Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Academy?

For the films of 2011
mojoe92
Graduate
Posts: 155
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 4:27 am

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby mojoe92 » Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:07 pm

This is awesome, love reading your guys' opinions

ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby ksrymy » Tue Dec 27, 2011 10:17 am

If you consider it horror, Donald Sutherland should have won major awards for Don't Look Now.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15381
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby Big Magilla » Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:27 am

Yes, of course it was Lair of the White Worm. White Woman might make sense if it took place in Africa ratehr than rural England.

Any discussion of best performances in horror films should include:

Dwight Frye in Dracula
Miriam Hopkins in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (co-star Freid March was the first and only hoor winner until Anthony Hopins and Jodie foster in Silence of teh Lambs)
Claude Rains and Una O'Connor in The Invisibe Man
Boris Karloff, Elsa Lanchester and Ernest Thesiger in Bride of Frankenstein
Gloira Holden in Dracula's Daughter
Maria Ouspenskaya in The Wolf Man
Henry Daniell in The Body Snatcher
Michael Redgrave in Dead of Night
Vincent Price in House of Wax and Witchfinder General AKAThe Conqueror Worm
Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee in Horror of Dracula
Joan Crawford in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?
Bette Davis in Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte and The Nanny
Mia Farrow in Rosemary's Baby
Edward Woodward in The Wicker Man
Jeremy Renner in Dahmer

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12422
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby OscarGuy » Tue Dec 27, 2011 7:05 am

Lair of the White Worm. I remember clearly because I was reading Fangoria back then and it took the cover of the magazine when it came out.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

LoganJ20
Graduate
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:04 am

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby LoganJ20 » Mon Dec 26, 2011 10:35 pm

criddic3 wrote:
LoganJ20 wrote:

Check out the following

Heather O'Rourke in Poltergeist
Amanda Donohue in Lair of the White Woman
Tim Curry in IT
Shelly Duvall in The Shining
Joe Spinell in Maniac
Sid Haig in The Devil's Rejects
Christian Bale in American Psycho
Margot Kidder in Sisters and Black Christmas
Bette Davis in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane
Michael Rooker in Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer
Anthony Perkins in Psycho
Boris Korloff in Frankenstein
Isabelle Furhman in Orphan


It is interesting that only one of these was actually nominated (Bette Davis). Personally, out of these, Davis and Perkins would have been the most likely nominees, and maybe Bale. Of course his was the most graphically violent of the three, so I can see why they ignored it. Is it Lair of the White Women or Worm? I still think Interview with the Vampire should have gotten acting noms for Cruise and Dunst. Pitt was good in it, too, but he also had Legends of the Fall that year. And I own It, one of the better Stephen King adaptations. Isn't Spielberg supposed to make The Talisman or was that shelved again?



I think it is Woman. hmm? I'll double check on that. But I might be the ONLY one to think this, but as bad of a film Queen of the Damned was I do think Aaliyah was worthy of a Supporting nom as well. Terrible film, only small bit of light was her performance. She kind of pulled a Brenda Vaccaro there.

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12422
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby OscarGuy » Mon Dec 26, 2011 7:30 pm

I may be wrong, but wasn't there some buzz surrounding a nod for Heather O'Rourke in Poltergeist? Or am I mistaken?
Wesley Lovell

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

User avatar
criddic3
Tenured
Posts: 2721
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:08 pm
Location: New York, USA
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby criddic3 » Mon Dec 26, 2011 4:22 pm

LoganJ20 wrote:

Check out the following

Heather O'Rourke in Poltergeist
Amanda Donohue in Lair of the White Woman
Tim Curry in IT
Shelly Duvall in The Shining
Joe Spinell in Maniac
Sid Haig in The Devil's Rejects
Christian Bale in American Psycho
Margot Kidder in Sisters and Black Christmas
Bette Davis in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane
Michael Rooker in Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer
Anthony Perkins in Psycho
Boris Korloff in Frankenstein
Isabelle Furhman in Orphan


It is interesting that only one of these was actually nominated (Bette Davis). Personally, out of these, Davis and Perkins would have been the most likely nominees, and maybe Bale. Of course his was the most graphically violent of the three, so I can see why they ignored it. Is it Lair of the White Women or Worm? I still think Interview with the Vampire should have gotten acting noms for Cruise and Dunst. Pitt was good in it, too, but he also had Legends of the Fall that year. And I own It, one of the better Stephen King adaptations. Isn't Spielberg supposed to make The Talisman or was that shelved again?
"If you can't stand the nut on the left and you can't stand the nut on the right, go for the Johnson,” Jonathan S. Bush (10/21/2016)

LoganJ20
Graduate
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:04 am

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby LoganJ20 » Sun Dec 25, 2011 7:58 am

anonymous1980 wrote:IT was a cable/TV miniseries, I believe so Tim Curry wouldn't have been eligible.



