Comments on: Open Forum Friday: Should Comedy and Horror Ever Mix?

By: JT

JT — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:00:23 +0000

Not many films can be funny, scary AND good. They usually fall under one or two of these categories. For example: Behind The Mask: The Rise Of Leslie Vernon, Drag Me To Hell, Death Proof, Shaun Of The Dead & Dead-Alive are all much funnier than they are scary but I thought they were all very good movies.

By: Deven Science

Deven Science — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 02:29:02 +0000

One of the strangest comedy/horror mixed movies was The Frighteners. It was genuinely scary in some parts, which most comedy/horror movies aren’t (even the good ones), and some parts were very funny. But it also showed how that mixture could throw the viewer out of the movie. The horror parts were too scary for a comedy, and the comedy was too silly for the horror sections. Overall I like the movie, but the balance is very precarious, and proof to me that to be successful, one should commit more to one way or the other. A comedy with some horror, such as most of the above examples of Shaun of the Dead, Ghostbusters, and Gremlins, or a horror with some comedic or slapstick elements, such as Sam Raimi’s work. The Frighteners shows that an even mix of half and half is clumsy.

By: Primal

Primal — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:28:17 +0000

I’ll paraphrase George Carlin in saying that you can find humor in anything. Whether it is horrific or not there is a joke in there somewhere. To even question that humor should be excluded to another genre is ridiculous.

Not every horror film can be The Ring or The Exorcist. It’s these kinds of horror films that keep many filmgoers away from the horror genre. I would even say that the horror-comedy subgenre is the best gateway-film into the horror genre.

By: CL

CL — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:28:37 +0000

Absolutely, almost every single time. Every horror made in the 80’s and being remade now, etc. Fright Night and Fright Night 2, come on! This is not to say that there isn’t a place for a legitimate psychological thriller/ghost story type tale but the more supernatural the more it has to have some sense of humor.

By: Nat Almirall

Nat Almirall — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 11:34:28 +0000

I think most of us can agree that a good movie is a good movie no matter how well it does at the box office. Shaun of the Dead may have “underperformed,” but it’s still a good movie and a decent mix of the comedy/horror genres. On the other hand, I think Gremlins is mediocre, but it made millions.

Genre doesn’t determine whether a movie’s good or bad; you could just as easily ask if horror/romance movies should ever mix, or splatter/buddy-cup movies, or family/snuff films…regardless of what genre they fall into, some of those movies are going to be good, some of them will not.

By: steve

steve — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:42:57 +0000

I can only comment on Shaun of the Dead as I have not seen the other recent comedy/horror films but I don’t think that it underperformed in any way at all, I thought it a very good film on all levels.

By: mitch

mitch — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 13:12:56 +0000

FUCK no

By: Jurassicalien

Jurassicalien — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 04:28:57 +0000

Part of the problem, at least I think, is that many horror/comedy films tend to be “counter programing” the weekend they come out. “Drag me to Hell” came out against “UP”. “Slither” came out against “Ice Age 2″ and Shaun of the Dead was a british film, I live in Los Angeles and I even had to hunt for a theater playing Shaun. This week, Zombieland IS the big film opening, all the other films are counter programing or playing in art houses. Now the argument can be that horror fans have no interest in the big films like “Up” or “Ice Age 2″. But I find that most people are more well rounded and will go see the big film and the horror film.

Also in the 80’s, films stayed in movie theaters ALOT longer. Now a days movies come and go from week to week, sometimes if you don’t see a movie the week it’s out, you won’t see it again till it’s on DVD. And with “Gremlins” it was produced by Spielberg post E.T. so I have to image the studio really pushed that when it came out. And “Ghostbusters” had Bill Murray post Stripes and Caddyshack, and Dan Akroyd post “Trading Places” and “Blues Brothers.” Most horror comedies coming out today tend to have well known genre actors or little known character actors or comics.

I do think Horror Comedy can work, and even if they don’t make bank I think those films are still great if done right. But if the issue is Box Office, I think the studio needs to push horror/comedies as the film of the week, and not just counter programing.

By: Alex

Alex — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 17:18:22 +0000

horror is sometimes so over the top that you have to laugh at it. Personally, most horror mosvies are part comedies to me weather they are trying to be or not. It just comes with it. Not in a sadistic way but just because its funny to watch a death scene that could never happen (eg final destination) or some over the top antagonist character (freddy vs jason was hilarious). i think thats where the whole mixing came from in the first place. horror became a parody of itself.

By: Ian

Ian — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:25:08 +0000

By: Reed-tard

Reed-tard — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:02:10 +0000

Well, Justice. Zombieland isn’t excactly a mix of genres, more like a comedy taking an element (zombies) from a genre, and nothing more.

By: Reed-tard

Reed-tard — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 13:01:15 +0000

Not really. I enjoyed Army of Darkness because it was funny, not because it was scary (which i can’t remember it ever was). I have never liked Sam Raimis humouer, and though Drag Me To Hell sucked. But I love Simon Peggs movies, and he does it much better. His movies usually shift from funny scenes to serious scenes, unlike Raimis.