best horror movie ever - Picnic at Hanging Rock (1979) Discussion

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 5thHobbit 16 years ago

It sounds to me like you were expecting it to be an actual horror movie, which it is not. It's an unsettling, dreamlike mystery - scary, but not the sort of scary that you were looking for. You were looking at it with the wrong eye.

And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 5thHobbit 16 years ago

What I mean is that while it could be classified as "horror", it doesn't sound like the kind of horror that you were looking for. If I were you I would watch it again without thinking of the "horror" tag, as that sets up expectations far removed from what Picnic at Hanging Rock actually is.

And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.

reply

[–] gertflump 15 years ago

I was under the impression that horror films are meant to scare, whether it's in a more typical visceral way or the high brow way you seem to imply.

"For that day."
-Three Days of the Condor

reply

[–] JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies 16 years ago

I mean, nothing ever happens in this film! They go to Hanging Rock. A couple of the girls wander off and then disappear

I like how you say that nothing ever happens in the film and then your next two sentences relay things that happen in the film.

http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies 16 years ago

The problem with that is that lots of other things happen . . . I wouldn't try to list them all, as I do not have that kind of time to waste, but they include a police investigation, a search party, two boys searching on their own, a girl having problems with the owner of the school, etc. Those aren't even all the "major" things, and there are hundreds of minor things that happen.

What would make more sense for someone to say is, "Not much happened that I found interesting", or "I didn't care for the pacing", or something else along those lines.

http://www.rateyourmusic.com/~JrnlofEddieDeezenStudies

reply

[–] midnight_muse 14 years ago

You forgot:

4) bizarre disappearance of partially unclothed teacher the same day
5) unsuccessful investigation & search by authorities
6) successful search by Michael, with supernatural overtones, on the Rock
7) Irma found alive days after she should have been dead from dehydration
8) Irma being frighteningly attacked by her hysterical schoolmates
9) school (and headmistress) slowly coming apart at the seams
10) suicide of orphan child, with horrific scene of screaming when she's found
11) suicide or accidental death of school headmistress on the Rock
12) poignant revelation (a tragic missed connection) that Albert was Sara's brother

That's just off the top of my head.

I'm sorry there wasn't enough stuff going on for you...

________________________________________

I don't come from hell. I came from the forest.

reply

[–] crickfiend 15 years ago

Love your work! I completely agree with you, this movie damn near bored me to tears. I never have before, but when watching this movie I almost picked up the remote to push the fast forward button. Like you said, Its not the fact that it was made in 1975, or that it was set in 1900, it was just so damn boring.. And yes the exorcist is most certainly the best horror movie ever made, It is one of maybeeeee 3-4 movies that i have rated a 10 on imdb.

It's not you, I just don't like having dinner with people

reply

[–] ethermusic1981 11 years ago

The Exorcist sucks.

reply

[–] crickfiend 11 years ago

Sacrilege! Care to elaborate?

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] callmedabo 16 years ago

The movie scares the hell out of me. I haven't seen it in a few years, but I'm sure I'll watch it again now that I'm thinking about it. I actually brought it up on IMDB tonight, because I watched Bravo's 100 Scariest Movie Moments last night, and I was sure that the scene on the rocks would be on there, and was totally disappointed when it wasn't. Just thinking about this film makes my skin crawl - I think it's just FABULOUSLY shot and honestly one of the scariest films ever.

reply

[–] sweethoneypie 15 years ago

I totally agree. I'm a huge horror fan and this film unsettles me far more than the stuff that typically falls under the horror tag.

reply

[–] jad1986 16 years ago

I agree, this is one creepy movie. And the thing is, there's no graphic violence, there's no monsters or evil ghosts or serial killers. The horror, as I explained to one friend, is in what you DON'T see!

Best Aussie flick EVER!

Must watch again soon. I was going to do it Halloween night, but I went to a party.

Nothing like a nice lawsuit to ruin your day...

reply

[–] JRodFilms 16 years ago

very creepy movie. it slowed down a little, but the ending was scary too. its so scary without even trying. the movie looks like little house on the praire, and no night scenes.

reply

[–] ThunderDonkey 16 years ago

I agree with Gov William. What's so scary about this movie? Nothing ever really happens, just like Gov William said. "It's so scary without even trying" Please you must be joking, there must be something that I really missed because this movie was boring.

reply

[–] BartlebyScrivner 16 years ago

Three girls apparently enter into a trance-like state and willingly walk into oblivion, followed by their teacher, who has apparently also fallen victim to some form of hysteria. One girl appears a week later with her hands mutilated and her underwear missing but no other sign of what happened to her, and no memory of the events. Two girls and the teacher are never seen or heard from again, having literally vanished into thin air.

Apply these events to a real world setting and tell me if you wouldn't find them disturbing.

reply

[–] tha_ej 16 years ago

Well put.

