Practical effects are often more believable than CGI, especially in horror films. As an example, I'd point to John Carpenter's The Thing from 1982 compared to the 2011 prequel, also titled The Thing. The former is considered a cult classic and one of the best practical effect movies of all time, while the latter was a complete flop that most people forget even exists. Part of this is owed to the fact that the 2011 version entirely misses everything that made the original so good and focuses purely on the horror-movie aspects of the monster itself, but I think some of this has to be attributed to the fact that the practical effects of the original movie lend it am unsettling "real" quality that the CGI of the prequel fails to capture. There's something primally disturbing about a real object that your brain registers exists in physical space that a computer-generated image has far more difficulty emulating.
Speaking of horror movies, most horror movies, especially those made in the past 20 years, are complete and utter garbage not worthy of the time it takes you to watch them. Jumpscares and startling noises don't make for an engaging movie. Truly good horror movies come in two varieties; the psychologically unsettling kind that worms its way into your head and makes you think about what the implications would be if this were to happen in the real world, and leave you thinking (and slightly disturbed) long after having finished watching the movie, and schlocky classic horror films that have their own unique charm, at least until they've had a dozen sequels based on them and any originality and charm the original movie had has long since been bled out. Movies that fall into these categories are rare. Cheap startles, jumpscares, and making the 20th Friday the 13th movie is much easier than originality, apparently.