Welcome to Gaia! ::

I disagree.
Borderline pornographic sex scenes, like we've been seeing in recent horror films, have no place in romance movies either.

And I disagree with the ignorant statement you (unintentionally?) made:
"lol mo killins"
Horror isn't about just killing. In itself killing isn't all that horrifying, as the case may be, there's a certain psychological and emotional aspect that a horror film needs to play on that makes it truly horrifying. I concede that a successful horror film doesn't need a lot of sick-out scenes, i.e. gorenography. Saying a film simply needs more killing to be a horror movie is as ignorant a statement as saying that it needs a sex scene to be popular. In a way with that statement, you're underestimating the psychological needs of the audience just as much as modern film makers.

An example is the first and second and even the third Saw films. There are psychological and emotional aspects that the films play on so that the viewer ultimately sympathizes with Jigsaw. It's not just the brutality of the early films that make them good. And as is obvious, the 4th-6th films have all turned to s**t because they lost those aspects and are more geared towards simple and senseless violence that would only appeal to a small audience of morons who only care, and possibly get off on senseless gore.

Fine. 1st and 2nd Hellraiser, perfectly good premise, kept to a relatively original storyline, essentially everything after that is completely superfluous. Even the first couple Child's Play films had a certain aspect that was respectable, despite my hatred for said films. Nightmare on Elm Street, another example, but really it's been more of a hit and miss, first one awesome, second one was mediocre, etc. etc.
Still want more?
The Exorcist, even the second film was enjoyable to an extent.
Texas Chainsaw Massacre

All of these original films have an enigmatic element to them, a emotional aspect that they play on that is more terrifying, ultimately, than ridiculous gore. Rosemary's Baby, Eraserhead, Nosferatu, M, these films all accomplished what recent gorenography films have not with minimal gore.

Mind you, I'm not saying that gore has no place in horror, because it is a decidedly needed factor. All I'm saying is that excessive gore with a hollow plot line, hollow acting, etc. is not scary.

TL;DR:
Try being a horror movie elitist on someone else.

Then excuse me. I took your comment more like "lol u suc cuz u watch post 1990 movies".

I agree with Wilted there should be more blood, guts, fingers, and toes ^^

I will say, that while my favorite horror films are the ones that have an intense plot and an emotionalism that grabs me by the balls with terror, I do miss the gore and the senseless violence of retro splatterpunk films. To me, a bad horror movie can be made entertaining by at least making it gory. Gore is entertaining. It's a lot of fun. Modern horror strays too far away from that in worry that it won't sell, and so when a bad horror movie is made, it's not even entertaining. It's just a lot of semi-decent looking actors and actresses all making pouty faces at a camera the entire movie while somber music plays, and things jump out of the shadows. It's boring.