Blaze of Gory (In production).

Blaze of Gory is a new horror anthology that hopes to be completed around October. The project fell into horror filmmaker and executive producer of the anthology David V G Davies' lap last summer when he was presented with a short story written by a twelve year old girl when he was looking for short stories for a horror blog he was hoping to start. The story he received was so advanced and creepy that he insisted to both the writer and her parent that the story has to be made into a movie.

The writer gave him some more stories, and in no time at all David had turned them into nine great screenplays. The writer loved the idea of having her worked turned into movies, and gave the green light to find nine different directors to tackle the stories.

Each of the stories is horrific in every way possible. From the outset, David knew that the stories were definitely going to create a huge problem when it came to censorship, but he is determined and knows this project has to be made.

In January, David V G Davies directed the first story that captured his interest. He flew his cast and crew out to a remote cabin in Norway where they shot for two days, and it was a great experience. Currently, out of the nine stories, four are being edited, with three currently in production all over the UK, and one being filmed in New York.

The final movie will run for around two hours as both David and the writer have linked each story with a wraparound story. They also intend to release some of the shorts separately as trailers of the full project. The cast and crew are very talented, and this movie is definitely going to be something to look out for, especially as they have the unique selling point of the stories being written by such a young talent.

I for one am incredibly interested in seeing what the writer and cast and crew can come up with. This is certainly one to watch out for. I will be sure to keep you all updated.

Many thanks to David V G Davies for the information on this exciting project!!

Darkest regards......Dani.

Chromeskull: Laid to Rest 2 (2011).

This movie picks up exactly where the original Laid to Rest left off, with Chromeskull's face melting, and two of the people he was attempting to kill getting away from him once more. We then find out that Chromeskull isn't alone, as a team come and collect his dying body and take him away for some reconstructive surgery which plays out over the opening credits. After a member of Chromeskull's company goes out and ties up some loose ends, the movie fast forwards a few months, and again, all hell is about to break loose as Chromeskull chooses another victim for his sick games.

The great thing about Chromeskull: Laid to Rest 2 is that it took a completely different path to the original movie and doesn't retread any old ground like most sequels do. Although it does go a little way into explaining what the character of Chromeskull is all about, it also creates a neat little story around all of the carnage. The story is more well developed than the original movie, and does actually contain a lot of emotion, which goes a long way towards caring for the characters.

The kills are incredible yet again. Everything looks so real and painful. The gore factor is high, which after the first movie, is to be expected, and believe me, this movie does not disappoint.There are also a number of different weapons used, as well as Chromeskulls trademark knives, which liven up the graphic death scenes. Never has death looked so painful as it does in the Laid to Rest movies.

The characters this time are incredibly well realised, but again it is Nick Principe's Chromeskull who dominates the movie. He really has made the character his own, and even though his face is obscured throughout most of the movie, he conveys emotion incredibly well, and comes across as even more intense and scary than he does in the first film.

Chromeskull: Laid to Rest 2 is so much bigger in scope than the previous film, and it really does work. Opening Chromeskull's universe up but leaving the viewer with even more questions was a very clever way to breathe even more life into the story, and it has definitely left this viewer wanting more. A very solid and enjoyable slasher movie with one of the most destructive and efficient killers in the history of cinema.

Darkest regards......Dani.

The beginning, re-birth and over saturation of the zombie movie.

It has been 82 years since arguably the first zombie movie, White Zombie, was released (of course, discounting 1910’s Frankenstein, and 1919’s The Cabinet of Dr.Caligari). Since that time things haven’t changed much. Back in those days, Voodoo played a big part in the zombie movie and zombies weren’t the living dead that have become synonymous with today’s movies. They were slaves to a voodoo practitioners whims, doing the bidding, be it good or bad, without question, neither dead nor alive. Revolt of the Zombies followed in 1936, but failed to live up to the precedent set by the genuinely creepy White Zombie.




A few more films featuring Voodoo and lumbering slaves were released to little or no acclaim, and it wasn’t until 1968 that a man from Pittsburgh, George A Romero, would change the face of the zombie movie forever. Upon it’s release, Night of the Living Dead was heavily criticized as it featured many violent scenes and cannibalism, something which had never been shown on screen before. The movie was surprisingly also ignored by the majority of critics, which given it’s cult status today is incredibly surprising. Gone were the voodoo elements, the hypnotized slaves who did the bidding of their masters. In their place were flesh eating ghouls who would not stop unless their brain was destroyed, usually by a well placed bullet to the head.

