As we draw towards the end of the first decade of this new millenium, what do people think about the last 10 years?

Has it been good for new approaches to horror, or has it been more about the spread of the dvd reissue of older stuff and the rise of the internet as a search tool to both buy and watch films?
Or are you just disappointed with it all?

All thoughts welcome.

I think DVD and the internet have given us access to lots of films that may have been forgotten otherwise and using region hacks we've worked round global distribution issues and censorship so in a sense we've got more selection than ever before, in that sense its been a good decade.

Sadly I now speak of new films of which very few actually impressed me, granted I've seen some great modern horrors lately but the genre has mostly lost its way and become a generic cesspool of needless sequels, laughable remakes and films that borrow from but never match the classics of times gone by, all this would be great if it were just the big budget films as is commonly thought but the independent scene isn't doing much better with gore being its favoured tool in elevating it beyond being standard but not suceeding too often and the foreign market constantly churning out semi-decent films seemingly aimed at becoming popular enough to be remade.

In conclusion the 00's have been a great decade for horror film distribution and access but not all that great for its actual new films, still even though it never matched the 70's or 80's its had its moments and much like the 90's has some great titles behind it.

I think this decade has seen more horror films than ever, it seems the one genre that anyone can get a DVD release for. Unfortunately the majority of them are absolute tripe, but there have been a few standouts for me. The Ruins, Midnight Meat Train, Hills have eyes, Texas Chainsaw and Halloween remakes. Rec, Quarantine, Let the right one in, The Mist, 28 days/weeks later, Shutter (thai version) and a good few others were all enjoyable enough.

In this decade i've found that its been good for horror because among the remakes and teen horror there have been a lot of standouts, yes they may be straight to dvd but my standouts have been Outpost, and Dead Snow. I have also enjoyed the odd remake like Dawn Of The Dead, My Bloody Valentine, Friday The 13th but I also got sick of a few endless sequels - Saw mainly but I think at the minute horror is quite strong

I think that, not only has the last decade not been very good for horror cinema, it may actually have been harmful
As with every decade, there have been standouts - Let The Right One In, Rec, The Orphanage, 30 Days Of Night. However, the 00's really seem to have cemented the Hollywood market for sequels of everything - from the most obscure foreign indie-horror, to classics of the genre. Not only that, but there's been an increase in movies getting toned down for our 'MTV generation', eg. Die Hard 4 given a 15 rating. Add to this the idea of desensitisation - Hostel is acceptable nowadays, but no-one would've dared make it even 10 years ago. There are fewer and fewer taboos, and teens are watching scarier, gorier films at younger ages. Case in point, my 11-yr-old sister turned to me the other day and asked how I could watch The Shining as it's "boring crap"
I think a few director's should make a comeback and show these young amateurs how it's done - John Carpenter, Tobe Hooper and George Romero, I'm talking to you!!

PS. I know The Orphanage isn't technically a horror film, but it scared me a hell of a lot more than most recent 'horror' flicks

Excellent answers all,here's what I've liked from my limited viewing of horror over the last 10 years.

Bone Sickness
Otto;Or Up With Dead People
The Call of Cthulhu
Cthulhu
Dead Girl
Five Across The Eyes
Trick R Treat
Gutterballs
Amateur Porn Star Killer 1-3
Philosophy Of A Knife
Martyrs
Timecrimes
End Of The Line

Wow Count that's a pretty small list from a whole decade of films, sadly my list would only be a bit bigger if I wrote one.

Paul Cliff I largely agree with what you're saying, it seems today many a youngster don't have the patience to watch a film that doesn't have that MTV style fast cuts (which are more annoying than anything) or action and gore every two seconds, don't get me wrong I love a good gorefest if the film is any good but I also enjoy a subtle horror built on suspense over the course of an hour or longer, this would just bore those who are used to seeing something blow up every two minutes so the classics are largely dismissed. I don't think you're right about "Hostel" though as films as early as the late 60's were pushing the envelope as far as that one e.g. "Shogun's Joy of Torture" and then there's "Bloodsucking Freaks" the early 70's film "Hostel" borrows from (poorly), brutality in film has been very strong for decades and seen by those who seek it out but it has definitely gone up a notch within the mainstream recently, still they just splash a little blood around and don't handle the really graphic or controversial stuff shown in lesser known titles.

