-
Many thanks to Raineypark and Castlebee for helping me to launch a different aspect of a previous discussion!
Rainey, for me "good horror" is what I enjoy! I think people who don't watch either tend to lump slasher and horror films together. I despise the first and love the second. Give me a scary, sad monster, a vampire, a ghost, or similar creatures and I'm there eating it right up. To me there is a huge difference to being scared or grossed out. Love scared. Seeing "The Others" in the theater was incredibly intense for me and it scared me to pieces in parts. It is now one of my all time favorites! Ditto with "The Shining" and "Fallen" with Denzel Washington. But I also enjoy older or campier horror movies that were not made on any where near as professional a level. Not as much, but I do like them. I haven't seen "From Hell" or "Dracula 2000" yet, so can't comment on them. But a friend from church said "Dracula 2000" was fun and had a very interesting religious quality in it that intrigued me.
Yes, I am a VERY religious Christian. I would EVEN say that God and my faith are more important to me than DS! My kids too, but not much else. (I may or may not be kidding, I'm not sure of it myself!) I actually did struggle with the issue of my horror fixation for a while. I decided-oh, to heck with it, I do love it and it doesn't harm my faith. I think it interesting that horror themes are frequently the only ones that allow mention of God and glimpses of crosses. It seems it is hard to show evil without it's holy counterpoint. I find that a good movie/tv show will often get my thinking on some deep theological points. Not something that I got from "Friends", back when I did watch it.
As for kids, I would protect them from the scariest stuff. The midlevel stuff they pretty much decide for themselves. "The Mummy" was too scary for them, they don't want to watch it. It's there when they think they are ready. A priest at church was commenting once that he just didn't understand why people let their kids dress up as evil characters at Halloween. I told him that I felt the same as he did, before I had children. (The priests in my church CAN marry, but this one is single). Now, I realize that their understanding of vampires and such is so innocent and I want to let them enjoy that aspect of it. I don't need to bring them to another level of understanding the evil those beings represent, they will come to that when they are old enough. My son was a vampire on Halloween, he wanted to be like Barnabas. I would never ruin that for him for some knee jerk reaction that doesn't really understand children.
SO, enough about ME, what constitutes good horror for YOU?
-
For me, the scariest things are the things you don't see. My favorite novel is Shirley Jackson's "The Haunting of Hill House", which was made into one brilliant movie in 1964. It scares the hell out of me because of what it DOESN'T show you ... like what in the name of hell is that THING bulging the door in like that?!?
I like to pretend the remake doesn't exist.
Nicky
-
I think suspense is an element to good horror, not to be confused with shock.
Hitchcock once explained the difference between the two.
Shock is suprising the audience without warning.
Suspense is letting the audience know something is going to happen, but not letting them know exactly when.
The gory movies with shock doesn't do anything for me, but give me suspense and that's what I think true horror is. Also mix in elements that actually scare you in real life. When I see a movie like The Haunting, it doesn't do anything for me, because it doesn't look real and everything is shown.
I think, when making good horror, the human element, namely true fear and fear of the unknown or unseen, is crucial.
deron
-
For myself, the first requirement of a "good horror" experience (TV show, movie OR book) is the element of possibility. Not that a thing has to BE real, but that you could imagine it being possible. For example¢â‚¬¦.I don't believe that Aliens like those in "Independence Day" are out there coming to get us, but I absolutely consider it possible that we are not alone in the universe. If a premise is so far-fetched that it strains my ability to suspend disbelief, I'm bored already.
On the other hand, I will NOT sit through any more "Hero Saves World from Terrorists" movies because they are utterly real and no longer entertaining in the least. Never liked them before, won't tolerate them at all now.
After that would be the use of the 2 elements already described by deron. Shock is so badly over used in slasher flicks as to render them stupid. Suspense, on the other hand is much harder to pull off, and much more entertaining. Understanding that one fact was probably the root of Hitchcock's genius.
With regard to movies and TV, the use of audio effects matters a great deal to me. We focus intently on visual effects, but for me, the scariest thing can be music or the sound effects. That was the case, in particular, in both "The Exorcist" ("Tubular Bells" can send me screaming out of a room to this day!!) and in "The Haunting of Hill House", in which the muttering, murmuring voices were creepy beyond belief.
Beyond that, "good horror" is completely a personal preference¢â‚¬¦..I love old black and white "noir" films from the thirties and forties¢â‚¬¦.because I watched them as a child. Same goes for Sci-Fi flicks from the fifties. The original "Thing" may look hopelessly hokey now, but it scared the hell out of me when it was new¢â‚¬¦.hideous creature¢â‚¬¦.nerve-rattling isolation on the North Pole¢â‚¬¦..and that CREEPY music!! :o
But that's a direct result of my age.
My 15-year-old doesn't "get" them at all, though she's watched them with me. In fact, her hilariously derogatory comments and "re-enactments" during "The War of the Worlds" ("Mom, that Martian screams like a girl...runs like one too!") has ruined that formerly scary experience for me forever!! ::)
Well, THAT was more than anyone needed to know about Rainey's taste in horror flicks¢â‚¬¦..who's next?
Raineypark
-
Seeing "The Others" in the theater was incredibly intense for me and it scared me to pieces in parts. It is now one of my all time favorites!
I finally rented and saw "The Others" a few weekends ago - what a great movie! Thank goodness I hadn't read or heard too much about it because the ending came as a total surprise. I sat through the whole thing figuring out various scenarios I thought would probably end up being the explanation at the end but when I finally got to the end I was just blown away! Best movie I've seen in years - literally!
:)
-
have to agree with all of you slasher movies aren't even scary just made for teenage boys to see other teenagers slashed (while necking most of the time) while one teenage girl is stalked[sick]! The girls always seem to be bouncing out of their bras!i did enjoy the first Halloween though don't ask me why!
i do love horror that is King or Alfred H. still find that first shower scene scary as hell![evilg]also love mystery and it is true what you don't see is sometimes far more creepy
than what you do! also love the first Haunting too!
jennifer
-
I agree that often it's what you DON'T see, or what you THINK you see, that makes for fine horror. "The Haunting" (Jackson's "Haunting of Hill House") is one mighty fine example. So is "The Innocents" with Deborah Kerr (upon which a very familiar DS storyline is based) is another. And then, if more is to be shown, if done with class and style, I would say the Corman/Poe/Vincent Price movies offer a fine example.
