I know this will sound strange to some, yet obvious to others, but horror doesn't have to be scary to be good. It's basic quality of goodness or badness has, in fact, little to do with how scary it is and more to do, as with all art, with how effectively it conveys its meaning. If that means an overall sense of dread rather than a lot of scares, so be it. Hell, I like an overall sense of dread in horror.

On Facebook recently I posted a status update alluding to The Exorcist and Larry Aydlette chimed in to say he never found the movie scary. He was not, as some do, posing this as a criticism, merely an observation. Rod Heath did the same, carefully adding, "but that's not a fault, just a personal reaction." Marilyn, on the other hand, wrote, "I was terrified the first time I saw The Exorcist. The audience was freaking out all around me, people running up the aisle screaming. It was a happening." Sounds like it. My first experience with The Exorcist was quite different.
I saw it on an early cable showing in the seventies (it may have been HBO but I can't remember) with my sister, mother and father. Yes, I was around ten and my parents watched it with me. They were never the hysterical type, worried that if we were exposed to something with violence or language we would turn to a life of crime or insanity. And my father, and this is important, was a true believer, still is. He left college after his parents died to enter the monastery but left before taking his vows, deciding that marriage was the sacrament for him. His sister, on the other hand, stuck with it and became a nun who became Mother Superior of an order in Massachusetts. Finally, in our house, along the second bookshelf in the den, was and is the entire set of the Encyclopedia of Catholicism. So The Exorcist was a movie he had to see and, what the hell, might as well watch it with the kids.
My sister was decidedly scared and freaked out through most of it and I, while more fascinated than upset, was a little creeped out by things like the desecrated statue of Mary and the death mask flashing on the screen. By the time Merrin and Karras were doing battle with Regan in the bedroom at the end of the hall my father was more bemused than anything else. Bemused with my sister's reaction and the movie itself. He assured my sister there was nothing scary in the movie. It was a girl under the control of a demon, a demon that would be driven out by the faithful. No harm would come to her and, aside from exploiting an old man's weak heart, she
could bring no harm to anyone else (Burke Dennings notwithstanding). Besides, he noted, this stuff doesn't even really happen like this. Yes, my dad's one of those types of movie viewers, the ones that too often let reality get in the way of a good story. But here's the thing: I agreed with him (on the "not scary" part, not the other stuff). I thought it was an excellent movie, but I couldn't be sure what everyone found scary about it. I mean, it's a girl. On a bed. Tied down, no less.When I got older I realized that, while some people may be scared by it, what I felt was a sense of dread. A pall of death and familial collapse hangs over the house throughout the movie. Very, very little, if anything, in the movie actually feels good. And that is what makes it a great horror movie. To me, it's not meant to scare, it's meant to disturb, and those are two very different things. The Exorcist is disturbing, as in it disturbs our view of a normal mother/daughter relationship. It disturbs our view of faith, in ourselves and, if we choose, God as well. Most of all, it disturbs our view of what is right and wrong and good and bad. It is, in fact, one of the most disturbing movies I have ever seen. So whether I'm scared by it or not hardly even matters. The feeling's the thing, and the feeling is one of dread, a dreading of what's coming and how much worse it can still get.
I've had that feeling with several movies and some movies I consider the very best of the genre I would never consider scary, The Wicker Man for instance. I think it's brilliant but not because it's scary, rather, because it feeds on uneasy feelings of isolation, "us and them" belief systems and societal dysfunction. That it's not scary doesn't affect its quality one iota. It's brilliant, as is The Exorcist, in taking a feeling and building a whole movie around it. Sometimes people get the wrong idea about horror, even if they're a fan. They think it's about jump scares and gore and evil creatures and, actually, it is! It is about those things but it's also about so much more and whether or not it frightens isn't always the end-all, be-all of whether or not it succeeds. Sometimes, the best thing a horror movie can do is fill you with a vague, creeping sense of discomfort. Disquiet. Disorder. And when it's done right, it can be downright scary.

