Come on...where's the real truth for contemporary horror


John Carpenter said it perfectly mid-way through in that we give directors like Craven (for Last House on the Left) too much credit in that LHOTL was social commentary. Like Eli Roth's criminally over rated Hostel, these are not great social comments on America.

LHOTL is an excellent film, but it is an excellent exploitation film...and a film that can only be a product of its time - i.e. US cinema became more independent following the mid-60s boom, of which European cinema had been for many years. Before that, it had been controlled implicitly by a studio system. The horror genre will always thrive through independence.

With Hostel, it is again a product of its time (okay it has trite, spoon feeding themes in it, but still...). It is a reaction to how desentisised we are with the genre, a marketable push again by Hollywood studios to cash in on real issues - it's painful really.

Another point made here was that the barrage of updates/remakes of 70s horror that has become more gory and violent due to violent world events.....don't give me that, it is purely we are used to dumbed down violence, not just from news reports but by the need to shock and go one step further with what has previously been made (can you imagine a remake of TCM with no blood in it, like the original - the studios wouldn't take the risk). The US studio system would remake anything if they could. If the point was that these remakes reflected social ills, why is it that the slew of Eastern horror, mainly from Korea and Japan are tame versions of their original sources, and not bloody, shocking versions. Again, it is a studio ploy, nothing more, nothing less.

I think the real depth to US contemporary horror was missed here again with this doc. We've heard the same trite academic stances before, over and over, with no counter argument.

And that is why another poster on this board makes a good point that 70's US exploitation cinema is just as important, as it existed outside of the studio systems, away from franchises, pushing boundaries and normal expectations, much in the way that there is a wealth of amazing European exploitation films (Italy, Germany and Spain being obvious, but many more beside).

All this doc shows is the marketable historic arc of the horror film....and for that motivation, misses the point entirely.

"Gran'pa was always tha best...."

reply

Excellent post. I was thinking the same thing while watching this drivel. One thing I did come away with is the overwhelming sense that film makers like George Romero, Wes Craven, and John Carpenter absolutely hate the United States. Not only that, they think very little of the ignorant masses who pay to see their films.

Guys, it's okay! He just wanted his machete back!


reply

I agree, they definitely hate this country. Just look at the way they demonize Ronald Reagan when most people in this country think he was one of the greatest presidents in recent history

reply

doesn't criticism make democracy what it is? the people who tout ronald reagan are usually those that have no memory of his presidency and prefer to romanticize what were otherwise a grim time in american history.

reply

You must despise America more than any other country in the world if you honestly believe that "most people in this country think he(Ronald Reagan) was one of the greatest presidents in recent history". He was the absolute WORST president in history. He set this country down a path to ruin that we we still be recovering from decades from now, and you KNOW this.

reply

One thing I did come away with is the overwhelming sense that film makers like George Romero, Wes Craven, and John Carpenter absolutely hate the United States. Not only that, they think very little of the ignorant masses who pay to see their films.


Funny. I didn't get that from this at all. It's particularly confusing to me that you would draw that conclusion about Craven since he didn't even participate in being interviewed for this film. I think they come off as more anti-establishment than anything else but I guess if you're a huge believer in the idea of the American dream, this film might not be your cup of tea. I personally really enjoyed it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ywLWkHaQ6A

reply

movies nowadays are a product of the industry, not social commentary. you can say that about most any american film made these days.

reply

You realize The Last House on the Left was a remake of Ingmar Bergman's The Virgin Spring right? More of an antithesis to the Swedish film's idea of the horror of the parent's reaction and breaking their religious pacifism as opposed to the true emptiness of the parent's action...

The Last House on the Left's reputation as merely an exploitation film is extremely unwarranted.

Other than that, I somewhat agree. There were legitimate points this documentary tried to make and then some points where it was just scraping at the bottom of the barrel.

You ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?
Yeah, he told me you're gay.
*BANG!*

reply

Good post.

I found this documentary rather shallow. While there were some interesting tidbits, far too much time was spent discussing the political views of a few directors, and the sad thing is they were taking themselves seriously.
This is much like how the academic world overanalyzes literature to find the "hidden meaning" in a story when none exists. Take Stoker's Dracula. Professors and professional students throughout the academic world have been trying to say that Dracula was really a commentary on imperialism, or about sexual repression, or fear invasion from the outside, etc. In reality, Stoker was a civil servant who just wanted to write a good novel. He found the myth of the vampire very interesting and let his mind do the rest. No deeper political statement, no hidden meaning, just entertainment.

And that's all horror films should be. Yes, some directors with inflated egos will think their movies will stick it to the man or tell those evil conservatives how things really are...whatever. Nobody looks for a political lecture from a film, horror or not.

reply

It is irrelevant what the creator's intentions are/were, for there can still be unintentional meanings. So films like Dr. Strangelove and The Manchurian Candidate are films that no one watches; how about the Italian Neo-realists? Believe it or not, but a lot of films are politically charged.

HI-F___ING-YA
Nicholas Cage Deadfall
2014 Rankings: imdb.com/list/mOL23rGRrh0/

reply

It was a clip show with some liberal editorializing. There was little real analysis. The horror industry makes the same films during a President Obama as they did during Bush.

reply

Yeah, I was disappointed in this. I liked hearing the directors' view points on things but it got very tiring with everyone else shoehorning politics into every film. Not every movie is about being middle class, or the American Dream, or the freaking empty promise of home ownership. Movies require characters, and there are only so many socioeconomic categories into which your characters can fall. It doesn't necessarily mean anything. And repeating the phrase "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" doesn't automatically make whatever point you're trying to make profound.

It's a documentary ostensibly about the American horror genre that ends by saying "foreign films are better". Even if I may agree with that sentiment, why is it in this documentary?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]