Gerard
P.S. By the way, when I saw the first "Friday the 13th" in the theater, I and my friend actually took out a pad of paper and a pen and began to write down who was getting what when. While everyone else was screaming, we were sitting there, saying: "Okay, that was Bambi; she just got the fish skewer through the eye.......No, no, no. It was Buffy who got the skewer; Bambi got it with the lawn mower.......You're wrong! Brent got it with the lawn mower, or was that Brad? Or did Brad get it with the salad spinner?........"
-
My components for good horror:
(the top three of which have already been listed by Nicky, deron, and Rainey :) )
Also, I'm limiting this to the cinematic.
1. The unseen. Stephen King writes about this in Danse Macabre (and then proceeds to not do it in everyone of his books thereafter). Don't show me the monster behind the door. I don't want to know that it's 40 feet high and dripping saliva, because anything you can show me is not nearly as bad as what I can imagine it to be.
2. Suspense.
3. Plausibility. If you give me a plausible context and believable characters and dialogue, I'm there. I will willingly suspend that disbelief all the way. The Blair Witch Project had me terrified for days and it had mostly to do with the fact that I know idiots like those three kids who would do stupid things like not mark their trail before going blindly into the woods.
4. Strong characters. It can be the villains. It can be the heroine. It can be that adorable small child. If I can't identify with someone (and I frequently can't), then give me someone who will engross me.
5. Atmosphere. The best horror films/tv shows do this well. It's hard to explain what I mean, but I think you all know what I'm talking about.
6. Adequate production values/historical accuracy. I'm one of those shallow people who will find themselves completely distracted by the fact that all of the women in a Hammer film set in the 1800s have 1960s hair or find myself laughing hysterically at someone being menaced by a vicious plastic vine. Know your limitations and go from there. If the Blair Witch crew can take twine, some rocks, and some sticks and scare the bejesus out of me, then it can be done. If you can't do it, then don't try.
Tall order, I know.
This is a great post, btw. I really don't want to get into the Christianity aspect of it, but it may be of interest to note that most faiths hold that if you're going to accept that there is good, then you have to accept that there is evil which leads into the "if there's a God, then there's a Devil" theory.
Luciaphil
-
(One little aside to Gerard: Guess who's sitting here quaffing hot-pepper martinis?)
This is an interesting topic in that everyone is affected differently by the stimuli that horror provides. The world at large tends to equate the term "horror" with Freddy Krueger, Michael Myers, and Jason Voorhees, with an occasional nod to Stephen King (in other words, sneering at the whole concept); indeed, the horror field is the ghetto of "serious" literature, oftentimes deservedly. When horror is handled poorly by its creator(s), it rates as one of the lowest forms of entertainment on earth. Almost as low as rap/hip-hop (let's see if THAT opens a can of worms). Nowhere outside the horror field, perhaps, is Ted Sturgeon's postulate that "90% of everything is crap" more graphically illustrated.
I think there is a place for graphic horror; but in small quantity and as a complement to a theme--not as the focus. For example, the original TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, for all its cheapness and campy style, has a neat little undercurrent of authentic dread running through it (in fact, there's almost no gore in this movie; it's all done by suggestive camera work). Clive Barker has produced some effective material, both literary and film, although he tended to lose focus about 3/4 of the way (to be generous) through everything he wrote during the late 80s through the early-to-mid 90s (I haven't read any of his later work and can't comment upon it). There's a lot of "shocking" horror that has some merit; but the key is in the effect of its execution. And very, very few people have done it well.
Good horror, as in all fiction, requires an emotional connection with the characters, and in horror, it's easy to lose that connection because of the prerequisite need to suspend one's disbelief. As soon as a story goes over the top, it loses its audience if it doesn't provide something or someone to connect with on an intimate level. To agree whole-heartedly with Raineypark, this is why action-adventure films--characterized by the typical fluff of Jerry Bruckheimer, John McTiernan, and John Wu--rarely appeal to me.
The 1990s adaptation of THE HAUNTING characterizes just about everything that's wrong with the horror genre. And like Gerard said, you can predict every moment of a Jason or Freddy film down to a beat. Effective shock depends on effective suspense--for the very reason that "shock" requires nothing more than making you jump; anyone can do that. And most fright flicks just want to make you jump rather than tremble first. It requires considerably less brain power to induce a shock.
I detest the ubiquitous quip that audiences of today are "more sophisticated" than they used to be. What a load of crap. By and large, audiences today might be able to identify CGI, and they might quibble with a made-up iguana masquerading as a Tyrannosaurus, but they've lost a lot of their imagination. They laugh at the original, classic THE HAUNTING while extolling the virtues of the newer one's special effects, but that's because they've come to expect every detail being spoon fed them. The sounds of the reverberating booms through the halls of Hill House, without apparent source, are a thousand times more frightening than a silly pendulum whipping out of a fireplace to knock the head off of an unsuspecting actor. People nowadays are much happier with the avenging ghosts of wronged children than an unknown, inexplicable thing that might not be a ghost at all because they have a pat explanation. There's no need to engage the brain and ingest, interpret, and otherwise interact with the story.
Actual horror (not to be confused with terror) is the realization of sheer futility in the face of something beyond acceptance, whether that thing be supernatural or as human as you or I. You might know horror when you realize you are going to die because you are a passenger in a plane that's about to crash into a building. You're completely helpless. Worse, you're either a pawn or merely insignificant to the force that has devised your end. That idea, to me, is the appeal of Lovecraftian fiction, with its accompanying mindless, ambivalent, but altogether destructive entities; there's no more reasoning with them than with a shark. Yet there is purpose behind them. They aren't just there to make you jump out of your seat.
Exploring the emotions of horror and terror generate adrenaline; I think that's why many of us enjoy the genre. I think a lot of my interest in horror derives from the same source as my enthusiasm for roller coasters. But for the roller coaster to be effective, there has to be a gradual, logical build-up before the great descent. The big hill is the not the whole experience; just a part of the ride.
Lastly, since in most horror stories, death is involved at one point or another, there's hardly a better field where religion and philosophy can be explored at their farthest bounds. After all, we're all going to die. There's a certain fascination with that idea. Few of us know how we're going to die. In a story or movie, if we're engaged with a character and he faces a ghastly fate, we're there with him. If the [writer/actor/director/insert appropriate creative individual here] has done his job, for those few moments we experience the same thing vicariously. We're engaged emotionally as well as intellectually. To me, getting both is what good horror is all about.
