"Rants & Ravings About Horror" - Week 9: “Gore! Gore! Gore!”

Week 9: “Gore! Gore! Gore!”

If you’re a fan of horror then eventually someone will ask you your thoughts on gore films.  These can include the infamous films of Lucio Fulci or even more recent film makers like Eli Roth and Tom Six (and if you don’t know any of these names then you are definitely missing out).  Gore films, like other subgenres of horror, have their place and purpose in the horror genre and should not be summarily dismissed.  There are, in fact, several that even the most placid fan should see for their own personal education if for nothing else.

What is a gore film?

Most people would determine this simply as a film with lots of blood and guts (and for the most part they are correct), but many include Tobe Hooper’s The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) and Tom Six’s The Human Centipede: First Sequence (2009) in this group and both of those have very little to no gore.  A better definition would include films that make audiences so uneasy that they appear to be filled with gore and blood and guts whether they actually have it or not.  Most torture porn films are included in this but there is very little gore in Captivity (2007).   Saw (2004) is also included in this but this film also has very little to no gore (unlike the many sequels).

Films that go beyond being just a simply gore film are Braindead (1992), Tokyo Gore Police (2008), and Re-Animator (1985) which all revel in the gore but are so darkly comic that you kind of dismiss it.  Comedy (especially in the films today) is used to off-set the copious amounts of blood and guts in a horror film which also changes the perspective of the genre.

Why is gore important?

Gore to horror films (or any genre of film) is important in that it off-sets our perspective on the events taking place in the film.  Sometimes dealing with something so dramatic as death and murder cannot be sugar coated.  Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986) and Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom (1975) are so polarizing in the content of the story that the gore is secondary which doesn’t diminish the reality of the story being told.  In Dawn of the Dead (1978), director George A. Romero is presenting to audiences the most realistic zombie film ever made; he is erasing the memory of the placid White Zombie (1932), and presenting audiences with what would happen in a real zombie apocalypse.

Presenting events as they would be in reality is key to the success of a good gore film.  One of the goriest scenes in modern day cinema is the opening battle of Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan (1998), in which the film maker wanted to present war as it was in the most realistic way as possible.   The darkly comic Cabin Fever (2002) uses gore to represent what it would be like if a group of friends were forced to deal with a flesh eating virus.

Real Gore Vs. Comedy Gore?

In this day and age, some of the most well remembered gore films and moments in gore films are surrounded in comedy.  Day of the Dead (1985) has just as many gory moments as its predecessor and it is all presented in a realistic manner but in Shaun of the Dead (2004), which pays homage to that film, presents some of those same moments but mixed with comedy.  Re-Animator and From Beyond (1986) have many gory moments but director Stuart Gordon is pitch perfect with the dark humor.  There is nothing humorous in the infamous Cannibal Holocaust (1980) but Piranha 3-D (2010) has more gore in it than all the above films mentioned but it’s all played tongue firming in cheek. 

Does horror and gore need comedy?  There is no right or wrong answer to this because for every Martyrs (2008) there is a Bad Taste (1987) and for every Feast (2005) there is a Zombie Flesh Eaters (1979).  Real gore has its place and directors like Pascal Laugier and Ruggero Deodato relate and present it differently than Edgar Wright or Peter Jackson whose films are drenched in comedy and blood.

Some of My Favorite Gore Films:

I enjoy gore films of all types.  I believe there is a place for films like Sharknado (2013) just like there is for New York Ripper (1982) and Ichi the Killer (2001).  I do prefer my realistic gore films to have more of a point and not just be cannon fodder.  I love Deodato’s Cannibal Holocaust and David Cronenberg’s The Fly (1986) for the message that they say but I also love Bride of Re-Animator (1989) and Evil Dead II (1987), which if they have a message I’m not aware of it.  I know I will probably never see Salo or Anthropophagus (1980) again but Hellraiser (1987) and Dead Snow (2009) are two of my all time favorites.  Fulci’s A Cat in the Brain (1990) is just as disturbing as Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer but I’ve only seen the latter more than once even though I love both equally.  The entire Feast franchise is one of the most entertaining and fun whereas the Saw franchise has only a few standout entries.  

