A special top ten for Halloween. The top ten horror movies of the decade. The problem with a genre list is that you don’t only have to pick films that are good enough for the list but also fit the genre, therefore although good enough to make the list Zombieland (2009) and Shaun of the Dead (2004) have been dropped as they are more comedy than horror.
10 Eden Lake (2008): A British horror thriller with a relatively low budget. From first time director James Watkins. The success and failure of the film relies on a great leading performance from Kelly Reilly. The chav, asbo, hoody kids of the movie are a clichéd Daily Mail representation of all that is wrong with modern society. The characters make stupid irrational decisions that symbolise bad horror. Despite these problems it is still a great little film.
9 Drag Me to Hell (2009): 2009 is a special year, Sam Raimi is back to doing what he does best, horror with a comic twist. I shouldn’t have to describe the film, if you are reading a movie blog and you haven’t seen this film yet what is wrong with you? For those that haven’t seen it, it is the story of a young woman who becomes the victim of a supernatural curse that threatens to drag her to hell. It is funny, scary and shocking with no Lycia clad superheroes, everything a Sam Raimi film should be!
8 The Orphanage (2007): Directed by Juan Antonio Bayona the film had Guillermo del Toro attached as a producer, you would be forgiven for thinking it was one of his films. Full of layered characters and strong performances the film is more chilling and disturbing than actually scary but it will still make you jump from time to time. Like any film with Guillermo del Toro’s name on it the photography is nothing short of stunning.
7 [•REC] (2007): Fake documentary horror films with shaky cameras will always be compared to Blair Witch Project but once in a while there is a great example of the genre. This Spanish film is one such example. Set in the confines of an Barcelona apartment block the film chronicles’ the beginning of a zombie outbreak. The simple story with minimal plot and down to earth dialogue is elevated by charismatic performances and some really scary moments. Like the successful Japanese horrors of recent years the film has also had the Hollywood remake treatment.
6 Switchblade Romance(2003): Original title Haute tension, released as High Tension in some countries is a French horror/thriller directed by Alexandre Aja whose remake of The Hills Have Eyes nearly made the list too. It is a simple story of two young women who are terrorised by a crazed killer, or is it? The film is graphic, bloody and violent, it really lives up to the tag horror!
5 Ginger Snaps (2000): Whilst these days we are inundated with Vampire movies, 2000 saw the first good and original werewolf movies since An American Werewolf in London. The eponymous Ginger and her sister Brigitte are slightly weird and moody outcasts at school to begin with, then Ginger becomes a werewolf. This complicates maters somewhat! The film works as a visceral horror as well as a metaphor for puberty.
4 Let the Right One In (2008): When you mention a vampire movie based on a book all people can think of these days is Twilight. While I don’t have a problem with the teen romance vampires of that particular saga this Swedish vampire movie offers so much more. The film centres on the relationship between a twelve year old boy and a girl who appears to be a similar age who turns out to be a vampire. The film explores lots of issues and lingers in the mind long after you have seen it.
3 The Devil’s Backbone (2001): Set during the Spanish civil war The Devils Backbone is one of visionary director Guillermo del Toro’s best films. More an eerie ghost story than an outright horror. Told from the point of view of an abandoned child in an uncertain situation, the characters mirror the political turmoil of the era and setting. The film is both beautiful and unnerving.
2 28 Days Later(2002): Zombies got reinvented as The Infected in Danny Boyles modern horror classic. Cillian Murphy awakening to a deserted London is an amazing creepy and memorable scene. Subsequent scenes offer some gruesome horror and genuine scares.
1 The Descent (2005): With a relatively unknown cast Neil Marshall created a fantastic film. There is a great sense of foreboding from the start as the group of female friends descends into the darkness of a cave system. Foreboding gives way to unsettling before becoming seriously tense and scary. Great characters, strong performances and horrific images what more could you ask for.
When compiling the list it didn’t occur to me until I started adding the photographs that most of my chosen films feature strong female roles often leading roles. Is this a pointer to an ingredient that makes horror movies good or just a reflection on my taste?
In preparation for this post I have watched my favourite three David Fincher films in a week, it’s a hard life! There aren’t that many directors around these days that you can truly call an auteur, David Fincher is a member of a very select group of directors who makes films accessible, enjoyable and entertaining and can be described as both movies and art. His movies often have an Existential feal without being esoteric or elitist. For this series of blogs I have decided to limit the directors to those who made their feature début as a director within the last twenty years. I already have an idea of who I will be writing about but suggestions are welcome.
