Every year I devote October to watching a lot of horror films. I love the horror genre even if I don’t like most of the horror films I watch. This month I watched over 30 horror films but I only actually really liked about eight. Of course, that I prefer cerebral horror films makes finding horror films that I love a more difficult task since cerebral horror films are not made very often, much less good ones! As I explicate at length in another post on the horror film, while the horror film has been mostly a means for escapism, because of its potential to explore many facets of the human condition, it is the genre that I would argue can potentially be the deepest or at least on par with science fiction. In that context, I’m always on the lookout for interesting and deep and complex horror films, and I think I did find seven this year, four horror films that I would put in the “special” category. Having said that, I also enjoy just a fun, well-made horror film as well and some of the below fit that as well. Here are a list of some of the horror films that stood out to me, and I’ve included one that I screened earlier in the year as well.
Nope
Having seen Nope (2022, Jordan Peele) only once, I still haven’t put all the pieces together yet for this complex science fiction-horror film. But I think I have enough of a clear understanding of the general thrust of this latest fascinating entry by the great Jordan Peele. Indeed, if we take at least some of the pieces in the film, we can see a clear pattern developed: The really interesting Ricky “Jupe” Park/Gordy’s Home TV show thread, a commentary on using a wild animal – in this case, a chimpanzee — for profit, perhaps a reference to the many TV shows and films (Flipper, Gentle Ben, etc.) from a bygone era that exploited wild animals for entertainment (profit) purposes, a form of cruelty; Ricky (Steven Yeun) then doing what he was traumatized by, trying to exploit the creature in the sky (nicknamed “Jean Jacket”) by making it part of a show, backfiring big time when he and the audience get “consumed” by the creature, “consumption” becoming a key idea in the film; the whole using horses for entertainment (profit) purposes, the Gordy Home show making clear how horses/animals are seen, as disposable, as Ricky feeds horses to “Jean Jacket”; the TMZ guy on the motorcycle, who cares more about his (for profit) footage than his own well-being; the hotshot cinematographer, Antlers Holst (Michael Wincott), who only cares about getting sensationalist content and some “impossible shot,” at the expense of animals or people; and even OJ (Daniel Kaluuya) and Emerald’s (Keke Palmer) desire for the “money shot,” becoming more interested in getting a shot of the creature for fame and fortune than to just prove its existence. All these threads (and there are probably more) speak to how we have created a single minded desire for “fame and fortune” above all else including the sacredness of life. Though Nope is on one simple level an effective and wildly entertaining “monster” movie, there are just too many inserts of deep symbolic elements begging to be read commentary that makes for a deep film as well. But then that’s the brilliance of Peele’s work (even if I wasn’t a fan of Us), how he can make both an entertaining film and, for those of us who want something deeper, give us a deep film as well. One crucial element in particular that I think still needs unpacking, that curious oversized wild west balloon figure who gets consumed by – and is what kills – the creature. Again, more on this film soon!
Men
So I think I loved Men (2022, Alex Garland) though Men is one of those films that I cannot recommend. In terms of the former, I need to screen it again to be sure; it’s one of those complex films that one really needs to watch at least twice, first time for the real time twists and experience and then a second time knowing what is coming and analyzing the deep elements to fully grasp if the film is successful or not. In terms of the latter (can’t recommend it!), the last half hour or so of the film shifts to a Cronenbergian body horror film and I know body horror films are not for everyone. And also like many of Cronenberg’s body horror films, Men is, well, weird. For everyone else, though, I do heartily recommend Men, a film that is to my mind brave in its focus. I say brave because, in my reading of it, it doesn’t mince words so to speak, it is an out and out attack dog film, attacking not “men” per se, but rather toxic masculinity “men.” I suspect many people, and, yes, especially men, will not like Men for that reason alone, because it is a full throated, unequivocal attack on toxic masculinity men. And I do think it’s important to stress that the film doesn’t seem to attack men in general, just toxic masculinity men, an important distinction.
The other point that needs to be stressed about this interesting film is how it is one of those films that rides that fine line between realism and allegory. Though grounded in a “realistic” story, the film pretty quickly clearly establishes itself as an allegorical film, with virtually every character and facet of the film subject to an allegorical reading. The ending of the film especially forces one to in retrospect read everything that comes before allegorically, and the allegorical here adds to the boldness of Alex Garland’s project, a literal rewriting of Biblical/cultural/ideological undergirding of toxic masculinity ideologies. In short, toxic masculinity ideologies (patriarchy, phallocentrism, hypermasculinity, sexist gender norms) began with religious belief systems (especially Christianity), which began the process of “begetting” phallic men who see their (phallic) sex as that which makes them the center of being and thus “privileged” to dictate being to women. Lots to unpack with this film but, again, I’ll come back to it in a later post.