Hi, A. Walker
I apologise if you misunderstood my point - concerning Hostel, I meant in terms of mainstream distribution. Sorry about that
I agree about the fast-editing process being more annoying than anything, and it just shows how popular it is when you see that a lot of feature film directors these days come from music video backgrounds. The Orphanage felt like a breath of fresh air to me with its emphasis on lingering shots, suspense and sound design, and it's often to the films of yesteryear I find myself returning - The Birds, Black Christmas, The Haunting, The Shining, Salem's Lot, etc
I'm not saying all remakes are a bad thing either. I actually prefer The Hills Have Eyes remake to Wes Craven's original (which I think everyone looks back on with rose-tinted spectacles), but the majority of them tend to taint the reputation of the original (Rob Zombie's Halloween, Friday The 13th, etc)

No need to apologise Paul, I too prefer and continually return to older films rather than what's coming out these days, I think from the late 60's to the mid 80's horror was at its peak and although some modern stuff is great the films often just don't have that special something they once had.

As for remakes I'm opposed to them as I just don't see the point in tampering with a film that's already fine as it is, sure they could do remakes of bad movies instead but who'd bother seeing them and more importantly how do you define bad, every film has its fans and is essentially a work of art so it shouldn't be tampered with regardless of popularity, anyway thats just my opinion, I do like a few remakes though like "The Thing" and "The Fly" and although I preferred the original "The Hills Have Eyes" the remake didn't do too bad in comparison, anyway as you said the majority of them are an insult to their original counterparts and they're sapping all the creativity out of the genre so I generally give them a miss these days.

Hi everyone.
There's been a few recent films I've enjoyed, and my list would look a lot different from the Count's. There's still a fair few to chase up as well, and as ever the Count is as reliable source of recommendations as anyone!

As the film industry moves into an uncertain era, it's perhaps natural it would look to horror as sure fire way of recovering money spent on production. It's also inevitable that the bulk of that would be aimed at an entry level teen market.

I agree that older directors haven't really shown us much in the last few years - and to Paul's list I would unfortunately have to add Argento. You would have hoped that one of them would have dropped a masterpiece in the last decade, but they are seemingly treading water and sometimes pandering to that teen demographic.

I refuse to be disheartened when there's been some stuff I've really enjoyed by the likes of Brad Anderson, Takeshi Shimuzu, Takashi Miike, Park Chan Wook, James Watkins and others.

I think the main consolation is the availability of dvd reissues of older films - companies such as Anchor Bay, Blue Underground, Shriek Show, Shameless and Arrow are doing such a fine job of keeping underground horror gems alive. It's been sad to lose Tartan and I'm beginning to realise what a lot of great stuff No Shame were putting out before their demise.

So, all this and a general relaxation of BBFC censorship (and the general irrelevance of censorship in the era of internet ordering and streaming) leaves me being more glass half full than empty.

We've just got to keep educating the young whippersnappers - show them Val Lewton, Hitchcock and Bava etc at an early enough age that they are proud of being aware of horror's history. Then they'll be ready for the more challenging end of new films in the genre.

Cliff I can't believe she turned and said The Shining is boring cr@p - it's one of the greatest films made, I first watched my first horror film when I was 14, it was Dawn Of The Dead and I got into the genre through that, I have never seen any Hitchcock films sadly.

I used to like the Tartan label they were brilliant films but by first ever video nasty I watched was Zombie Flesh Eaters, then I watched The Exorcist but I am annoyed that most of the horror films are 15 rated now, it has got to the point at my cinema where there are hardly any 18s be shown. Cliff, I think you should show her City Of The Living Dead and see if the coughing up her guts scene will knock the girl sick lol,

The Shining I love for various reasons, the 1st reason is the atmosphere, the 2nd is the music, and the 3rd is the way it is filmed and the acting.

