Scoob - I'll look for the script when Don posts it. I'll let you know.

George - Yeah, you got it. I didn't type my feelings correctly, but basically it would be two movies in one. An ordinary movie dealing with a conflict, but is interrupted with the horror part. The main character would have to overcome the struggle for her life so she/he has a chance to resolve the other conflict. Sounds confusing doesn't it? But I think it's somewhere in my brain...


MacDuff

Scoob, you got a good point. Slashers should be scary movies. They should have moments to curl your skin and curse to yourself. You'll never want to see it again until you realize how good it really was.

I'm sure some of the best of the genre have normal plots that the characters are trying to achieve while the slasher dude is chasing them down. In Halloween, Laurie was just trying to do a babysitting job. She played games, took care of the children, put them to bed, etc... She let her friends hang out at her house. It made sense when she walked straight into danger, and she ran at the right time.

I believe the main plot would be almost mundane since the excitement will come from the slasher plot, but that main plot would have to be there so the main character is not doing stupid things like going into the spooky old mill for no reason at all besides her boyfriend thought it would be fun. Can you predict this scene using common horror fare?

From this, we can already predict that the boyfriend is hacked to death and the main character gets "watched" the whole time but never finds the boyfriend's body because the killer "hid it" for some inexplicable reason. She walks back home, confused but hoping her boyfriend will be there when she gets back.

We need to change this convention...meaning that the boyfruiend never went into the spooky old mill because it's dark outside and only a moron would do such a thing. This means the killer must be more creative which means the writer must be more creative. Characters must always do things that fit their character, not things that fit the plot.

Blair Witch is a slasher film? I always thought of it as a thriller or psychological thriller film.

I can't say that any of the movies in this thread are real SLASHER films... FRIDAY the 13th, a slahsher, LOL!  A NIGHTMARE ON ELM ST, LOL!

C'mon!

Real Slashers are movies such as... NEW YORK RIPPER, A BLADE IN THE DARK, SLEEPLESS, THE CARD PLAYER, STAGE FRIGHT, OPERA, TWITCH OF THE DEATH NERVE, PIECES... movies like that and my list can go on and on and on.

But a SLASHER to me is something way way way different too... a SLASHER film to me isn't a monster running around killing people. It's a normal man or woman, who feels pain and can be killed. They are often very smart and methodical. The movies you've all described... well, they are more superhero's than slashers. Michael Myers can't die, Jason can't die, Freddy can't die... It's all a joke.

And who said the fuggin' BLAIR WITCH PROJECT!!!!!?????!!!!!??  Don't even try to pawn that pile of shit off on the SLASHER genre...

Quoted Text Blair Witch is a slasher film?

I believe he was extending the subject to all horror movies.  Not a bad idea, since as MADBALT said the definition of slasher is unclear.

Quoted from George Willson What's your favorite? What can be done to help this tired genre? What would the perfect slasher movie HAVE to have to be successul in your opinion?

Since someone has gone and resurrected this old thread, here are the central questions that were posed at the time.

I seem to recall that the consensus was to stick a fork in it...

In general horror... DEAD N BREAKFAST has to be the best horror film to come along in a very long time. It's a fantastic movie!  I've no fate in horror no more... I've been blasted with THE FOG trailers and previews and just get sick to my gut everytime.

That is hands down probably the worst remake I think they ever could've touched. They have the story all wrong... All wrong. I don't think these people who made it saw the original, CARPENTER version. I really don't.

No 7 strangers drifted into town
The pirates didn't want Jamie Lee cause she wasn't from the town

This movie takes all of that and tosses it all out the window. Not to mention the realisim, had it had any to begin with is gone, cause half the cast is black. ... But c'mon... This is a costal fishing village... This is a group of "WHITE" kids traveling to a wedding.

No blacks would be traveling with them

&

No blacks would be living in that "COSTAL" fishing village.

It's just not something that would happen. I think it's a good thought, having that shown on screen shows unity and all that B.S.  but at the end of the day... life isn't like that... and they do little things like this in movies all the time. It bothers me. It takes "any and all" realisim out of the story.

I'm just beside myself on this one... Oh and the absurd remake of 2000 MANIACS!!!! Why!!!!?? Why!!!!? Why!!!!?  

Not to get tooo out of topic, but I've just seen some pictures of the set from the new "The Wickerman". (I live around 30 minutes from the set)...

My first question is WHY? Why the hell remake the The Wickerman? What made the Wickerman as great as it was...was that it was ahead of it's time. It shocked audiences and created a new type of horror. A 3rd act and climax that was not the norm at the time shocked the audiences.

The movie was filmed in the Highlands of Scotland, where I was born. My parents remember the buzz and shock this little low budget movie made when it finally came out. I wonder if the remake will be set in Scotland...I doubt it.

sheesh.

Quoted from Balt I can't say that any of the movies in this thread are real SLASHER films... FRIDAY the 13th, a slahsher, LOL!  A NIGHTMARE ON ELM ST, LOL! Real Slashers are movies such as... NEW YORK RIPPER, A BLADE IN THE DARK, SLEEPLESS, THE CARD PLAYER, STAGE FRIGHT, OPERA, TWITCH OF THE DEATH NERVE, PIECES... movies like that and my list can go on and on and on.

You may recall I attributed slashers to two basic categories:

Quoted from tubkas These slashers usually fall into two categories: the "super-gory, there's the killer look-out!" variety and the "there's a mysterious killer, whoever could it be" variety.

True, some of them involve supernatural demonesque type critters who tend to trudge along endlessly, but those date back to the beginning of film. I recently cursed myself by watching the four sequels to The Mummy (1932 version -- they only rewrote the original backstory and spirit of the original movie to make the interlocking sequels from 1940-1944). The first Mummy was not a slasher, but the subsequent four very nearly fit the "Michael Myers" slasher mold. Granted they sucked, but that's not the point of the discussion.

And I also find a fine line between slashers films and thrillers that involve some kind of killer. Balt, I must be completely out of touch or something. Out of all the movies I've seen, you picked a slew of them I've never even heard of. I'm filling my Netflix queue way up here.

Quoted Text Personally, I tend to use the appellation 'slashers' for films that really have no point other than to show a lot of often-gory onscreen deaths.

I believe that sub-genre of slasher is usually called "splatter" film.  Or, as Roger Ebert calls them, "Dead teenager movies".

what has everyone got agaionst slasher films? i admit i hate the "friday' series and i can only watch Halloween 1 and 2 without cringing ni disgust, but whats wrong with a good old slasher?