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