As regular readers may have noticed, I was unable to follow through on the promise of a kick-ass Halloween in the last half of October. Unfortunately, real world responsibilities always come before blogging. My greatest regret was in my inability to participate in 31 Flicks That Give You The Willies over at Shoot The Projectionist. The proprietor, Ed Hardy, Jr., was kind enough to send me an invite for the event, and I was about halfway though my list when other matters stole my attention. To make up for my absence, if only in a small way, I’d like to post my thoughts on the somewhat controversial results.

Unlike some of the contributors, I found the list itself to be more diverse than I expected. How often do you come across a list that places such films as Eyes Without A Face or the original Nosferatu so highly? But for the most part I like lists like this more for what it says about the participants and their views on horror than I do the actual films on the list. In the comments section of the post Kimberly of Cinebeats points out that genre mainstays such as Bava and Corman didn’t make the cut. Even Ed Hardy, Jr. shows some dismay at the selection. I wonder how these lists are influenced by the availability of the material, or if the horror canon has been shaped over the years to exclude certain movies, at least in some circles. I know that for myself there are certain kinds of horror films which I have only a passing familiarity with. If my lack of breadth in the genre were revealed I would probably be drummed right out of the club.

Adding to that is the fact that both the nominating and voting process were open to people who weren’t necessarily horror enthusiasts. I don’t doubt that at least a few people participating in either level had only seen maybe double the amount of horror movies necessary to contribute. If I had to choose 31 of my favourite comedies, the final half would consist of whatever I could remember having watched, not what I consider quality film. This may seem as if I object to non-horror fans participating, but that isn’t the case at all. Last year I invited some of my favourite non-horror bloggers to write posts for The Horror Blog. I’m always interested in the insight of those people not immersed in the genre. It’s just that, with their wider focus on all film, it’s less likely that they’ve seen many horror offerings from outside the usual suspects.

A quick look at the 33 winners by decade (there were a few ties) shows that the 60s and 70s combined overtake the other six decades represented by 19 films to 14. I found this somewhat surprising as I have always considered most bloggers to be of an age where their nostalgia would show preference to the 80s (which, to be fair, placed third behind the 70s). Were the 60s and 70s actually a Golden Age for Horror? Or are we trading on the opinions of those before us?

None of the above should be seen as a criticism of the list itself. Like I said, I prefer mulling over the ‘whys’ over the ‘whats’ in a list like this and 31 Flicks That Give Me The Willies provides plenty of grist for the mill. My one complaint, and the only thing that almost makes me glad I didn’t participate, is some of the negative commentary that accompanies the selections in the post itself. Hardy says in the comments “I’d tried to be diplomatic in presenting the results, since it was after all my survey,” but it’s hard to see how with quips like “If there is such a thing as a one-hit wonder in the film, this was it” and “Not to step on any toes here, but… this one I just don’t get.” The two movies targeted above would have probably made my list, and I would have felt a little put out if I had taken the time to participate only to have my choices ridiculed. There are plenty of selections in the list which I wouldn’t place in my top 100 let alone my top 31, but I can at least acknowledge why I think they’re important movies, if not very good ones. If he considers repeating the event in years to come Hardy would do well to allow select people who actually chose the movies he dislikes to offer their own commentary, not unlike what he did with a few selections.

This entry was posted on Monday, November 5th, 2007 at 9:08 am and is filed under Movies. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.