Fight Club (1999) Based on the novel of the same name by Chuck Palahniuk Fight Club is better than the book it is based on. Director David Fincher had read the book and tried to buy the rights himself before being hired by 20th Century Fox. He cast Edward Norton against the advise of the studio and Brad Pitt who he had worked with on Se7en. Helena Bonham Carter completed the leading cast, playing against type and beating actresses as diverse as Courtney Love and Reese Witherspoon. One of the most controversial and thought provoking films of the late of recent years it works as a precursor to the lack of hope and direction. The film challenges personal cultural values and consumerism, it is best summed up by the quotes of Tyler Durden: “You’re not your job. You’re not how much money you have in the bank. You’re not the car you drive. You’re not the contents of your wallet. You’re not your fucking khakis”. And: “Man, I see in fight club the strongest and smartest men who’ve ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see squandering. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need. We’re the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War’s a spiritual war… our Great Depression is our lives. We’ve all been raised on television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won’t. And we’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very, very pissed off.” Poorly marketed the film made a small profit on it theatrical release it found its true audience on DVD, I saw the film at the cinema then went back two days later to see it again to make sense of what I had seen. The other thing about the film that people often forget, it is at times very funny. But the true genius of the film lies in what it does. It lulls an unsuspecting viewer into thinking they are watching a dumb action movie about illegal fighting, what it then gives them is an intelligent thought provoking satire. 
Se7en (1995) A film about a serial killer with an elaborate theme is not original, we have seen it many times before most notably in Manhunter and Silence of the Lambs. But Se7en was different, not because of the clever (or contrived depending on your point of view) use of the seven deadly sins as both a way of choosing the victims and the manor of their death. It offered the viewer so much more, or so much less to be precise. The film is very economical, there is nothing going on that is not relevant and integral to the story. Even the domestic scenes and the interactions between the characters becomes relevant as the plot unfolds. One of the most notable things about the film when I first saw it was Brad Pitt, although I had enjoyed some of his previous films this was the first time I actually looked at him as an actor and not a movie star. Set in an unnamed metropolitan city where it constantly rains the film is filed with despair and is virtually devoid of hope. The dark and gloomy interiors and exteriors have a perverse beauty, shot by Darius Khondji who had previously worked with Jean-Pierre Jeunet on The City of Lost Children and Delicatessen, he went on to work with directors as diverse as Bernardo Bertolucci, Alan Parker, Roman Polanski, Kar Wai Wong and Michael Haneke. Reminiscent of but more subtle than Hitchcock’s Vertigo the photography is unnerving for the viewer, this is achieved in the angles, the framing and the use of colour as well as the lighting. Making full use of the dark build-up the juxtaposition of image and plot is staggering in that the story reaches is darkest despair in the films only bright and sunny scene. It ends with Morgan Freeman quoting Ernest Hemmingway: “The world is a fine place and worth fighting for” he follow this by saying “I agree with the second part”. What else can you say about the film? What more do you need to say about it! 
The Game (1997) After the success of Seven The Game had a lot to live up to. It received mixed reviews and I was very unsure about it when I first saw it. I felt cheated by the ending. But watching it again over the last few years I have grown to both appreciate and enjoy it more on every viewing. Although not as good as Fight Club or Se7en it is still a great film with lots to offer. The great thing about the game is you are never exactly sure what is going on. We learn at the start that Nicholas Van Orton (Michael Douglas) has been given a gift by his brother (Sean Penn) that is some type of game but the viewer and the character alike are never really told what the nature of the game is. This combined with the slow building plot helps create a sense of frustration in the viewer and the protagonist. The unfolding of the plot is like a magicians slight of hand trick, we know he is being played but we aren’t sure how or why, is it the game or is the game a cover for something more sinister? This is played out perfectly when he is told by Christine (Deborah Kara Unger) that they are after his money. Is that part of the game, is she playing her part in the game? The casting is superb, Michael Douglas is totally believable as the cold and ruthless banker, where the baggage of having played Gordon Gekko could be a hindrance to some parts it is a benefit here. It is the strength of the performance that makes it acceptable to relegate the talent of Sean Penn to a relatively small part. Set in San Francisco, the director shows great maturity and restraint to avoid lingering shots of clichéd locations. The film is shot in a very similar style to Se7en although he used a different cinematographer, Harris Savides. These days he is probably best know for his collaborations with Gus Van Sant but he did work with David Fincher again ten years later on Zodiac. The film isn’t as dark in its look or subject matter but don’t let that fool you, although a far more hopeful and atomistic film with themes of salvation and redemption it still digs it to the mind sole of its characters and audience.
Firefly (2002): Original, inventive and believable sci-fi that owes more to the Western genre than other space set films/shows. It would be easy to say that as it was cencelled after so few episodes that it didn’t have the chance to lose its way like so many other programs, this may be true but taking it on its own merits and looking at Serenity the spin of film I think it completely deserves its place at the top of the list. 
Battlestar Galactica (2004 -2009): As a kid I used to love the old Battlestar Galactica then a few years ago I watched the film version (I think it was cobbled together from a couple of TV episodes) on TV on a Sunday afternoon. It was really bad! For this reason I didn’t bother watching the new show until last year when I saw a rerun of the pilot on TV. I immediately rented the series on DVD and was hooked watching four seasons in a couple of months. The themes of life death, religion, politics that are explored in it are far deeper and better handled than in any other TV show I can think of.
