Scared Sensibly

I like to watch movies that scare the shit out of me and then talk about it.

[scaredsensibly]

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974)

Released in 1974, Tobe Hooper’s The Texas Chain Saw Massacre begins with the news that a number of graves have been vandalized, prompting siblings Sally and Franklin Hardesty to investigate their grandfather’s grave. After stopping at a service station and discovering that there’s no gas, the siblings and their friends wander off into a bizarre Texas community. Eventually each member of the group finds themselves face-to-face with the chainsaw wielding Leatherface, turning their trip to the family homestead into a fight for survival.

While remembered as a slasher, there is surprisingly little gore in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Rather this film hinges itself on psychological scares, often tricking the audience into believing it’s seen more than it actually has. While it feels as though you’ve seen Leatherface butcher his victims it’s largely your imagination which creates terror. In this way the audience is forced to engage in the action, putting the viewer in the middle of the horror experience. This raises the stakes of survival for these characters, as their safety is now that of the audience.

Another factor contributing to the psychological horror of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is the film’s sense of realism. As the group uncovers the dark mysteries of Leatherface they are surrounded by mundane settings. The expansive fields and solitary house in the country seem like places many audience members have likely been, and could wander into if desperately searching for help. The characters too are flat, giving the viewer plenty of room to see his or herself in their experiences. Additionally, as in real life, their misfortunes often come down to timing: it just so happens they discover the house that Leatherface is in, and it just so happens he’s home to kill his victims. Because the murders coincidences it makes them so much more upsetting, as their is no logic or justice in their suffering. The actors performances and reactions to the unexpected killer solidify this realism. Marilyn Burns as Sally and the entire cast of Leatherface’s family give especially powerful, convincing performances. Their collective scenes in the in the third act make the film’s final moments its strongest and hardest to watch, and make the film’s conclusion all that much more satisfying.

In 2017, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre’s approach to horror seems much more simple and subtle than it did at the time of its release. In comparison to the torture-porn explosion of the twenty-first century Hooper’s gore is genius, handing the audience the tools they need to construct violence rather outright showing graphic mutilation. While I can’t confidently say this was the film’s original intent, a retrospective viewing of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre feels like a fresh dose of gritty and realistic horror, making it obvious to the audience what makes this a horror classic.  

[paranoidinsane]

It (2017)

[scaredsensibly]

mother! (2017)

Darren Aronofsky’s mother! is a slow burn towards a twisted, glorious, and satisfyingly unsatisfying ending. It’s the sort of film you should watch with an open and devoted mind, paying attention at every chaotic turn along the way.

The film follows a young woman, played by Jennifer Lawrence, who lives in an isolated country paradise. Her husband, Javier Bardem, is a poet whose writer’s block is exacerbated by the arrival of a mysterious couple, Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer, who reveal themselves to be obsessed fans. The arrival of the intrusive guests puts great stress on the homeowners’ relationship: she wants them out, but he thrives on their adoration.

One highlight of the film is certainly the performances by the main cast. Lawrence’s emotional range and visual acting are perfectly suited to reveal the nuances of the mother’s anxiety. Bardem similarly captures his character’s complexities, with the poet being all at once charismatic and unsettling, caring and destructive. Perhaps the brightest performance comes from Pfiffer, who steals every scene she’s in, captivating the audience with the miserable pit her viciousness leaves in your stomach.

The film was also a particularly pleasing film to watch. The color palette uses yellow and brown tones softly at first, but more harshly as the film progresses to parallel with the tension the plot. The camera around the house also impressed me, with its shaky journey through the house making it feel like a labyrinth. Consequently the viewer, like Lawrence’s character, starts to feel trapped in it by the third act, unsure how exactly to escape this nightmare.

While there’s much more to be said about mother! it’s a piece that’s best left to the viewer to dissect on their own. That being said, after you see it it’s suddenly impossible not to keep digging through the layers of meaning and allegory. While this film isn’t for everyone, it’s sure to leave an impression on everyone who sees it.