[shadow=black,left,300]--Mark[/shadow]
-
Oh Mark forgot to mention your books in my post of horror I love! :o
jennifer
(and yes this is buttering up to get you to write more of your story)
-
My components for good horror:
(the top three of which have already been listed by Nicky, deron, and Rainey :) )
Also, I'm limiting this to the cinematic.
1. The unseen. Stephen King writes about this in Danse Macabre (and then proceeds to not do it in everyone of his books thereafter). Don't show me the monster behind the door. I don't want to know that it's 40 feet high and dripping saliva, because anything you can show me is not nearly as bad as what I can imagine it to be.
2. Suspense.
3. Plausibility. If you give me a plausible context and believable characters and dialogue, I'm there. I will willingly suspend that disbelief all the way. The Blair Witch Project had me terrified for days and it had mostly to do with the fact that I know idiots like those three kids who would do stupid things like not mark their trail before going blindly into the woods.
4. Strong characters. It can be the villains. It can be the heroine. It can be that adorable small child. If I can't identify with someone (and I frequently can't), then give me someone who will engross me.
5. Atmosphere. The best horror films/tv shows do this well. It's hard to explain what I mean, but I think you all do.
6. Adequate production values/historical accuracy. I'm one of those shallow people who will find themselves completely distracted by the fact that all of the women in a Hammer film set in the 1800s have 1960s hair or find myself laughing hysterically at someone being menaced by a vicious plastic vine. Know your limitations and go from there. If the Blair Witch crew can take twine, some rocks, and some sticks and scare the bejesus out of me, then it can be done. If you can't do it, then don't try.
Tall order, I know.
This is a great post, btw. I really don't want to get into the Christianity aspect of it, but it may be of interest to note that most faiths hold that if you're going to accept that there is good, then you have to accept that there is evil which leads into the "if there's a God, then there's a Devil" theory.
Luciaphil
Luciaphil this is the exact post my sister would post!
she likes Tall orders too!
jennifer
-
It's interesting you should mention "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", Mark, because I was just thinking of it while reading about slasher films in other responses to this topic. I saw it for the first time two summers ago, and rewatched it with my friends this past spring. It's the most recent film that has scared me consistently throughout, and you're right: that sense of dread that permeates the entire film is palpable. "TCM" is one exception to the "slasher films aren't generally scary" rule.
I'm a big fan of old ghost movies in general: "The Innocents" and "The Uninvited" are two examples. As far as other ghoulies, ghosties, and long-legged beasties, werewolves hold the title. Vampires, I've always thought, are sexy as hell, but werewolves are just plain terrifying, mostly cuz they just wanna eat you. When I was 7 or 8 I was mesmerized by "American Werewolf in London" and "Silver Bullet", both which scared the living hell out of me. They still do. Werewolves, man ... brrrrrr.
Nicky
PS -- Luciaphil darling ... good point re: Stephen King in Danse Macabre. I love the man and adore 85 percent of his work (and I really can't say a bad word about him; when I was in 2nd grade, the man sent me an autographed copy of "Cycle of the Werewolf" with the script included, knowing full well I was a 7 year old kid in MT, so I think I owe him considerably), but you're right ... he points out how scary it is not to rip the door off, and then promptly rips the door off every friggin' time. Go figure.
-
(One little aside to Gerard: Guess who's sitting here quaffing hot-pepper martinis?)
[shadow=black,left,300]--Mark[/shadow]
You shall be hearing from me, Master Rainey, of my experience of reading your chapters while enjoying the spirits of a Skyy Blue Vodka. And whilst I enjoyed your bard, there actually was a thunderstorm underway. But for the details, you must wait!
Gerard
-
It's interesting you should mention "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", Mark, because I was just thinking of it while reading about slasher films in other responses to this topic. I saw it for the first time two summers ago, and rewatched it with my friends this past spring. It's the most recent film that has scared me consistently throughout, and you're right: that sense of dread that permeates the entire film is palpable. "TCM" is one exception to the "slasher films aren't generally scary" rule.
Eons ago, I took a film class called "Modern Monsters" and Texas Chainsaw Massacre was one of the movies we screened. It didn't scare me, but I think that being scared is a highly subjective and personal thing. On the other hand, one of the more disturbing aspects of the film was the feeling I got that of otherness. The protagonists, disagreeable as I found them, are from our experience, our world, if you will.
They arrive in the area still believing that they're in that same world and that their ways are superior to that of the locals. Part of the horror is realizing that they don't belong. They're not on the top of the food chain anymore ;) In short, that they are the hunted (and that's kind of a primal fear).
There's another low budget horror film that sort of speaks to that, albeit from the other side of the coin. Carnival of Souls was the low-budget offering of Herk Harvey who before and since produced industrial films. They shot the thing in Lawrence, KS and for the most part, I don't think the actors ever appeared in anything else again, but it's a surprising effective movie. They use that same theme of displacement/belonging.
Luciaphil
-
My components for good horror: (the top three of which have already been listed by Nicky, deron, and Rainey)....
Luciaphil, that was a perfect post. I didn't see it until after I'd written mine, so some of mine was almost superfluous in comparison. Your categories and descriptions of each nail it quite well, especially the plausibility factor. So many horror stories fail because they don't even set up an internal logic; therefore, to my mind, they fall apart before they begin.
Oh Mark forgot to mention your books in my post of horror I love! (and yes this is buttering up to get you to write more of your story)
Hmm, I wonder if Jennifer is trying to get me to write more of the DS story. I shall have to go and ponder this cryptic and mysterious note. ;)
Thanks.
[shadow=maroon,left,300]--Mark[/shadow]
-
Woo! Horror movies, my favorite genre!!
As everyone else has mentioned, the original B&W the Haunting is one of the best horror movies of all time. Scared the wits out of me the first time I saw it, and that was only a few years ago. Had never seen anything like it. Fantastic movie. The remake was horrible. BEYOND horrible.
Halloween. The first one was great. The second one was okay, it took them until number 7 (H20) to make another good one. Sad to say there's another one coming out this summer. Put it to rest already!
When I lived in NJ (it was for approx 3 months) we had a creepy neighbor kid who used to stand in his backyard and look into ours, stock-still, not moving, dressed up like Michael Myers. Or he would stand in the windows of his house and watch us. There was something wrong with that boy.
Have always loved Vincent Price movies, along with Peter Cushing. My favorite Vincent Price movie is The Haunted Palace. You think NODS is based on Rebecca? It's more like 95% of this movie remade. Check it out.