I do tend to have more fun watching the gore films with comedy (because they are so easy to just pop in the DVD/BD player and go) but the more serious ones I tend to go back to when I need a good film that doesn’t talk down to the audience (hence my love of all the Romero zombie films and just about anything from Fulci and Dario Argento).

Is Gore Important?

Gore and gore films are important in that it allows us to view reality without the sugar coating.  It informs us about the reality of death and murder and more importantly all things in life.  In today’s climate gore is not only for horror but for all other genres as well.  This Is the End (2013) and The Expendables (2010) and Hot Fuzz (2007) and Fury (2014) and The Raid 2 (2014) all have their gory moments to make them more realistic which is what audiences today crave.  There is no doubt that sometimes gore can be excessive but where would we be if all the gore was stripped out of Dead Snow 2: Red Vs. Dead (2014) or the original Robocop (1987) but a hollow by-the-numbers (and highly forgettable) film.

Film Review: STANLEY KUBRICK: A LIFE IN PICTURES (2001)

Director Stanley Kubrick was one of the most respected and reclusive directors in film history who never repeated himself as a film maker and had unbelievable control over most of his films.  He died just after his final film Eyes Wide Shut (1999) was released but Jan Harlan’s documentary Stanley Kubrick: A Life in Pictures (2001) is the most comprehensive film on the director. 

Harlan (who also produced the film) charts Kubrick’s legacy from his very first short film to his very last film (including a small section on his collaboration with Steven Spielberg and A.I.: Artificial Intelligence).  The great achievement of this film is all the interviews with Kubrick and his home movies which are scattered from beginning to end.  It is not just a film about a great film maker but his life as a private man with his wife and children and how his life influenced his film life and vice versa.

Kubrick was such a unique talent and a recluse who later in life averaged maybe one film a decade that you would think it hard to get into his inner workings and influences.  The amazing thing about Kubrick and which Harlan does a great job on addressing is the fact that he never produced “easy” films.  His films were always cutting edge and ahead of their time, so much so that many times they were under appreciated at the time of their release but later became cinematic classics.  This is the case with Lolita (1962), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), A Clockwork Orange (1971) or Eyes Wide Shut, to name a few.  Even today, audiences marvel at the ambiguity of his films which are open to interpretation and test the endurance of the audience like Barry Lyndon (1975) or Killer’s Kiss (1955).  The one consensus from film makers today is that Kubrick is a visionary and auteur.

 Kubrick was also a family man.  Through his home movies we get a glimpse at the man with his family and his thoughts and fears of people’s reaction to his uncompromising films.  We learn that he had to make cuts to his Lolita because the Catholic Church’s demonization of the film.  Kubrick pulled A Clockwork Orange from cinemas in the UK after the young related deaths that became associated with the film.  The bad publicity and reaction to that film was a threat to his personal welfare and family and he always maintained that his family came first above everything else (which is why he left the United States to raise his children in the UK).

This is not only an informative look at one of cinema’s greatest legends but also a look at the man and the way in which people saw and experienced his films.  This is one of the best films of its kind and should not be missed.

Film Review: COMING SOON (1982)

Jamie Lee Curtis is the Host of the John Landis directed film Coming Soon (1982) which a Universal Studios produced “clips” film about the greatest in Universal horror and sci-fi monsters.  Curtis takes you on a journey through the classic black & white Universal monster classics characters such as Dracula, he Wolfman, the Mummy, Frankenstein’s monster and the Creature From the Black Lagoon that inspired and frightened a nation.  She also delves deep into the popularity of certain genres as the tide for horror films changed from one decade to the next. 

There an extended sequence with director Steven Spielberg while on the set of E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) and mention of the popularity of his film Jaws (1975). There is also a lengthy bit that focuses on Alfred Hitchcock’s classics Psycho (1960) and The Birds (1963).  This film, which is only 55 minutes in length, is for people who love classic Universal monsters and it reminds us of how the studio build its reputation.

