CHUD.com Community › Forums › CREATURE CORNER › Creature Corner Main › Would Horror Be Scarier Without the Morality?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Would Horror Be Scarier Without the Morality? - Page 2

post #51 of 68
3/30/07 at 9:58pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by teledork
I always wondered if he might have been worried about being a stronger vampire because of his faith.....sort of a "those that fall from loftier heights reach the deeper depths" kind of thing. Not sure that it would have been explored in that flick, though. As I remember, though, several years ago Piers Anthony did look at that idea in one of his "Incarnations of Immortality" novels. Basically, the incarnation of Satan was given to an upper level official in the church because he understood the power of the highest faith. When he fell, he rebelled against that faith FAR more than an ordinary person would.
That's part of a whole other debate I remember having in college -- can you have a tragedy if the protagonist isn't of a high rank? Is it a tragedy if some peasant falls from grace or some minimum wage slave finds himself compromised and brought low by circumstance? It's the argument used by those who try to say that Death of a Salesman isn't a true tragedy because Willie Loman isn't a noble figure.
Reply
post #52 of 68
3/30/07 at 10:17pm
Good point. But, at the risk of going way off topic, I'd have to say a tragedy could happen if there's a loss of *potential* greatness. Willie Lohman knows he's not a noble figure. Knows what could have been.

Thus the "On the Waterfront" power with Brando's "I coulda been a CONTENDER".
Reply
post #53 of 68
3/31/07 at 4:45pm
Thread Starter 
If the goings on in most horror films can be classified as :tragedy", I don't think a high station is necessary; most of them are just doofy teens trying to avoid getting killed. Even the virginal survivors in your standard issue moralistic flicks aren't from a really high station. And what was that Anton Chekov story about the guy who just wants someone to talk to, and searched thru the whole story for just that, getting repeated brush offs, and ends up telling his woes to his horse? Pretty tragic, I'd say, and there was nothing special about him. Just a humble farmer, if memory serves. I guess a high station and the resultant great fall would help tragedy along, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary.
Reply
post #54 of 68
4/1/07 at 11:48pm
What about a case where the hero becomes the monster? Take American Werewolf for example... David is the victim (innocent enough, or did they disregard local folklore?) of a werewolf attack, becomes a lycanthrope himself, is unable to control himself and kills others. His undead (Jiminy Cricket!) buddy, Jack, tries to convince him to kill himself before David finally goes on a rampage and is gunned down in an alley-way near Piccadilly.

What's the call on people who are cursed/mutated/transformed against their will? Not the mad scientist who toyed with science/nature/magic, but the truly innocent victim who is forced to continue the circle of carnage.

Or is the fact that David is an American (stranger in a strange-land) reason enough for the unfortunate fate?

EDIT: I also consider stuff like the Prophecy, The Exorcism of Emily Rose, 9th Gate, & End of Days, religious horror BTW... Any horror with the Devil, Exorcisms, Angels/Demons, etc.

EDIT: Haunted house movies in general seem to victimize people for merely moving in. And often times, the mischievous/malicious ghost was an innocent child themselves who was victimized before their death (Changeling, Grudge, etc). Neverending cycle of undeserved horror. Sometimes the original guilty party is the one that is now haunted, thus the comeuppance.
Reply
post #55 of 68
4/2/07 at 1:47pm
Thread Starter 
You know, that's a really interesting thought. Now that I think about it, "The Wolfman" may have been way, way ahead of its time. I'd like to see a movie explore this theme a little more in depth again, like AWIL did, but maybe let the "hero" get a rampage ot two in first. How much more horrifying would it be for some otherwise scrupulousy good, moral person to wake up after killing a family (including the kids, of course!) of equally innocent people? In this case, the hero doubles as a victim, and doesn't deserve his fate any more than the people he kills. . . unless, of course, he fails to take action to stop himself from killing again. I guess "The Lost Boys" tried this, but it almost gets lost in the Corey Haim-ishness. Both that film and AWIL have some comedic aspects to them. I really wanna see this played absolutely straight, now.
Reply
post #56 of 68
4/2/07 at 2:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler
Sure, the morality makes it a little more effective, but, take the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Granted, I haven't seen it in about 6 months and I may have forgotten a detail, but where was the morality in that? If I recall correctly, those kids weren't doing anything wrong but still got rubbed out and that was still scary as hell. Of course, someone will come in and point out a glaring omission on my part and my point will become moot, but until then...
Drayton warned them (at the gas station/bar-b-que shack)they shouldn't go messing around on some one elses property. Even though they initially went to the old Hardesty estate, it didn't take long for them to go "messing around" at the Sawyers home instead.

