harsh, but I always see the same, tired, exhausted, fatigued, worn-out old response about this hellish movie. It’s not scary. Ugh!

First off, lemme just start by screaming at semantics. Scary is as scary doobie-doobie-do. You can go on and on about how something isn’t scary, and then say “oh but it’s disturbing,” “not spooky though,” “maybe frightening,” but all and all you just want to make a different point without truly making one. Let’s just leave it at this: The Exorcist is fucked up!

The scene in the attic, after the mother hears a noise and swivels around, is what most people think SCARY means. This is the cheap sense of thrill you get out of a horror movie. Any crappy horror movie can make you jump (the good ones make you jump even the second time you watch the film). But The Exorcist decides not to be an entire movie of people searching dark places, waiting for a cat to jump out unexpectedly. This movie decides to DISTURB. And I don’t know about you alls, but being disturbed is worse than being scared.

Maybe the newer audiences see this OLDER movie how all young people see them… OLD, dated, and ANCIENT. But what I don’t understand is the change in morality. A young girl stabbing herself in the vagina isn’t wicked to anyone, anymore? Were these juvenile audience members in the bathroom or buying milkduds when next the little girl crams her mother’s head into the bloodied virgin hole and instructs to lick her? I hope they were elsewhere because I’ve never seen anything like that in a movie and I hope I rarely ever do again.

I’m not religious… could you tell by this website?… but I will say that when I was a kid the EVIL in this movie was potent because I was more religious. Now, pretty much I watch it and think, Damn, if there is a devil this is how demented the cocksucker really would be. But the kids don’t like, no, no… and I think they want to laugh at the movie rather than think about what it really tries to do. If this flick would have come out… well, let me see, oh… NOW than these same film patrons would be mystified by it.

My parents challenged me once when I was a kid to watch this movie alone. And… I did. It wasn’t too bad either. I think back then I’d seen so many horror movies that this one didn’t really seem to settle-in until I went to bed that night… I kept seeing the image of the devil, that smooth bluish skin and parting mouth of fangs, twisting and writhing in the darkness. In the movie you’re only allowed a glimpse of this for scattered moments, but boy did it make an impression on my young mind.

Psycho. (shouldn’t it be pronounced sigh-cho? Sounds like a martial Arts form)

I had a wonderful experience with this movie. Recently I got my girlfriend to watch it and, believe it or not, she hadn’t seen it nor did she know the true identity of Norman Bates’ mother. I don’t feel bad mentioning it because its hardly a spoiler for a movie as old as Hitchcock’s Psycho, but it sure was interesting to see the look on my girl’s face when Norman comes storming into the basement, lunacy trapped in the shiny lenses of his eyes, gray wig askew on his head.

Yes, this is a great horror movie and rightfully called the first “slasher” movie, and if it isn’t then the others ones weren’t worth a spit. And no, it’s not great just because Hitchcock’s name on it; it’s great because it made Hitchcock’s name valued that way. It wasn’t his only great film but it was definitely a voyage into groundbreaking cinema.

Here’s some elements of the movie that just blow me away when I think about them:

1) The film’s structure– where the story begins and where it ends are leagues apart

2) The film’s characters– Norman Bates is the first character I can think of that occupies two personalities in a single body. Perhaps film buffs, or other nay Sayers might prove me wrong, but Norman certainly wins in the most creepy department.

3) The film’s direction– the shower scene is only one great collection of shots, but this film is absolutely riddled with interesting camera movement and placement. Plus, you got that moment where the audience gets to see UNDER Norman’s chin. I don’t know why we get this privilege but its always been weird enough for me to full-on dig it!

The scene above was interpreted differently in the 90s remake. Vince Vaughn as Norman was apparently flogging the little “Trent” whilst he watched his private nudie show. This was a detail that I could have done without. Plus, would Norman, with his Mother ever present in his mind, be able to do something like that without her eyes on him? Saying that he’s conscious of the dichotomy would make him a Fibber, not a Psycho.

We’ll have to wait for an “Alfred Shortstick Presents” on this bad boy. There’s plenty that’s been said already and there’s plenty left to be said, but even down to the Orchestra hits timed perfectly with the knife diving down and down, this movie is a innovative thriller that really deserves all the hype and its place in the list.

And let us not forget that Psycho III is also pretty killer too. The bloody ice cubes baby!

(this was originally a two-part article on the original site)

So, we meet again. If you’ve made it this far you probably either disagree with us and want to chortle at our conceptions of good Horror movies, or you don’t care either way (probably tried to look up “Scary Spice” on a search engine and ended up here… well ain’t that spooky). And we mustn’t forget the possibility that you have agreed with this list so far and for that I love you.

The new list is a tad different. We now present three new entries that are not exactly the cream of the crop but nonetheless interesting, relevant horror movies. So let’s get this little corksucker going, shall we?

JACOB’S LADDER arrived at a time when war movies had begun to grow as stale as a decade-old box of Honeycombs. Vietnam movies, especially, came out during the eighties and nineties. I think producers were backing dump trucks full of money to filmmakers’ porches if they even hinted at making one.

But fear not… this movie goes beyond the typical constraints of a normal war flick. Rare it is that movies achieve the psychological level that this one does. I’m going to keep my observation of this movie a little neutral because there are some out there who haven’t seen it (shame on you and your pets).

Okay, all right, I won’t bring the pets into this, but if you like interesting twists in movies and you don’t care if you’re mind-fucked just a bit– well maybe more gentle than a fuck, maybe a little mind-lovin’– then this film is for you.

Tim Robbins stars in this along with some really hot chick who looks great even when she’s got demon’s eyes. Mac Culkin also bares up his ugly head, but don’t worry, he doesn’t say much and he never slams his hands to his cheeks, not once, I checked. (no not really).