Love the original Dracula. If you loose yourself in it it can be pretty spooky. Last fall I watched it every other day. The Wolfman too, if only because I love Lon Chaney. He was a terrific actor.
The remake of "House on Haunted Hill". Loved it. Scared the hell out of me. I don't do well with insane asylum stuff, freaks me out. I love Vincent Price but the original is damn annoying. Wanted to strangle that stupid woman who kept screaming. (Check out Session 9 if you can. Creepy and hella suspenseful). The remake of Thirteen Ghosts. I don't normally do gore, but these were fun movies, and the Jackal was damn freaky. (That insane asylum stuff again)!!
The Fog. Love John Carpenter's earlier works. Spooky pirate leper ghosts with a vendetta.
The Sixth Sense. Come on! Easily one of the best.
Stir of Echoes. Nothing like the book but an awesome movie! Kevin Bacon was so fine in that! ::snicker::
There's definitely more but this list is getting too long.
~Arashi
I think I may have just killed a man..... with cheese! Tony Peterson for America's Dairy Council.
-
For me it's the suspense & audio which makes the whole thing scary. As someone else pointed out here, sometimes it's what you don't see that makes you sit at the edge of your seat.
I remember being terrifed the first time I saw "Night of the Living Dead." It was done in black & white and the whole atmosphere seemed pretty scary. Just the thought of dead people "waking up" like that and roaming the earth like zombies really freaked me out!
A few years ago, I saw the strangest, freakiest movie I've ever seen in my life. It was called "Freaks" and it was supposidly banned in the U.S. and England. That movie totally scared the heck out of me.
I think the B & W movies are really the best for horror films.
I still get scared out of my wits every time I see the shower scene in Psycho. The audio in this was pretty scary and lent more suspense to the show than actually was. The Haunting Of Hill House was like that too and so was the Exorcist. For me, those are really horror shows because just the music & sounds alone can leave you sitting on the edge of your seats terrified.
-
Oh! Night of the Living Dead! That was a great movie. It seemed to me to portray more what would *really* happen in real life if such events were to occur.
~Arashi
-
Three other great films mentioned: "Carnival of Souls"; "Freaks", and "Night of the Living Dead". I had heard a great deal about "Carnival" and finally saw it - where else? - on the Sci-Fi Channel. The only word I can describe for this cult classic's horror is "claustrophobic". Regarding "Freaks", it can still - and will - shock today, particularly the climax. For a 60-year-old film to do that, it tells you something about style. "Night" is an example of where graphic horror DOES work, when combined with that "claustrophobia", as well as all other elements which make a film like that work so well: believable characters; tight pacing; use of imagination (listening to the trapped survivors describe what they had seen); etc. As an aside, I lived in Pittsburgh for several years; "Night" was filmed in locations around the city, locations I'm very familiar with, including the various towns and places mentioned on the bottom of the TV screen during the scenes of civil defense broadcast. That really adds something to the movie for me. And I also use to go shopping in the mall where the sequel "Day of the Dead" was shot.
Gerard
-
Gerard, you've brought up perhaps the MOST disturbing "horror" movie of all time.
"Freaks" was produced just as the official censorship of films began...which means they did things no one would be allowed to do again for decades. In this case, no one would DREAM of remaking this film but for reasons completely different than before.
Perhaps the most terrifying aspect of the story is that while it's absolutely a "horror" story, there is no 'supernatural' element what so ever. All the characters are real human beings, and while the things that happen are hideous, they require nothing beyond human capabilities. That's the horror of it....that people can be so cruel to one another.
I saw this film in a College course on censorship (a course open to Comm Arts majors only, requiring the viewing of a whole LIST of banned movies :o)...is it even possible to get one's hands on the original version of "Freaks" anymore? No....don't send me any web sites...one viewing of it was enough for me!
Raineypark
-
Don't quote me, Raineypark, but I do think it is available on tape (maybe even DVD by now). I actually saw it for the first time on AMC (it's been aired there several times). It is so dang, garn creepy. We should do an internet check to see if the video is listed anywhere, if it is on video at all.
Gerard
PS - Even now I'm getting shivers just thinking of that ending.
-
"Freaks" IS on video, Raineypark! I just checked. Amazon.com has it, and it's even on sale.
Gerard
-
Some time last year, I found a coffee table type book about the career of Tod Browning....with LOTS of photos. I picked it up and opened it randomly.....and almost dropped the damned thing on the Borders Books floor!! I'd swear even the PRINT looked demented ...never mind the pictures!
So thanks for finding it, Gerard, but as I said, one viewing of "Freaks" was enough for me. ;)
By the way.....I'd be amazed if the version shown on AMC was uncut from the original. Do you know?
Raineypark
-
By the way.....I'd be amazed if the version shown on AMC was uncut from the original. Do you know?
It's scheduled to be aired on TCM on August 30, 11:15PM so maybe you can save your pennies.
IIRC, Browning used actual circus freaks for the film. There's a great interview with Olga Baclanova who starred in the film in John Kobal's "People Will Talk" and I know she discusses the experience in that.
Luciaphil
-
It's interesting you should mention "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", Mark, because I was just thinking of it while reading about slasher films in other responses to this topic. I saw it for the first time two summers ago, and rewatched it with my friends this past spring. It's the most recent film that has scared me consistently throughout, and you're right: that sense of dread that permeates the entire film is palpable. "TCM" is one exception to the "slasher films aren't generally scary" rule.
I'm a big fan of old ghost movies in general: "The Innocents" and "The Uninvited" are two examples. As far as other ghoulies, ghosties, and long-legged beasties, werewolves hold the title. Vampires, I've always thought, are sexy as hell, but werewolves are just plain terrifying, mostly cuz they just wanna eat you. When I was 7 or 8 I was mesmerized by "American Werewolf in London" and "Silver Bullet", both which scared the living hell out of me. They still do. Werewolves, man ... brrrrrr.
Nicky
PS -- Luciaphil darling ... good point re: Stephen King in Danse Macabre. I love the man and adore 85 percent of his work (and I really can't say a bad word about him; when I was in 2nd grade, the man sent me an autographed copy of "Cycle of the Werewolf" with the script included, knowing full well I was a 7 year old kid in MT, so I think I owe him considerably), but you're right ... he points out how scary it is not to rip the door off, and then promptly rips the door off every friggin' time. Go figure.
nicky SK gave books (not horror of course)
to all the kindergarden kids in maine (at least in Portland)and when she mentioned her cousin(me)
was a big fan he gave two for my kids too! What a guy!
jennifer
-
Some time last year, I found a coffee table type book about the career of Tod Browning....with LOTS of photos. I picked it up and opened it randomly.....and almost dropped the damned thing on the Borders Books floor!! I'd swear even the PRINT looked demented ...never mind the pictures!
