Horror movies vs Monsters movies

[Henry88]

[MekaGojira3k]

[Pkmatrix]

[MouthForWar]

[king_ghidorah]

[GhostMachine]

[jellydonut25]

[MouthForWar]

[william newell]

[GhostMachine]

I'd argue that Gojira is more of a horror movie while Godzilla, King of the Monsters is more of a monster movie, but both versions are monster movies.

[MouthForWar]

Gojira is most certainly a horror movie with some genuinely unsettling moments. The whole movie has a looming sense of dread hanging over it like a black cloud.

[The Giant Pacific Octopus]

[jellydonut25]

[william newell]

[king_ghidorah]

Gojira is indeed a horror movie, as it is also a message movie...I'm sure if it were made today a lot of you would b*tch and moan about the film makers trying to slip in an anti-nuclear message in a movie that should do nothing more than entertain

[jellydonut25]

[kiryugoji04]

While I agree there is a ton of overlap, my preference towards out and out monster fare has me choosing the latter.

Oddly enough though, I'm coming to realize that after monster movies (with an obvious emphasis towards the giant), my second-favorite genre of film probably consists of largely aimless, meandering, sometimes-quirky, usually-not-terribly-downbeat, mostly-upbeat, mellow, slice-of-life films. And I'm okay with that. Notable examples include but are not limited to Lost in Translation, Take Care of My Cat, Chungking Express, Fallen Angels, Kamome Diner, and Turtles Swim Faster than Expected. I think it's an interesting duality, to say the least.

[Giganfan]

I'm specific when it comes to horror movies. I can tolerate the Texas Chainsaw remake of a few years ago, and the Dawn of the Dead remake wasn't all that bad, if you ask me. But the Saw generation, and everything that came in its wake is ridiculous. Come to think of it, I've never been a fan of the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

I like the Universal horror movies from the thirties and forties because, despite the lower budgets, Carl Laemmle Jr. and co. were still trying to make actual "movies." The stories were elegant, the music properly researched and the monsters were brought to life by truly great actors. Anything from Universal, MGM or Paramount during that period, that featured Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, Peter Lorre or Claude Raines, and directed by the likes of Tod Browning, James Whale, Karl Freund or Reuben Mamoulian(sp?) is great horror filmmaking, if you ask me. Hammer studios made some really great ones too.

Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho is, to my taste, the greatest of all horror movies, even though the "horror" elements in that film are a result of the extremes to which Hitchcock went to create suspense. Psycho is so much more than a simple "genre picture", but if we were going to categorize it, I would file it under the "horror movie" section at the video store, because it has all of the trappings. The same goes for The Silence of the Lambs, which brings up another point I'd like to make. I think Ridley Scott's Hannibal is the perfect example of a a modern day "horror movie", in its purest form, should look like. Sure, there is plenty of gore and violence, as is to be expected in this day and age, but it's all in healthy moderation. It allows characterization and story to shine, where crap like Hostel is content to bludgeon you to death with sado-masocistic shocks. I've always liked Hannibal, where most people always seem to judge it against the film that inspired it, which is an untouchable masterpiece, to be sure.

ANYWAAAYZZZ...back to the subject at-hand. Which do I prefer, monster movies, or horror flicks...I can't decide. Godzilla and friends begat every other kind of movie I've ever been interested in, including horror films, so I guess I'm partial to them. 'Depends on what kind of mood I'm in.

[Inferior Rodan]