The premise of the movie, not giving anything away, includes a Vietnam conspiracy and a supernatural world of hellish beings surfacing in Jacob Singer’s life. But this movie is CUH-ree-PEE! And it’s because of all the little moments that clarify the creepiness. There are special effects, like when a demon gives Jacob’s girl the HIGH-HARD-ONE and it’s dick <blurp> comes out her mouth! (no, not “in,” but “out” this time, believe me or not).

But most everything else in the movie is far more subtle. Like when Jacob wakes up at the beginning of the movie on a subway and reads an advertisement, focusing on the word, “hell.” Brilliant. I love the simple, I do I do.

Possibly one of the film’s best moments comes when Jacob is spirited through a hospital littered with dead bodies, mutilation, deformed people, and strange organic matter thrown everywhere. It’s not as unbearable as it sounds, but it sets up an eerie moment where Jacob pleads manically to be released from all of the chaos. We don’t expect it, but a disembodied voice does answer him, lowly. It’s almost difficult to hear. I won’t tell you what it tells him, but it starts to make him cry.

Oh fear of dolls, how we love it. After talking mom into renting CHILD’S PLAY for us, I couldn’t even say the word “Chucky” to my little sister without causing her to tuck away for a three week stay in my parent’s bed. Good choice mom, har-har-har! But pirate laughs aside, I always thought my Sis was just being too yellow. After all, she was the one who wanted all those dolls in the first place. She begged Santa for them and she was the one who lined them in a neat row against her wall in order of popularity, their little plastic eyes shining in the darkness, thirsting off the weak glow of her nightlight.

Luckily for boys at the time, G.I. Joes, Transformers, and He-Man (the Holy Three) were too small to be distinguished at night, and any dolls large enough were usually stuffed animals, or if your parents could pull off a few sucker-punches, a Cabbage Patch Kid. For the most part boys were safe though because our stuff was way more far-out. You know, stuff that’s less than real and didn’t resemble little, idle people.

I recall Richard Matheson’s “Trilogy of Terror” where a Tiki figurine comes to life and starts stabbing this chick with his little spear, and then in Stephen King’s Cat’s Eye something similar happens with a mini-sized Troll. Something within us, an elephantine sort of fear, plagues the mind with images of small things getting the best of us: diseases, mice, bugs, Dudley Moore.

But the fascinating thing about Child’s Play can be explained by those most captivated by it— the story is ludicrous and we buy into it! We’re watching it, saying to ourselves, “Wooh, look at that evil little shit. I’d toss him a whole city block if that plastic dickhead tried any shit with me!”

At least, the first movie we had this enthusiasm, and parts of the second one. The third is forgettable, and the Bride of Chucky is always in progress when I sit down to watch it, so I can’t say (but Jennifer Tilly will always give you a little thrilly). I will say that the director of Bride did Freddy Vs. Jason and I enjoyed that one too much.

But Chucky should and must go on. I say move forward and stabs some more ankles and bite some more fingers, Chuck. You are in the business of entertaining US and we want to continued to be amused by how ridiculous a doll looks trying to be murder things thirty-times its size. So, keep rockin’ and sockin’ semi-dude.

I got this off of an Asian site (no, I don’t have this much time on my hands, in case you’re wondering). I myself wonder if there are any cultural implications behind this animation. Do the people on that site believe that Chucky would do a thing like this? Is this really scary to them? Or a joke? And what’s with the blue lips? Is this how Chucky met his end? By being strangled? Too many questions and no answers, ladies and gentlemen.

And another thought: Maybe Chucky’s doing drag-queen stuff now. See Roachito’s review of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert to see if it sheds any light. Or perhaps study the “it” in Alfred Shortstick’s Rope review.

George A. Romero (or in Latin phonetics: Hor-hey Ah RoMayDoe) created a film about a true Vampire and he named this movie, simply enough, MARTIN. This cult classic is startling because it demonstrates so much skill in its presentation that you can forgive some of its campy music score and odd patches of dialogue.

The gist of this movie: Boy thinks himself Vampire, Boy meets Girl, Boy drugs girl, Boy cuts girl, and Vampire gets blood. Pretty disturbing if done the right way, and it is.

The beginning of the film happens on a train and a lot of suspenseful moments occur right off the bat– I’m not going to bring ANY of them up because if you haven’t seen this movie, blabby-bla-bla. I will say that havoc ensues and blood is shed. This is a movie with a religious message but forget not that it is indeed a horror movie. Victim Uno, Victim Ni, Victim Three, and so on and so forth.

If you are a bit squeamish about blood and bloody acts, this film may not be the best to sit down with. However, the movie blood here falls victim to what a lot of 70s blood effects were afflicted with: it looks like creamy, thick red paint. And that it was actual paint might not be too far away from the truth. Dawn of the Dead and The Crazies present the same kind of pseudo-sanguine color. Nevertheless, Martin isn’t supposed to be a gore fest, but a suspense-ride, although there is a gratuitous police chase at one point that turns into a grisly gunfight. George likes them guns!

The more interesting thing about Martin is how Martin’s character appears to be as much of a monster and as less of a monster at the same time. There’s an entirely extra layer to the movie that makes you think that Martin may not actually be the monster at all. Sure, he is a murderer, and it’s unsettling that a real person with a mental affliction could do the things that Martin does, but the true monster in the movie is revealed later, toward the film’s end. And though we’ve always suspected it, at the film’s conclusion we aren’t surprised when Martin’s creator turns on him. Yet, for some strange reason, we are disappointed when this happens, and, oddly enough, kind of feel sad and empty. Even during the credits. Now that’s a movie that pulls on some of your strings.

Meet the daughter of Carrie and Michael Myers…