Pearl
I had a mixed reaction to the film preceding Pearl, X (both 2022, Ti West) but I really love Pearl! Interesting to think about how now that I’ve watched the prequel Pearl, I think maybe X might be more resonating for me a second time through, a really kind of ingenious move on Ti West’s part. Here again I’m going to write a longer blog post on this film, perhaps after the final part of the trilogy (MaXXXine) comes out, so for now I can only scratch the surface of this interesting and exquisitely shot film. In terms of the latter, as so many have mentioned (including Martin Scorsese!), the use of color in this film just pops, especially the blood red, the red becoming more than just a signifier of literal violence in the film or more pointedly, the person causing the violence, Pearl (Mia Goth). Indeed, the film compellingly argues that the literal violence that Pearl enacts on others stems from a deeper violence to the self. That is, the film’s focus is on the many facets of Pearl’s alienated self, from her isolating and dead-end rural existence to her oppressed femaleness to her mother using her prim and proper and work ethic (austere) Christian beliefs to try and keep Pearl yoked to the oppressive role she is expected to inhabit. Her “dance” with a scarecrow — one of many analogies to The Wizard of Oz — is too precious for words, the moment both macabre and resonating, stressing Pearl’s own empty existence. Also, Pearl’s single minded desire for fame becomes a core commentary for so many who misguidedly think that (fame, celebrity) pursuit will fill one’s emptied-of-meaning alienated existence. The greatness of the film is in both playing out these very real and disturbing realities for poor Pearl and keep us not sympathizing too much with her, to the point where we realize that she really is a dangerous psychopath who needs to be stopped. I’ll leave it at that for now, but I must add one other point here, Mia Goth’s performance is really just stunning. A small little violent horror film won’t get any attention from the Academy Awards, but her performance is that good, so at the very least her performance should get some attention!
Antebellum
So I finally watched Antebellum (2020, Gerad Bush, Christopher Renz). I had put off watching it purely because it had gotten such terrible reviews. I had a feeling the film was bad and though the subject matter interested me, I kept delaying what I thought was going to be a painful viewing experience. How wrong I was! I’m going to re-watch and write a longer post on this interesting film but for now I will say that for me – and here too I pre-emptively defend this film as a horror film – I can’t think of anything more horrific than what happens in this film. The “twist” is as disturbing as anything I’ve experienced and also why the “classic Hollywood style” continues to reap its potential for empathy and suturing us into characters’ experience. In this way, I would strongly argue that this film forces all of us to both experience white supremacy and experience it in a way that is particularly traumatizing. In terms of the latter, part of the trauma is in so starkly reflecting on just how deep and disturbing white supremacy persists in our world, to the point where I cannot image one can watch this film and walk away not seeing how in a very real way, the stark horrors of white supremacy have not changed from the slavery/civil war era. That is, the “return of the repressed” in this film is how there are two polarities in our present times, equality and empowerment in our present time by African Americans but that constant shadow of the horror of white supremacy that STILL permeates society. The REAL or “return of the repressed” isn’t that we “repress” what slavery was but that we “repress” just how much it still informs so much of the African American experience, e.g., as long as white supremacy/racism exists, African Americans can only be reminded of the horrors of what their ancestors endured and still endure the attempt by white supremacy to keep them in that shadow. (There may be another facet to this element, something along the lines of this film’s focus on representation and perhaps how even well-intentioned slave narratives indirectly inform a perpetuation of this self [white supremacy]/Other dynamic but I’m not sure about that yet.) I’ve always believed that while slave narratives are important (12 Years a Slave comes immediately to mind), we really don’t need anymore of them, unless they come with something more, perhaps getting at the root cause of slavery (instead of just giving us the symptoms of slavery, the degradation, the cruelties, etc.) or doing what Antebellum does, referentially commenting on slave narratives and actually giving African Americans a way to engage them in a more agentic way. I want to say more but to do that I would have to give away the “twist” and that really should be experienced in the way the filmmakers enact it. For this blurb at least, I won’t give away any spoilers.
The Autopsy of Jane Doe
The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016, André Øvredal) surprised me. I had heard a little bit about it before screening it but not enough to suggest that it was a superior horror film. At the heart of this complex horror film is a woman who has been tortured beyond comprehension and in this has been transformed into a vengeful entity enacting her pain and suffering on others. That the main others in this case are two men can’t be coincidental, and two men who unknowingly attempt to do the very thing other “men” did to her – violate her body sovereignty. This scenario is the classic case of evil not being born but being created, and the creation of such evil often can be traced to toxic ideologies (misogyny, toxic masculinity ideologies [patriarchy, phallocentrism, hypermasculinity, sexist gender norms], religious belief systems/Christianity, etc.) that make Others (women in this case but also people of color, LGBTQ people, etc.) the subject of their sadistic treatment. This fits Robin Wood’s important concept of the “return of the repressed” to a T, where the “monster” represents the “return” of all that society has “repressed,” in this case, the oppression and traumatization and mutilation and killing (violation) of women. For an excellent in-depth analysis of this film, check out Paul Wooldridge’s piece on it.