Shameless I thinking of collecting them, I love the gore, violence and even tho the films are low budget I still like them

I'm sharing Doc's optimisim.
While CG Animation have a long way to go (and I would allways prefer animatronics), we had a taste of what great visuals can look like, with The Cell and Silent Hill. And 3D is full of exiting possibilities.
On the other end of the spectrum, the availability of technology made it easier for independents not to rely on big studios and their restrictions. Making the lo-fi, d.i.y., hand held camera look, an artistic statement, and we do associate it with realism.
But the best about the last ten years is that we finally enjoying the fruits of globalization. Can anyone argue with the relevance of Directors like Miike Takashi to contemporary horror?
80's end and 90's end did not look as promising as now.

I've been pondering on this one and have come to the conclusion that horror is no better or no worse than it has ever been.There have always been interesting films out there if you are willing to look.Pre-internet this involved buying and reading fanzines,tape swapping and the risk of prison.Today things are no different with websites dedicated to horror,file sharing sites and again the risk of prison.I think it is down to the personality of the viewer as to what makes a great decade of horror.I would argue with tech advances that the last ten years of horror have been the greatest ever if we are talking sheer volume of films made.This leads to the down side of it all,with so many films out there,what do I watch and how do I decide to watch it.

With more and more websites reviewing films, I struggle to find a writer who has a similar taste to mine or who I trust enough to take a risk and part with my cash and go out side my horror comfort zone.At present Stephen Thrower is the only writer on horror/exploitation that I like and trust.

The people I trust the most are in fact people who post on here,namely AW,Doc,AlanK47 and Jonesy.

Question-how do people find out about films?Are there any good writers on line or published I should look out for?I sometimes spend hours going through the whole horror section on here and other sites looking for a film that grabs my attention by cover art or title alone then research it before deciding to buy.A short cut would be nice.

That's a really nice compliment to all of us other horror freaks Count, I nearly wrote something similar myself in an earlier posting. I'm glad you said it.
I don't think there's any short cut though - we've come to know each others tastes, and been able to trust each other on what to check out. It's really hard to do that off the back of anyone else's reviews, I find. Perhaps it reflects a need for dialogue in that process, something lacking in the majority of internet postings which are quick to tell you something is good or bad without always containing many reference points or even reasons why the writer thinks that.
I agree that Thrower is the exception as he writes so well and with such obvious knowledge and enthusiasm.
I think his published writings (and the manner in which they've been presented by FAB Press in particular) have to represent another highlight of the last ten years.

I'm not sure why Rob Zombies Halloween gets no love, the original may have been great in its day, but now it's no great shakes, featuring a now tired and cliched....well, everything. At least zombie gave us something we hadn't seen before, and if anything was more of an origins story than a straight remake. I just think some people already have their minds made up to hate something on principal, whereas ill at least give it a fair chance.

You know what else I did enjoy? The Masters of horror series. How cool was it to have something like that available every week. Miikes Imprint, Jennifer, Pelts, Cigarette Burns etc, all quality.

I gave Rob Zombie's Hallowe'en 'reinvention' a fair chance - I watched the theatrical cut at the cinema, and the Extended Cut at a friend's house
The original Hallowe'en was one of the forerunners of the slasher genre (whether it invented it or not is debatable), and any clichés that have sprung up since were originally used in that film, and were new ideas at the time. You can't berate a classic horror film for being clichéd when 1) it invented a lot of those clichés and 2) Rob Zombie's Hallowe'en basically insulted John Carpenter's original
As I said before, I liked the Hills Have Eyes remake. I felt they did a good job with the cast (largely unknowns) and they adapted the story to allow for a sleeker, more 'streamlined' movie. Maybe it made all the difference having Wes Craven on-board as a producer?
And, while I agree with Count's POV to a degree, I'd ask "what horror film has REALLY stood out this decade?". The 60's have The Shining, the 70's have Hallowe'en, the 80's have The Shining and the 90's have The Ring (Japanese). What films from this decade can represent classic cinema like these? By the way, they're just a few mainstream flicks I chose - but I'd still argue that 'underground' horror isn't as good as it was 10 years ago