In 1979, a movie entitled Tombs of the Blind dead, featuring satanic Knights Templar who have risen from the grave, was released. The movie was the first in the Blind Dead series, and although many consider them to be zombie movies, the director Amando De Ossorio objected to the claims insisting that his undead Knights Templar more resembled mummies and that the Templars were not mindless corpses, as zombies were. The movie was incredibly creepy and atmospheric, and as the Knights Templar are blind, many of the death scenes are filled with suspense with the victim trying to remain as quiet as possible so as not to be detected by the lumbering Templars.
 



George Romero revisited the zombie genre for Dawn of the Dead after being persuaded by Dario Argento to continue the plight of humanity against the undead. Romero decided to move the majority of the action this time to the Monroeville mall. This time, the violence, action and gore were all increased to great effect, but Romero also included comedy in the movie, which I feel really didn’t fit. This is no more apparent when numerous zombies are squirted with water and have custard pies thrown in their faces. Dario Argento rectified this with having final say over the European cut of the movie, removing the comedy element therefore making it a much darker and pessimistic movie. Other things prevalent in Romero movies were the struggle the humans went through against their undead foes, and incredibly biting social commentary.





The Italians took note of the zombie boom Romero’s second film had created, and decided to get in on the act with a slew of carbon copies, something that the Italian film industry was incredibly adapt at. A few Italian movies did stand out from the crowd though, most noticeably Lucio Fulci’s Zombie (AKA Zombie 2, Zombie Flesh Eaters). Again, the movie was frowned upon because of extreme violence, but what many don’t remember is that Elisa Briganti and Dardano Sachetti (the writers of Zombie) took the zombie movie back to it’s Voodoo roots, although this is only hinted at in film. Nevertheless, it goes some way as to letting the viewer know why the dead are rising from the grave. Zombie plays out like a nightmarish gore fest, with Fulci’s trademark eye trauma missing from the UK cut. It also features probably one of the strangest scenes in zombie movie history, where a zombie attacks and fights a shark, tearing flesh from the animal. It made no sense whatsoever, but is certainly impressive nevertheless.



  
Burial Ground (Night of Terror, The Zombie Dead) is another Italian zombie movie worthy of a mention, featuring maggot and worm infested zombies attacking a mansion, some incredibly amazing deaths, and featuring zombies that are more intelligent than the usual shambling corpses. This is shown by the fact that the zombies use tools to kill, as opposed to their hands and jaws. The character of Michael is particularly memorable. He seems to want an incestuous relationship with his mother, and when he succumbs to the creatures invading the house, the scene where his mother stands transfixed while Michael takes a bite of his mothers breast is cringeworthy and uncomfortable viewing.
 



Fulci returned to the zombie genre again and again, most noticeably with the giallo themed slasher movie The House by the Cemetery, the nightmarish Lovecraftian nightmare The City of the Living Dead (also known as The Gates of Hell) and probably his most celebrated zombie movie, The Beyond. The zombies in all three of these movies were incredibly different than what had come before. Dr. Freudstein from House by the Cemetery was a knife wielding surgeon who harvested his victims for body parts. The zombies in The City of the Living Dead had supernatural powers, being able to teleport. They also seemed incredibly keen to crush the skulls of their victims, never feeding on them. The zombies in the beyond also seem to only serve one purpose, and that is to chase the characters played by Catriona MacColl and David Warbeck into hell.

Then in 1984, Romero released what I consider to be the epitome of greatness in the zombie sub genre, Day of the Dead. The zombies in this movie were rotting corpses, foul rabid creatures that seemed to have the strength to tear men apart with their bare hands. The movie is incredibly pessimistic with some of the human characters surpassing the viciousness of the undead. It is an incredibly emotional movie, and also shows an evolution in zombie behavior with the captured zombie Bub, who seems to remember certain things from his past. The violence is also much more shocking and brutal, again containing some incredible effects from the always great Tom Savini.




1985 saw the release of Return of the Living Dead, a zombie comedy that gave a reason why the dead were coming back to life. The movie has it’s roots in a novel of the same name, written by Night of the Living Dead co-writer John Russo. Although it is nowhere near what John Russo wrote, the movie is a brilliant exercise in gore and humour. This movie is also the first to feature running zombies, something which was bought back for the movie Zombieland, and many more zombie movies of the 00’s.


