Rob Zombie: Horror Hack or Hero?
There are a lot of musicians who attempt to make the transition to the world of movies, and although some go on to become decent actors, very few have become successful filmmakers like Rob Zombie. His third movie hits theatres this weekend, an update of John Carpenter’s horror classic Halloween, and you better believe that some people must have confidence in the guy in order to hand over the reins to such a massive remake. Still, a lot of moviegoers are divided on Zombie and his talents. Personally I’ve never been a big fan of his films. His style has always turned me off — it’s just too loud and too rock n roll, and he’s definitely not one for subtlety. But the thing is, when some people claim that he is one of the best new original voices working in horror today, I can kind of see where they’re coming from. His movies do set themselves apart, and he’s certainly not one to ease back on the blood and gore. So I thought this week it would be a good opportunity for people to discuss the new Halloween if they’ve seen it, and Rob Zombie’s talents as a director in general. What do you say? Is Rob Zombie just a two-bit hack or is he the saviour of horror? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.
Comments (19)
Wow! The Devil’s Rejects was one of the best films of 2005. Never caught 1000 corpses, but the man certainly directed the hell out of Rejects.
Posted by Kurt on August 31st, 2007I can appreciate some elements of The Devil’s Rejects (the roadkill scene was classic) but overall I thought it was self-indulgent and it just didn’t have the same sense of fun as something like say, Grindhouse. It did have some dark humour, but I just didn’t find any of the characters likable.
Posted by Sean on August 31st, 2007I disliked House of 1000 Corpses but I have to agree with Kurt, The Devil’s Rejects was excellent. I’ll find out which way Halloween tips the scales this weekend.
Posted by Steven on August 31st, 2007The self indulgent super-extended final scene left a horrible taste in my mouth. Although it was better than House of 1000 Corpses, the decision to stretch a scene out to match the beats of Free Bird (A song much too long for the scene) had me rolling my eyes.
Posted by Jay C. on August 31st, 2007Let’s be realistic. Rob Zombie (as much as I may like him) has yet to make an original film. He is a super fan that continues to rehash his favorite flicks.
I did see Halloween and afterwards, like so many recent remakes, I couldn’t wait to see the original again.
Posted by Daemon on August 31st, 2007i’ve only watched part of one of his movies. i sat through about half an hour of House of 1000 Corpses, was bored out of my mind, and walked away from the TV while my roommates suffered through the rest of it.
They said the commentary track was basically him saying everything he couldn’t do, almost indicating that he thought it sucked too.
Even the soundtrack to that movie sucked. Rob has had his hands in so many side projects that none of them actually seem to be fully realized. Especially that last album. His second solo album was really ‘eh’ but the Educated Horses one from last year was just plain unlistenable.
Posted by Goon on September 1st, 2007“The self indulgent super-extended final scene left a horrible taste in my mouth.”
Yeah, god forbid a director does something to please himself rather than the audience.
Posted by Henrik on September 1st, 2007Have you seen the movie Henrik?
Posted by Jay C. on September 1st, 2007I have not.
Posted by Henrik on September 1st, 2007I’ve only seen House of 1000 corpses and disliked it, but I’m still interest in seeing Zombie’s Halloween because I am a fan of horror films.
It’s interesting in calling Rob Zombie self-indulgent. I never thought of ever using that term with directors because I thought directors who show a certain vision or personality usually seperate themselves from the rest. Of course, I think this is a positive thing. Maybe I am getting the term wrong.
I too, havent seen The Devil’s Rejects, but I’ll definitely check it out to see it from your guys’ perspective. Now that I thought of it, there are many directors who are self-indulgent.
Posted by Primal on September 1st, 2007“god forbid a director does something to please himself rather than the audience”
wouldnt this justify every problem in every movie ever?
Posted by Goon on September 1st, 2007No, because the argument isn’t wether it’s good or bad, just that it is wrong because it’s self-indulgent. Which means any time a director places his own taste above the particular audience members he is making a mistake, and I don’t agree with that.
Posted by Henrik on September 1st, 2007I mean, I can appreciate if someone does something for himself, but just because they do that doesnt mean its wrong to dislike it. If it is indeed self indulgent, why is it wrong to not agree with his taste and say so?
Posted by Goon on September 1st, 2007Actually Henrik, it was about good and bad, at least in my comment. It was bad and undeserved self indulgence.
Posted by Jay C. on September 2nd, 2007Henrik and Primal bring up a good point. I guess this is kind of getting into the whole debate of filmmakers as “auteurs” and artists versus being mere facilitators to putting a story on screen. Obviously there are certain directors who have a very strong personal style, and this is something I generally applaud. The problem comes when a director gets so wrapped up in trying to be cool and edgy that they forget to actually tell the story, or lose sight of the fact that no one cares about the characters. It’s all a very subjective thing and there’s a fine line there. For me, Rob Zombie crosses that line.
However, I do give him props for the fact that he actually has a sort of trademark style now (even if a lot of it is emulating his own favourite movies, but hey, Tarantino does the same thing). So that’s why in the post above I said that I can see where people are coming from when they say he is an original and unique voice in horror. But I guess I agree that to say a director didn’t make a good movie simply because he’s being self-indulgent isn’t necessarily a valid criticism.
Posted by Sean on September 2nd, 2007Yeah, I guess it all depends on wether or not you feel like the style overtakes the substance of the movie. Then it might feel like self-indulgence I guess. However, it can work at times. In theory there is no difference between setting Free Bird to a fight scene and setting The Blue Danube to flying spaceships. Both could be called self-indulgent decisions, and both pieces of music could be critisized as being too long for what’s being done story-wise with the scenes. So the problem, to me at least, doesn’t lie with self-indulgence and presenting your film in an almost arrogant way to the audience, as much as it lies with the actual content that’s being used to do so. In other words you can be as self-indulgent as you want as long as you’re talented.
Posted by Henrik on September 2nd, 2007Zombie has proven to me that he’s just as much a hack as Uwe Boll.
Posted by scoville on September 2nd, 2007I’m honestly surprised that the numbers are so close. I, for one, haven’t liked anything he’s done. I’ll most likely be seeing the new Halloween sometime on DVD.
Posted by Rian on September 4th, 2007I am a big fan of self indulgence myself, and have a hard time criticizing someone of that ilk. I agree to some degree with other posters, and yet I simply enjoyed the campy nature of the flix. So, I preferred DR to 1000 – but enjoyed both for what they are worth (sometimes a bag of popcorn with Tabasco.
Posted by Misfit on September 5th, 2007Leave a Reply