So thanks for finding it, Gerard, but as I said, one viewing of "Freaks" was enough for me. ;)
By the way.....I'd be amazed if the version shown on AMC was uncut from the original. Do you know?
Raineypark
It was totally uncensored. Every scene I read about before seeing it on AMC was there, plus the AMC host said something some like "and now, in its entirety...." He had stated how the film was banned for decades, and even when it was finally allowed to be shown in certain places, various scenes were censored.
Gerard
-
My thoughts on this have been well expressed by many others on the board already. But I can't resist the topic so here are my 2 cents worth. In order for something to qualify as good horror to me the book, film or TV show must be¢â‚¬¦
Subtle, take its time and draw me in slowly through every day unspectacular events first. This makes me feel as though what's coming is not only plausible but also very possible. Stephen King is a master at this I think. Dark Shadows was better at it in the beginning than later on when they got more involved in some of the tangled plotlines. It would have been good to see more of the everyday mundane events (eating, house cleaning, even (gasp) watching TV) going on in the midst of the kooky stuff.
Definitely more psychological than physical. I'm going to be scared on a much deeper level if the writer can get into my head and allow me to take part in some of the unseen imagery. Once again that's why the old telephone is one of the scariest props DS ever employed on the show. And this point is also where most of the newer films have lost me¢â‚¬¦slasher stuff is more like a line up at a slaughterhouse than anything else. A parade of fake gore. Just because a special effect can be done is no reason it always should be.
Slower in pace and more involved than most new films tend to be. I like various levels something going on over here, over there as well as a chance to see some character development and tie the various elements together. All that takes a little time to do well IMHO. I feel that Victor Hugo did a brilliant job doing this overall - especially in the Hunchback of Notre Dame. The slasher genre seems to only exist in order to show you a living body with no apparent personality, a psychopath with even less and then proceed to cause the live person to be a dead one. The end. BORING!
And yes, yes, YESSSS¢â‚¬¦I love all the trappings the big old house, the dark stormy night, beautiful costumes, atmospheric music, a little tragic love interest thrown in to give it more flavor. And when I'm lucky enough to stumble across something with all those elements it will have my life-long interest and loyalty. So, thank you Dan Curtis and company!!!
P.S. To those who loved "The Others" - I heartily agree! I've rented so many clunkers lately that this was a really pleasant surprise (in more ways than one!)
[jawdrp] .
-
It was totally uncensored. Every scene I read about before seeing it on AMC was there, plus the AMC host said something some like "and now, in its entirety...." He had stated how the film was banned for decades, and even when it was finally allowed to be shown in certain places, various scenes were censored.
Gerard
Okay Gerard....consider me completely amazed. I would not have thought it possible. And you are correct, Luciaphil, the "freaks" were real side-show "oddities"....which is part of what makes it such a brilliant (albeit horrific) film.
Raineypark
-
Three other great films mentioned: "Carnival of Souls"; "Freaks", and "Night of the Living Dead". Regarding "Freaks", it can still - and will - shock today, particularly the climax. For a 60-year-old film to do that, it tells you something about style.
Gerard
Gerad, when I first posted about the movie "Freaks" I almost thought I was the only one who had seen this. It was good to see that I wasn't going out of my mind and that someone else had seen it too. I wasn't really sure if it could be classified . . as "horror' or not, but to me, it certainly was.
Gerad, I had seen it awhile back and was really horrified on what I saw there. What amazed me the most was how dedicated these poor souls were. I had to give them alot of credit for acting in a movie the way they did. IMO, I also felt that there was kind of an "undercurrent" towards the message here, especially regarding the shocking ending. To this day, I still can't get some of those images out of my mind.
-
It was totally uncensored. Every scene I read about before seeing it on AMC was there, plus the AMC host said something some like "and now, in its entirety...." He had stated how the film was banned for decades, and even when it was finally allowed to be shown in certain places, various scenes were censored.
Gerard
Gerard, I believe you're right about that. I had also read that it was uncensored. I too also had viewed it on AMC years ago. I had taped it, although I don't know why, since I only viewed it once and want to keep it that way. I still feel that those poor people were truly amazing on what they accompolished in life, despite their handicapps. There is that one image I still can't get out of my mind and don't think I ever will. That is the one of the man lying on the ground, lighting his own cigarette. To this day, when I think of that one, I shiver all over.
-
Oh! Night of the Living Dead! That was a great movie. It seemed to me to portray more what would *really* happen in real life if such events were to occur.
~Arashi
Arashi, that's exactly what I was thinking!! Considering all the radiation surrounding us these days, and since that's what caused all the havoc in movie, my imagination really started runnin wild!!
-
How could I forget "Night of the Living Dead"?[/b]
The movie that made me decide to be cremated! The movie that I sat through by myself in a theater in absolute terror only to remember in the very last frames that someone had told me how it ended?
-
How could I forget "Night of the Living Dead"?[/b]
The movie that made me decide to be cremated! The movie that I sat through by myself in a theater in absolute terror only to remember in the very last frames that someone had told me how it ended?
Good point kuanyin saw that movie the other night
cremation would be better!
also for all of who you have totally grossed me out just hearing you describe the movie "Freaks" what is it about?
-
Good point kuanyin saw that movie the other night
cremation would be better!
also for all of who you have totally grossed me out just hearing you describe the movie "Freaks" what is it about?
Okay, but not to give too much away (you really should see it, especially since it's available on video), here's what it's about in a nutshell. It takes place in a circus, centered around the freaks exhibition. Real "freaks" were used, some quite popular at that time and real celebrities. A beautiful acrobat has her eyes set on one of the freaks, a dwarf, simply because she believes he's loaded; the golddigger is actually the girlfriend to one of the circus strongmen, and the two are plotting how to use the dwarf (even to the point of murdering him) in order to get the moola. The whole underlying theme is how the freaks try to live "normal" lives, wanting - despite their physical oddities - to be recognized by the "normal" world for what they really are: human beings. Because of that difficulty, the only place where they can find acceptance is amongst themselves. And here comes this beautiful "normal" woman, who seemingly not only accepts them, but is apparently in love with one of them. Do they find out what she's really up to? Well, you'll just hafta watch "Freaks" and find out.............