46 comments:
A pall of death and familial collapse hangs over the house throughout the movie. Very, very little, if anything, in the movie actually feels good.
Precisely. Nothing is ever truly comfortable, even moments that are ostensibly pleasant-ish. I think Friedkin achieves this through careful use of silence.
Anyway, my first viewing came after having read the book, and hearing rumors (which turned out to be true!) about what went on in the film. And I, too, watched it with my mom, as well as a few brothers who'd seen it before. My mom hadn't, and she was a sweet woman, and a Catholic, and I don't know why the hell we were watching it with her. All I know is that when the crucifix scene rolled around, a lot of heads turned away, in embarrassment and unease.
Friedkin really knows how to do this, what would I call it, madness quite well. If you haven't seen his "Bug," do! It's actually very much in the mold of The Exocist in the sense of family rupture and the hell that unleashes on a guilt-ridden woman.
I call films that aren't outright scary "eerie." Like the Val Lewton films, they cause unease, maybe even outrage. You can't shake the feelings they evoke easily.
Bill, I don't think I really got what was going on with the crucifix scene the first time I saw it so I was too ignorant to be embarrassed in front of my mom about it. And that's probably a good thing.
In fact, I probably didn't get most of it but I know it made everything feel kind of bad and off, more than scary. Watching it again, several times, have confirmed this and I think you're right that Friedkin's lack of an ever present musical score (really, it's just at the end) works well towards that goal. Much of the movie is quiet, and when Karras and Merrin are ascending the steps to confront the demon that "score" is the sounds of the many voices wailing in the background. Extremely effective.
Marilyn, I never have seen Bug and haven't heard much about it. I do know from The French Connection and Sorcerer that Friedkin, at least in the 70s, had a real feel for developing madness on the screen. Popeye Doyle's crazed run off into the warehouse after killing a fellow agent at the end of The French Connection turns a crime thriller into a psychological freak show in the final frames.
I love Val Lewton's eerie films so much and that's probably the best way to describe them. They give you a feeling you just can't shake.
Bug
RNOTHING SCARES ME. Things intrigue me, make me interested, put me in suspense, disgust me, but NOTHING SCARES ME.
Somebody planted a bug on my blog. Oh, it was Marilyn.
So, there were a lot of supporters for the movie in the comments, including Pat, Ed and Kimberly. I'll definitely give it a look.
The 'one-hit wonder' comment on imdb though just reinforces again why no one should ever listen to a word anyone has to say on imdb comment threads.
Rod... BOO!!!
Did I scare you? I definitely could get scared by things as a kid and a good nightmare will still scare me, no doubt about it. In a movie though, I can't imagine many of us, past a certain age, still get scared by something in a movie. As in, turn all the lights on and so forth.
Oh yes, when I was a kid, things could scare me - hell, I remember hiding behind the chairs of the next aisle in the movie theater when Lance Guest was getting chased about by the shark in Jaws The Revenge - when I was eight years old. Since I grew up, however...I suppose that's why I love atmosphere and sustained mood in horror films so much more than nitwits trying to make me jump in my seat.
Given that horror is about visceral emotions and responses, I suppose it's surprising how long it took me to realize that you really need a full complement of intelligence to get the full yield out of the genre.
By intelligence I don't mean math and science smarts or even deductive reasoning but the honesty that comes, or should, with intelligence. The honesty to admit that a horror movie situation is dire even though you may not be scared at the moment of watching it in a movie; a sense of empathy and an aesthetic flexible enough to distinguish between how you feel living the moment vicariously through a character in a fictive setting and how you might feel in the same situation in real life.
I don't know why there's such a reluctance to feel for characters these days; there's nothing I enjoy more, horror-wise, than when my palms break out in a sweat for a character who has found him or herself in a bad spot. I regret that too much horror is given over to schadenfreude and the enjoyment of seeing harm come to single-trait stick figure characters. I find that deadly dull and not really horror at all, except for what it says about the people who enjoy that kind of thing.