[scaredsensibly]

Scream (1996)

As long as I’m covering Wes Craven Iet’s talk about Scream. Unlike the first two movies I reviewed for this blog, this isn't the my first viewing of the 1996 horror/comedy. That was all the way back in 2013, freshman year of college, and my roommate/personal pop culture enthusiast showed my first three films in the franchise in a single night. The next night be finished the franchise and watched Wild Things, having established an unspoken pact to only watch Neve Campbell movies from that point on. But besides my love the actress, who plays protagonist Sidney Prescott, there are plenty of reasons to indulge in Scream:

1. Scream is my go-to movie recommendation for someone serious about dipping their toes into horror, thanks to its ability to perfectly balance horror and comedy. In general it’s not easy to genuinely scare or make people laugh, and that becomes even more difficult task of doing so for an hour and a half of consistently enjoyable, visually pleasing film. While there are a handful of movies in this dual-genre there are only a few that truly scare me. (If you’re wondering Cabin in the Woods and Get Out come to mind. Shaun of the Dead was wonderful but the comedy far surpassed the horror). So if you want to feel like you successfully watched a great horror film but didn't shake in your seat the entire time, this one is for you. 2. I made a similar point in my Nightmare on Elm Street review, it’s just a true in regards to Scream: there's something Wes Craven just gets about being a teenager. The John Hughes of horror if you will. The teenagers feel real in their speech and actions. The performances of Drew Barrymore and Neve Campbell in particular highlight the vulnerability of these two characters, their voices carrying a fear that feels genuine. (IMDB Fact: Craven told Barrymore stories of animal abuse to keep her truly terrified during filming). Moreover, Craven keeps you weary of the monsters next door. In Nightmare it’s the overprotective and dismissive parents, while in Scream it’s the fear the knowledge that you never truly know the nature of those around you. This keeps the scares hitting close to home, and lets the audience carry the fear beyond the screen. 3. References. References galore make this film amazing upon further, more enlightened viewings. When I first saw Scream I understood the basic cliches which were being referenced, but far fewer specific sources to point to as examples. In fact, the only specific thing I knew was the Freddy Krueger janitor, played by Craven himself, and because of its icon status, because I hadn’t seen the film at that point. So though I've already stated it's a good beginner film even the seasoned horror pro will be rewarded in a close viewing of this film.

Scream is in some ways an unexpected horror classic. The 90s were arguably a rough decade for the genre, with much of it being dedicated to cheesy special effects and cheap, easy to produce products. And of the great classics to emerge during this time, this film stands out from others (Silence of the Lambs, The Sixth Sense, The Blair Witch Project) as a return to high school slashers.In this way it’s a nostalgic throwback that managed to breath life into a heavy, over-saturated genre at the right time.

*I couldn’t fit this into the article seamlessly but it’s occurred to me that my boyfriend has been compare to both Johnny Depp and Skeet Ulrich. My conclusion is that Wes Craven has a type, and apparently it’s very similar to mine.

[coolnessgraphed]

[scaredsensibly]

Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

When I think of Johnny Depp and horror films my mind immediately goes to Secret Window, a 2004 adaptation of a Stephen King novella. This isn’t because it’s particularly good, but rather because this is one of the first horror films I remember sitting all the way through. Besides, that’s far from Depp’s only contribution to the genre, as in conjunction with Tim Burton he’s made quite the impact on spooky/creepy works. Films like Sleepy Hollow, Sweeney Todd, and Edward Scissorhands have all received critical acclaim and have been lauded as favorites of a number of my acquaintances. That being said I was pretty impressed to see the 21 Jump Street actor’s name unexpectedly pop up during the opening credits in the original Nightmare on Elm Street. After three decades the fact that this movie hasn’t been reduced to a “Johnny Depp film” speaks to its staying power and the genius of its ability to transcend its surface level and the actors associated with it.

