Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxf.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihuxf!features From: features@ihuxf.UUCP (aMAZon) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Women and Horror Films Message-ID: <2697@ihuxf.UUCP> Date: Wed, 18-Sep-85 12:25:29 EDT Article-I.D.: ihuxf.2697 Posted: Wed Sep 18 12:25:29 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 19-Sep-85 06:17:26 EDT References: <140@nvuxg.UUCP> <1902@reed.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 22 Lady Godiva writes: > Since the subject women and horror films seems to have caught on, > I'd like to make a distinction between two different kinds of horror > films. I love scary movies. Psycho is one of my ten favourite movies, > and I'll always go see a vampire or Frankenstein. In fact, any Hitchcock > is great, because even if it's nothing that will make you scream (I > screamed even the second time I saw Psycho) they almost always put you > in suspense, which is just as exhilerating. On the other hand - I can't > tolerate gory movies. I haven't seen any of the Friday the 13ths, and I > would flatly refuse an inviation to do so. I just can't tolerate the > violence. Being frightened is great - seeing blood and gore just doesn't > do a thing for me though. Anyone else make this distinction? > I, too, make that distinction. The 1921 version of "Nosferatu" spooked me tremendously. And there was nothing really shown that would normally be all that frightening. The Klaus Kinski version ('77?) is similar, but cannot replicate the terror that the first one can inspire. -- aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com