Scenes in non-horror films that gave you the willies

[Noodle Lizard]

I still haven't watched Inland Empire because of that scene. I know what it is without even clicking on it.

It's not very good.

That scene's just a jump scare with Laura Dern doing a Joey Deacon face.  I never understood how it became "that scene" (along with the one near the end with the big Laura Dern face).  Shit, I reckon.  'Mulholland Dr.' and 'Lost Highway' had far scarier sequences.

[Subtle Mocking]

It's not very good.

ITV occasionally show it at 11.30pm at night, for some reason. Maybe that's why.

[Sexton Brackets Drugbust]

I'll remind everybody that Watership Down was rated U, despite it being horrific in a number of places. I'll nominate the scene with the rabbit warren being gassed, described in harrowing detail by Holly.

If you mention Watership Down to my mum, she's guaranteed to tut and say, "Animated gore."

[Noodle Lizard]

ITV occasionally show it at 11.30pm at night, for some reason. Maybe that's why.

Being a Lynch fan, I think I pretended to like it for a while before finally accepting that it's shit, ergonomically designed for cunts.

I think it's his longest film and it's just not at all substantial.  I've probably watched it three times the whole way through and it's just a chore to get through.  There are individually good bits, but they really don't make up anywhere near the majority of the three hours or so that it goes on for.  Also, while seemingly incomprehensible films like 'Mulholland Dr.', 'Lost Highway' or 'Eraserhead' all have a cryptic logic which explains them perfectly, 'Inland Empire' is by Lynch's own admission just a bunch of stuff that he shot on a whim every few weekends with his fancy new camera (which now looks utterly horrible).  I've seen people try to deconstruct it, but even the most devout Lynch fans have basically given up.  There's no point.  With 'Inland Empire' and this transcendental meditation bollocks and the albums and the coffee selling, it's almost like David Lynch was secretly replaced in the early 2000s by someone shit trying to carry on his ouevre without the requisite talent or imagination, Paul McCartney style.

That's what I reckon anyway.

On topic?  Er ... heroin withdrawal sequence in 'Trainspotting'.  Fuck it.

[Puce Moment]

I think that's a horribly reductionist reading of Inland Empire. It sounds like you don't like it, which is fine, but there are a sizeable amount of people who really liked it a lot on first viewing without any need to convince ourselves of that fact. It's quite an exciting film in many ways, and far more unsettling in very specific ways than anything else he has done. It's disjointed and far less linear than anything else has done outside of his shorts, and that is partly because of process. Something I find refreshing given that his films get excellent global distribution and are a neat alternative the slew of Hollywood guff that is starting to clog up even the arthouses.

[Noodle Lizard]

I think that's a horribly reductionist reading of Inland Empire. It sounds like you don't like it, which is fine, but there are a sizeable amount of people who really liked it a lot on first viewing without any need to convince ourselves of that fact. It's quite an exciting film in many ways, and far more unsettling in very specific ways than anything else he has done. It's disjointed and far less linear than anything else has done outside of his shorts, and that is partly because of process. Something I find refreshing given that his films get excellent global distribution and are a neat alternative the slew of Hollywood guff that is starting to clog up even the arthouses.

It sounds like you like it, which is fine, but there are a sizeable amount of people who think it's shite.  I suppose we should be watching 'Transformers 4'.

It wasn't a "reading" of 'Inland Empire', it was my opinion.  Perfectly reasonably stated, I thought.

[Peru]

Also, while seemingly incomprehensible films like 'Mulholland Dr.', 'Lost Highway' or 'Eraserhead' all have a cryptic logic which explains them perfectly, 'Inland Empire' is by Lynch's own admission just a bunch of stuff that he shot on a whim every few weekends with his fancy new camera (which now looks utterly horrible).  I've seen people try to deconstruct it, but even the most devout Lynch fans have basically given up.  There's no point.

It depends whether you feel that it has to have a "cryptic logic" in the first place, I suppose. I don't really care about it making a unified kind of sense, to be honest - Lynch's work has always been about dreams, and this is the one where he goes full-on "dream" - bits and pieces only tangentially connected, occasional overlaps and themes spilling into different sections of the film. I also think that you could basically describe the premise as the dream of a middle-aged actress has mid-life crisis/nervous breakdown/affair, and Lynch spins off from there. For me, by running for three hours, it enables you to get completely lost in the dream, whereas the earlier work always has, as you say, an underlying plot structure. Some people like it, others don't, but many "devout Lynch fans" absolutely love it.

