Anyone else think modern horror movies are overlit?

I think alot of the look of older horror was not only to cover up cheesy effects, but due also to the fact that the super low budgets in a time of film not digital had the producers using low end short ends of film stock for begetting reasons and not being able to afford enough lighting to expose correctly. It's easy to look at the budgets they had then from this digital age and think it directly correlates to the micro budgets we use now, but the comparatively larger numbers don't directly correlate due to the cost of stock and processing. Not all choices in the image are made for artistic reasons :)
 
harmonica44 said:
Drag Me To Hell was low budget?
Click to expand...

Well, you know, lower that what he usually makes (or what we can afford). The story has very few, simple locations which are repeatedly used: A bank, a mansion, the protagonist's house, a cemetery.

I've seen other reviews refer to it as "low-budget," but according to Wikipedia, it cost $30 mil.

So maybe not that low! :no:
 
I was doing research on how to shoot a night scene during the day. I looked at examples and they all look a lot like how a lot of these horror movies look at night, with a similar overlit look. Could that be it? With new digital computer technology, a lot of filmmakers are shooting their night scenes during the day, and and it shows in the final result?
 
Day for night shots often look wrong as there is too much light coming from too many directions, because sunlight bounces off of everything. True night shots usually have light coming from one, or only a few, directions.

Lighting at night is hard. Blue filters on lights alone won't do it. I really admire well-lit night shots that don't look like well-lit night shots!
 
But some modern movies do have that look at night where there is light coming from all directions, or too much direction. That's one thing I hated about the Nightmare on Elm Street remake.
 
I pulled off a pretty convincing day-for-night in my silent film, because it's a black-and-white movie and I just darkened parts of the shot with mattes. There were also streetlights in the shots, and I added glow to make them look like they were on. It looks great.
 
Cool. I might have to try that. I just hope I can do it with the ACS 5.5 and not have to order a completely separate program for it, out of my budget. I'm looking into it now.
 
I did that shot all in FCP. It was easy.

AE, will of course, do a fantastic job. I got tired of pushing up against the limits of FCP, which although it can do quite a lot in the effects department, especially with plug-ins, it's typically much more time-consuming and labor-intensive than to accomplish the same thing (or better) in AE. No comparison.
 
2001 Productions said:
This is just a guess, but I think home video changed the paradigm. Well, actually I know it shifted several paradigms.

In the old days (pre-home video), if you wanted to see a movie you went to the theater. There you sat in the dark, fixated on what was happening onscreen. As long as the projection equipment was properly calibrated for the space, even the smallest point of light drew your attention.
Click to expand...

I think that's right on. I've recently set up a projection system in my home for watching movies on blu ray. It's an entirely different experience from watching on TV. When you turn the lights down, and your entire field of vision fills with the image...

I also think it has something to do with the proliferation of CG. Often, in the past (similar to what happened with Jaws), filmmakers were compelled to shoot darker scenes, with more left to the imagination. As I understand it, this is also how the noir aesthetic emerged. Now filmmakers can show whatever they can imagine, for better or worse.
 
Last edited:
spinner said:
I saw Drag Me To Hell. 2 hours of my life I'll never get back.


Evil Dead 1, however, love it.

The Raimi brothers are legend at Michigan State University.



-- spinner :cool:
Click to expand...

You must take your horror very seriously. I much prefer Evil Dead 2 (and Drag Me to Hell) to Evil Dead 1. Granted the original has a certain scrappy energy that comes from being made by kids on a shoestring. But 2 feels like the product of someone with vision, someone getting comfortable and having fun.

Drag Me to Hell was a blast. I've seen it 3 or 4 times now, and think it's great. Fun, gleefully mean, and just the right length. Ah well, to each his own...
 
I like Drag Me to Hell and Evil Dead 2 better. But it's not the fact that I am not in a dark theater, to think of movies being too bright. I recently watched the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre on DVD and that one is scary dark, and not near as bright as a lot of modern ones.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top