Gerard
-
I remember being terrifed the first time I saw "Night of the Living Dead."
A few years ago, I saw the strangest, freakiest movie I've ever seen in my life. It was called "Freaks" and it was supposidly banned in the U.S. and England. That movie totally scared the heck out of me.
.
I just wanted to add another horror flick to my list.
I thought "The Blob" was pretty scary. Im referring to the original version starring Steve McQueen. ;)
-
"Good Horror" is when you are watching something, and you get the feeling that something bad is behind you, or you start hearing noises, and insist it's an intruder or some kind of ghost.
-
AND, i am absolutely scared of Pascow and Zelda from Pet Sematary! Pascow was the ghost, and Zelda is Rachel's dead sister, with the back problem (Zelda was played by a guy)
-
I'd say a good horror film would be "BRAM STOKER'S DRACULA('92)" -or- "SLEEPY HOLLOW" are good horror. There are many good horror films I could list for you fellow DS cousin.
-
What constitutes good horror for me? Whatever is left in my video collection after all these years. When I was in my teens and early twenties, I was a confirmed horror film addict. I had every movie you could think of, and some of the grossest ever. I got rid of most of them. I now have a small collection. Some of them are Halloween I, 3, and H20, Friday The 13th Pt. 1, The Shining, The Thing (1982), Prom Night, Nightmare on Elm St. Pt. 1 and 3, Ghost Story, and a few more. I remember when Halloween came out in 1979, I saw that movie over and over at drive-ins and movie theaters, at the drive-in whenever I was paying attention to the screen, and not my date! :-*
-
I remember another movie that I saw awhile back which btw I really can't classify as horror, but the suspense alone during the whole movie was pretty darn scary and left you on the edge of your seat. The movie was called "Duel" with Dennis Weaver. Did anyone else see this?
-
"Duel". Another classic! Actually made-for-TV. And wasn't it directed by a very young Steven Spielberg? I think it was one of his first; not too long before that he made his debut (at the age of 20 I do believe) directing screen-legend Joan Crawford in the pilot of "Rod Serling's Night Gallery".
Gerard
-
Even before DUEL, Spielberg made a little horror film called SOMETHING EVIL (1972), which starred Darren McGavin (just prior to his NIGHT STALKER stint), Sandy Dennis, Ralph Bellamy, and Johnny Whitaker. It was a made-for-TV flick, and was downright terrifying to me as a kid. Watching it now, it still holds up as a very effective film, if not quite as scary as it was when I was 13.
It occasionally runs on the Flix movie channel, uncut. I recommend it highly if you get a chance to watch it.
[shadow=red,left,300]--Mark[/shadow]
-
Hey Cassandra and Gerard
thanks for your explanations of "Freaks'
went to the internet movie base as you suggested Cassandra and just the message board about it gave me the creeps :o Will have to think twice about viewing it!
Thanks
jennifer
saw Psycho II last night on mystery ch it was too bad they felt that had to do it because it just wasn't the same that shower scene in the first Psycho scaried
me for months after! :o
-
"Duel". Another classic! Actually made-for-TV. And wasn't it directed by a very young Steven Spielberg?
Gerard
Yes, you're right Gerard. It was indeed directed by Steven Spielberg. As a matter of fact, it's suppose to be airing this Thursday, channel ENC, at 8pm (Eastern time)
It seems like as soon as I get off this thread, I think of more films. Two more I enjoyed were "The Birds" old classic Hitchcock movie, and "The Fly" (original version)
-
I remember another movie that I saw awhile back which btw I really can't classify as horror, but the suspense alone during the whole movie was pretty darn scary and left you on the edge of your seat. The movie was called "Duel" with Dennis Weaver. Did anyone else see this?
A great movie, Cassandra. Not horror, but one helluva thriller! Not long ago I read that this was scheduled to come out on DVD, but for some reason the release has been held up. :(
-
I'm only getting a chance to read this thread now, and I won't try to formulate an eloquent essay since there are several here already. I just have a couple of comments, and they're taken almost direct from my post in the Dan Curtis thread from a few days back.
I had a taste for the macabre from a very early age. I remember my mother taking me to the public library when I was about seven and I told the librarian I wanted a "scary" book. The book she gave me was "Where the Wild Things Are," which I found very disappointing. I must have already been watching DS by this time.
Throughout the '70s one of the networks produced a "Movie of the Week" and they delivered a number of chillers. I can only remember a few of them, but one that comes to mind (which I mentioned in yet another thread!) was "When Michael Calls," about terrifying phone calls a young couple receives from their dead son (as best I remember it). Then there was the TV movie where a group of people had somehow been gathered in a remote location (possibly a lush island paradise, I'm not sure) and awful things happened as they struggled to remember/understand what they were doing there. I'm sure these were not graphically horrible things like in today's movies, but I can still feel the sense of dread that built from these character's fears, and in the surprise ending it slowly dawned on them: they were dead. A plane crash here, a car accident there ... they began to remember.
Another made-for-TV movie was about a family who drove into a small New England town, Melas, where awful things happened. I think there was a young blonde woman who was practicing witchcraft and working mischief and evil on the family, and driving a wedge between the husband and wife. At the end, the family narrowly escaped from the town's wicked inhabitants. In the rearview mirror of their car you could see the town's welcome sign as they drove off. The lettering was reversed in the mirror to show the town's disguised name:
S - A - L - E - M.
Then there was a wonderfully disturbing remake of an old classic, "Death Takes a Holiday" with Melvyn Douglas and the alluring Yvette Mimieux. The realization builds that an awful thing was happening -- no one was dying, anywhere. Death had come to earth in the form of a man and fallen in love, taking a leave of absence from his duties ... Somehow this movie had a grandeur and dignity about it ...
There were many such movies, where the horror was conveyed not through special effects or buckets of blood, but through the writing and direction, and the sense of dread these produced.
I remember a number of suspense movies of this period, thrillers rather than horror, such as "You'll Like My Mother," which aired on TV (both this movie and "The Other" are erroneously referred to as having been made for TV by posters on the imdb; neither was made for TV), as well as a number of made-for-TV thrillers that starred such screen legends as Olivia DeHavilland and Shelley Winters. I guess the time for those movies is long past.