Oh I know. Still worthy though :D

bizarre
Assistant
Posts: 558
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby bizarre » Sun Dec 25, 2011 6:37 am

I think as a genre horror deals with such a limited selection of functional tropes because, like comedy, its effectiveness is dictated by how well it creates a specific emotional response. This probably makes it hard to explore horror's relationships with other genres in a postmodern way and produce an successful film as a result, as if not enough attention is paid to hitting certain marks the entire piece loses its power for the audience. It certainly makes it hard to do anything fresh with the genre.

I prefer exploring genre film by exploring a genre's differential relationships with other genres. I prefer films like this than those that are 'pure' genre, I guess - you don't see a lot of experimentation with the typical 'horror' template but I think some of the more successful contemporary horrors are those that try to recall past fads within the genre - exploitation, 50's B etc.

I often enjoy horror films but I don't find that I would call many of them 'good films'. A recent example might be Orphan, which I think deserves credit for achieving the impossible task of making successful camp on purpose.

anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 5067
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby anonymous1980 » Sun Dec 25, 2011 6:18 am

IT was a cable/TV miniseries, I believe so Tim Curry wouldn't have been eligible.

LoganJ20
Graduate
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:04 am

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby LoganJ20 » Sun Dec 25, 2011 3:31 am

ksrymy wrote:My biggest gripe is the acting in horror films. It's atrocious. And when it is good, it's not a horror film it's a psychological thriller à la Sixth Sense and Black Swan. Carrie was the first time I ever saw supreme acting in a legitimate horror movie outside of German Expressionistic horror silents and MGM classics.



Check out the following

Heather O'Rourke in Poltergeist
Amanda Donohue in Lair of the White Woman
Tim Curry in IT
Shelly Duvall in The Shinning
Joe Spinell in Maniac
Sid Haig in The Devil's Rejects
Christian Bale in American Psycho
Margot Kidder in Sisters and Black Christmas
Bette Davis in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane
Michael Rooker in Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer
Anthony Perkins in Psycho
Boris Korloff in Frankenstein
Isabelle Furhman in Orphan

ALL OF THESE performances were Oscar worthy. So to say that all acting in horror is atrocious. I have to agree to disagree. And these aren't even a quarter of performances that were deserving
Last edited by LoganJ20 on Sun Dec 25, 2011 8:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby ksrymy » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:57 pm

My biggest gripe is the acting in horror films. It's atrocious. And when it is good, it's not a horror film it's a psychological thriller à la Sixth Sense and Black Swan. Carrie was the first time I ever saw supreme acting in a legitimate horror movie outside of German Expressionistic horror silents and MGM classics.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald

anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 5067
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby anonymous1980 » Sat Dec 24, 2011 4:26 am

Both The Thing and The Shining were not received well by mainstream critics during the time of their initial release. Only later did they both receive the classic status they now enjoy.

jack
Assistant
Posts: 862
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 4:39 pm
Location: Cape Breton, Nova Scotia

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby jack » Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:42 pm

How is the technique used to serve the film? Your own question, criddic, is exactly why Hellraiser deserved its nomination. The make-up design served the story as it was required, and I doing so advanced latex make-up design in the same way the early Cronenberg films did.

Part of my post was a joke. However, the Hellraiser score most certainly was not.

LoganJ20
Graduate
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:04 am

Re: Why can't Horror films be taken seriously with the Acade

Postby LoganJ20 » Fri Dec 23, 2011 6:12 pm

I couldn't see Hostel get a nomination for anything except Heather Matarazzo's performance. That I will agree with.

The Lost Boys make-up and song Cry Little Sister should have gotten nominations and at least a win for make-up. Dianne Wiest was fresh off her Oscar win for Hannah and her Sisters so Im surprised Lost Boys didnt get any buzz at all


Return to “84th Nominations and Winners”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest