Best horror movies of the last ten years

[paulofilmo]

an overwhelming and painful feeling caused by something frightfully shocking, terrifying, or revolting; a shuddering fear

I'm partial to unheimliche.

Looking forward to Inland Empire, Noé, Requiem, We Need to Talk About Kevin (haven't forgiven myself for not seeing this at the cinema).

Thought Martyrs was an interesting attempt (at horror).
Loved the purgatorial atmosphere of The Machinist, and rated it a few tiers higher than the PSI.

[CMonster]

I would also agree that horror isn't a derogatory term, I think most people have the intellectual capacity to recognize the difference between the shit that pervades the genre and the gems that stick out. On that note, my top and lowest horror scores:
Tier 10
Cabin in the Woods
Shaun of the Dead
Black Swan

Tier 9
Pan's Labyrinth
Zombieland

Tier 2
Van Helsing
I am Legend
Snakes on a Plane
Club Dread

Tier 1
Doom
Scary Movie 3
Scary Movie 4
Megalodon: Sixty Feet of Prehistoric Terror
Piranhaconda
Paranormal Activity
Twilight
The Twilight Saga: New Moon
Starship Troopers 2: Hero off the Federation

[Mentaculus]

As for a definition, I think Noël Carroll is onto something in his book The Philosophy of Horror, or Paradoxes of the Heart (1990) (you can find a pdf of it using google) when he says that horror needs a monster, but I think there are some problems with his criteria for what constitutes said monster.

I read the same book and found the same (loop)hole in this argument - to be more clear, it had to be a physical manifestation of evil, the 'evil incarnate', which makes 'psychological horror' a contradiction of terms. And if my memory serves, this manifestation had to be something that was 'revolting' to the human characters, and therefore 'anti-human', but I think we find something terrifying or horr-ible in everyday people all the time. Or I'm simply a terrible, cynical individual. And I think my "Top Horror Films (T10 and T9)" reflect that. There's some genre overlap, but I believe outright fright, detestability in human nature and the degredation of the body are the predominant themes:

Inland Empire - 98
Let the Right One In - 96
Cache - 93
The White Ribbon - 92
Sunshine - 91
Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence - 89
Zodiac - 89
Oldboy - 87
Pan's Labyrinth - 87
Antichrist - 85
Le Couperet - 84
Running Scared - 84 (A surprise for me...!)

[TheDenizen]

Not counting shorts:

T10
Planet Terror
Feast
Let the Right One In
The Machine Girl*
Pan's Labyrinth*

T9
3 Extremes
Cloverfield
Dear God No
The Host
House of 1000 Corpses
The Mist
Prometheus*
Shaun of the Dead
Thirst
Zombieland

*I probably wouldn't consider these ones to be "horror" movies.

[bizarre_eye]

Tier 10:
The Call of Cthulhu (2005)
I Saw the Devil (2010)
Black Swan (2010)
Gozu (2003)

Tier 9:
The Life and Death of a Porno Gang (2009)
Treevenge (2008) (short)
Let the Right One In (2008)
[Rec] (2007)
The Descent (2005)
The Eye (2002)
A Tale of Two Sisters (2003)
Trick 'r Treat (2008)
Silent Hill (2006)

[Stewball]

**What IS the draw for horror after all.

You know, it's a bit like the need to eat animal's flesh from time to time. I like to think of a horror film as a "steak for the soul".

So steak is horror-ble , and "steak for he soul" is substitute phrase for communion. I think you're onto something with the pagan aspects of horror.

[edkrak]

So steak is horror-ble , and "steak for he soul" is substitute phrase for communion. I think you're onto something with the pagan aspects of horror.

Wasn't aware of that, I'm not familiar with American religious slang.

[Stewball]

Wasn't aware of that, I'm not familiar with American religious slang.

It isn't American, it's self-evident.

[Dreamer]

Horror has become so permanently associated with low budget, low talent teen slasher, generic monster, vampire, werewolf, zombie etc. movies that emphasize prurient blood and gore, and cheap 180 db shock along with the glob-de-jur coming from just off screen; I think we need to avoid the term along with what the term is generally associated with today, with any serious discussion of cinematic art.

The Black Swan and Pan's Labyrinth are suspense, art, fantasy, mystical, metaphysical films, or any other number of adjectives, but they aren't horror unless the objective it to trash them.