[xxxx xxx x xxx]

The "squeal, piggy" hillbilly scene in 'Deliverance"[nb]...and he certainly got the willies[/nb]

[Noodle Lizard]

It depends whether you feel that it has to have a "cryptic logic" in the first place, I suppose. I don't really care about it making a unified kind of sense, to be honest - Lynch's work has always been about dreams, and this is the one where he goes full-on "dream" - bits and pieces only tangentially connected, occasional overlaps and themes spilling into different sections of the film. I also think that you could basically describe the premise as the dream of a middle-aged actress has mid-life crisis/nervous breakdown/affair, and Lynch spins off from there. For me, by running for three hours, it enables you to get completely lost in the dream, whereas the earlier work always has, as you say, an underlying plot structure. Some people like it, others don't, but many "devout Lynch fans" absolutely love it.

I suppose I don't find it very rewarding to watch since there seemed to be little to no thought put into it (and Lynch himself has pretty much confirmed that).  I like abstract films which could casually be written off as nonsensical ('The Holy Mountain', 'The Room' etc.) but only when I feel it's actually trying to convey something.  'Inland Empire', for the most part, felt like a collection of student shorts aping what they thought David Lynch was about, despite not understanding how his absurdity is essentially a vehicle for a bigger idea.  It's like "shock-for-shock's sake" in comedy to me; you don't need to have a purpose or message to it all, but it's so much better when you do.  It probably doesn't help that I didn't think it captured the essence of dreams/nightmares anywhere near as well as something like 'Eraserhead' did.

But like I said, there are individual scenes and moments in 'Inland Empire' that I really like, and in fact the whole first hour or so is very promising, I just don't think it's a good film.

[PAGATRON]

Superman 2 where clark decides to become mortal, the scene where he gets stripped of his powers he get literally stripped down to the flesh.
Can't find this scene anywhere on YT.

Also this scene gave me the shits the first time I saw it when I was a young'n.
Raiders of the lost ark

[Puce Moment]

It sounds like you like it, which is fine, but there are a sizeable amount of people who think it's shite.  I suppose we should be watching 'Transformers 4'.

It wasn't a "reading" of 'Inland Empire', it was my opinion.  Perfectly reasonably stated, I thought.

But your "opinion" contained some a posteriori opinionating presented as a priori fact - so not that reasonable. I think it is pretty reasonable to dislike Inland Empire - most people do, and it is obvious why.

[Peru]

I suppose I don't find it very rewarding to watch since there seemed to be little to no thought put into it (and Lynch himself has pretty much confirmed that)

Really can't agree that the film has "little to no thought put into it", and Lynch has actually been vocal about what began as a piecemeal project (which he'd considered releasing as shorts) coalescing into a whole. At that point he went away and created a larger structure and shot the rest more conventionally. See this Collider interview:

Lynch: You know, after a while the scene-by-scene revealed more.  And then I wrote a lot of stuff, and we went and shot more traditionally.  You know, we could shoot for several weeks and have stuff to shoot and organize like a regular shooting schedule.  But it was just in the beginning that it was scene-by-scene, and those could've ended up just being that.

[Grazor]

I found this analysis of Inland Empire a couple of weeks ago:
http://xixax.com/halfborn/

It seems like a fairly convincing explanation of it all - though I'm sure some of the details could be read in different ways - before reading it my thoughts were that Inland Empire was mostly some thematic arty noodling around some themes (especially given the reused rabbits scenes); but this did point to there being a pretty solid story underneath the cryptic surface, like with Mulholland Drive.

[another Mr. Lizard]

In certain circles I'm reasonably respected as a horror movie historian and have written, edited, and contributed to various books on the genre. So I get asked the question "what's the scariest film you've ever seen?" rather often. And always give the answer THE KING OF COMEDY.

Bloody terrifying throughout - so many utterly chilling moments, notably all the stuff with Pupkin 'interviewing' cardboard cutout celebs or recording his 'shows'. The revelation that he has an enormous mural depicting an appreciative audience hits unparalleled heights of terror (the distinct possibility that he might even be imagining this picture  - as opposed to imagining an actual live crowd, like any standard psycho might  - adds several further disturbing levels). But it's the scene where he dates Rita (Diahnne Abbott) that truly frightens, in particular when he whips out his autograph book and goes into showbiz mode discussing each signature in detail and doing his best to suggest a personal connection with each megastar. Having remarked that the more illegible a name is, the more famous that person will be, he then turns to an indecipherable scrawl, asking his date to guess whose sig it is. Of course, it turns out to be Rupert's own. I've never experienced anything quite so frightening in a movie.