I take from The Exorcist what I saw in it nearly 40 years ago, which is a sickening of a home through the corruption of its members. Not corruption in the Satanic "offer you can't refuse" way but in the willful leaching away of affection that happens in families through physical and emotional distance and the sickness that is visited upon them through alienation and disaffection.
Having grown up in a home with a chronically ill and mentally unstable family member, I recognize the hushed tones and drawn curtains in The Exorcist; a lot of that film plays as a home movie to me. And yet I enjoy it - probably because it brings a sense of order to my memories of a very unstable and unhappy time.
I suppose that's why I love atmosphere and sustained mood in horror films so much more than nitwits trying to make me jump in my seat.
It's not that I mind jump scares, it's that so much of horror thinks that's all it is anymore.
I regret that too much horror is given over to schadenfreude and the enjoyment of seeing harm come to single-trait stick figure characters.
It's one of the reasons I never liked the Friday the 13th franchise because it was all about killing caricatures, not people. What's horrifying, as you say, is watching characters you've gotten to know and feel you understand, have harm come to them.
It's why Psycho works so well. The screenplay takes its time to build and develop Marion Crane for the audience, let us in on her frustrations, as well as her hopes. It even lets us follow her to the point where she decides it's time to grow up, go back and get things in order. And then it cuts the legs out from under her.
I bet a lot of people think Psycho is great because that Norman is so creepy and the shower scene is so well done. And it's true, both of those lend to its greatness. But it's great because fleshing out Marion so fully is what gives the shower scene so much power. She's not just an extra, a faceless victim. She's someone we were comfortable with and understood.
Well, Arboghost nailed it, as he so often does. But I will say that I am capable of being scared, still. It's rare, and it can come from an unexpected source, but it happens. When I saw JU-ON, and that little girl comes crawling down the stairs -- that kind of imagery has become cliche', now that Asian horror is all the thing, here in 2002, but at the time it really gave me a genuine chill. And what got me wasn't any overt evil expressed in that demon/ghost child's face, but rather the honest curiosity. What something like that might do when curious was just awful to me.
Bill, something causing possible harm to innocent people will always give me a chill if done well but what you describe touches on so much more. That thought, what something like that might do out of curiosity is chilling.
Watching The Uninvited again recently - the Ray Milland movie, not the recent remake of A Tale of Two Sisters - I got actual horripilations from the ghost business. I know the movie, I know the outcome, and yet I was thrilled and chilled by an expert fusing of craftsmanship and whimsy. Whimsy! Delight!
We've said it before, but that really is one of the best ones out there. Just fantastic! And the ghostly figures are perfectly done. Detailed enough that we can make out a figure of some kind, blurred enough that the indistinctiveness spooks us.
I honestly don't like the feeling of being unnerved. I am not a horror fan and must really decide to watch a horror movie in much the same way I have to decide to watch a documentary or drama about a subject that is horrifying. Out and out being scared is much easier on me - I actually relished Open Water and The Host, both excellent films that managed to scare the bejesus out of me.
Documentaries scare me, for real, especially ones showing the underbelly of the world. They scare me because it's a real situation that could affect any one of us.
I've had The Host queued up on Netflix Instant for ages and still haven't watched it. And I've heard so many good things about it! I really must find time this weekend and correct that.
I'm not sure horrifying is the same as horror, but it sure comes close.
And since this is your horror month, The Host will be an appropriate film to watch.
THE HOST is a really interesting movie. I didn't like it as much as most people seemed to, but I appreciated that the story followed its own path, and had a truly emotional base to it. I thought the whole thing was a bit too loose, but it's certainly worthwhile.