Mad Men (2007 – ????): To a casual observer who tuned in half way through an episode Mad Men could come across as a soap-opera, some of the storytelling is similar to a soap but it goes far deeper than that. The attention to detail is incredible the costumes, sets, the prop are all completely believable but this is only the surface the characters are what makes it brilliant.
Life on Mars (2006 – 2007): One of only two British shows on the list. It works predominately for two reasons: The 1970’s nostalgia and the ambiguity of the time travel/dream whilst in a coma setting. This lets it operate on two levels as both a great 70’s cop show and an exploration of the differences between then and now. Like the other British show on the list it proved its quality and appeal by being shown around the world and receiving the American remake treatment. It also spawned a sequel Ashes to Ashes in 2008.
Heroes (2006 – ????): Dispensing with the costumes of a typical super hero show, heroes deals with realistic people (other than their extraordinary abilities) in recognisable situations. The crisp sharp images and high quality effects make the show the closest thing TV can offer to cinema. As is often the case the first season was the best and subsequent seasons have failed to live up to that high standard but it is still going strong and has plenty to offer. 
Lost (2005 – 2010): At times the most baffling show since Twin Peaks and that is what is so good about it. The completely ridicules and unbelievable becomes strangely believable and plausible as we see it from another point of view or a flashback tells a back-story. 
House (2004 – ): If I am completely honest I don’t think House represents first rate groundbreaking TV, it is actually formulaic, repetitive and clichéd. However it has one thing going for it that elevates it beyond so many other TV shows: a a really good character played to perfection by Hugh Laurie.
24 (2001 – 2010): This show has really lost its way in recent years that could have jeopardised its place on this list but it deserves its place for its originality. Real-time has been used before in films but to stretch that out into a show that covers an entire 24 hour period was a brilliant idea. The show also gave us an iconic character in Jack Bauer. 
The Office (2001- 2003): The other British program on the list. Shot in a documentary style with a completely deadpan delivery that is often painful to watch. Re-watching it again it is still as funny and relevant as it was when it first hit the screens eight years ago.
True Blood (2008 – ????): Vampires are really in vogue at the moment but they haven’t always been sucesfull on TV. Since the end of Buffy and its spinoff Angel the shows Blood Ties and Moonlight have come and gone without much interest but True Blood is different. Not afraid to target a more adult audience beneath the semi clad (or often naked) bodies the show has something to say. With vampires recently coming “out off the casket” as they say in the show they work as a metaphor for both race and sexuality, this is emphasised by the southern setting and diverse cast. And getting an Oscar winning movie star to play the lead doesn’t do any harm.
The 
Far less is said about X-Men: First Class but it goes without saying the film will slot in-between X-Men Origins: Wolverine and the first X-Men movie. The Harry Potter reference suggest a school set story with the characters most likely in their teenage years. We have seen brief glimpses of this in the first three movies but here it will be the main focus. Continuity dictates we will not be seeing Wolverine or Rouge in this movie so they will have to make the most of the characters they have. The existing members of the X-Men at the start of the first film Jean Grey, Scott Summers/Cyclops, Ororo Munroe/Storm could all be used along with Henry ‘Hank’ McCoy/Beast who it was revealed in X-Men: The Last Stand was a previous member. All these characters will need younger actors to play them as will Charles Xavier, this could prove interesting. To make up the numbers they will have to introduce some other characters, the most interesting of these that springs to mind is one who made a brief appearance in Wolverine. Emma Frost aka The White Queen. 
Deadpool also looks set to get his own movie, inevitably really following the fans response to his characters appearance in Wolverine. Fortunately it looks like we are getting the wisecracking Ryan Reynolds version and not the mute seen towards the end of the film. Lauren Shuler Donner is quoted as saying “I want to ignore the version of Deadpool that we saw in Wolverine and just start over again. Reboot it. Because this guy talks, obviously, and to muzzle him would be insane”. To work this will need a great script and the right supporting characters not to mention a top director. 
They seem far less confident about a Magneto movie suggesting it could be five years away. This isn’t a bad thing as I’m not sure I want a Magneto origins movie. The character works fine with going into it but Lauren Shuler Donner does assure us that “David Goyer has written a brilliant script. It starts in the concentration camps” This fits in with the movie continuity where flashbacks tell us how he discovered his powers whilst in a concentration camp. The big problem is casting. How do you find a young actor capable of filling Sir Ian McKellen’s shoes? This is something they will have to do; as good as his acting skills are I think he will struggle to play a teenager! 
It will be interesting to see how it develops in the next few years. My biggest problem is they are looking back to try and squeeze things into gaps in the original films that often aren’t there instead of looking forward to new stories. What the filmmakers must appreciate is that they already have a strong cast of characters who have been introduced. In most cases they have done an excellent job is casting them but they aren’t getting any younger. Wolverine supposedly ages very slowly but at 40 Hugh Jackman is ten years older than when he first played him in the first X-Men movie. He won’t be able to play him convincingly when he is 50 so don’t waste the time you have now by making more rubbish like the last film. Finally I still think they are missing a trick and should make a 
