15 Popular Scary Movie Tropes That Fans Aren’t The Biggest Fans Of

There is a vocal contingent of horror fans who dislike animal cruelty. There are even websites dedicated to tracking whether or not films contain animal deaths so that people can avoid films that contain them. While it may seem ironic since scary movies frequently have the deaths of many human beings, animal cruelty may affect people in this way because animals bond with humans, trust them, and are less able to defend themselves than a human might be. People become emotionally attached to their pets, so it is a very emotional issue for them no matter where they see animals being harmed, even if it isn't real.

One of the other most disturbing elements in horror films is incidents of sexual assault, especially the type that seems exploitative. This kind of violence might be an integral part of the story in some movies. In others, it might not, and that's when fans get upset about including this kind of scene. Sometimes, they might object to how the scene is filmed and whether or not characters are exploited to cater to prurient interests with the use of nudity rather than telling the story, or they feel that it is unnecessary and only there for shock value.

What irritates a lot of fans in scary movies are the times when people try to warn the other characters, and they seem not to listen. This lack of communication and listening drives people up the wall. Every single time a character tells a room full of people, "Hey, don't go out there. I just saw a pack of zombie werewolves." then a bunch of people immediately walk outside for feeding time is exasperating.

It's true. Fans of terror films are tired of the trend of taking a hit song and slowing it down to make it creepy in horror. The trend has been going on for a long time, possibly since "Donnie Darko" in 2001. It is a kind of musical shorthand that gets used often in trailers and films, and people are increasingly calling it out. It seems a bit lazy and has been done so often that it is annoying and not as effective as it used to be.

Speaking of communication, fans are not fond of the times in films when a partner or loved one refuses to listen to the concerns or warnings of their partner. Not only is it counterproductive, but it looks disrespectful not to acknowledge the feelings or fears of someone you love. Sadly, this is a trope that does exist in real life. One example of the opposite of this behavior is Craig T. Nelson's character in "Poltergeist"; the minute that his wife (JoBeth Williams) says that weird things are happening in their kitchen, he immediately believes her.

What is very annoying to a large segment of the audience for scary movies is characters who are either not very smart or who do things that are not a good idea. Quite a few ask for intelligent characters can figure out what to do in a situation. Characters that were praised for their smarts and take-charge attitude are MacReady from "The Thing," who immediately gets the flamethrower; Ellen Ripley from the "Alien" franchise, who wastes no time in many different scenarios; and Ana from the 2004 remake of "Dawn Of The Dead" who always remembers to grab the keys.

Jump scares! A jump scare can be excellent in any film when used judiciously and adequately. The thing that people object to is an overreliance on jump scares in general. There is actually a website that keeps track of jump scares, and the film that has the most, according to their count, is thirty jump scares in one movie. That movie is "The Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia." An overreliance on jump scares seems like a form of cheating to the audience and a way to avoid having to do the work of setting up shocks in a more organic way.

Clowns and dolls are naturally scary. An objection that fans have to certain films is the filmmaker's tendency to exaggerate the look of a doll or some object that naturally is frightening in an attempt to underline the fearsomeness of the object. An example that has been brought up is the Annabelle doll from "The Conjuring." The actual doll that Annabelle is based on is an ordinary Raggedy Ann doll, and people find that doll frightening enough. But the doll in the film has been made to look "scary," and they feel that wasn't necessary.

The mystery is an underrated tool in cinema art these days. Of course, it is possible to not explain enough in a scary movie, but the issue that people have is when the filmmakers explain too much. Perhaps it happens because the filmmakers don't have enough faith in the ideas in the film to scare people, but it is possible to tell the audience too much. Leaving mystery in a film allows the viewers to use their imaginations to fill in the blanks.

In the Scream Universe, this is known as "the killer always comes back.", the objection that viewers have is when allowed to take the villain of the movie out, too often, characters are content with simply knocking them out and running away. Their reasoning is this: if you can take the killer out, why not take it? Why hit them over the head and assume that's enough? This usually leads to the villain coming to and starting to chase you again, and there's a straightforward way that this could be avoided. When you get the chance, don't stop until you know the job is done. In Scream (2022), Sam Carpenter doesn't hesitate and manages to shock Sydney and Gail with her decisive action.

Fans want to give films like "The Shining" and "Poltergeist" a pass on this one, but they are tired of the trope when a child speaks in an obviously creepy tone. Back in 1980 to 1982, the idea was pretty new. But now it is a device that more films use and has devolved into a trope that isn't original or scary. It comes with the growing sophistication of film audiences. They want more.

We've all seen it before. When a character suddenly starts spouting a lot of exposition, that seems to be the only reason the character exists in the narrative. Exposition is necessary to a certain extent, but having it all dumped on the audience and coming from one source is a trope many fans and viewers are tired of. There are imaginative and different ways to enlighten the audience, and creative ways to deliver exposition make the film much more fascinating.

The head tilt is a significant moment in "Halloween." Viewers object to the many characters who have used the head tilt to get an easy scare. It's so popular that actors and filmmakers have used it many times since, but what matters is not the action but the work of the actor who is doing it. The head tilt, the shot of Michael standing near a hedge, and the ghost costume in Halloween all work because of the actor behind the mask, Nick Castle. His performance made everyday actions menacing. Without that kind of actor, it won't be nearly as terrifying.

Plot armor strikes again! And again! One thing that gets viewers goats in horror films is plot armor. It means when the monster, killer, or zombie horde has no trouble dispatching most of the cast or tons of people on the street but suddenly can't manage to do the same to the lead character. It happens in a lot of films, honestly, but "World War Z" is one of those films where judging by the speed and sheer numbers of the undead masses, you'd think that Brad Pitt wouldn't last five minutes, but he always seems to survive no matter what happens. To someone watching a film, there needs to be reasoning and logic, usually but not consistently, and this idea defies standard logic of what would happen, so it seems dishonest.

Oh, ye of little faith! In many horror films, a lot of trouble could be avoided if people, especially authority figures, were more open to the possibility that something out of the ordinary might happen. In " Friday the 13th Part VI: Jason Lives", the sheriff, like many other law enforcement figures in horror, doesn't think anything is wrong. It doesn't turn out very well for many people because the sheriff refuses the idea. Would it hurt to consider it? I mean, what's the worst that could happen? They're wrong, and you're right. I don't see the downside to that.