In an age of ever-evolving technology, it’s not rare to sit down to watch the most anticipated horror movie of the year and be bombarded with only CGI gore and effects. To some, this might excite the thought of technological advancements, thinking back on times when practical effects lengthened the production process by months. To others, the sole use of CGI feels like the easy way out.
Practical effects include the usage of things like makeup, prosthetics, fake blood, animatronics and more to create the gore or creatures we see on our screens. These effects have been used in all types of film, but they have a real prominence in horror. It’s hard to think of a time when horror did not use practical effects, with the original Nosferatu (1922) using components such as makeup, puppets and camera movement to build the iconic world of Dracula very early on. The integration and normalization of practical effects in horror was in full swing by the 80s, with classics displaying these effects, such as The Thing (1982), Beetlejuice (1988), and An American Werewolf in London (1981). The glory of practical effects being the singular option for horror was quickly stopped by the emergence of CGI in the 90s.
So, what really is CGI, and why did horror fanatics and casual movie viewers alike demand the resurgence of practical effects instead? CGI (Computer Generated Imagery) is created on advanced computer software and has the ability to do, well, practically anything. CGI can add a single tree in a scene or make an entire ecosystem, down to the smallest of details. Undeniably, this is a fantastic feat in technological advancement, which still requires remarkable skill, knowledge and talent. But picture this: You’re watching a horror movie you’ve waited months, maybe even years, for. The anticipation is palpable, but suddenly, a poorly computer-generated monster that’s so clearly digitalized comes on screen—the suspense is gone. Now, instead of being on the edge of your seat, you’re laughing at whatever you just saw, or even disappointed. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, I encourage you to watch It (2016) and Nightmare on Elm Street (2010). It might not ruin the movie, but it certainly can ruin the suspense, causing horror fans and moviegoers alike to dread hearing that a film heavily leaned into CGI use rather than practical effects. But like all powerful things, CGI included, there has to be a balance that allows for the ultimate enhancement of horror movie effects.
Damien Leone, creator of the now iconic Terrifier movies, is a man who mastered this balance. The director, writer, producer, film editor, special effects artist and makeup FX artist is praised for his levels of highly-realistic gore. In an old interview, Leone talks about watching Tom Savini’s Scream Greats (1986) and being heavily inspired by the genius of his practical effects. Clearly, his fascination continued and turned into execution in his own films. In 2013, Leone began experimenting with the two concentrations in a particular way, using practical effects that are only slightly enhanced by CGI. With an emphasis on beyond-shocking gore, Leone’s process made his small indie horror project explode into a franchise with sales reaching over $65 million and counting. Leone, though having one of the most acclaimed uses of practical effects, wasn’t the only one to realize early on that this could be a way to maximize the potential of horror movies. The Conjuring (2013) and Cabin in the Woods (2012) also deserve recognition for using an array of practical effects, making these notable movies as realistic-looking as possible with only the aid of CGI.
Since the explosion of these films, horror movie developers have caught onto this successful tactic and claimed it for their own films. This combination has given us some of the most acclaimed effects in recent horror movies, like Weapons (2025), Evil Dead Rise (2023), and The Substance (2024). It goes to show that using more practical effects than just CGI makes for a better, more believable, and successful movie. My hope, as a huge fan of horror and gore, is that this serves as a reminder that creative advancement in practical effects is just as, if not more important, than technological advancement in moviemaking.