Horror movies: At Home or in the Theatre?

[Kevin]

How are horror movies the most effective for you, at home in the dark and by yourself or in a movie theatre where you get the energy of the crowd around you?

I kind of prefer at home. Depending on the film I also find them more effective alone. Which is weird because the few times I have watched horror films in the cinema I've gotten really scared. But at the same time that can get ruined too easily by some jerks making fun of the film and killing the mood for you.

So, how do you like your horror to be served?

[Andrew Forbes]

Definitely at home. I can more easily control the atmosphere and, as you said, mood-killing laughs are more easily avoided. I also find that most theaters have the audio volume set too high for my comfort, causing musical stabs to be especially unpleasant.

[JoshRode]

During the movie, I find it more intense at home; however, after the movie it's much easier to re-acclimate to reality at home. At the theater, there's always that feeling of being watched or followed in the dark, empty-ish parking lot, and the sense that things aren't back to normal usually follows me home.

[mavrach]

Home. Yes horror movies are probably the ones most prone to theater hecklers - "Don't go in there stupid!!!" But for me most horror movies fail to actually be scary, see my avatar for the scariest movie image I've ever seen. But if you're talking about one of the majority of crappy horror flicks based around jump scares, it's probably best to be in a theater where at least the energy of the people around you might carry it a little better.

[Dunnyman]

see Bryan Pope's avatar for the scariest movie image I've ever seen.

Fixed.

Home for sure. At the theater, it can't be too scary because if some insane, hatchet wielding nutjob is in there, he's gonna get a few more people before I'm in his range because I always sit in the middle, and I'll notice the bodies and get the hell out of there. But at home? He might just be behind my damn sofa and at any second I could be chopped into Alpo....way scarier that way. Plus you always have the possibility of the phone ringing, or your pet jumping up on you during a really scary scene and having an immediate heart attack.

[Paul Kile]

Definitely at home. The first time I saw the William Castle classic House on Haunted Hill was when I was 10 years old - in someone else's house - ALONE. This transpired one summer because I was going to watch it with my older sister and some of her friends, but at the last minute they all decided to go see The Haunting (1963), playing at the local theater. We didn't have a TV in our summer cabin, but one of my sister's friends said I could watch the movie on their TV. This was back in the day when a 10-year-old kid could be left alone and nobody would bat an eye. My Dad would come over every half hour or so and see how I was doing, but basically I was left alone for the bulk of the movie.

Another good situation is to see a horror flick at home with a friend or two. That's how I saw most of the classic horror and Sci-Fi films when my buddy Tom Abbatiello and I would get together on Saturday nights to watch "Chiller Theater" on Channel 9 in New York. At the time they were showing all the classic 1930's-40's Universal releases, the 1950's Universal-International Bug-Eyed-Monster movies, and occasionally Plan 9 from Outer Space, perfect fodder for a couple of prepubescent yoots to enjoy on Saturday night.

[Bryan Pope]

see Bryan Pope's avatar for the scariest movie image I've ever seen.

Fixed.

I'm watching you, Dunnyman. Always watching you.

The last truly unsettling movie experience I had was the first two acts of "House of the Devil." I mean... damn. And that was in my office, during my lunch hour, in broad daylight. I hate to think how I'd have handled it alone in my living room late at night.

[stypee]

It depends really. I don't have a great sound system like a used to so some of the effect is taken away. If it's something I really, really love like for example "The Exorcist" than of course it's something I'd enjoy watching at home. Of course that film is 38 years old.

There are moments where it's a heck of allot of fun seeing a horror flick in the theatre. I'll never forget seeing "The Strangers" in a packed house back in NY. The sound was perfect and the audience was glued to the screen. They're reactions were actually allot of fun and it was minimal on the yelling at the screen crap.

So I'd have to say I'm 50/50 on home and cinema..

[Burson_Fouch]

Although my preference is to watch a film in a good theatre with a properly behaved audience, as far as horror films go I'd rather view them at home. This is due to the fact that modern horror films generally get butchered for theatrical release in order to achieve that dreaded PG-13 rating so that the studios can get the teenagers in the theatre.

