I will always be a sucker for underdog horror movies. I think that too much money in petty cash is the biggest problem with horror movies today. Necessity is the mother of invention. The less money a filmmaker has, the less he has to idley throw at problems. In the best case scenario this leads to a heightened on screen realism that shines through the actors and encourages creativity. Exspecially with horror as to truly scare people you have to convince the audience that the danger is real.
William Castle used real life gimmicks to this effect. He got the audience involved by zapping their seats, convincing them that monsters are in the theater waiting to bearhug their spines and a cornicopia of other gimmicks. Modern gimmicks to this effect are the shakey camera to play on our attatchments to home movies and making you aware of the camera man. (Diary of the Dead, Cloverfeild, district 9, last horror movie) These, I believe, create a distraction fromt he real world by putting you in touch with the setting, if done properly, or at least cause a distraction so you forget that you are sitting in a theater, lazy boy,or next to someone who's company you no longer enjoy.
In horror, wearing out an actor can sometimes be the only thing that makes his or her performance work. On a no budget set you are lukey to get a minute to sit and a moldy cheee sandwich. This can be the lube to slide in the suspence nice and thick. Same for a small crew. Horror is about not being comfortable. Having the illusion of safty peeled back revealing unknow dangers. It can be treacherous to do this with no name actors. So you have to trick em but not so much that they quit and leave with a grudge.