When 1990 came, Tom Savini did the incredible and made a remake that actually built on the previous movie to make something all the more fascinating. Night of the Living Dead marked Tom Savini’s directorial debut, and was an incredibly fresh take on the zombie tale. It also had differing plot points to the original Night of the Living dead, which made for interesting viewing.

Peter Jackson in 1992 created what is arguably the goriest zombie movie ever made. Braindead (Dead Alive) was an amazing splatstick movie, coupling humor with extreme gore. The modified lawnmower scene towards the end of the movie is an incredibly joyous scene where the floor and walls are flooded with blood and limbs are flying in all directions. Amazingly, the movie was a commercial failure upon it’s release, but found it’s home upon home video where horror fans loved every minute of the bloodletting. There is also a little nod to Braindead in Peter Jackson's King Kong. When the crew are on their way to skull island, they are below the decks, and you can see numerous cargo boxes stamped with “Beware, Rat Monkeys.” An interesting touch to an otherwise derivative and overlong exercise in tedium.

It wasn’t until the release of the remake of Dawn of the Dead in 2004 that the zombie genre enjoyed another bump in popularity. It managed to take everything we loved about the original and increase the tension, horror and gore impressively. Admittedly, I was rather disappointed that the zombies could run, but in the end, it was something different, and made escape from the flesh hungry hordes even less possible. Other movies that stand out in the 00’s are Dead Snow, and incredible throwback to 80’s gore movies, and the french effort La Horde, which is incredibly brutal and well worth a viewing. 

Which brings us to the present day. It doesn’t seem like a week goes by without another onslaught of direct-to-dvd zombie movies hitting the shelves. I hate to be the one to say this, but it seems like the zombie film is being flogged to death. It doesn’t seem like many original zombie films have come out for a long time. Zombieland decided to play on humor and the relationships between the characters rather than zombie horror. The Walking Dead seems to be more interested in showing 40 minutes of conversation rather than zombie threat and action. The over saturation is killing the sub genre. But when it is done right, it can still shock, surprise and blow the viewer away.

Take 2012 effort Before Dawn directed by one half of the team that run the Leeds Zombie Fest, and star of British soap opera Dominic Brunt. The story is incredibly simple, featuring a couple who are on the verge of divorce going away to a cottage in the hills of Yorkshire to try and repair things. While out on a run, Joanne, the wife is attacked by a rabid zombie (and yes, they do run) and slowly goes through a terrible change. The feeling of isolation and helplessness is incredible in this movie. It manages to be incredibly scary, whilst maintaining its heart and drawing you deep into the characters plight.

With the imminent release of World War Z, I really don’t know how to feel about the ongoing over saturation of the zombie genre. I am sure World War Z will go down well with the general public, but I myself will certainly be giving it a miss. The fact that the zombies are all CG creations, and the fact they seem to use each other to climb high structures, just seems to take things a little too far. I am sure I will end up seeing it, and I will not go as far as to say it is going to be a load of rubbish, but from the trailer, I can certainly see it is going to have to seriously impress me for me to take note.

As what happened in the late 70’s/early 80’s with the slasher movie, I am sure the zombie genre will keep on being milked for all it’s worth, with even teen comedies such as Warm Bodies featuring the undead, but not as we know them, to little effect. It may be selfish of us genre fans to hold creatures such as Vampires, Zombies and Werewolves in such high regard, but what the general public do not seem to understand is that these creatures have been with us for a long time, and to see them displayed in ways that completely betray the roots of what these creatures are, is tantamount to blasphemy. Let’s hope the over saturation does not switch the future generations of horror fans off the zombie genre, as it has been shown that amongst the trash, there are always diamonds. It just takes the viewer to dig a little to find these gems. At least there are companies out there who continue to pick up the classic zombie movies for future generations to see. Just like a zombie, the zombie sub genre will return from the dead again and again, no matter how many times mainstream cinema inadvertently puts a bullet in it, or every time an indie filmmaker makes a carbon copy zombie film, the zombie sub genre will rise again, bringing fresh meat to the table to impress all of the undead fanatics out there. Until then, we will sit and wait, festering like the corpses in the movies we love, lumbering from one piece of trash to the next, until we find the next jewel in the crown.

Darkest regards......Dani.

The New York Ripper (Lo Squartatore Di New York) 1982.

Whilst not as artistically developed as Fulci's other horror movies, The New York Ripper is a sleazy gore soaked ride into New York. It is an ugly, blood soaked movie that revels in it's sadistic cruelty. The main difference in this movie, compared to Fulci's other horror movies, is that the setting and execution in The New York Ripper are incredibly realistic.