I began reading Edgar Allen Poe's unsurpassed stories when I was still in grade school, and a few years later Frankenstein and Dracula. Somewhere about this time the last good horror movies were produced (IMO) - The Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby, The Other (from the Thomas Tryon novel, which I read before the movie was made). The directors of these films were well respected, not the hacks that seem to direct so many of today's endless stream of gorefest flicks. I had already read "The Exorcist" and frankly was disappointed in the movie, not to mention disappointment with the audience which tittered with laughter rather than fainting or throwing up as the newspaper stories were saying.
Far better, I thought, was Rosemary's Baby, which my family watched when it aired on TV, and viewing it again today I find its web of deceit and suspense unsurpassed.
Then "The Omen" came out, and while the subject matter appealed to me, I remember seeing too many gaps in the story and again being mildly disappointed. All the kids were eager to see the head being lopped off by the sheet of glass, which I thought was a bit much.
I think it was shortly after this that "Carrie" came out. I heard a lot about it from other kids, but the bucket of blood or whatever didn't appeal to me and I never saw it. In fact, I never saw another horror movie after that. Just hearing about them turned me off (and I was only a junior high kid) -- the blood and guts, the slashers. I've seen parts of those movies on TV from time to time, and while they have jolts and some suspense, can you actually be interested in the characters the way you are with, say, Marion Crane in "Psycho"?
For me, the entire genre seemed to have changed and I never again had an interest in "horror."
It wasn't until I rediscovered DS again in the last few years that a spark of my previous interest has been rekindled, and I've learned about such movies as The Haunting, The Uninvited, The Innocents (thanks to posters on this board and the previous board!). I was very interested in the Blair Witch Project, which sounded very promising, but somehow I never got to the theater. And from what I hear, the recent "The Others" also may have some of the qualities that I used to like about horror (though I've heard it has a surprise ending that sounds very similar to one of those made-for-TV movies from the '70s that I mentioned above).
Well, I guess I went on a bit longer than I planned, caught up in reminiscing.
Note to Luciaphil and Raineypark: When I was at my local B&N last week, I happened to remember the writer you had been talking about - E. F. Benson. Low and behold, I discovered a copy of his Collected Ghost Stories, bought it, and am looking forward to reading some of them. I also have the LeFanu stories, de la Mare, and several other classics still to read.
Oh, and I hope to read the three chapters from the unpublished DS novel next week once I've finished up another class ... ;D
-Vlad
-
Then there was the TV movie where a group of people had somehow been gathered in a remote location (possibly a lush island paradise, I'm not sure) and awful things happened as they struggled to remember/understand what they were doing there. I'm sure these were not graphically horrible things like in today's movies, but I can still feel the sense of dread that built from these character's fears, and in the surprise ending it slowly dawned on them: they were dead. A plane crash here, a car accident there ... they began to remember.
This was a movie called "Haunts of the Very Rich," from 1972, I believe. I remember it quite well, moreso than many other made-for-TV movies from the same period. I don't think it was a particularly great film, but its atmosphere of growing disbelief and dread was pretty effective. If I remember right, it starred Lloyd Bridges, Cloris Leachman, Ed Asner, and Donna Mills. Haven't seen it since it originally aired, but I'd love to be able to watch it again to find out how it holds up against my memory.
[shadow=red,left,300]--Mark[/shadow]
-
Note to Luciaphil and Raineypark: When I was at my local B&N last week, I happened to remember the writer you had been talking about - E. F. Benson. Low and behold, I discovered a copy of his Collected Ghost Stories, bought it, and am looking forward to reading some of them.
Luciaphil....do you think if you search your Reference Resources hard enough, you might find some sort of connection between E. F. Benson and Dark Shadows? That way we'd be able to talk about him and his wonderful stories and not be accused of going WAY O.T.!! ;)
Raineypark
-
Hey Cassandra and Gerard
thanks for your explanations of "Freaks'
went to the internet movie base as you suggested Cassandra and just the message board about it gave me the creeps :o Will have to think twice about viewing it!
Thanks
jennifer
saw Psycho II last night on mystery ch it was too bad they felt that had to do it because it just wasn't the same that shower scene in the first Psycho scaried
me for months after! :o
Hi Jenn, glad you checked out the site. I figured you'd be able to get some more views on the movie there.
I hate when they try to do a re-make of a classic movie. Somehow, it just doesn't seem to work. That shower scene was a classic thriller, and the more they try to do it over, the worse it becomes. Sometimes it's better to leave well enough alone. :)
-
Just wanted to thank all of you for this great thread. I only discovered it this morning. Wow--you all know your stuff. I have nothing to contribute other than to say you've touched on films and themes near and dear to me and you've all said it better than I could.
Oh, one final film you might enjoy: Dementia. In the vein of Carnival of Souls and NoLD, it's an almost silent, B&W nightmare from the 50s--too weird to describe here, but it's out on DVD in a lovingly restored version. Some of the sets will remind you of our favorite show :)
-
Even before DUEL, Spielberg made a little horror film called SOMETHING EVIL (1972), which starred Darren McGavin (just prior to his NIGHT STALKER stint), Sandy Dennis, Ralph Bellamy, and Johnny Whitaker. It was a made-for-TV flick, and was downright terrifying to me as a kid. Watching it now, it still holds up as a very effective film, if not quite as scary as it was when I was 13.
It occasionally runs on the Flix movie channel, uncut. I recommend it highly if you get a chance to watch it.
[shadow=red,left,300]--Mark[/shadow]
There was one scene in particular, Mark, in "Something Evil" that caused me to shiver, and still does. It was the one where they are viewing a film clip they made of the house, and as they watch it a pair of shimmering eyes appears gazing out through a window. An extremely creepy moment.
Gerard
-
Luciaphil....do you think if you search your Reference Resources hard enough, you might find some sort of connection between E. F. Benson and Dark Shadows? That way we'd be able to talk about him and his wonderful stories and not be accused of going WAY O.T.!! ;)
Raineypark
Rainey, I wish I could. But I don't know that there is much of a connection other than "The Room at the Tower."
Benson eventually moved to Rye and lived in Lamb House, which is notable for at least two things: it was once the home of Henry James (who wrote among other things "Turn of the Screw" which is a major influence on an upcoming plotline) and Benson used it as the model for Mallards in his Mapp & Lucia series.
Of all the characters on DS, the only ones I can think that might fit into a Mapp & Lucia story would be Roger (who would have to loosen up a lot) and Mrs. Johnson. These are great stories, but they have little to no plot--it's stuff like who cheated at bridge and who is the first to stun the town of Tilling with a daring new suit of red velvet.