The star power of Curtis (who has been a permanent fixture of the horror genre) and written by Landis and Mick Garris (a huge supporter of all things horror having worked on numerous Stephen King film adaptations as well as the creator of the TV series Masters of Horror) this is a film made by fans for the fans.

Film Review: THE AMITYVILLE HAUNTING (2011)

The myth about the Amityville house and what happened there is the stuff that would give anyone nightmares.  Too bad there will be no nightmares had after watching The Amityville Haunting (2011).  You can never keep a good idea to make a profit down as this film is nothing more than an easy way for an indie production company to make money off a popular marketable idea. 

Taking its cue from the popularity of the found footage film, Tyler Benson (Devin Clark) is the next young Steven Spielberg whose family (mother, father, younger & older sister) has moved into the house that is made of nightmares.  Over the course of a week after they move in Tyler films everything getting things on tape that he can’t comprehend and as people start to die from accidents in the house, Tyler and his family soon come to realize that they are not alone in the house.

Besides using all the wrong clichés of bad found footage films the worst thing about the film is that it is filled with unlikable characters and an annoying little kid as the main protagonist.  The film is beyond predictable with nothing you haven’t already seen a hundred times before in other found footage films.  This is not the nail in the coffin for the film as the film is filled with atrocious acting all around and even worst is the way in which the film is edited which has more unnecessary jump cuts than an MTV music video.

This film is beyond amateur and bad with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.  This is a travesty that most people will turn off within the first ten minutes (as I should have but I suffer through these films so you don’t have to).

2013: FIRST QUARTER BOX OFFICE SMACK DOWN!

As usual with the first quarter of the year the Box Office sees a healthy amount of genre releases that tend to disappear just before summer Hollywood Block Buster time.  This year has had a couple of Box Office champs with the success of Mama and the Paranormal Activity spoof A Haunted House as well as the rom-zom-com Warm Bodies.  Early opening weekend success for Texas Chainsaw 3D did not translate to a complete success story nor did it bold well for Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (although this film has done very well in the International market).  Despite the fact that Dark Skies and The Last Exorcism Part II underperformed they too had a little success if you take into account their meager production costs ($3.5 and $5 million, respectfully  ).  On the limited release front (where many of the films had a VOD release before a limited theatrical release) there was the success of John Dies at the End, Room 237, The Monk, and The ABC’s of Death.  There are also a couple of titles that defy explanation which includes Midget Zombie Takeover (with a production budget of only $2,000!) and Eddie the Sleepwalking Cannibal.  Surprisingly horror hasn’t disappeared yet from the Box Office as the success of the remake of Evil Dead and the re-release of Steven Spielberg’s Jurassic Park 3D so maybe there’s more of the summer horizon than we think.  Below is a list of the Box Office performance of this year’s film (figures gathered from Box Office Mojo – www.boxofficemojo.com).

1. MAMA - $71.6 MILLION

2. WARM BODIES - $65.7 MILLION

3. HANSEL & GRETEL: WITCH HUNTERS - $55.5 MILLION

4. A HAUNTED HOUSE - $40.04 MILLION

5. EVIL DEAD - *$35.2 MILLION

6. TEXAS CHAINSAW 3D - $34.3 MILLION

7. JURASSIC PARK 3D - *$25.5 MILLION

8. DARK SKIES - $17.2 MILLION

9. THE LAST EXORCISM PART II - *$15.2 MILLION

10. STOKER - *$1.7 MILLION

11. JOHN DIES AT THE END - $141,951

12. ROOM 237 - *$113,032

13. THE ABC’S OF DEATH - $21,832

14. THE SORCERER & THE WHITE SNAKE - $18,759

15. THE MONK - *$13,472

16. MIDGET ZOMBIE TAKEOVER - $6,251

17. EDDIE THE SLEEPWALKING CANNIBAL - $1,294

18. STORAGE 24 - $72