Do fans no longer want likable characters I.E. Cabin Fever?

I want to care about somebody in the movie. It doesn't always have to be the "hero". In Frankenstein and King Kong the monsters aren't the bad guys. I would call the heros either. They are just misunderstood and that's why they end up doing bad things. In any story there should be those you care about. You want things to turn out good for them in the end.

There does seem to be that new breed of fan that goes to horror movies just to watch people die in different ways. That's something that I just don't understand. If there isn't anybody in the movie to root for, why care at all? How can you be emotionally invested in the characters and the story if you don't care about anybody in it? I guess it would be easier to watch them die it you don't care, but I don't want movies to be easy. I want them to make me feel things that I rarely do in real life. I want them to challange me to face fear and the uncomfortable feelings that we don't want to face in real life. To do that you have to be emotionally invested in the characters.

Well that just my opinion.

I've said it a million times. I prefer to care about the people in peril because it makes me care about their fates.

You mention Cabin Fever and I agree, but I will admit, that while I hated Paxton in Hostel at first, by the movie's end I was definitely rooting for him. That's an impressive thing.

I like realistic characters. When people act in a manner I feel unrealistic it takes me right out of a movie which is nigh-unforgiveable in a horror movie. If I am not into a movie it is virtually impossible for me to be scared by it. "Cabin Fever" is a mixed example because some of the characters were quite realistic (the mains) while others (Dennis aka "the pancake kid") were just out there. The other is that I would consider it a horror-comedy which does change things.

It is not that I want despicable characters necessarily. I just want characters whose actions are realistic. This means that they can be good, bad, or much better yet, somewhere in between. Caring about them is important, but I would say that finding them believeable is more important to me.

It depends on the movie for me. Sometimes I want to watch something for just pure dumb fun. Like the F13 films or much of the sci-fi channel stuff. In these I don't really want to connect with the characters or feel much if anything for them. I would find liking or caring for the characters in a F13 movie depressing.

I do definetly agree though that the very best horror films are the ones where the script takes the time to develop solid characters and the acting can support this.

It depends on the movie for me. Sometimes I want to watch something for just pure dumb fun. Like the F13 films or much of the sci-fi channel stuff. In these I don't really want to connect with the characters or feel much if anything for them. I would find liking or caring for the characters in a F13 movie depressing.

I do definetly agree though that the very best horror films are the ones where the script takes the time to develop solid characters and the acting can support this.

-"Gus Bjork"

Gus sir, I couldn't have said it better.

it's simple for me. if you have any hope of your film being scary, the main characters have to be indentifiable and it must be possible to sympathise with them (though they don't necessarily have to be likeable, a likeable character fulfills both of those). if you don't empathise with the characters in the film you won't feel scared for them. if you don't indentify with them you won't think... 'shit... that could be me.'

if the film isn't trying to be scary, then it's not an important thing to me. so long as they're believable characters then i'm okay with it. See No Evil was a solid horror film that didn't really have any likeable characters... but that kind of film doesn't need likeable characters.

all my favourite horror movies have characters i can identify or sympathise with though... so i voted yes.

it's simple for me. if you have any hope of your film being scary, the main characters have to be indentifiable and it must be possible to sympathise with them (though they don't necessarily have to be likeable, a likeable character fulfills both of those). if you don't empathise with the characters in the film you won't feel scared for them. if you don't indentify with them you won't think... 'shit... that could be me.'

if the film isn't trying to be scary, then it's not an important thing to me. so long as they're believable characters then i'm okay with it. See No Evil was a solid horror film that didn't really have any likeable characters... but that kind of film doesn't need likeable characters.

all my favourite horror movies have characters i can identify or sympathise with though... so i voted yes.

-"plagiarize"

How can it be called a horror film if it isn't trying to be scary? Isn't that what horror are all about?

That's what is so tough on these forums. All 'horror' seems stuck under the same umbrella. No other genre does this. I would consider myself a monster movie fan more than a horror fan. The most horrific things I can think of or see in a movie are people realistically, even sadistically, suffering. Something like Henry. Quite simply, I don't like to see them. I do enjoy the feeling of being scared, of suspense building to a payoff. But I don't like to be horrified. I see a difference. And I agree that the most succesful horror films are those in which you feel for the characters enough that they come alive. But is it feasible that all these films under the horror umbrella are scary?

