Talk:History of horror films

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles

Horror High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article creation

This is the expanded work that I've moved from the article Horror film. The horror film article was basically a bit too long as it was, and needed pruning, so on a talk page discussion, it's been moved here. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrzejbanas: great work! As per our discussion on Talk:Horror film, how would you feel about adding a globalize tag? Arcahaeoindris (talk) 11:43, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I think we should establish what specifically is lacking in the Globalize context here. Like, if you look at those "List of horror films" articles, they are predominantly American and British productions (with occasional waves of Japanese and Italian films). I think we should establish the kind of things that might be missing in these article before we add the tag, that way, we know what we are doing to try and solve it instead of just playing guessing games. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Broadly, coverage of horror film history outside of Europe and America is what I meant. Horror films in Bollywood, one of the largest film industries, for example would be a key one to include. Horror films in many Asian countries (from my limited research) are also heavily inspired by the respective folklore and beliefs in each culture, so for instance that could be nice to include in the "early influences" section. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I'd agree but as ...it's going to get tricky! Like, as we open up in our paragraph the timeline of horror is not very linear, so I'm not sure if we should include that towards the sections where these countires start to actively make their own horror films, or put in an early influence section. It could get confusing. I think as we flesh out the "Regional sections" as we are doing now, it'll be easier to clip and edit some prose into this article, as I have done recently with the information about New French Extremity horror films, and how they are somewhat related to the "Torture Porn" (these names man) trends. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

History section

I have question about this section, which also applies to the same section on the parent article; horror film. See Talk:Horror film#History section. Thanks - wolf 18:44, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

The article includes the word "drams" where it should say "dramas", in the early influences section. Editing is locked so I can't fix it. 67.160.53.2 (talk) 23:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Belbury (talk) 06:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another typo - in 1990s HISTORY OF HORROR FILMS section this time:

‘'intendent’’ should say ‘'independent

if in fact this is the background of some of the 1990s filmmakers mentioned in the text

[like the ones who were at the Sundance Festival and had their films launched there].

If the writer/s were intending to say “aspirant” or “intended” or something similar...

Such a big word would have to apply to all of them or none of them?

[or just the ones who weren’t attached to a Big Studio like Paramount].

I feel that if I read this article much further, I will find more typos!

—106.70.91.181 (talk) 07:06, 4 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I fixed the typo, but was a little scared to read on in case there were many more. I didn't ponder too deeply about your “aspirant” or “intended” train of thought. Commander Keane (talk) 08:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @Commander Keane,:

for the editing and the thought.

So far there were no others that popped out or that were otherwise clear to me.

Some people spell by eye (for example - where something was added and/or left out); some people by ear (indendent/intended - which is one way to spell it - and NOT the original typo! - various Ds and Ts in their spots or out of their usual spots); some by meaning and/or context clues.

I would tend to spot them fairly early in the paragraph where there was an impediment to the sentence.

And the last serious editing which had been done would appear to have been done last month (October 2024).

It does help us understand more clearly the evolution of horror in film and how it was received from a 30/35 year standpoint.

—106.70.91.181 (talk) 01:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Another typo:

The popularity and innovation of zombies… (sentence begins) needs a space after the full stop in the sentence preceding it.
This is the paragraph covering the mid-2000s (and I think the film mentioned immediately before was Shaun of the Dead).

—106.70.91.181 (talk) 02:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar this time (and possibly some judgement):

That zombie revival sentence!

Should it be a revival OF or a revival IN?

As in - a revival of the subgenre?

—-106.70.91.181 (talk) 02:10, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I fixed the full stop that was missing a space. Not sure about the OF or IN. Frankly you seem to be a better spelling/grammar expert than me so I would encourage you to create an account, see Wikipedia:Why create an account?. After 4 days and 10 edits you would be able to edit articles that are semi-protected like this one. You don't have to create an account but benefits include no banner ads asking for donations and other users can ping you using the @user function. You pinged me above hence why I arrrived rather quickly. Accounts are completely optional though, and if you continue to point out errors on talk pages that is helpful too. Commander Keane (talk) 02:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandra West and New French Extremity

X: In her book Films of the New French Extremity, Alexandra West found that some of directors started making horror films that would still fit their art house standards such as Claire Denis's Trouble Every Day (2001) and Marina de Van's In My Skin (2002), which led to other directors to make more what West described as "outright horror films" such as Alexandre Aja's High Tension (2003) and Xavier Gens' Frontier(s) (2007).

Y: In her book Films of the New French Extremity, Alexandra West found that some directors started making horror films that would still fit their arthouse standards such as Claire Denis's Trouble Every Day (2001) and Marina de Van's In My Skin (2002); which led other directors to make more what West described as "outright horror films" such as Alexandre Aja's High Tension (2003) and Xavier Gens' Frontier(s) (2007).

(and the whole LED verb is so delicately balanced. {Like a good equation}

On one side {some directors: ie Denis and de Van} are making arthouse horror; on the other side {other directors ie: Aja and Gens} are making films which are more overtly “horror” or are conversant with more commercial forms of horror which were around in the past.

And a punctuation point - perhaps a semicolon between the titles of 2001 and 2002 and “which led other directors” where the comma currently is in the X sentence?

Whose arthouse standards is West talking about? Those of the directors or those of New French Extremity as a whole?

I would never have found out about New French Extremity if it weren’t for Wikipedia; and I imagine it would be the same for many casual readers (who may or may not dip into film magazines and journals or listen to people talk at the movies during screeenings).

And there is probably a (written or implied) OF - though that would again be quantity more than quality of films.

—106.70.91.181 (talk) 02:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]