Is Being Weird and Creepy Enough?

Anybody here a fan of what I call the "plotless horror movie," where "vague weirdness" carries the day, i.e., the highly successful "The Grudge?"

Anyone see a problem with a movie they didn't even know how to end, like "The Forgotten?"

Was "The Mothman Prophecies" any better, and, if so, why? (Aside from making a little money.)

"The Number 23" was vaguely weird, all right, and something of a psychological horror-thriller, but it tanked in all senses. Was it too pat at the end, after being too vague up to then?

"The Invasion" didn't seem to make money at the box office, though it had Nicole Kidman and a thematic of individuality vs. conformity, a character arc of sorts, a few really good scenes like the roof jumpers, and a clear resolution. It was actually a remake of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" at the core, so did it fail on the basis of not being original enough?

It seems as if no one wants to make traditional monster movies much, so they're evading what they know, delving into what they don't know, but don't know how to plot it. Any one agree or disagree?

On the other hand, introducing a gang war element into "vampires and werewolves" seems to have made an economic success of the "Underworld" movies.

(I'm into "suspense" type horror, not gore/slasher stuff, which is why I'm not discussing "The Saw," etc.)

So, let's hear it. Is it enough to just be creepy and / or cringe-inducingly gory, or do traditional story plot factors still matter?

I think as long as you have good characters it can work

Wow, lots of questions, all with the same answer. It's a matter of taste. If that's the kind of movie you like, then that's what you should write. I personally like a straightforward story with a good ending *about* something weird. But that's just me.