[stypee]

Although my preference is to watch a film in a good theatre with a properly behaved audience, as far as horror films go I'd rather view them at home. This is due to the fact that modern horror films generally get butchered for theatrical release in order to achieve that dreaded PG-13 rating so that the studios can get the teenagers in the theatre.

When are these idiots going to learn PG-13 is more of a curse than a profit margin?

[mkiker2089]

Here's the thing about horror movies, they are only as scary as you make them. Once someone is old enough to know what balancing a checkbook means then nothing on a screen in front of them is comparable to real life. There some sort of switch in the brain that throws. Well I had an ex who was scared to death at suspense movies, so not everyone has the switch. She claimed nightmares for a week from Shutter Island... Anyway the point is in the theatre you'll usually end up with the crowd that cracks jokes and tries to be "tough." Those old enough to understand that tough has nothing to do with a movie theatre will find the experience highly annoying.

So, ideal world = movie theatre
real world = horror at home

[mkiker2089]

Although my preference is to watch a film in a good theatre with a properly behaved audience, as far as horror films go I'd rather view them at home. This is due to the fact that modern horror films generally get butchered for theatrical release in order to achieve that dreaded PG-13 rating so that the studios can get the teenagers in the theatre.

When are these idiots going to learn PG-13 is more of a curse than a profit margin?

Maybe never. As the studios are abandoning the theatre the pg-13 theatrical run is more of a scape goat or perhaps quick cash grab. The real money is home cinema be it cable, internet, or physical media. They save the "unrated" version for that. They don't even have to pay a second MPAA fee because home video is pretty much open game for anything.

Theatres are dead, we may as well mourn them now and get it over with. They may come back as niche items but will never be relevant again like they were in the 80s.

[hoytereden]

Definitely at home. The first time I saw the William Castle classic House on Haunted Hill was when I was 10 years old - in someone else's house - ALONE. This transpired one summer because I was going to watch it with my older sister and some of her friends, but at the last minute they all decided to go see The Haunting (1963), playing at the local theater. We didn't have a TV in our summer cabin, but one of my sister's friends said I could watch the movie on their TV. This was back in the day when a 10-year-old kid could be left alone and nobody would bat an eye. My Dad would come over every half hour or so and see how I was doing, but basically I was left alone for the bulk of the movie.


Another good situation is to see a horror flick at home with a friend or two. That's how I saw most of the classic horror and Sci-Fi films when my buddy Tom Abbatiello and I would get together on Saturday nights to watch "Chiller Theater" on Channel 9 in New York. At the time they were showing all the classic 1930's-40's Universal releases, the 1950's Universal-International Bug-Eyed-Monster movies, and occasionally Plan 9 from Outer Space, perfect fodder for a couple of prepubescent yoots to enjoy on Saturday night.

At home, for sure.
The first film that scared the you-know-what out of me was The Thing From Another World that I saw at my Aunt's house during a summer in the late '50s. Watched it late at night after she went to bed. It didn't help matters that this was on a farm in the middle of nowhere. Good times!

[Andrew Forbes]

The first film that scared the you-know-what out of me was The Thing From Another World that I saw at my Aunt's house during a summer in the late '50s. Watched it late at night after she went to bed. It didn't help matters that this was on a farm in the middle of nowhere. Good times!

Vegetable farm?

[Attrage]

Home. The vast overwhelming majority of horror films I love are older ones anyway, from the 70's to the late 80's, so I have no choice but to watch them at home anyway. Plus, the first real horror film I saw was Alien. I watched it on an old black and white TV in a musty old apartment late at night while a howling windstorm blew outside. Perfect.

[hoytereden]

The first film that scared the you-know-what out of me was The Thing From Another World that I saw at my Aunt's house during a summer in the late '50s. Watched it late at night after she went to bed. It didn't help matters that this was on a farm in the middle of nowhere. Good times!

Vegetable farm?

Actually it was in southern Maryland and was a Tobacco farm! I remember being terribly confused while watching the movie because at every commercial break the announcer would say "We'll return in a minute to The Thing starring James Arness." Now this was at a time when Gunsmoke was hugely popular and being a preteen who loved westerns I knew who Marshall Dillon was but try as I might I couldn't spot him anywhere! Later I would find out that he was the title role. Also, the fact that Arness was not particuarly proud of the fact that he played such a part in his pre-star days he didn't go out of his way to acknowledge it.