I want your opinions. I -crave- your opinions.

Hey guys,

I know I'm new here; hey, I'm Ashley. I wanted to ask this question, actually, so I'm hoping for some heated debate (if I'm lucky ;) ) and just general opinion...

So I noticed the tendency in modern American horror lately to go further and further into intense visual representation (...ie, gore). And that these films are having physical side effects...

For example, I'm thinking of the reports of people throwing up in the aisles of Hostel; walking out of The Hills Have Eyes; fainting at Saw III. Lolling eyes, deformed rape scenes, racks which turn all limbs 180 degrees...


So:
+ Why do you think this influx of hardcore gore and the like is a current trend?

+ Do you think it's a current trend, or that it actually has older roots? If so, where?

+ If you enjoy going to these kinds of movies, why? If not, why not?

+ Have you ever experience physical trauma, akin to the news reports, at a sighting of any of these movies--even if you liked the movie?


I might have more questions, of course... but I'm really looking to engage with you all on this.

[slayer666]

The fact that you are asking serious horror-related questions proves that you are new here. Welcome!

+ Why do you think this influx of hardcore gore and the like is a current trend?

I agree that this is a trend now in American horror. I'm not sure that there is a good answer to the "why" question except to note that trends are cyclic and we've seen this one before.

+ Do you think it's a current trend, or that it actually has older roots? If so, where?

It is a current trend with roots in 70's exploitation flicks. Last House on the Left, TCM, the original Hills Have Eyes were the exploitation films that much of the current trend seems to be based on. I see what is happening now as more of a rehashing the exploitation subgenre as opposed to anything new.

+ If you enjoy going to these kinds of movies, why? If not, why not?

Although I do enjoy a small number of films that belong to this subgenre, this is my least favorite horror genre. In general, I have very little interest in watching torture, although I do make a few exceptions (e.g., Audition). Why don't I generally care for exploitation films? I suppose it is because I don't find them particularly entertaining. In fact, many of the recent ones I have seen were terrible films without any redeeming qualities I could discover (e.g., Hostel).

+ Have you ever experience physical trauma, akin to the news reports, at a sighting of any of these movies--even if you liked the movie?

No. I have turned a movie or two off before the end because it was so bad that I couldn't see wasting any more time on it, but I've never experienced the sort of reactions you described.

[ManchestrMorgue]

Good thread.

I don't think that depiction of "hardcore gore" is a recent trend. If you look at horror throughout the ages, pushing boundaries is nothing new. For example, consider Freaks (not gore, but caused considerable controversy for years after it was made), and the outrage by critics/censors at some of the early Hammer films (mainly for gore). These seem tame now, but at the time they were controversial in their time.

These films may seem tame now, but in their time they pushed boundaries that had hitherto not been crossed, and in this context were controversial. Once the boundary has been pushed, those that come after it need to push that boundary further or find other boundaries to become controversial.

These physical responses that you mention with Hills Have Eyes and Saw III are similar to those reported with older films such as The Exorcist, and even Dracula (1931). Hard to imagine given the films we are used to seeing now...

[swiss tony]

i think both manchester and slayer make good points and that the recent trend is a mixture of both answers. yes, its time for the 70's style video nasties to reappear because its their turn, and as part of the evolution of all art forms people are trying to 'push the boundaries'. the counter balance to these movies is the attempt to remake everything of quality that has come out of asia in the last ten years. what i find most disturbing isn't the mindless gore fests that we are seeing but western movie makers inability or unwillingness to make a thinking mans horror. why take the easy option and just buy the rights to these j horror classics when there are probably numerous talented american writers with great scripts out there. the remakes always suck anyway. the most notable exception is session 9 (i know its not a remake), and everything by M Night Shymalan

[Mictlantechutli]

We're at war.

The writing and directing of these gore-soaked films reflect the climate of cruelty across the globe right now. Many of the 1970s exploitation flicks were direct offshoots of Vietnam. Tom Savini openly admits that his time spent in Vietnam as a photographer shaped the way he created effects, and his gore effects lead the way for our current level of what's acceptable.

