goddangwatir's profile

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

Thu, Feb 13, 2020 11:29 PM

Live Poll: Second Scariest Non-Horror Movie

It is widely agreed upon by most critics and fans that the Silence of the Lambs is the scariest non-horror film ever made (perhaps even the scariest film over all). With that being said, which of these movies not categorised as horror deserves to hold the title of second most terrifying ?

List: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls096389509/

Poll: https://www.imdb.com/poll/5FMCNVqgbqU/

Responses

1.4K Messages

 • 

58.6K Points

1 y ago

Seven!  - closely followed by American History X

67 Messages

 • 

2.9K Points

I think you've got this spot on, Gitte.

Could I possibly add,

The Night of the Hunter (1955)
Marathon Man (1976)
No Country for Old Men (2007)

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

Added The Night of the Hunter !

The minimum amount of votes for a movie included in one of my polls is 75.000, therefore I will not add Marathon Man.

177 Messages

 • 

8.1K Points

1 y ago

My vote goes to Schindler's List by a nose. Second is Requiem For a Dream.

cinephile

2.3K Messages

 • 

46.7K Points

1 y ago

Definitely  Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory  WILLY WONKA is a psycho.

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

1 y ago

bump

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

1 y ago

bump

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

1 y ago

bump

4.4K Messages

 • 

129K Points

1 y ago

Why isn't it a horror film? I mean we see a man eating human flesh...
And yet Psycho is regarded as horror...

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

By 'horror film', I mean with constant jump scares and such, which The Silence of the Lambs does not have. It is more of a 'psychological thriller' (at least in my own opinion, and many others as well).

Interesting statement about Psycho, please explain further.

4.4K Messages

 • 

129K Points

Well, it may be arguable whether movies like The Silence of the Lambs or Jaws are horror, but I'm in total disagreement with them being considered non-horror films while they can be more horrific to watch than films like Psycho or Rosemary's Baby. And I don't mean "drama horror" but good old "horror horror" (blood / human flesh / jump scares etc.)
The point is:  what is partially true is also partially false, isn't it?

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

Ah, I see what you mean now. Well, 'Second Scariest Non-Horror Movie' has got more punch than 'Second Scariest Partial-Horror Movie" ;-)

Jokes aside, they may both have elements of horror, but in my opinion, a film is either a "horror" or "non-horror" (horror for me is quite an "extreme term", so that is why I label them both as "non-horror"). I can see where you are coming from though with your statement.

4.4K Messages

 • 

129K Points

No problem, what's your opinion about Jaws then? H or no-H?

177 Messages

 • 

8.1K Points

Horror films keep the scare element above everything else, whereas in non-horror films like Jaws or Silence Of The Lambs, characters and story are above everything else. The horror part is incidental, almost like a by-product.

Even if you haven't seen Jaws for 10 years, you still remember the characters, probably even the names. But if you haven't seen Zombie Flesh Eaters for 10 years, all you remember are the scares or the scenes that made you jump.

I think an even better way to put it would be, horror films aim to scare the audience, first and foremost. No-horror films have no such goal, even if they sometimes do scare the audience worse than some horror films.

4.4K Messages

 • 

129K Points

Interesting.

But if you extend that logic, you have to separate between Lambs and Jaws, I refuse to believe that Spielberg's priority wasn't to scare the audience (besides making a quality film), the story is rather linear but I totally agree that the best thing about the film is the character but maybe that it was that aspect that was incidental.

Or if we consider that the film has two distinct part, we can agree that the first one is pure horror and the characters only "bloom" during the second.

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

@ELMo

As you stated, Jaws has two parts; one "horror" part, and one "thriller" (plus "character") part. Therefore, I have to make an exception here (in my system of classifying horror films). I still believe it is more of a thriller than a horror movie however, hence its inclusion on the list.

@Ardan

You put my thougts regarding this subject into words perfectly, thank you :-)

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

@ELMo

As you stated, Jaws has two parts; one "horror" part, and one "thriller" (plus "character") part. Therefore, I have to make an exception here (in my system of classifying horror films). I still believe it is more of a thriller than a horror movie however, hence its inclusion on the list.

@Ardan

You put my thougts regarding this subject into words perfectly, thank you :-)

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

I don't know why my reply got duplicated.

^

3.9K Messages

 • 

91.1K Points

1 y ago

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

Added Jaws and Nightcrawler !

I am a bit split over the former though, but I suppose I can include it.

The minimum amount of votes for a film to be included in my polls is 75.000, therefore I will not include Psycho Raman.

Champion

 • 

3.6K Messages

 • 

230K Points

Ardan Tüzünsoy, I respect the points, but they're also why horror turned into a ghetto genre: if there is a smart horror movie it immediately gets rescued into another genre by critics and audience alike, while "straight horror" only has fewer chances to rise above the niche and be considered as just a great movie. 

It's been so for decades and honestly, genre offered aplenty of masterpieces during those. It more than deserves to include more Academy Award winners which were dragged into other genres simply to have horror as its own thing. 

177 Messages

 • 

8.1K Points

The Oscars have always been snobbish, so we can forget the notion of them being fair toward horror. Or sci-fi. Or comedy. Or non-Hollywood films.

But to be honest, the ratio of [great / good / at least watchable movies] versus [don't bother / terrible / must be confiscated and burned movies] is pretty bad in the horror genre. In fact the only other genre that produces a higher number of crappy movies versus great movies is, in my opinion, romantic comedies. This contributes to the horror genre not being taken as seriously as it should be.

Other than that, I agree that there are some great movies that are pure horror. I adore The Omen, The Exorcist, Day of The Dead, The Wicker Man, Carnival of Souls, The Changeling, classic Universal movies, Evil Dead, The Haunting etc.

But straight up terrible horror movies are so many in number that it's mind numbing. I lost count of how many "skinny girl with long hair walking eerily in the forest" movie covers / posters I saw since The Ring. And that's just one example: One fine horror movie producing an offspring of dozens of lesser imitations.

Back to the topic: A few more non-horror scary movies are Lilja 4ever, The Counselor and Lost Highway. Perhaps creepy or disturbing is a better term than scary, but these were tough films.

(I'd also suggest Eraserhead, but it's already listed as horror)

Darn, how could I forget this... It haunted me for days after I saw it at a movie festival:
The War Zone.

2.7K Messages

 • 

70.2K Points

1 y ago

30 years have passed. A lot of time has passed. Literally hundreds of films that could qualify for this proclamation. By now? The Silence of the Lambs may not have that alleged consensus.

A rewording of your thesis is in order.
"It is widely agreed upon by most critics and fans that the Silence of the Lambs is the scariest non-horror film ever made (perhaps even the scariest film over all)."
The Silence of the Lambs, arguably, is the scariest non-horror film ever made (perhaps even the scariest film overall).

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

You make a good point, but I personally believe that if The Silence of the Lambs was to be included in the poll, it would have won overwhelmingly (as it actually did in one of my other recent polls; "Most Nerve-Racking Movie"), and that would be rather boring.

I can change the description to your version however, as it is probably more fit.

236 Messages

 • 

8K Points

1 y ago

bump