We discuss Harryhausen here, Godzilla movies, Planet of the Apes, all sorts of stuff that would not be scary under any stretch of the imagination. And lets be honest, in this crowd, how many films out there actually scare us?

I've never had a film scare me, not that I can remember. But I do what them to try. I would guess that movies like Godzilla, Planet Of The Apes, Harryhausen movies and the rest were scary to younger aged fans. Godzilla and the Apes movie were more about social fears, fears of war and nukes. More than begining scary horror films are about what scares us. War, nukes, loss of control are all things that scare us, a movie can be about those things and not frighten us. For to be about those things and work, we must care about the people in the movies.

Of course in ever movie we need to care about the character in order for them to work. That's why dramas can be just as jerk-off boring as any sci-fi movie of the week. Cookie cutter troubled families, dad is dying of cancer and needs to reconcile with his gay son before Thanksgiving, quirky grandma and her wisdom, cynical goth sister's biting humor hides her delicate underbelly and grandpa hung himself in the barn.

I have no point in reference to this topic btw. It just got my blood boiling. Horror films getting looked down upon, sometimes with good reason, while it seems anybody attaching drama and social commentary on whatever unwatchable piece of shit road movie gets a free pass and screened at Sundunce.

I agree with the others here that say they need or want to care about somebody in a movie. Take House of 1000 Corpses for example. As much as I love the movie, I couldn't stand the four main victims. They came off as your average snotty college kid types and I couldn't wait for them to die. Including the one who almost survived.

How were we supposed to care about them? Did Zombie want us to root for the Firefly clan from the beginning? These are all things that don't make sense to me because there wasn't a clear "hero" in the film IMO. Anyway, that's just my 2 cents on the subject.

Thanks for your opinion, I'm glad I started this topic as I am learning a lot and being a budding screenwriter this is helpful.
I agree about House of 1000 corpses. I found it easier to watch as the victims were trying to get away and were innocents. Even if they were irritating and when they got killed it wasn't that bad. Where as with Cabin Fever the main characters start off by doing something heinous and then do other heinouos things and there is no one trying to do the right thing which would have created conflict which is nice in a movie. It was more a psychological study in behaviour than a movie.

As for the above comment about never being scared in a movie, that's unfortunate I have been scared by movies and that's what I look for in a supernatural or mad killler movie. But there are 2 kinds of being scared for me. The first is when I am scared on behalf of the characters and don't want bad things to happen to them. I feel a sense of relief if they escape. The other is movies that unnerve me and stick with me for days afterward. These are usually supernatural movies.
I think Evil Dead did both for me. But as a contrast, The Blair Witch project didn't unnerve me or scare me in any way. Blair Witch 2 where there were sympathetic characters in danger from demons or spirits scared me and that unnerved feeeling stayed with me.
I forgot about the jolts in movies where something awful happens unexpectantly or the killer just pops up. I like jolts as well.
Except the killer in the back of the car and the director frames the shot with the driver to screen right and lots of room for the killer to pop up on the left side.
Thanks

One of the main reasons I hate Eli Roth is his unlikable characters in both Cabin Fever and Hostel. Am I really supposed to care about some womanizing, testtosterone laden, collage douchebag who uses the word fa**ot every other sentance? These are the kind of people I want to see die when i was in highschool. His characters are so shallow and self involved that i really don't care what happens to them.
I remember reading an interview with Roth where he said that this is how people talk and act so get over it, but you have to even it out with some redeemable traits in your character.

I like to be able to empathize and fall in love with my characters. Some of the most gut wrenching moments I've seen on film happens when you fall in love with the character. If you can't like the character, then the deaths don't have an impact and you're sort of an impassive watcher.

Take "Jaws" for example and shark hunter Quint. Quint was one of the coolest characters you could ever meet. Then there's the whole scene where Quint and Richard Dryfus' character are compairing scars to each other and Quint tells his tale about the Annapolis.

You SYMPATHIZE with Quint like mad.

Quint's a survivor.

Then you know what happens to Quint?

He DIES.