Benson's "spook stories" are really, really wonderful. Very atmospheric. It may not have been intended, but I agree that "The Room at the Tower" does have that sense of dread they were trying for with the dream curse . . . That's about all I can come up with.
Luciaphil
-
This was a movie called "Haunts of the Very Rich," from 1972, I believe. I remember it quite well, moreso than many other made-for-TV movies from the same period.
Well, that's one down! Amazing ... Thanks! This certainly had a top-notch cast, so I wish there were a way of seeing it again.
I'd love to be able to watch it again to find out how it holds up against my memory.
The test of time - that's the clincher. I would approach some of the movies I mentioned with trepidation if I could see them again today because I've matured a lot since I was 10. ;D On the other hand, I've found my 10-year-old judgment to have been pretty reliable (maybe it hasn't appreciably changed ;)) when I've been fortunate enough to view some of these movies more recently: Rosemary's Baby (I don't think anyone doubts that one holds up), The Other, You'll Like My Mother... (Not to mention such non-horror movies, like "Dead Ringer," which was every bit as good as I remembered it and now has a place in my personal Top 10 list, alongside "Rebecca" ...)
Interestingly, I like The Exorcist much better today than I did when it first came out. I find it much more frightening as an adult, though I still think the book was better. I remember reading the book when I was home alone one night back in the early '70s. I was engrossed in the book when I distinctly heard someone cough. I kept reading, thinking it was my dad. Then I remembered I was the only one in the house. Guess that's what "good" horror will do for you. [eek]
-
I rented a movie awhile back called "What's the matter with Helen" (or close to that) Anyway it starred Shelly Winters and Debbie Reynolds. Shelly was Helen and she was a kook. I don't know if I would called it horror but the end had a cheap slasher kind of theme to it. ( If you like bunny rabbits watch out!) :P
Now someone mentioned the screaming skull and I just watched that on Mystery Science Theater last weekend. Not at all what I expected. ::)
** I think this belongs in bad horror. sorry!**
-
Another made-for-TV movie was about a family who drove into a small New England town, Melas, where awful things happened. I think there was a young blonde woman who was practicing witchcraft and working mischief and evil on the family, and driving a wedge between the husband and wife. At the end, the family narrowly escaped from the town's wicked inhabitants. In the rearview mirror of their car you could see the town's welcome sign as they drove off. The lettering was reversed in the mirror to show the town's disguised name:
S - A - L - E - M.
Vlad, This movie sounds very familar to me. Do you remember if Hope Lange starred in the movie? It sounds like something I saw awhile back.
-
Vlad, This movie sounds very familar to me. Do you remember if Hope Lange starred in the movie? It sounds like something I saw awhile back.
Cassandra, I don't remember if Hope Lange was in the movie I remember or not. I probably didn't know who she was at that time, so she might have been. I looked her up in the imdb, and there is one movie from about the right time period (1970) that seems to fit the bill, but I can't be sure.
The made-for-TV movie with Hope Lange from 1970 is called "Crowhaven Farm," and if that isn't the one I'm remembering, this nevertheless sounds of great interest to DS viewers. Typical viewer comments on the imdb site are "greatest witchcraft movie ever made," "I saw this when I was 10 years old, was scared to death and have never forgotten it," etc. From what people write, this sounds like the basic story: a young couple moves to a small farming community, and the wife (Lange) begins hearing crying sounds from the woods and has visions of people in clothing from the colonial era. There is talk of a wedge being driven between the couple, as was the case in the movie I vaguely remember. At the end of "Crowhaven Farm," Lange's character realizes that a cult of witches is still operating in the town after two centuries. She realizes that she also lived in the Puritan era and had testified against the townspeople in a witch trial, and they are now seeking revenge.
Although a "twist" at the end is mentioned, no one in the imdb posts mentions if the townspeople are the original inhabitants of Salem.
As an aside, I have found lapses in the imdb listings in the past, especially with respect to actors' TV appearances, so Hope Lange could even have been in another TV movie with a supernatural theme during the same general time period (say, 1968 to 1972).
-
The made-for-TV movie with Hope Lange from 1970 is called "Crowhaven Farm," and if that isn't the one I'm remembering, this nevertheless sounds of great interest to DS viewers. Typical viewer comments on the imdb site are "greatest witchcraft movie ever made," "I saw this when I was 10 years old, was scared to death and have never forgotten it," etc. From what people write, this sounds like the basic story: a young couple moves to a small farming community, and the wife (Lange) begins hearing crying sounds from the woods and has visions of people in clothing from the colonial era. There is talk of a wedge being driven between the couple, as was the case in the movie I vaguely remember. At the end of "Crowhaven Farm," Lange's character realizes that a cult of witches is still operating in the town after two centuries. She realizes that she also lived in the Puritan era and had testified against the townspeople in a witch trial, and they are now seeking revenge.
Vlad, Yes! That's the one I saw. "Crowhaven Farm." As I recall the witch who caused the wedge between the married couple was very young, I think perhaps only a teenager, but nevertheless, very evil. I don't remember alot of the details, just that this young girl came to stay with this couple and it turned out that she, along with the wife had been witches in another lifetime. The wife, who is played by Hope Lange, testified against this young witch and her coven, and they were all put to death. (sounds alittle like Miranda & Judah)
Also there is a scene in the movie where Hope Lange is driving in a car with her friend, (well, she thinks she's her friend, when in reality, she is also one of the witches) and supposidly, the "friend" is trying to help her get out of that crazy town. Well, as they're driving by the town sign, which reads Melas, you can see the actually town name in the rear view mirror, which reads, "Salem."
The ending wasn't your usual good guys win the battle against evil. For revenge against Hope Lange's testimony against them, the young witch wants nothing other than the good woman's husband and Hope Lange has no choice but to comply with this.
Im not sure if this the movie you're referring to in your post, but I found alot of similarities between the two. Either way, I thought it was a pretty scary movie and was worth seeing. Thanks Vlad for refreshing my memory! :)
-
I remember "Crowhaven Farm", but if my memory serves me correct (which it often doesn't), I think the location of the town was out west, possibly in California, not in New England. It's actual name was San Melas; it was where the descendents of the Salem witches eventually settled (hence "Melas" being "Salem" when seen in the rear-view mirror).
Gerard
-
Ooooooooooooooooo!
Thanks, you two! That had to be it!
;D