The moral: You should never trespass. Especially when the warning comes from some one as creepy/potentially psychotic as Drayton Sawyer.
Reply
post #57 of 68
4/2/07 at 3:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Myers
Imagine being slashed, burned, maimed whatever tortured in any kind of way... but you DON'T die. There's no end to the pain, experiencing hell constantly. Like that greek mythology with Prometheus and the eagle, eating his ever-growing liver for 30k years.

Being ripped apart by Pinhead's chains is one thing, being ripped apart every hour another.
Ah, good point. Nicely done. Has there been such a horror movie? I can think of plenty of flicks that fall under "torture porn" guidelines, but the people of course die. I wonder if a horror movie like that would work. Something to ponder...
Reply
post #58 of 68
4/2/07 at 3:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by DARKMITE8
EDIT: Haunted house movies in general seem to victimize people for merely moving in. And often times, the mischievous/malicious ghost was an innocent child themselves who was victimized before their death (Changeling, Grudge, etc). Neverending cycle of undeserved horror. Sometimes the original guilty party is the one that is now haunted, thus the comeuppance.
But most haunted house films follow the pattern of the family moving in, strange but benign things begin to happen, then a more overt indication the family should leave, then all hell breaks loose. Like the Eddie Murphy routine, the victims are usually punished for not heeding the ominous voice telling them to "GET OUT!!!" They're punished as much for their disbelief in the power haunting the place as they are for being in it.
Reply
post #59 of 68
4/2/07 at 3:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler
Ah, good point. Nicely done. Has there been such a horror movie? I can think of plenty of flicks that fall under "torture porn" guidelines, but the people of course die. I wonder if a horror movie like that would work. Something to ponder...

Well, not exactly the same, but what of films that take place in limbo? Jacob's Ladder, Carnival of Souls, Dead End. The people can't die because they are already dead. Their torture, whether it be psychological or physical(and if your already dead, I guess it all possibly falls under psychological) continues until they move on, in a sense. In some cases, like Jacob's, they do, but in others they could be trapped in that limbo forever.
Reply
post #60 of 68
4/2/07 at 4:13pm
What kind of story could you do based off infinite torture? Where'd be the tension? The climax? The plot, even?
Reply
post #61 of 68
4/2/07 at 5:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson
But most haunted house films follow the pattern of the family moving in, strange but benign things begin to happen, then a more overt indication the family should leave, then all hell breaks loose. Like the Eddie Murphy routine, the victims are usually punished for not heeding the ominous voice telling them to "GET OUT!!!" They're punished as much for their disbelief in the power haunting the place as they are for being in it.
A. With the way the real estate market is here in Orlando, I can't blame someone for sticking it out.

"GEEETTT OOOUUUTTT!"
"F**K you, Casper. Have you seen how inflated the market is lately?"
"GOOOOD POOOIIINT... sorry."

B. Haunted Mansion flick makes Eddie a hypocrite retro-actively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IggytheBorg
As for the Monster Hunter movies, most of them kind of slip over into action/adventure territory and away from "pure" horror, I think. And in a twisted sort of way, you almost can't say that he doesn't 'deserve' "special attention" from the monsters. He does put himself in harm's way voluntarily, in most instances. He kind of has to expect that as an occupational hazard, doesn't he?
Well, it's a "kick ass or have your ass kicked" kind of world out there...
Reply
post #62 of 68
4/2/07 at 8:37pm
What of the American j-horror imports, namely The Ring, The Grudge and Dark Water. Not much "he/she got what was coming" in any of those, just "bad things are coming and there's nothing you can do." Are they just style over substance or am i missing the cultural guilt-force or something that should be subconsciously at work?

All I get out of it is the dead generally have two things, long black hair and an abiding hatred of the living. And, according to The Ring II they tend to get wildlife worked into a lather.
Reply
post #63 of 68
4/2/07 at 9:33pm
Thread Starter 
I disliked "The grudge" so much I don't have much of it committed to memory, so I'll remain silent on that score. But as for 'The Ring", I think the 'sin', such as it is, is hubris (the pride that cometh before a fall), because the victims (escept the little kid, I guess) watch the tape despite hearing about its power. Much like the protagonists in a Lovecraft story, don't mess w/ what you don't understand, 'specially if you've been warned. . . .. Does it justify what they get? Not in the least.

but it IS a horror movie, after all.
Reply
post #64 of 68
4/3/07 at 10:30am
After pondering, I think Iggy is right, pretty much all the j-horror flicks are takeoffs of the traditional haunted house story, where the victims are "punished" for their blatant disrespect of the disembodied "GET OUT."
Reply
post #65 of 68
4/3/07 at 11:32am
Additionally, many "haunted house" tales (and J-Horror) are sorta mysteries as well. The protagonist many times sees the occurences as clues to discover what atrocities took place, so the killer can be brought to justice, the remains can be found, spirits can finally be put to rest, etc. So= actually staying around, being brave in the face of WTF, and "sticking it out" proves to be the only way to end the curse (SPOILER= Stir of Echoes). Doesn't always work... sometimes they also fall victim to the ghost's revenge machinations (SPOILERS: Dark Water & Silent Hill) through death, madness, limbo, loss of a loved one, etc.