Has anybody but me listened to the commentary track on the DVD for the original FRIDAY THE 13TH. Since the movie is lousy, this isn't much of a compliment, but the commentary, or at least portions, are much more entertaining. My favorite sections are when the screenwriter is talking. He wasn't before, and hasn't been since, any kind of horror fan, but Sean Cunningham was his friend and filmmaking partner, so he got hired to write it. He mostly did soap operas before that. Anyway, he talks about watching a bunch of horror movies for research, and so he could lift basic ideas from, say, HALLOWEEN. This of course partially explains why the movie's no good, but from a technical, this-guy-has-a-job-to-do perspective, I found it interesting, and kind of charming.
I'm am curious to see The Host, it's just that something else always pops up as more enticing. But this being October, I see no reason to put it off any longer.
Bill, I think Friday the 13th suffers as much from very poor direction as anything else. There's not much going on there that strikes one as well paced, nicely shot, tightly set-up. It's really ramshackle through and through. And it's pretty funny that someone needed to do research to come up with "one kid after another gets killed until we find out it's the mom taking revenge for her son that drowned." That required research?!
My dad was very spiritual and a devout christian and conservative yet we sat down and watched The Last Temptation of Christ together on cable tv as soon as it hit..and he liked it.He could see what they were trying to say in the story that others picketed and refused to look at.
I don't really get scared at horror movies..(The Haunting-1963 can still creep me out tho)I watch them more for darkly aesthetic pleasures..the Universals,the silents,the Val Lewtons(which I'm re-watching again this autumn,Curse Of The Cat People is one of my fave christmas holiday films)..The Screaming Skull is one of my fave low budgt creep outs..
Curse of the Cat People is one of my favorite holiday films too. It's such a great winter movie. My wife and I with the youngest watched it last December, both of them for the first time, and we all really enjoyed the experience.
Good article, Greg.
I was in my teens when The Exorcist came out. I didn't think much of it then (the ballyhoo overshadowed the film), but I do recall my mother -- a supporter of the Catholic Legion of Decency, one who attended mass only on Easter and Christmas -- found it something of a comedy, as she came from a decidedly more restrained, reserved and mannered culture. She likend the film to a carnival attraction.
I went back to the film years later when reviewing a book on Friedkin, but was still unable to muster any enthusiasm for it.
A few years ago I saw a silly and terrible "version they never showed you" edition, with Friedkin's subliminal death's head now branded across the screen, looking far less menacing if not outright goofy. Is the original theatrical release version still available for viewing? Or has it been replaced by inane director's cuts and other "special" editions?
I still have the original release and refuse to give that awful director's cut the time of day. I mean, it really does destroy so much of what was good, it's like Friedkin is intentionally trying to sabotage it or something.
It was the freak show elements that my dad kind of liked because I think he sort of secretly wished at some point in the monastery someone had become possessed by a demon and he could've assisted in the exorcism. It was procedural stuff he would point out as being wrong, using those damn encyclopedias. I mean, c'mon dad, really.
Can only read, not comment at work, but I liked this article a lot.
I've never been much for The Exorcist, but The Wicker Man is one of my favorites.
Movies in the general scheme of horror can do so many things aside from just making us "scared". The dread and disturbance is one of the most exciting of those. But any number of them are valid. I, too, get tired of horror movies being dismissed for not meeting that one rather limited expectation.
Greg, I love this post.
I saw "The Exorcist" in the theatre on its first release. I was 14, and a friend's mother took a group of us to see it. (We had to have adult accompaniment since it was "R"-rated film.) My expectations were high - I'd already read the book a couple of times. In fact, I can recall toting that purple paperback around my 9th grade classes, and having people "borrow" it for a few moments at a time, just to read the grossesst parts. (The page where Regan masturbates with the crucifix got pretty dog-eared.)
At 14, I was a bit disappointed to find it didn't scare me nearly as much as I expected. But I've seen it a few times since - most recently the 25th anniversary re-release on the big screen - and I've come to appreciate the way it builds that atmosphere of dread and the feeling that something truly terrible is going to happen at any minute.