A crazed killer is murdering women in incredibly brutal ways, and the only clue the police have is that the killer speaks with a voice reminiscent of a cartoon duck. A grizzled detective heads the case, and a woman who survived an attack by The New York Ripper gets closer to discovering his identity, and it could be someone she already knows.

The gore is a huge part of what makes The New York Ripper such a special film. The victims aren't stabbed or killed quickly as in most movies. They are sliced and mutilated in particularly gruesome ways, all the while the killer is quacking like a duck! The FX are incredibly well done, and because it's a Fulci movie, all the gore is shown in beautiful close up.

The plot twists and turns throughout the running time, with many dead ends unfairly given, along with people who you suspect to be the killer turning up dead. The film certainly doesn't play by any rules whatsoever, and that sometimes comes across as frustrating and disappointing. Not only is this film a gore spattered slasher, it also has elements of the Giallo amongst the blood shed and perversity.

There seems to be an incredibly strong link between the murders and sexual desire, as all of the victims are promiscuous and attractive, and there are also many close ups of lips, eyes and the cuts and stab wounds the killer is creating. The link between an obsession with murder and sex is further created with some amazing lingering camera shots of the killers knife. There is a distinct similarity between Peeping Tom and The New York Ripper, as we are forced to view these killings from the point of view of the murderer, making us feel as though we are involved in the slaughter and mutilation going on in the movie.

I still feel that this movie is still as powerful as it was back in 1982. The ways in which the killer brutalizes his victims, and the strange way in which he communicates is truly chilling. The sexual aspect of the movie is also more prominent than it would be in a movie of today, and that only adds to the exploitation elements that are alive in this movie.

The New York Ripper is one of Fulci's most disturbing, violent, intelligent and well directed films, and certainly deserves to be seen by everyone because not only does it display a lot of sickening and perverted subject matter and violence, it also is an intelligently crafted movie, and shows New York as a sleaze filled city of sin. What more can you ask for from an exploitation movie?

Darkest regards......Dani.

The ABCs of Death (2013).

Horror anthologies never fail to entertain me. ABCs of Death is the latest in a resurgence of anthology horror movies, and with each of the directors (one for each of the twenty six shorts) given $5000 and total artistic freedom, there is something for everyone here.

Some of the shorts aren't as interesting as others, but you really don't have time to get bored, as each short is on for no longer than ten minutes. On first viewing, the movies unpredictability is what makes it so exciting. Anything from arthouse cinema to claymation is utilized in the shorts, and no segment is even slightly similar.

ABCs of Death is a difficult movie to review. There is no plot, nothing linking the stories together apart from each of them featuring death, and each one begins and ends with a shot of the colour red. I am going to give a short review for each segment, with no spoilers for those who haven't seen it.

A is for Apocalypse.

A shocking beginning, placing the viewer amidst the chaos from the very first minute. Some brilliant FX and gore too.


B is for Bigfoot.

A strange, EC comics style short that is touching and shows that bad guys always get whats coming to them.

C is for Cycle.

A strange Groundhog Day style short. An interesting concept developed into a cool short film, again featuring a nice bit of gore.

D is for Dogfight.

The most touching segment. An incredibly well choreographed short shot entirely in slow motion. Definitely one of my favourites.

E is for Exterminate.

A poor CGI spider did nothing to enhance this story, but it is still enjoyable and funny, with a memorable ending.

F is for Fart.

The most bizarre and out-there short. I didn't enjoy this one. It came across as silly and juvenile, but it might appeal to others for various reasons.

G is for Gravity.

Another strange short, and one that might take a little thinking about. Another interesting concept that is filmed from a first person perspective. Why you would go surfing on that day is beyond me though. There is no swell whatsoever. But that really does add to the story. 

H is for Hydro-Electric Diffusion.

A weird tale, coming across like a more adult Loony Toons cartoon. I enjoyed it's weirdness and it did make me laugh at it's madcap humor.

I is for Ingrown. 

A disturbing short. This one was rather dark, and a contrast to what has gone before. it shows that death isn't always quick in horror.

J is for Jidai-Geki.

Another crazy short. This is humorous and out there, but works incredibly well. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever, and is all the more funny because of it. Some of the shots are beautiful and there is also some crazy action with eyeballs that made me smile.

K is for Klutz.

The first animated short. Again it is humorous, but also ends up being rather dark. It may also seem a little childish to some, but I found it entertaining.

L is for Libido.

