HorrorDex helps horror fans and newer viewers explore subgenres, franchises, characters, filmmakers, effects, remakes and film history. Our guiding question is simple: what makes this horror idea, character or filmmaking choice work? We aim to answer with useful context, informed analysis and respect for both the craft and the scare.
Research and source selection
Our editorial work draws on current and archival film sources, official credits, filmmaker interviews, reputable film criticism and history, and primary production sources where available. The right source depends on the claim: credits establish who made a film, interviews can illuminate creative intent, and historical sources place a work in its period.
Release versions, chronology and franchise scope receive particular attention. In horror, alternate cuts, retitled releases, remakes and tangled continuities can turn a simple claim into a trapdoor. We verify these details and include them when they materially affect the reader’s understanding.
Attribution, analysis and opinion
HorrorDex distinguishes documented facts from editorial interpretation. When a source’s identity matters, we attribute it in clear language. Analysis and recommendations are reasoned judgments, supported by the examples and tradeoffs that matter. A useful opinion explains why a technique, performance, design or story choice succeeds—or why it falls flat.
Research, criticism and visual analysis are not presented as firsthand testing. Claims based on direct experience, measurements, equipment use or other hands-on work appear only when that experience is documented and relevant.
Spoilers and commercial relationships
Plot details should remain proportional to the subject. When meaningful spoilers are necessary, we clearly signal them before the revealing discussion. Commercial relationships are disclosed on affected content when they are documented and relevant to a reader’s assessment of a recommendation.
Corrections
Readers may report a possible error by emailing contact@horrordex.com. Please include the article URL, identify the disputed passage and provide supporting evidence where possible. We assess correction requests against appropriate sources and update affected content when a correction is warranted.