In addition to being deep, I was also surprised by how unnerving I found the film! In terms of the latter, it is really hard for a horror film to scare me anymore, which is why I never make “scary” be a criteria for a good horror film, since “scary” is just so subjective and in any case for most horror film fans, not really a thing anymore. (In terms of the subjective part, perhaps my greatest fear is being eaten alive by a bear, so such films are the few that really do scare me!) And while I wouldn’t say that The Autopsy of Jane Doe scared me, it did give me some anxieties at times. And that stems from its twist, the answer to the mystery of “Jane Doe,” that and that these two men we come care about are locked away with her in dungeon-like space that adds to the intensity. I won’t give away the mystery – that’s part of the fun of the film – but for me it was a good twist and an eerie one.
The Black Phone
Feels wrong to say that a film about a serial murderous pedophile is fun but that’s what I come away with after watching The Black Phone (2021, Scott Derrickson), a really well made little horror film. I guess that we always know that Finney (Mason Thames) is going to escape and be fine and that he is being aided by past victims, with the help of his super powered sister, gives the film a wish fulfillment feel to it, kids collectively coming together to bring down a predator preying on them. Add in that his clairvoyant sister Gwen (Madeleine McGraw) is using her powers to help find her brother and we get that Strangers Thing vibe of a very dark story lightened up by seemingly powerless adolescents coming together to defeat a powerful evil in the world. But The Black Phone isn’t just a fun little horror film, it is also intricately constructed, layering some interesting layers together that seem to suggest deeper layers of meaning, from the stress on a time of innocence (1978) that hides a hideous evil – we often think of past times as somehow “better” when they are often worse – to the “bully”/violence norms in the film. In terms of the latter, there is a striking parallel between the bullying and violence of adolescent kids and an alcoholic father who beats his kids to “The Grabber” (Ethan Hawke), the suggestion being that such violence reveals a thoroughly dysfunctional society, it is really just a question of degrees.
1BR
So, I know that 1BR (2019, David Marmor) essentially telegraphs what’s to come in the first 20 minutes of the film, but I must admit that I find well-done films about cults irresistible! Moreover, despite the predictable direction of the film, I think there is some deeper meaning in the film. For one thing, the stress on a “gated community” and a cult philosophy based on some bizarre definition of “community” and what it means to be “good” and the pretense of some fake (happy, “family values”) community – hiding psychopathy – and finally the “surveillance society” element in the film, all give the film more urgency than I think most horror films, the echo of real world (think QAnon, MAGA, Christian fundamentalism, etc.) similar sensibilities very palpable. The ending is also not surprising but like the rest of the film, it too registers something very scary and disturbing going on in our world today, how there is just too much of people seeming to need to be controlled and used by an exterior power, which is also nicely allegorized in the film. In terms of the latter, by creating an unknown controller, the similar omniscient power that seems to control all of us is registered as well.
Hellraiser (2022)
Okay, so I don’t think there is anything deep about Hellraiser (2022, David Bruckner) but I have to say that I just love the premise of this unique franchise so much, “extradimensional beings” who thrive on hedonistic torturing sensation. This shouldn’t work for me, after all I really don’t like “torture porn” films, but for some reason it does. I guess part of this is just the uniqueness of creating monstrous entities that exist in a whole other dimension, sentient and with a philosophy that they see as “normal.” Of course, their philosophy means death to most of the humans who find themselves in the cross hairs of their path. I guess the Cenobites would be considered “monsters” but they seem too sophisticated for that. And that is part of what makes them compelling, that they seem to be a sub-genre all to themselves, not “monster” or “demon” or “slasher” but I guess what could be called Lovecraftian extradimensional entities who we would deem as “evil” but who probably don’t see themselves as such and perhaps don’t even have a conception for. But therein lies the problem with this franchise, e.g., because they are so alternative to our way of being, creating a compelling and comprehensive back story and “universe” for the Cenobites is a challenge to say the least. The temptation is just to make them killing machines, which some of the latter sequels to the first rendition of them did, but that ruins their potential for something more complex. While this first film reboot actually takes away some of the complexity of the first go around for the Cenobites (Hellraiser, 1987, Clive Barker)– the Cenobites seemed to thrive on those singular individuals looking for sensual pleasure – it is nonetheless for me a great first reboot outing, making the Cenobites as they were before, creatures one can’t take one’s eye off of. Perhaps most pleasing is how Bruckner gives us the “beef” so to speak, giving us how the Cenobites play by certain rules – even to the point of making one of their own a target – how they can bargain and engage (not just torture and kill), how the puzzle box becomes more than just a one dimensional initiator and portal, how their end “reward” is (of course!) not what it seems, and how they are created. The film is also surprisingly well-made including some really striking shots, such as when Nora is taken from the van by the Cenobites, their portal to their victims able to apparently penetrate anywhere, the shot stressing how it enters the van and then pulls her out of it, so cool in how it was shot. In other words, I had a lot of fun with this Hellraiser entry and hope more entries are coming!
Speak No Evil
Ultimately, I really didn’t like this film! But the film really stayed with me long after viewing it and so I ended up writing a whole blog post on the film. See my blog post for more of my thoughts on Speak No Evil.