This tale was rather sick and disturbing. Featuring a couple of sick deaths and lots of boy fluids, this again is a strict contrast to what came before.

M is for Miscarriage.

This short lasts no longer than a minute, and is direct, if not a little disappointing. It still sent a chill down my spine though.

N is for Nuptials.

Another short filled with hilarity. The talking bird is certainly the star of this short. The ending is expected, but it still entertains.

O is for Orgasm.

Another strange short. The french call the orgasm Le petit morte, and this short shows many abstract images of both sex and death, all bathed in colors that bring Argento to mind. There is something else that will bring the Giallo to mind, but I will leave that to discover for yourselves.

P is for Pressure.

A sickening segment. One that shows the length people will go to for money. Not nice at all.

Q is for Quack.

I loved this one! A funny, shocking farce that is brilliantly played out. Also features a duck!!

R is for Removed.

A gory short. Something is taken from someone, and he uses what was stolen to get revenge. Genius and shocking. The ending is strange but fitting too.

S is for Speed.

A grindhouse style short, and one that again is filled with action. An interesting commentary on death pursuing it's victim and nothing being able to stop it.

T is for Toilet.

A claymation short, and an incredibly shocking one at that. Nice twist ending too, with some brilliant gore.

U is for Unearthed.

A first person vampire tale. Shot extremely well and coming across as creepy. This is vampires done right!

V is for Vagitus.

A sci-fi action short that features psychic mutants and a machine gun toting mech. Very different than what has come before, the short screams comic book from every frame.

W is for WTF.

A crazy, out there short featuring, amongst other things a killer walrus and zombie clowns. Another one of my favorites.

X is for XXL.

Gory, sickening and probably the most well developed tale out of them all. The ending is shocking too, and takes self mutilation to a whole new level.

Y is for Youngbuck.

A sickening tale of revenge. One scene nearly had me running to the bathroom. The payoff is definitely deserved and welcomed.

Z is for Zetsumetsu.

An incredibly over the top segment. A giant penis that shoots rice and has a blade protruding from the end. Very out there, but really well done, coming over like a messed up propaganda video.

This movie really does have something for anyone. It certainly has re-watch value, as a lot is lost on the first viewing owing to the differing nature of each short. I recommend this to anyone with even a passing interest in the bizarre, strange or horrific. While none of the shorts are really scary, most of them are twisted and shocking and some are so insane that you just have to go along for the ride.

Darkest regards......Dani.

The Shining (1980).

The Shining is one of the most over-rated, slow and boring pieces of cinema out there. In my opinion, because Kubrick didn't include any of the character development or back stories to the characters, the movie becomes completely devoid of having any of the human drama that is key to Stephen King's work. Why does Jack become a crazed killer? Is it just because a ghost tells him to kill his wife? The movie just comes across as a rather flat and boring haunted house film, albeit with some striking imagery that isn't explained and seems out of place.

There are some unintentionally hilarious and cringe inducing moments in the movie. The character of Wendy in the book is a strong willed, intelligent and resourceful woman. In the movie, she spends almost the entire duration whining and disheveled. By the time Jack has her trapped in the bathroom, I was hoping he would get to her to finally silence her, she grated on me that much.

Little Danny talking to his finger? That has to be one of the funniest things I have ever seen in a straight horror movie. I have no idea why Kubrick put this in the film. It is completely out of place, and certainly doesn't movie the story along in any way. As for Nicholson's Jack Torrence? I was under the assumption that he was a man who went SLOWLY insane. In the movie, from the very first shot of him, you can see he already has a few screws loose. The transformation from regular family man to crazed killer is never given any explanation, and happens so quickly in the movie, it doesn't come as a shock in any way. He over acts in every scene he is in, cancelling out any sense of horror that has been attempted (but also failed miserably) and just makes things even more laughable.

Just imagine if this film hadn't been made by Stanley Kubrick. Do you think it would be as universally praised as it is? I have the feeling it wouldn't. I feel critics and audiences would be out in droves, tearing the film down any way they could. But because everyone likes to analyze and read more into Kubrick's work than what is actually there, the film is unfairly held on a pedestal. No other director would have gotten away with making this movie. Only Kubrick.

Kubrick stuffed this movie with cheap visual scares and cliched performances. It fails because he never left any room for the audience to use their imaginations. The ghosts all come across as harmless, preferring to stand there and converse/cackle at Jack rather than attack him.The film is also incredibly lacking in any type of subtlety. The Shining is pure style over substance, and no matter how many times I sit through it, I have never changed my mind. The ending is a joke. Why, when there is such a huge hotel that would have been the perfect place for a cat and mouse chase, does the director decide to take the finale outside into a maze and have the main protagonist freeze to death. It really does make no sense to me.