The morality of the tail becomes an obligation to end the cycle due to the responsibilty of having a mortgage/lease. Nice. As if property tax isn't enough trouble.
Reply
post #66 of 68
4/3/07 at 11:59am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IggytheBorg
You know, that's a really interesting thought. Now that I think about it, "The Wolfman" may have been way, way ahead of its time. I'd like to see a movie explore this theme a little more in depth again, like AWIL did, but maybe let the "hero" get a rampage ot two in first. How much more horrifying would it be for some otherwise scrupulousy good, moral person to wake up after killing a family (including the kids, of course!) of equally innocent people? In this case, the hero doubles as a victim, and doesn't deserve his fate any more than the people he kills. . . unless, of course, he fails to take action to stop himself from killing again. I guess "The Lost Boys" tried this, but it almost gets lost in the Corey Haim-ishness. Both that film and AWIL have some comedic aspects to them. I really wanna see this played absolutely straight, now.
Actually, after further reflection, I recalled that "The Fly" and "Interview With the Vampire" are kind o0f studies of the 'innocent' protagonist cursed w/ an evil affliction. In Brundle's case, his only 'sin' may have been a tiny bit of scirntific hubris in that he tested the telepods before maybe he should have after getting drunk following his argument w/ Geena Davis. At 1st, he's totally opposed to the transformation and looking for a cure. Later, he decides that he kind of LIKES (or at least accepts unqustioningly, now) what's happening to him, and decides instead of curing himself he's gonna graft his whole family together. Loius is a little less sympathetic (and a lot more annoying) because he WAS offered a choice and did say yes, but just couldn't bring himself to do the repugnant things being a vamp required.

But I don'r think either of these quite hits the mark on what I'd like to see; a story where a truly 'innocent' protagonist is afflicted w/ some sort of curse (like lycanthropy), knows what's happening to him, is utterly horrified by it, but can't bring himself to end it all thru cowardice or self preservation, and is tortured by the consequences of his (admittedly uncontrollable) actions while in beast form, or whatever. I'd prefer not to see him turn evil; that's kind of been done (see, "The Fly", above) and would be too easy. I want to see him squirm, wracked by guilt, as the body count rises.
Reply
post #67 of 68
4/3/07 at 11:46pm
Thread Starter 
Just caught the end of "Near Dark" and am reminded that this is kind of an 80-fied, poor man's "Interview w/ the Vampire", b/c the Adrian Pasdar character is reluctant to the point he gets them all killed by letting a potential victim escape. But I think this device of the innocent, afflicted, guilty for the bloody & violent killing of innocents, can't help himself hero would work well in (at least near) isolation; alone w/ his tortured thoughts & guilt, self loathing & disgust at his own inability to man up & by opposing end these slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. A perfect psychological hell. probably work better as a book than a movie.
Reply
post #68 of 68
4/4/07 at 11:39am
Not necessarily horror films, but Sturla Gunnarsson's Beowulf and Grendel and Hal Hartley's No Such Thing (both with Sarah Polley) are pretty good modern & objective observations on the myth, origin, perception, and treatment of the "monster character".

But also look no further than Frankenstein for a truly tragic take on a monster (of someone else's creation) who must "live" out existence as a loathed and lonely (and dangerous) being. The idea of playing God (Doctor) resulting in an abomination who terrorizes the villagers (and takes an innocent child's life) is a perfect examination of morality. The angry mob aren't the only victims. The monster himself is a victim of his own creation and circumstance (basically a strong, retarded, impulsive child).

EDIT: Also... thinking about Monster flicks in general. In addition to the scientists and military that are often responsible, there are often alot of collateral damage (plenty of innocents crushed, eaten, impregnated, etc). Maybe the morality lesson is just that... ignoring the danger of messing with mother nature/the atom/genetics/etc can result in a massive loss not accounted for originally. Innocents paying for others' mistakes = a huge burden of guilt.

"What have I done???"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Creature Corner Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › CREATURE CORNER › Creature Corner Main › Would Horror Be Scarier Without the Morality?