I can certainly accept Picnic being labeled a Horror movie, but I don't really describe it as such myself. It delves deep into the emotions, some being quite disturbing, but never blatant. That's the beauty of the film.

I'm quite a big LOTR fan and on the cast commentary of Fellowship, Christopher Lee says something that has really stuck with me. Loosely quoted, he said "Often, what we don't see is far more frightening, exciting, erotic than what we do see". He was of course more eloquent than that, but that's the gist of it. It runs in the same vein as "fear of the unknown". That is Picnic's strength; it's full of suggestion and ambiguity. Otherwise, it would have been a long forgotten.

reply

[–] callmedabo 16 years ago

Something else that just occured to me about why this movie was so scary (at least to me). When i was first released in the seventies and also when I first saw it in the mid-eighties, we didn't have access to the almighty internet which allows us to easily get "the real truth" about anything, and message boards to pick apart every detail of a film. When I first saw it, I believed it was based on a true story, as did most people I think. It was an urban legend that these girls had really disappeared, and the book was written and the film made based on what might have happened to them. I think it freaked me out a lot more, thinking that these were not just characters in a film, but that some girls actually disappeared on that rock, so what the hell happened to them???? God, I have goosebumps just writing this!

reply

[–] agera 16 years ago

>Nothing ever really happens...

On the contrary, a lot happens. But nearly all of it happens out of sight, either on the "infernal" rock or inside the characters' hearts and minds.

Even after seeing it many times over many years, I still find it endlessly fascinating. If I could only ever again watch just one film, I'd pick this one.

reply

[–] luxmissus 16 years ago

But nearly all of it happens out of sight, either on the "infernal" rock or inside the characters' hearts and minds.

Exactly. It is in my top five movies of all time. Not only is it beautifully acted, directed and filmed but the score (Zamfir doing Ravel on a pan flute, IIRC) takes the film's atmosphere nearly to perfection.

There is not a thing I could fault about this film. It works on several levels, just read some of the many threads on this mb to see that illustrated. It completes and enhances the original story (and that rarely happens). It is visually stunning. It is everything a movie should be and hardly ever is.

reply

[–] smurdock-1 16 years ago

huh ? you must not have seen many horror movies ... this was a pretty good movie ... but to say it's the best horror film of all time .... uh, yeah .. can i have some of the stuff you're smoking

reply

[–] pullgees 16 years ago

It is not a horror movie and was never intended to be. It is a beautiful work of art with mystery and strangeness about girls reaching puberty in Victorian times and all the psychological problems that can entail. These girls are entering a different world from childhood the rock is symbolic of this. Some are fascinated with the rock and want to explore it. There is so much symbolism in this film and one can read lots of weirdness; it was meant to be weird and strange but never in the horror band. To read some posters above that see it as a very scarey horror is a ridiculous distortion of what was there.

reply

[–] torpedoboy4 16 years ago

It scared the hell out of me. It is a creepy %$#$ing movie.

reply

[–] gertflump 15 years ago

Is it really a mystery, though? We're told what happens in text at the start of the film - girls disappeared. In the film, we never know what happened to them, and we knew what was coming from the start.

If this film is anything, it's a period piece horror speckled drama. I mean, it scared the tar out of me a few times.

"For that day."
-Three Days of the Condor

reply

[–] nephihaha 11 years ago

Oh it's scary alright, and intended to be.

I think some people have a very narrow definition of horror. Our nightmares aren't all sharks and zombies.

---
It's not "sci-fi", it's SF!

reply

[–] Fabrice_Fan 15 years ago

I didn't think this was a horror movie at all. I just thought it was kind of an eerie, semi-thriller. Although I thought the second act dragged a bit.

Still, I watched this yesterday and right afterwards took a walk around my neighbourhood, a lot of which is forested (I live in the country). Scared the bejibbles out of me just to be outside!

reply

[–] matheusmarchetti 15 years ago

It´s definetely one of the genre´s best. Not you typical horror movie, that´s for sure, and by far superior to all that 80´s slasher crap. It´s a haunting, surreal, patient, intelligent and beautiful horror, on the same vein of Don´t Look Now (1973) and Lisa and the Devil (1974)

The theater is like a faithful wife. The film is the great adventure, the costly, exacting mistress

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lombano 11 years ago

It's haunting, etc, but I don't agree it's horror. That is, if we define horror expansively enough to include PAHR, then just about every thriller, crime mystery, police procedural, etc would qualify as horror, rendering the label meaningless. I don't mean that only slashers, etc ought to be called horror - for example, I'd argue for What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? being horror.

reply

[–] Mojazz22 11 years ago

I wouldn't really consider this an horror. It does have an eerie and dark atmosphere to it. But I wouldn't call it horror. For me, horror is something you would see with demons and zombies, something that would make you jump frightfully. The film doesn't really do that, even though I was still quite creeped out.

reply