The Shining is easily the most overrated horror movie in the entire genre. I am a huge horror fan, but this movie contains absolutely nothing that I would even dream of being horror. Kubrick obviously had no grasp of the horror genre, and just threw cliche after cliche at the audience, hoping that something would work. Unfortunately, nothing did.

In my opinion, anyone who say's The Shining is one of the greatest horror films ever made, obviously has no idea what horror really is.

Darkest regards......Dani.

Sexism and the horror genre.

I was recently directed to an article on Horrormovies.ca that gave a list of the top ten new masters of horror. People then began crying out "No women on the list"? I had to ask myself, was it really a case of sexism, or was it due to the fact that women still had to make a big name for themselves within the horror genre. Another question then came to me. What proportion of horror directors that are well liked are female? I would be the first to admit that horror is a male dominated industry, but to cry sexism because no females are included in a list of ten new masters of horror?

One could certainly argue that women be included just to represent their gender, but isn't that in itself sexist, giving women special mention because of their gender? Women on the list instantly jumped to female directors defenses, bringing up such talent as the Soska Sisters, Rachel Talalay, Karen Lam, Mary Lambert and Amy Holden Jones. Now I certainly don't mean this to sound harsh in any way, shape or form, but how could any of those be considered masters of a genre when they only have a handful of films between them. It seems that women don't seem to make a large impression in the horror genre, as opposed to their male counterparts. While there are many women working in the horror genre, many of them seem less keen to make an impression.

The fact that these female horror fans were reaching back to the 80's and 90's with movies like Slumber Party massacre (a classic slasher, but seriously not anything groundbreaking) and Freddy's dead (a joke of a sequel that turned Freddy into a fully blown parody of himself) shows just how scarce female filmmakers are.

I am certainly not disagreeing with the fact that there are many female directors out there who will make an impression, but so far, they only have a few movies between them and can't really be considered for a list showcasing 10 new masters of horror. Admittedly, the inclusion of Pascal Laugier on the list was rather silly, as he himself only has 3 movies to his name. There are many female directors in the horror genre, but you cannot tell me they are as prolific as someone like John Carpenter for example.

As for people who state the horror genre itself as being sexist and misogynistic, do you even watch horror? A huge percentage of horror movies contain what is known as 'The final girl', and admittedly, while she has been reduced to a screaming half undressed ravaged woman, they gain empowerment against their usually male persuers, and manage to destroy them.

Meir Zarchi's I Spit on your Grave is another film that is looked down on by both sexes in the horror genre. In that movie, originally titled Day of the Woman, the female character is repeatedly raped by a group of country folk who seem to take a dislike to her being from a more civilized area of America. The rape scenes are filmed with such emotion, not focusing on the forced sex, but the look of horror on actress Camille Keaton's face, that it is hard not to identify with her. She then gains a strength and takes revenge on each of her oppressors, the most famous of which is where she uses her sexuality to entice her victim to bathe with her, and then takes the very thing from him that he violated her with.

These movies constantly show women as strong, resilient and willed, and unable/unwilling to bow down to the males who are attempting to kill/torture/maim them, where as men are almost always seen as horny, drug taking selfish cowardly humans who think little of anything but getting drunk, laid and living.

Just because females aren't included in a top 10 list does not automatically make the list sexist. People claiming this would probably take exception if someone who was gay would complain that there are no gay people on the list, or a small person complaining there are no small people on the list. It is making an argument for arguments sake. In a few years, I am one hundred percent sure that there will be many more women in every top ten list of new horror directors, but as it stands, no woman has made a large enough contribution to horror to stand out as much as their contemporaries. Horror to me seems to be one of the most open minded genres out there, accepting of all genders and sexualities. Why make something that is so open seem so closed minded? I don't think we will ever be able to answer that question.

I love the horror genre as a whole. I don't mind if a male or female is directing, writing, handling the FX. If the film is good, people will take note. Just look at the acclaim Erica Summers and the Soska's are getting for their movies. It isn't because they are female. It is because they are making incredibly good films that have something to say, and appeal to horror fans in general. As long as directors of any gender continue to do this, the horror genre will continue to grow, and won't be held back by people making petty sexism arguments where they aren't valid.

Darkest regards......Dani.