[Steven]

Made even scarier by the fact that Morrie of Morrie's Wigs fame is aping all of Pupkin's gesticulations from his table at the back of the restaurant.

[Noodle Lizard]

In certain circles I'm reasonably respected as a horror movie historian and have written, edited, and contributed to various books on the genre. So I get asked the question "what's the scariest film you've ever seen?" rather often. And always give the answer THE KING OF COMEDY.

Bloody terrifying throughout - so many utterly chilling moments, notably all the stuff with Pupkin 'interviewing' cardboard cutout celebs or recording his 'shows'. The revelation that he has an enormous mural depicting an appreciative audience hits unparalleled heights of terror (the distinct possibility that he might even be imagining this picture  - as opposed to imagining an actual live crowd, like any standard psycho might  - adds several further disturbing levels). But it's the scene where he dates Rita (Diahnne Abbott) that truly frightens, in particular when he whips out his autograph book and goes into showbiz mode discussing each signature in detail and doing his best to suggest a personal connection with each megastar. Having remarked that the more illegible a name is, the more famous that person will be, he then turns to an indecipherable scrawl, asking his date to guess whose sig it is. Of course, it turns out to be Rupert's own. I've never experienced anything quite so frightening in a movie.

I reckon Sandra Bernhard is the scariest thing about that film.  Just horrible to watch.

I don't really find that kind of thing scary, but I understand why some might.  I suppose it shares traits with horror in that you're practically yelling "No, don't do that!" at the screen.  'One Hour Photo', on the other hand, has one scene which did spook me out.

[Don_Preston]

Silently approaching Manuela. It really shat me up as a lad.

[non capisco]

^ Moonraker also has that bit where Hugo Drax sets his feral dogs on the other obligatory sacrificial lamb woman who Bond knobs and she's running away from them in utter terror through some dreamlike soft-focus woods. If only the double taking pigeon had been in that bit.

[Noodle Lizard]

^ Moonraker also has that bit where Hugo Drax sets his feral dogs on the other obligatory sacrificial lamb woman who Bond knobs and she's running away from them in utter terror through some dreamlike soft-focus woods. If only the double taking pigeon had been in that bit.

I reckoned Baron Samedi was creepy when I was a nipper.  There was also that bonus level with him in 'Goldeneye' which is so terrifying for a young person that it should be sick filth that got banned.

[non capisco]

I reckoned Baron Samedi was creepy when I was a nipper. 

Him and goat man with his snake. Right pair of wrong 'uns.

[Catalogue Trousers]

Fuck yeah.



YOIKS

[Puce Moment]

^ Moonraker also has that bit where Hugo Drax sets his feral dogs on the other obligatory sacrificial lamb woman who Bond knobs and she's running away from them in utter terror through some dreamlike soft-focus woods. If only the double taking pigeon had been in that bit.

[Gulftastic]

In Babe 2: Pig In The City, when Babe is being chased by the Bull Terrier and the Rottweiler. Terrifying.

[SteveDave]

This bit from O Lucky Man...

http://youtu.be/-oL7XP0ROvk?t=1m35s

Fuckinell. I'm glad I didn't go & see that with a girl a few weeks ago now. I would've screamed louder than matey boy there.

[amnesiac]

Be careful not to get trapped in a hole, I reckon.  Freak ya right out!

Also avoid 'The Descent' and 'The Borderlands'.

THIS. Fucking hell, I watched that on a plane on an iPad and I'm already claustrophobic as it is and the scene you allude to is just horrible and almost brought on a panic attack.

Good film though!

[Hank Venture]

When Lloyd get cornered in a toilet by a guy in Dumb And Dumber. Remember it as sinisterly hinting at male rape. Creepy.

[amnesiac]

[monkfromhavana]

The bit in Police Academy where Harris gets his head propelled up a horse's arse.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

THIS. Fucking hell, I watched that on a plane on an iPad and I'm already claustrophobic as it is and the scene you allude to is just horrible and almost brought on a panic attack.

My mum had a similar reaction during Kill Bill 2, when The Bride gets buried alive.

[Steven]

When Lloyd get cornered in a toilet by a guy in Dumb And Dumber. Remember it as sinisterly hinting at male rape. Creepy.

You should have seen the scene before it was heavily edited, terrifying. The whole movie was about 3 hours long and bombed before judicious cuts saved it.