Ironically the one thing that makes me jump and scream every time I see it is the scene where Karras is listening to tapes of the demon, and suddenly, unexpectedly.... the phone rings!
No lie, THE EXORCIST scared the bejezus out of me. I didn't see the full thing properly until I was about 20, and then I got to watch it in the theater -- not the director's cut, just a revival thing. For me it's not so much the "innocence randomly corrupted" elements that freak me out as its perfect way of bending mundane reality into something unrecognizable and totally hostile. The surreality of it, the sickening lurch from the known into something else entirely... That is cinema rendering Hell at its most potent.
In conversations like this I think a lot of, of all things, SILENT HILL. It's a mess of a movie with WAY too much going on, and I remember not being satisfied when I left the screening... but I also remember my box of Whoppers had been twisted into a tight rope. I had not realized how tense it'd made me all throughout, and how deeply I came to hate and fear the sound of those storm sirens.
I, too, get tired of horror movies being dismissed for not meeting that one rather limited expectation.
Neil, it's especially bad with teenagers. I've heard that critique from my own kids several times (though not so much anymore because I blast it down each time) when asked about a specific horror movie: "Oh my god, it wasn't even that scary."
"But it was good, right?" I'll ask. Eventually we get around to how it was good but not scary and that scary doesn't have to be everything.
Pat, the phone ringing scene works so well because enough time is taken to listen to the voices and realize they're saying something ("Merrin" mainly) until both our's and Karras' attention is fully focused at the moment the phone rings. It's a great scare in the movie and it startles me every time too. Also, Friedkin makes the ring really loud.
And I'm sorry to say but I'm like those friends of yours in school: I've never read the book, only thumbed through the wild sections.
its perfect way of bending mundane reality into something unrecognizable and totally hostile.
I think that's how all the best horror works. Whether it's a Colorado hotel, a Pennsylvania farmhouse or a Georgetown Townhouse, it's the idea of taking normal life and a normal environment and creating not just "other" out of it, but hostile other.
I never saw Silent Hill and barely remember the game now (I played it years ago) but now I'm kind of intrigued.
Well like I say, SILENT HILL is a big freaking mess with way too many threads going on (Sean Bean's character is in there by studio mandate alone; they didn't like that there were no male characters whatsoever)... but nonetheless I found it great for its atmosphere, its dread, and the way it just continually pulls the rug out from under the protagonist. I also liked piecing together what was "really" going on in the town, and what had caused its current state. It did not forget that good ghost stories are also good mysteries.
Actually, the recent THE MIST sort of works in this way too: it introduces a truly alien ecosphere into our own, and watching it unfold, you can sort of suss out how that alien ecosphere "works." But it is alien, and it is hostile, and it cannot be reasoned with or overpowered. The world itself has turned on you.
Come to think of it, that's a pretty compelling case for checking out MONSTERS. I'll have to see how that holds up.
Not to get too far off topic here but I've found that there have been a few good opportunities to make good horror movies from console or pc games and all have failed. I played all the Resident Evil games on the old PS system and I can tell you the movies didn't adapt the games properly, if that makes any sense.
In another piece I'm going to write this month I'm also going to mention some reeeeeeally old pc games ('93 and '94) that would make excellent movies, if done right.
I thought the alien world created in THE MIST was a great one and the creatures with their washed out colors made for a great monster movie. I'm on record with the Horror Dads roundtable at TCM as not thinking the ending succeeded at all but I really liked the rest of it.
I think it was finding films like Lewton's and The Exorcist and even newer ones like The Others and The Devil's Backbone that turned me from hating horror films a few years ago into actively seeking them out how. I'd associated horror with jump scares and slasher films and the like, which I still don't tend to like as much. The creepiness and dread factor is much more compelling to me than being "scared" in the sense of being startled or immediately terrified.