Though a monster flick at heart, Nightmare’s genius comes form its ability to mix the real life horrors and challenges of adolescence with otherworldly scares. I’ll be the first to say the metaphor of teenage sexuality is highly overdone and often poorly executed in horror. However, Craven’s work does a fair and concise job on this subject, and doesn’t just use it as an exploitative measure to bring in nudity. Instead he goes beyond this single aspect and explores other challenges of transitioning from childhood to adulthood, especially highlighting the the relationship between parents and teenage children. Nancy’s parents are both overprotective and dismissive, following her and placing bars on the windows of the house one minute, but refusing to give her potentially life-saving help when she needs it most (ironically, these same parents went out of their way years before to kill Freddy when he didn’t pose such an immediate threat). Moreover, while they claim to want what’s best for their daughter, the divorced husband and wife constantly drag her into their own emotional disputes, adding unnecessary stress to the trauma Nancy experiences. Consequently she is forced to seek out the monster and confront him alone, a task hardened both by her parents neglect and hovering nature. As a result of this disconnect between adults’ intentions and actions the stakes of the action are heightened and adds a sense of realism to the plot.

Another personal favorite aspect of this film for me is the relatively logical behaviors of the characters. Though Tina doesn’t perhaps make as much effort to run and fight back as she should in the opening scene, during the first dream it makes sense that she wouldn’t understand the gravity of her nightmare. Moreover, she does immediately become fearful and ask her friends to stay with her the next night. Moreover, as the remaining characters begin to understand Freddy’s nature they make an effort to overlap dreams and reality to defeat him. Nancy does this successfully at the end of the story and is even able to overcome her fear once she understands his behavior. In this was the plot deviates from typical teenage slashers with seemingly unbeatable enemies which terrorize their characters endlessly (Arguably the film’s last scene and continued sequels undo this, but speaking on Nancy in this standalone film I would argue that this is the case).

So though this film by no means needs a seal of approval from me, I’ll just reiterate what we all already know: Wes Craven is a horror genius whose psychological approach to adolescence takes this Nightmare on Elm Street from good horror to excellent film.

[scaredsensibly]

Slumber Party Massacre (1982)

It’s easy to see why one might become nostalgic for what Slumber Party Massacre (1982) could have been. Written by Rita Mae Brown, the original script for Sleepless Nights was intended to be a feminist parody of the slasher genre. However, it’s hard to say if eventual director, Amy Holden Jones, understood the subtle nuances of this proto-Scream film, or if she and husband/ cinematographer Michael Chapman simply chose to ignore them in favor of a quicker and cheaper project.

Visually this film can be summarized as “tits and blood,” which technically better films achieved long before and after. The shower scene, for example, parallels with the opening of Carrie, which was released six years earlier. In the 1976 Stephen King adaption, this setting serves to contextualize the protagonist’s outcast status as she comes screaming out of the shower, unaware the blood she’s drenched in is a result of her period. Yes there is nudity, but the lightheartedness of it punctuates the horrors to come. In contrast, the gym/shower sequence in Slumber Party Massacre is irrelevant to the plot. The information we learn here-- Diane doesn’t like new girl, Val, because she’s pretty and good at basketball-- could have happened in almost any context.

That being said, the true entertainment value of this film comes from moments like this, where the pandering and absence of introspection produce unexpected humor. Without too many spoilers here’s a brief list of nonsense: eating pizza on top of a dead delivery boy, implied masturbation to a Sylvester Stallone PlayGirl by high school girls, not-at-all subtle phallic imagery in a drill-bit killer who exclusively murders hot girls, and, as previously stated, lots of tits and red corn syrup. 

At only an hour and fifteen minutes, Slumber Party Massacre is a good, old-fashioned slasher that delivers the laughs and spooks without commitment to plot or character development. Though not quite a masterpiece of good-bad entertainment or horror classics, fans of either or both categories likely won’t be disappointed.