Whose approach to horror is better?
Carpenter's everyman, or Cronenberg's artistry
 |
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
Whose approach to horror is better? Carpenter's everyman, or Cronenberg's artistry
Whose approach to horror is better?
Carpenter's everyman, or Cronenberg's artistry
|
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
|
https://twitter.com/ATRightMovies/status/1555206933434535937
Cronenberg by far.
Cronenberg never fell off and he still makes good quality movies to this day because he evolved to other genres, meanwhile basically everyone else (Carpenter, Craven, Romero, Hooper, Argento etc) kept making the same thing over and over again but each time worse
Argento never made a single good movie in the first place
Hooper didn’t even make poltergeist, that was Spielberg ghost directing it lol. See what I did there?
Both are valid.
The Thing and Videodrome are both one of the greatest horror films ever made, and really films I could easily put into my list of 50 favourite films.
If we go by their filmographies tho, I'd say Cronenberg is more consistently interesting. Carpenter also fell off hard, last film he made is The Ward which was an immensely generic bargain bin tier horror flick.
If you mean in general which horror is better, I'd say "artsy" horror has more better entries in it, but also thay depends on definition of it. I consider Rosemary's Baby to be more artsy than "everyman" for example. Also the "everyman" quality of Carpenters work itself is questionable, as a lot of his films were both critical and commercial flops, with people not getting The Thing at all at the time.
True everyman horror is slasher films if we talk about the 70s - 80s and stuff like Final Destination or James Wan films (although even Wan has a recognizable style to him, although he usually subdues it for mass appeal, and one time he went full camp as he wanted with Malignant it wasn't very successful).
Carpenter dislikes the artsy approach of Cronenberg but Carpenter himself has made his best films in a non-commercial approach, they were definitely his vision and did not pander to the masses.
Carpenter
Classic case of high highs/lower lows vs consistency
Carpenter had the better horror opus (The Thing), but Cronenberg is more consistent and has much better longevity
Same with non-horror. Big Trouble is better than any of Cronenberg's non-horror films, but the latter has more good ones than Carpenter
Carpenter easily.
Cronenberg's movie plots sound interesting but the result is often just 3/5 His movies also often has gratuitous nudity in them.
>“I think the night that got me was when David Cronenberg showed up. He is an old friend of mine. Unfortunately, he takes himself so seriously these days. He is an artist now,” said Carpenter. “And literally, he was holding court in the middle of the room, and I came over to talk to him and he didn’t even look at me. I thought this is enough of this. Forget it. Goodbye.”
Just type in 'David Croneberg interview' in on youtube. The first result is like an hour and a half interview where he walks you through his movies. I put it on to fall asleep to when I go to bed. Very comfy.
Carpenter doesn't like Cronenberg anymore, he thinks he's become a snob.
Cronenberg’s best movies are far more creepy and disturbing than anything Carpenter ever made. Much more visceral too. Carpenter never made anything as good a Videodrome and his lows are far lower. Prince of Darkness is pretty interesting though.
What are Cronenberg’s best films? I've only seen The fly and didn't really like it, but that's only because I don't like Jeff Goldblum lol.
Videodrome, Crash, A History of Violence and Eastern Promises
Ty
do not take that answer as face value, near everything he's made is good and everyone will have different favorites. more of a top 10 director really
also read his book Consumed you guys would love it, it's being adapted for TV I think.
The Dead Zone, eXistenZ, Naked Lunch, Scanners, Crimes of the Future (the newer one) are all very interesting films
I remember eXistenZ had peak Jennifer J. Leigh. also that bone gun was creepy as frick
Peak Jennifer J. Leigh is when she turned into a MILF, pleb
Cronenberg is such a materialist atheist he seems to have a flesh fetish. Like he worships the machine with no ghost.
Yeah no shit he's an atheistic israelite. Props to him for never selling out to do a supernatural monster or ghost movie, even when he did a Stephen King adaptation he picked the one that thematically fits with the rest of his work
you're pushing a horror general so keep this reddit garbage there or delete the general
fricking gaygit
Carpenter is the king. Horror, action, scifi, romance, whatever field he touched, he put out a masterpiece. Halloween is the most "homaged" movie of all time, besides maybe Seven Samurai.
I enjoy both, but I have to go with Carpenter. Cronenberg just takes himself too seriously and lacks Carpenter's range.
I recently went through a bunch of cronenberg's filmography and I have to say it's complete trash. One note and uninspired, I gave up after like 5 films.
Neither.
David Lynch.
He dropped the ball too soon and ended his career with that complete mess that is Inland Empire. But he’s up there indeed
He's good but I prefer both Carpenter and Cronenberg over him. Lynch is too one-note outside of few outliers like The Straight Story.
>The Straight Story
Some unknown rando wanted to make that movie and asked Lynch to produce it, then Lynch just took over and directed it himself
What fricking artistry lmao? Cronenberg made one good movie and the rest is boring garbage.
moron
Carpenter had higher heights, Cronenberg has more consistent quality output
Never watched a Cronenberg movie, so definetely Carpenter.