I can certainly berate a "classic" horror film for "now" being cliched, even if it invented those cliches it doesn't change how it appears in todays world. I'm well aware that they were new at the time (im in my 30's and used to enjoy the movie), and if time stood still, then that'd be fine, but time moves on, and I think certain films in certain genres hold up well, and others don't. Horror is one of those genres that can age really badly. What was once "cutting edge" and a "video nasty" end up in the "what was all the fuss about" category 20 years later. In many ways that's why so many horror movies are remade for todays audience, because they no longer have the cutting edge compared to their modern counterparts. Don't get me wrong though, I have full respect for Halloween and it deserves its place in history. The soundtrack is still as edgy as ever and the camera work is very good, but I struggle to watch events i've seen a million times in the years since, and if Zombies Halloween had been a straight remake, i'd have probably been asleep halfway through.

It's probably unfair to compare standout titles in the 00's, to titles in the 90's, 80's and 70's. Those films you mentioned stood out because they were almost (or were) the first of their kind, and there just weren't as many horrors back then as there are today. Take into account nearly every avenue has already been explored to death, how memorable can we expect them to be? Its often not just the quality of the movie that makes it standout, its the originality of it. The Ring was the first mainstream Asian horror, Blair Witch stands out because it was the first mainstream documentary style. Scream broke ground by putting a new slant on a tired genre, which then sprouted a host of slasher copycats. Six Sense was memorable for its big twist which then spawned loads of other films that had a "big twist" and so on.

For me, the measure of a standout horror goes by the amount of copycats that follow it. In this day and age though, there can be so many sequels, spin offs or rip offs, it can be hard to remember how good the forerunner actually was. Saw for example was an ace movie on release, 5 sequels and I don't know how many copycats later, and it's hard to look back with the same fondness.

So we may not have standout titles in the sense that you mean, but thats through no fault of the films. I think what we do have is a larger amount of good to very good horrors, than there were in 70's and 80's.

My instinct is it's been a good ten years Doc though it's sometimes difficult to give a full appraisal until truely viewed retrospectively. Case in point I have really rated a lot of 70's horror as a very definable era but only recently have started to appreciate the 80's likewise, beyond always appreciating a handful of classics.
It seems that 'the market' has become a lot more accessible for film makers and the last decade has had more of an international feel about it than the decade preceeding that. The last ten years have seen asian horror briefly in the ascendancy with The Grudge (1&2), a Tale of Two Sisters, The Eye, Dark water, Phone, The Ghost, Shutter etc. European horror has also had a bit of a renaissance, notably France, Spain and Scandanavia and there has been the odd interesting one to come out of South America.
There have also been some good home grown efforts so there has been enough of interest for me and I always look forward as well as back with anticipation to see what the next slew of thematic, moral panic inducing terrors await.

I think the last decade has seen great things slowly emerging from Britain and at a faster pace from Europe with quite a few poor shows from Hollywood.
Let The Right One In, Outpost, The Devil's Backbone, Dead Snow, The Orphanage, Cold Prey, [Rec], Pans Labyrinth, KM31, to name but a few recent ones against Hollywood's new parasitical film making culture (stand up and hang your heads in shame Platinum Dunes and Rob Zombie). Has Hollywood forgotten how to make a decent original horror? Ok there's The Mist which i wasn't mad on but at least it was original and Drag Me To Hell - probably the one single film that proved to me that there could yet be life in the right hands in Hollywood but my palate is currently satified tasting fresher fruits closer to home rather than the boring regurgitated processed stuff from across the pond.

I honestly don't understand why Drag me to hell is so highly rated. I enjoyed the first half of the movie, and some of the scenes were really cool (old lady appearing on the mobile etc), but the switch to comedy just didn't work like it did for Evil Dead 2, the end twist I saw coming, the poor CGI ruined most of the scares and too many moments were like Raimi ripping off his own Evil Dead series. Such as the guy floating in air doing the Evil Ash dance, and the Possesed goats animations was reminiscent of the goats head on the cabin wall. It was an, at times, enjoyable romp, but so very far from "the greatest horror film this decade" tm.