I like your distinction between scary and disturbing, but I personally tend to find that things are disturbing in the way that The Exorcist is disturbing are far scarier than things that are merely startling. You get over jump scares by the next scene. Disturbing stays with you for hours and days and longer. I watched The Exorcist for the first time a few months ago, and what struck me wasn't a fear that Regan was actually going to physically hurt someone, but the really offputting sensation of deep corruption and brokenness - the fact that it was a demon possession was only gross intensification of something that could easily be present in any family. And that's scary.
Sorry that I am so late to this party Greg.
First off, loved the idea of your dad deconstructing the film...I think that would make a great scene in a movie (a family sitting around the TV watching The Exorcist, the father calmly explaining away the bloody crucifix and the pea soup to his terrified offspring ...).
I have always found this film terrifying as well as disturbing. It always gets under my skin, and it always leaves me feeling like I've been punched in the gut. More than that, I appreciate that it tells a compelling and, somewhat, heartbreaking story (I've also enjoyed that much of it is a detective story of sorts).
Anyway, great posting, as always.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I am going to play with my Ouija board.
I think jump scares are like comic relief, they're an effective tool when used well... and much like a straight out laugh a minute comedy, hard to pull of as a whole feature, but an entertaining ride when they do.
The stuff I'm left with later is what I'm in it for.
I said at the time that Silent Hill was the video game movie that best captured the feeling of watching someone else play a video game. I don't think that's a compliment, but some of it is indeed surprisingly effective aside from that.
I remember seeing Nacho Cerda's The Abandoned at a theater and some teenage(ish) girls got up afterward and said, "That sucked!" And while I'm sure it didn't do all I hoped it would, or all the makers presumably hoped either, I think it certainly didn't suck. And I was disappointed in humanity at that moment that that's all they got from it.
Great post - love the last sentence.
You get over jump scares by the next scene. Disturbing stays with you for hours and days and longer.
Jandy, that's so true. I got bored with horror in the eighties and nineties because it seemed to settle into jump scare and gross out mode while disturbing took a back seat, with exceptions here and there, such as Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, for instance.
And disturbing is scary, it's true. It's a different kind of scary for an adult than, say, a kid afraid a vampire going to get him after he's watched Dracula. But it's scary nonetheless.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I am going to play with my Ouija board.
FYI, Captain Howdy's a lousy playing partner. He always sends the pointer flying off the board.
And I wish, in some way, I could go back in time and watch that scene of all of us in the den watching The Exorcist. It makes me laugh every time I think about it. My dad was just so "over" this movie before it was done. I can't even remember what he was saying, just that he kept correcting exorcism stuff like he'd performed one or something. And me saying to my sister things like, "Oh my god, come on, Dad's right! This movie isn't scary at all," while being, admittedly, a little unsettled by some of it. But I was soooo tough! Ha, what a fool.
And I was disappointed in humanity at that moment that that's all they got from it.
I've said it here before on Cinema Styles, but I've defended bad movies or just decent movies I didn't like to people who dismiss them with a "it sucked." Somehow, I feel they should know about all the effort that goes into making a movie and unless it's a true bottom of the barrell stinker, almost every movie has something of value in it.
Great post - love the last sentence.
Thanks, very much!
And disturbing is scary, it's true. It's a different kind of scary for an adult than, say, a kid afraid a vampire going to get him after he's watched Dracula. But it's scary nonetheless.
Exactly - the kind of scary that sticks with you isn't fear of vampires, werewolves, creatures from the black lagoon, or even necessarily deranged serial killers, but the darkness that they represent. Horror that's truly effective unmasks something dark and sinister in humanity that we can relate to and fear even though the particular manifestation in a given film may not be something we fear.e
You state that you grew up from childhood with the entire set of the Encyclopedia of Catholicism. This puts you way ahead of the pack in knowledge about demonology, exorcism, etc. YOU should be making scary movies!
Catholicism can be scary.
The Host is kinda interesting. . I want to see it ASAP lol well the exorcist episodes are one of my favorite. . I watched all of them and honestly it freaks me out, can't sleep at night=(
Post a Comment