Things cooled off for a while and there was a general sense of global peace through the nineties, and these films faded away.

But the world is a very violent place these days. These films simply reflect current fears - which is the horror film's duty.

As for physical trauma, it's a movie. It can't leap off the screen and physically assault you. I'm sure you meant emotional/psychological trauma...and no, not traumatized by films regardless of their impact.

[Demonique]

I agree that this is not a recent trend, nor are the reactions to films new. When Alien came out in the theatre, people were screaming and running out halfway through. I have never had a reaction like that and frankly don't understand it.

I will stick my neck out by saying that I did enjoy Hostel and Saw - own them both and have watched them repeatedly. I believe the reason why I enjoy movies like this is because I have never seen a movie that actually scared me so I settle for ones that make me cringe.

Originally Posted by Demonique

I will stick my neck out by saying that I did enjoy Hostel and Saw - own them both and have watched them repeatedly. I believe the reason why I enjoy movies like this is because I have never seen a movie that actually scared me so I settle for ones that make me cringe.

Hmmm... You've never seen a movie that scared you? Not even psychologically? A friend of mine said that the gore doesn't get to her because it's the psychological stuff that she "takes home with her." So it's the cringing that gives you the thrill?

Yeah--I noticed that, about the rehashing of exploitation films... especially with obvious references to films like Last House on the Left. Do you think the recent ones differ from the originals in concept? How do they modify--if they do at all--beyond the addition of more gore?

Mictlantechutli--you bring up an excellent point I hadn't thought about. When I think about music, I think about sociopolitical climate. I just hadn't thought to apply that to film -head hang sheepishly-. Great observation.

ManchestrMorgue, thanks for bringing up the Exorcist and Dracula--I didn't know that they, too, were reported as having physical side-effects. ...Do you know if these physical reactions occur in any film genre apart from horror?

Me, I'm curious on my own level... to a degree...
Like, do you ever feel guilty... or, well, any kind of emotion... at our ability to watch movies like these? That we're that desensitized? Or do you think it has nothing to do with desensitisation... because it all looks fake anyway? Do you think it looks fake?

I'm a bloody coward. I know it, in real life... I mean, put me in any of those Saw situations, and maybe I'd escape 3/12 of them or however many there are. I feel like if I watch them, it gives me that small revel because I know I could never do it in real life. One of my friends watches because he thinks it "prepares" him, should a similar situation ever occur to him (ok, not Saw style, but you know). How do you justify your attraction to the genre? What makes it make you tick?

[Riff]

I don't think it's a current trend so much as a continuing escalation of what's been going on in American horror films for the last 20+ years. American horror filmmakers have confused gore with horror, and try to substitute one for the other. Audiences have become more and more jaded to gore as a result of this, so the level of gore shown has increased. This has resulted in the recent revival of 70s style grindhouse horror. DON'T GET ME WRONG!!! I'm not saying that there aren't gory movies that are scary, just that a lot of filmmakers substitute gore for genuine thrills. I think that's why you're seeing a movement toward j-horror in the US. People are looking for suspense and chills, and that tradition has been kept in asian film. The problem is, when they do the US adaptation, their first impulse is "it's not gory enough... can we add more gore?"

[illdojo]

There is nothing I can say that has not already been said.
Killer Thread. ;)

[ManchestrMorgue]

Originally Posted by venus headtrap

ManchestrMorgue ...Do you know if these physical reactions occur in any film genre apart from horror?

Well, only the obvious one :eek:

But seriously, the reactions you are describing are merely the result of intense emotional/psychological reaction to the subject matter.

Therefore, it stands to reason that it would not be only horror movies that provoke a "physical reaction" in the viewer. Some people cry when they watch sad movies or romantic films, and this is similarly a physical expression of the emotional/psychological state that has been invoked by the film (coupled with the person's own life experiences, psychological milieu, and current emotional state).

As such, I don't think that horror films are the only films that can provoke a physical response in the viewer. However, the responses provoked by horror films may potentially be more dramatic to the onlooker.