Outpost I thought was average as well, filled with flaws and too long. Dead Snow was only good for its last 20 minutes, which was hilarious but the rest was humdrum stuff. I don't think movies that average a 5 or 6 score can really be called "great" horror movies. I think Hollywoods Mirrors and many others all earned similar scores for example. If anything other lower budget American movies are in the same ballpark, Infestation was a laugh at times but nothing great, Dead End I enjoyed, Splinters had its moments, as did Reeker and anyone remember Slithers? That was really good. White Noise I also enjoyed, although I didn't think much of the ending.

Thanks for the complements Count I'm glad you largely enjoy what I recommend, just done a review of "Equinox" on your topic and its my latest "Death Game" so to speak, I have the feeling I'll be rambling about that one for some time to come. As for how I find what I find there's many a technique I use that I find effective that requires no books (although a bit of Stephen Thrower never hurts does it), first off look at the directors, many directors are hyped for a few films but actually made many unsung classics with Lenzi being a prime example, also Amazon has an item link where people who bought whatever item also bought whatever other items, this allows you to see what likeminded horror fans are buying in large and so you note down the films that continually appear in items you liked and research them, another good technique is typing in company names e.g. blue underground, severin etc and you tend to find items you might not have noticed they released.

DJM I can't agree on the original "Halloween" being a complete cliche, sure its been imitated to death (and quite badly so by the remake) but unlike the others the characters are likeable and interesting and the adversary of Dr Loomis is a brilliant touch most slashers don't bother ripping off, also it relies heavily on suspense with no actual bloodshed and instead just lots of atmosphere, another great thing about the original was the character of Micheal Myers himself who simply kills, its far more interesting to have a killer with no motive who came from a normal background then just suddenly became this thing of evil, again the immortal killer is now a bit of a cliche but none have done it justice like Carpenter did, I felt Rob Zombie's version ruined this most important element (among other things) and instead we get some typical serial killer with a bad background which would've worked if the film had been about Jeffrey Dahmer or Henry Lee Lucas but doesn't work in telling the Myers tale, personally I felt the "Halloween" remake to be one of the worst films of recent times and simply a bad imitation but to each his own.

By the way H. Randall I too really liked "The Mist" and consider it among the best things to come out of hollywood through the whole decade but I can't call it completely original, I couldn't help but notice it bore many similarities to Romero's "Night of the Living Dead" only with a sci-fi spin on events, much more characters and an interesting expansion on the tension between the trapped characters, don't get me wrong I loved the film and don't care that it borrowed from Romero a bit but I'm a bit surprised the similarities between these two films are never brought up.

Michael Myers in 1979 was an interesting character, 20 sequels and 30 years later? Not so much. Michael Myers stands out as a great killer because he was one of the first. Other characters can't hope to compete because its been done to death, and thats a double edged sword for new movies, and the originals.

I agree with most of what you say, and im not saying its without its merits, but the very genre of the film is a worn out formula in todays world, and "atmosphere" while admirable, just isn't enough to keep a film at the top of my list. Horror films age drastically, and thats why they are all being remade.

At least the Halloween remake added something new, and I actually prefer the origins story of the first 50 mins, than the following 50 mins. I was more concerned with what was new, whereas most people who disliked the film focus on the old stuff that was changed. I think if the Halloween remake had been under a different title, even Carpenter fans would have enjoyed it. I can't agree that its one of the worst films either though, have you seen My bloody valentine? Final Destination 3D? Those films are terrible, so never mind remakes, horror vehicles for crappy 3D effects are my main concern. Without remakes we wouldn't have had The Thing or The Fly. I also think the remakes of Texas and Hills are superior to the originals, and I know most people agree with at least one of those.