So if I understand you correctly your argument is that:
In the public mind the horror genre is associated with all these bad monster/slasher/zombie/etc. movies. Therefore we mustn't use the term horror to describe good movies even though they share similar properties with these movies (i.e. they aim, among other things, to evoke fear and may involve similar elements such as murder).

The unmentioned premises seem to be something like:
1. We don't want to give people the impression that any good movie is similar to the public mind image of a typical horror movie.
2. Calling a good movie a horror movie would be interpreted that way by a majority (or at least a large minority of) people.

I find premise 2 somewhat dubious and frankly I don't really care either way about premise 1 (what's the harm if someone not knowing very much about movies ends up thinking e.g. that Black Swan is a movie involving murderous mutant black swans :p, this person might even end up watching it even if they otherwise wouldn't have and potentially even end up opening his/her eyes to new genres). I'm going to keep calling movies like Pan's Labyrinth and Black Swan horror (/drama/...) movies. I think we need a genre to describe movies that have the power to evoke fear or closely related emotions. Some of us, including me, enjoy watching such movies, whatever the reason for this enjoyment might be.

What IS the draw for horror after all. Entertainment? Why is Boo, Blood and Torture entertaining when that's the only point of the movie? What's the kick, or maybe better to ask, Why the kick? Why not just go home and kick the dog?

In my view the point of horror movies is to try to scare you. Kicking the dog for entertainment would make you a scary person but it wouldn't scare you (unless you have a dog that can defend itself I suppose).

Suspense + fantasy = horror

So in your view a movie isn't horror unless it is fantastical? What about something like Psycho or Peeping Tom?

[Stewball]

Horror has become so permanently associated with low budget, low talent teen slasher, generic monster, vampire, werewolf, zombie etc. movies that emphasize prurient blood and gore, and cheap 180 db shock along with the glob-de-jur coming from just off screen; I think we need to avoid the term along with what the term is generally associated with today, with any serious discussion of cinematic art.

The Black Swan and Pan's Labyrinth are suspense, art, fantasy, mystical, metaphysical films, or any other number of adjectives, but they aren't horror unless the objective it to trash them.

So if I understand you correctly your argument is that:
In the public mind the horror genre is associated with all these bad monster/slasher/zombie/etc. movies. Therefore we mustn't use the term horror to describe good movies even though they share similar properties with these movies (i.e. they aim, among other things, to evoke fear and may involve similar elements such as murder).

The unmentioned premises seem to be something like:
1. We don't want to give people the impression that any good movie is similar to the public mind image of a typical horror movie.
2. Calling a good movie a horror movie would be interpreted that way by a majority (or at least a large minority of) people.

I find premise 2 somewhat dubious and frankly I don't really care either way about premise 1 (what's the harm if someone not knowing very much about movies ends up thinking e.g. that Black Swan is a movie involving murderous mutant black swans :p, this person might even end up watching it even if they otherwise wouldn't have and potentially even end up opening his/her eyes to new genres). I'm going to keep calling movies like Pan's Labyrinth and Black Swan horror (/drama/...) movies. I think we need a genre to describe movies that have the power to evoke fear or closely related emotions. Some of us, including me, enjoy watching such movies, whatever the reason for this enjoyment might be.

What IS the draw for horror after all. Entertainment? Why is Boo, Blood and Torture entertaining when that's the only point of the movie? What's the kick, or maybe better to ask, Why the kick? Why not just go home and kick the dog?

In my view the point of horror movies is to try to scare you. Kicking the dog for entertainment would make you a scary person but it wouldn't scare you (unless you have a dog that can defend itself I suppose).

Fear or suspense isn't what defines horrific movies, it's blood and gore for it's own sake--iow a movie that panders to the sadistic side of its audience, particularly when it's almost always going to be a cheap artless project as well.

Horror and drama appear to be mutually exclusive descriptions, and it's interesting to point out that Black Swan and Pan's Labyrinth use thriller, fantasy, mystery or suspense as self-designated descriptions and avoid the "horror" tag. Another movie that comes closer to being termed "horror" by those who want to save the tag for some reason, is Hannibal. If fear is all that defines horror, then it would certainly qualify, but it's quality drama and suspense, and even a thriller, but rightly eschews the horror label.

I think what we have here is some that are trying to justify enjoying gore for its own sake, when all it is is just another form of pornography. The ONLY difference between a snuff film and horror is someone actually dies in the former. The ("enjoyable") emotional reaction to realistic but pointless blood, gore and suffering is the same.