Score's very unsettling.

So cheesy, it has all the basics of a classic slasher horror movie. The "rules" of scary movies in Scream were pretty much taken directly from here.

Well-done, low-budget horror hit. Carpenter knows how to scare his audience.

I prefer the older 70's Horror to what they try to pass off now as a horror movie. I lost count how many times i seen this movie as a kid.

One of the greatest horror films of all time, led to a knew sub-genre, The Slasher Genre. Terrifying, suspenseful and a bit of a downer. A great technical film, with one of the creepiest scores of all time. A must see and own, especially the blu-ray.

367

I love how coldly and quietly night time suburbia is shown here making the mood really quite creepy, and I like the humour of the film. Also the opening sequence is really horrific as we are shown a killing from the first person point of view which makes you feel very complicit in the crime and helpless to do anything to stop it. Unfortunately Myers is seemingly able to teleport which really damages the tension for me. Also please make sure the killer is actually dead oh mighty heroine.

Ok I admit it these movies can scare the shot out of me when I let them.

Classic slasher horror. Micheal's lack of a motive makes him an enigma. Micheal works well as unexplainable evil, all he really is is an mask and a knife.

I don't care if it was the first, this movie is dumb. The killer is dull, the deaths uninspired, the characterization boring. I can't believe it was so successful, but at least it inspired some more fun movies after it.

As scary as they come. Carpenter at his best

It hasn't stood the test of time well, especially after being heavily parodised by the Scream and Scary Movie series. Everything about the production seems very rushed and there is a real lack of attention to detail, ranging from the props and sets to the choices of shot and editing. Very weak character build-up, too. At times as heavy-handed as a student film - Carpenter really seems to have little idea of what and who he ought to be filming. Disappointing.

Should the acting be better? Should the film be without the odd unintentionally funny moment? Or would such things forsake the mores of indie-kitsch genre horror? Like Hitchcock, the genre is a lesson in opportunity cost, where the sheep actors are at odds with what I find horrific or suspenseful. i.e. not for me.

I feel sad to say that this was quite an underwhelming experience. I liked the way it built towards the final act but so many of the scares were predictable. Plus the only character I cared about was Laurie, so the deaths weren't particularly horrific. There's also plenty of ripe dialogue to show Laurie to be the studious protagonist amidst disposable jocks/skanks. Only one moment personally stands out as genuinely scary.