I think this is worth bearing in mind though, if you saw Halloween upon its release, or shortly afterwards, you'd think it was great, because back then it was top stuff. Then anytime you view another slasher movie with a similar character, you think "he's just a rip off of Myers". Well that works both ways, and in todays world, Halloween won't be the first horror movie these teenagers see, and I don't know many younger people that actualy like it. Now we can label then as having no taste, but I find plenty of people who love The Thing, Scarface and The Godfather, even Dawn of the Dead holds up better amongst the younger crowd.

DJM I must admit you have a great point regarding people getting tired of seeing the same idea ripped off time and time again and that they won't necessarily see the original first therefore may not see it as the creator of or best example of the trend, by chance Myers plays into this point quite strongly as he is often looked at as the lesser Jason type character, I've even seen reviews that mock "Halloween" for stealing from "Friday the 13th" despite it being the other way around. I think you're also right about atmosphere not being enough in todays world although I'm not saying its a good thing, I think nowadays people just want something with lots of blood and action and while I don't mind this sometimes I think atmosphere, tension and slow paced plot driven films are just as good (depending on the actual films in question of course).

I don't agree with horror films dating as I can watch the 30's B&W Universal horrors or silent films with the same enjoyment as something made earlier this year, in my opinion people have gotten used to seeing new films and when watching older films nitpick at the lesser picture quality or dated concepts and get bored because of the lack of fast cutting or gore and while I admit watching older films can be a nuisance to those not used to them I'm sure films of all countries and ages could be enjoyed by people in large if they were veiwed with patience and understanding, I see the remake trend as a profitable business but not a necessity as films just don't need updating, if you can't enjoy the original then you simply don't like that film, its not that it needs updated to suit your needs but rather the film isn't to your tastes, having said that I did prefer both "The Thing" and "The Fly" remakes and thought the Hills and Chainsaw remakes were okay even if they didn't match their original counterparts so not all remakes are bad but the general trend just drives me nuts, still I think you're right about the 3D gimmick being just as bad if not worse, thats why I skipped the "My Bloody Valentine" remake, another slasher remake and this one selling on the 3D gimmick, I completely believe you about the end result being terrible.

The bulk of the young people I have horror conversations with actually really like the original "Halloween" and quite a few disliked the remake but that doesn't really matter as the original has a secure and large fanbase even if the bulk of them aren't youngsters, as you once admitted yourself teens or young adults tend to watch and like whatevers in cinema's and are more concerned with sex and partying than films and rightly so but as they get older and begin to look into some of the older and less trendy stuff they might find a liking for what they once disregarded, this might not happen with "Halloween" but I feel its a film enjoyed more by the person sitting through patiently and attentively than those who grab a few beers and stick it on with mates and so it might win the youngsters over yet.

I really don't think the remake of "Halloween" added anything new to the genre, granted it added a lot to Myers background but this worked against the character, why spend half a movie building motive for the ultimate motiveless killer, as you say it might have worked better if it weren't called "Halloween" but then people would've just seen it as a rip-off instead of a remake and probably still would've disliked it, besides "Halloween 3" had the same name issues and yet was a great film in my opinion, it unlike the remake would have been praised upon its release had the name not given Myers fans false impressions of what it was.

I'd say the best thing out of the last 10 or so years is the greater acceptance of Foreign Language Films in the Cinema in general, Horro has benefitted greatly from it. Admittedly I'm not as 'underground' as some of you guys as I sometimes find the more extreme end of the horror spectrum a little distasteful. That said, my Gold Medal for the period have to go to Alexandre Aja for Haute Tension, a film I went into completely unprepared and was really impressed with the skill and care poured into that film, and it has to be said I never expected to see a Chest of Drawers used as a weapon in quite that fashion !

On the filpside, my Wooden Spoon goes to Dario Argento, I cannot understand why he hasn't come out with something stunning for so long, don't know what's up there.

I'll also go against the grain and say I've enjoyed the Saw Films, I know they aren't the height of sophistication, but they entertain me.

On the December issue of the Wire, you can find Stephen Thrower article about (aham...) Prog Rock group Yes.
Count & Doc, you might be interested.