agreed!

the horror genre is finished.

if you go back to the 60's,70's, and 80's, low budget horror flicks had mood and atmosphere and soundtrack to compensate for lack of a budget...now, big budget films don't even have THAT stuff...the lighting is typical hollywood crap, soundtracks are more for CD sales, cinematography is like something right out of a "how to shoot movies for dummies" book, the gore is predictable, the "scarey moments" are predictable and rehashed from all of those low budget films from the 60's 70's and 80's, and even the contrived "sex" and "gratuitus" nudie scenes are fucking stupid (if they show anything at all!)...AND, they are all PG-13!

the horror genre has gone the way of the dodo bird. nothing shocking, gut-wrentching, or authentically scary. Sorry, but that dude getting his fingers cut off in Hills Have Eyes doesn't cut it for me...there was no single bad guy in that film that gave you nightmares!!!I mean, the orignal one had a chrachter that you saw when you closed your eyes-same goes for friday the 13th, Nightmare on elm st, suspiria, and even SCREAM...they all had some one who you could be "afrain of"....even "texas chainsaw the beginning" butchered the whole leatherface thing because they made him a victim!

Hostel and Saw might have offered something, but both movie concepts ran dry very quickly, and there was really no reason to re-watch either of those two because the "shock value" is gone.

well, hostel DOES have those two hot chicks....but thats not a good enough reason to re-watch a movie that was "average at best"....middle of the road, almost forgettable...

sorry, but Ive lost my patience with the horror scene....

Remake Suspiria!!!! No fucking way!!! That movie is perfect the way it is. They are also remaking Terror Train and Prom Night too, grrr!!!!

ALL of them? REALLY?

I know that some people would disagree with me, but I thought that the remake of Dawn of the Dead was really entertaining...
I kind of wish that they had called it something else, as it would have stood better on it's own. Without the preconceptions brought on by the title, it would not suffer by comparisons to the original. They are VERY different films, and each achieves something very different. While the original has a great commentary on the consumer culture of the time, the remake focused more on the raw horror of trying to survive a zombie apocalypse.

I am also a big fan of John Carpenter's "The Thing". I believe that it's one of the greatest horror films of all time, but it is a remake...I would love to hear why the original is better, because I would definitely need to rewatch it. Herzog's Nosferatu is pretty great as well...both the English and German versions. There are plenty of examples of non-genre quality remakes as well (like the new 3:10 to Yuma), but I'll try to keep it topical since this is the horror movie group.

What about remakes by the original filmmakers? I didn't like the American Ringu remake, but I am looking forward to the Katamura-produced American version of Versus and the Haneke-directed version of Funny Games...

I know that sunshine is just trolling with flame-bait, but he brings up a greater question: Do all remakes suck, or are there some that make the practice seem worthwhile? I would definitely argue for the latter...Even though they are far between, there is an occasional worthwhile (yes, even great) remake. Would anyone agree, have any other examples, or argue for why mine should not be counted as quality?