Talk:Horror film

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Horror film is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
October 22, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
November 10, 2006 Good article reassessment Delisted
December 3, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate
WikiProject Film (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
WikiProject Horror (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Large parts of article poorly written[edit]

Large sections of this article need desperate re-writes and citations. Just thought I should bring this obersvation to the table because no one else seems to have. Alialiac (talk) 19:16, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

So you felt you had to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm not into really into horror, but this article may qualify as an entry. I'm working on copy-editing and compressing the text, and removing irrelevant or else-located information. Directors and stars are important, but anyone who wants that info can go to the film's actual WP page. I'll also be taking many unsourced lists of films out; there is an entire publishing industry alive because everyone has a favourite film. Unless there's evidence and a source to backup a specific inclusion, I'll be leaving only a few names in (and most likely at random). This is a genre page, not a "list of films by..." page. If there is a specific inclusion warranted through a good source, feel free to replace another or add it along with its contribution and the citation. I'll likely eliminate the explanations in the subgenres section (they already have pages, go there to learn about them), and shuffle a few "see also"s into that section. Rhowryn (talk) 06:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

This article should not remain up in its current form. Speaking as a retired journalist who worked exclusively for genre periodicals, I can see that large swaths of this article are based on opinion, whims and flawed conventional wisdom. For instance, You're Next and Cabin in the Woods, whatever their merits, have not had any appreciable effect on the number of "slasher" movies released in their wake. The article is laughable to genre die-hards and thoroughly misleading to anyone curious about horror films. I know my response to myself would be "Then fix it, know-it-all," but I am in no condition to do such, as my health is failing rapidly. Spirit is willing, but the flesh is confining me to a bedridden retirement. Please, someone fix this, with less opinion and proper citations! Do a dying old man a favor... (talk) 06:35, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Influences on society[edit]

I found and fixed the source in the article, and then read the source. The section made claims entirely unsupported by the EW source. I also found that the previous source also led to an expired library database session. It appears that the original author neglected to find links accessible to the majority of us. The EW source was appropriate for the remaining bit about the prevalence of women as the audience for horror, but the rest was nowhere to be found in the source.

I also rewrote the last section to be a bit less condescending. "Women relatable topics such as pregnancy and motherhood"? What is this, Pleasantville? Plenty of people relate to all sorts of things, and even if the sentence wasn't so demeaning, the larger audiences of women going to both newer and older (rescreened) films (as the EW article mentions), I'm going to suppose that those "themes" aren't what's drawing anybody in. Rhowryn (talk) 04:03, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

You can also talk about some horror movie which is popular right now, you have spoken a lot about the horror movie that is popular in the past, but they may not so attractive because your audience may not be so interested in them. You can show more new good horror movie in this century. You can also talk about the influence that happened on the human. Here is a reference that may help. Perkins, Sharon. "The Influence of Scary Movies on Toddlers." Everyday Life., n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2016. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:5B13:B900:6C02:71FB:F3C4:DEAE (talk) 00:26, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

"The Human Centipede" Characterization[edit]

Under “Subgenres," "The Human Centipede" is listed as an example of a spatter film. But doesn't it fit the definiton of "body horror" more closely? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:14, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

This article needs to be revised due to the grammar and lack of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:08, 7 October 2016 (UTC)