Gets eaten by the shark.

When the great shark hunter is dead, you really fear for Chief Brody and the marine biologist (who's name is escaping me at the moment). If Quint can be wiped away so easily, what chance does Brody have? Not only does Quint's death have an emotional impact, it also makes you fear for the other two characters as well.

"Jaws", in my mind, is one of the scariest movies ever made, and it has some of the most memerable characters.

I remember reading an interview with Roth where he said that this is how people talk and act so get over it, but you have to even it out with some redeemable traits in your character.

-"Sick Nick"

What Eli-bubie forgets is, that's not how ALL people talk. And he's alienating at least 10% (or more; consult Kinsey) of his audience, either because they ARE queer (being one, I can use that term, thanks) or they have evolved socially and find that attitude tacky, if not actively offensive. The Nazis had some pretty off-color things to say about Jews - I wonder how he'd enjoy "authentic" WWII-Berllin era dialogue?

And Roth is not incapable of likeable characters - but in "Cabin Fever", the poor guy's an ineffectual weakling, and in "Hostel" he's a whiney prude and disappears about half-way in. Again, not a precedent - in "House of 1000 Corpses" the most likeable good guy is the first to get the chop.

Meanwhile, back at the subject (Great Topic, btw; thanks!), this business of less-than-lovable characters/heroes isn't a new thing. There are plenty of examples in the film noir movies of the '40s and '50s. In almost all of WIlliam Castle's movies, he populates the story with at least subtly nasty folks that it's hard to like; I certainly don't want ot hug and kiss any of the good guys in "Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things" or "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". At most in these things, we only sympathize because no one should be put through such ordeals (well, maybe a couple politicians). By the end of "Cannibal Holocaust", as the characters of the poor victims are revealed, I found myself actually kind of cheering for the cannibals!

With characters I like, that's really the source of the suspense, the terror (to use Karloff's distinction from horror) - I don't want this grisly fate to befall them; with characters I actively don't like (anyone in the TCM remake, or either of Roth's films), I think it conjurs a darker side of human nature. We're not supposed to WANT this shit-storm to rain on another person, but there we are, eagerly anticipating their ruin. Maybe that's what we find so objectionable, the bloodlust for the assholes on screen. Hitchcock's secret (one of 'em) was setting up the emotional conflict of not wanting something to happen to Character X, while deep down, we really kinda DO want something terrible to happen to them. If we don't like/care about/identify with the character(s), or even hate them, we have no cushion, no way to placate our consciences by being able to say "Well, I really didn't want that to happen, even if I did a just a little..."

Personally, I have no interest in going to the guillotine just to see the heads roll. I much prefer hearing the tires shriek in the night and wondering in that brief second if there will be a crash. I don't mind the odd limb or head flying once in a while - but it's that ghoulish waiting and fighting with myself about how I want it to turn out that keeps me coming back. Better to like the people than not.

One of the main reasons I hate Eli Roth is his unlikable characters in both Cabin Fever and Hostel. Am I really supposed to care about some womanizing, testtosterone laden, collage douchebag who uses the word fa**ot every other sentance? These are the kind of people I want to see die when i was in highschool. His characters are so shallow and self involved that i really don't care what happens to them.
I remember reading an interview with Roth where he said that this is how people talk and act so get over it, but you have to even it out with some redeemable traits in your character.

-"Sick Nick"

I totaly agree about Eli Roth, his movies aren't bad at all but his caracters are sooo annoying. Indeed, you just can't wait for them to die and that isn't what horrormovies are about! If you like really like the caracters in the movie and you care for them, then the tension is at it's maximum because you don't wanna see them dead!

In some movies you want the victims to get "what's coming to them". In others you want the victims to get away. I can handle either kind but I do want to care about somebody in the movie. Even if it's the "monster". In the better Frankenstein movies you should feel bad for the creature. He didn't ask to be created and he sure didn't ask to be created like he was. In a Frankenstein movie society is the real monster.

In both Rob Zombie movies I didn't care about anyone in the movie. I didn't care who lived or died. That is the biggest "sin" a movie can make IMHO.

Cabin Fever? Great premise, bad execution. Quit it with the T & A will ya?
:evil: