The horror pigeonhole

[The Second]

It seems to me that the genre of horror has become a very loose, ambiguous catchall category; a genre into which film makers and reviews can stuff any film that includes monsters, aliens, ghosts, or murderous killers.

Over the last couple of days, I've gone on a horror binge. I opened up Rotten Tomatoes, browsed to the horror listing, and sorted the movies by rating. Then I went down the list and watched anything that caught my eye.

To the credit of the site and it's reviews, most of what I watched was just what I wanted; The Babadook had just the right mix of psycho-terror and supernatural thriller, The Mist proves that human beings can be just as terrifying as supernatural beasts, Eraserhead is a surreal look into one man's worst nightmares.

But then we come to the films that, at least in my opinion, fell far short of what I expect a horror movie to be. The Host, for instance. This film was billed as a big budget monster movie, but at it's core, it isn't about the monster. In fact, it's a family drama. Forget about the monster, it's not important; in fact, the central story would have been just fine had the CGI monster bits been cut from the script. Replace the monster with some other plot element and the story fairs just as well.

Shaun of the Dead. There's nothing horrifying about the movie, except maybe the fact that it rates higher than Eraserhead, an actual horror film. Shaun is a forgettable drama/comedy/romance.

Let The Right One In is a movie about a vampire. So, it must be a horror movie, right? Hardly. Let The Right One In is a solid coming of age story. Yeah, there's a monster. Yeah, the monster attacks people. Yeah, there's a scene that could rate as horrible, but I find it difficult to feel anything but sympathy for the characters involved.

So, here's what I would like to discuss. Why is it that movies that include monsters, aliens, etc. always end up being labeled as horror? Wouldn't it make more sense to place them in the genres where they belong? Or are there some people who really find The Host, Shaun, or Let The Right One In horrifying?

[Vercingex]

Actually, I feel that "horror" is one of the more accurate genre labels in current media, because "horror" reflects the themes, tone, and the intended emotional state of the audience. Compare to say, Science Fiction, which is anything that can take place in The Future, or, worse, the Western, which is anything which has cowboys in it.* And while, say, Shaun of the Dead might not be incredibly, it does deal in horror themes and motif, and does have horrific scenes. It's definitely horror- it's just also a comedy.

*Yes, Westerns and Science Fiction do have their own unique storytelling elements and characterizations that can be used to define the genre beyond setting. It's just that people who aren't genre buffs tend not to recognize that. Most lists of Westerns don't include Seven Samurai.

[The_Dodger]

The way I look at it, there are main genres and there are sub-genres. Everyone movie falls under one of the main genres, it can then be narrowed down into a sub-genre.

The main genres include Horror, Fantasy, Sci-fi, Western, and (for lack of a better term) Modern

The sub-genres include Comedy, Thriller, Drama and Romance

So something like Shaun of the Dead is a Horror(genre) Comedy(sub-genre)

Anyway, just my 2 cents.

[Winter_Wolf]

Let the Right One In seems more like what you might call Fridge horror. You gotta think about it for a while, and if you've got a certain kind of mindset/temperament, the horror element comes to you over time. Honestly I wouldn't call it a traditional horror movie, but it had enough going for it I can see why it got labelled that way. Typin on iPad sux so I'll try to either edit or post in spoilers the points I think lend it to horror, if anyone's interested. Hey at least the movie isn't gorn or torture porn.

[The_Dodger]

..... Hey at least the movie isn't gore or torture porn.

Amen to that brother! So sick of that crap in horror. It isn't scary, its just gross and/or disturbing (and not in a creepy disturbing way, just a disgusting disturbing way)

[Closet_Skeleton]

It seems to me that the genre of horror has become a very loose, ambiguous catchall category; a genre into which film makers and reviews can stuff any film that includes monsters, aliens, ghosts, or murderous killers.


'has become' is incorrect, that's basically what horror was from the beginning.

All speculative fiction is basically descended from Gothic* horror anyway, which at start was basically a revival and parody of the chivalric romance. The early boom in fantasy fiction in the 1920s in America was mainly centred around Weird Tales, which was established as a Horror magazine and many of the 20s horror and fantasy writers were the same people.

The emotion 'horror' had a wider definition in the 18th and 19th century anyway. Some of the romantics defined their appreciation of pretty landscape as having an element of fear in it. Gothic horror was often more just about shocking the reader rather than trying to scare them.

Shaun of the Dead is very much an example of the genre its parodying, which in itself has basically been self-parody since the 80s.

Let the Right One In is not a coming of age story, its a twisted anti-coming of age story. Coming of age stories are supposed to be about positive moral growth, not becoming Renfield. There's nothing in the definition of the horror genre that says monsters can't be sympathetic or even heroic (see Frankenstein).


In fact, it's a family drama.

Many of the horror stories from the early stages of the genre's development were just very twisted family dramas with ghosts and curses as irrelevant noise on top.


Amen to that brother! So sick of that crap in horror. It isn't scary, its just gross and/or disturbing (and not in a creepy disturbing way, just a disgusting disturbing way)

Horror doesn't mean 'scary'. Disgust is a perfectly legitimate form of horror. Not something I like in movies but you're misunderstanding the definition of the genre if you try and simplify it down to fear.

*Gothic originally meant medieval when it first appeared as a genre. It just kind of got reclassified as 'Victorian' thanks to Dracula which was never written as a gothic novel and only got retconned into being one when its contemporary setting aged

[Eldan]

Amen to that brother! So sick of that crap in horror. It isn't scary, its just gross and/or disturbing (and not in a creepy disturbing way, just a disgusting disturbing way)

Gore can be strangely fascinating, if well done. Not torture, that's just gross. But I'm currently watching the TV series Hannibal and they have some very artfully arranged scenes of corpses and implements of killing and torture in there that I find aesthetically quite pleasing. I often find myself pausing for a minute or two to appreciate the scenery.

[LokeyITP]

You have to be careful of not watching crappy Hollywood remakes. Besides recasting the lead as a white male that probably can't act, they tend to miss the point of the original (losing tone, suspense, etc).

Also is the host tween fiction adaptation that shouldn't be highly rated for a million reasons or am I thinking of some other ambiguously titled film?

[Zrak]

The emotion 'horror' had a wider definition in the 18th and 19th century anyway. Some of the romantics defined their appreciation of pretty landscape as having an element of fear in it.
Probably the definitive example, here, is the incident of the Simplon pass in Wordsworth's Preludes.


*Gothic originally meant medieval when it first appeared as a genre. It just kind of got reclassified as 'Victorian' thanks to Dracula which was never written as a gothic novel and only got retconned into being one when its contemporary setting aged
Indeed, though I think it's also from a tendency to mistake anything between Shakespeare and the twentieth century as "Victorian." Gothic novels loomed large in the latter half of the 18th century, after all. Still, Austen's Northanger Abbey is essentially post-gothic, and yet Austen is pre-Victorian.

[tomandtish]

There's also the habit for a sequel to be categorized the same as the original.

Alien: horror

Aliens: Sci-fi action (there's nothing at all scary about the sequel).

Evil Dead movies are another good example. First one is horror and by Army of Darkness you are in full-blown comedy. Same for Reanimator.

[BeerMug Paladin]

I usually think of the genre of horror as being where the tone of the story makes you think characters are facing potential death or injury as the story goes on. Usually by means that are abnormal or unusual being presented to the audience. (IE, monsters are shown, or unusual occurences are depicted as happening)

I think the existence of monsters alone in a movie usually qualifies it as horror to most people because monsters are a suspension of the natural order of things. A monster even existing at all is abnormal, hence the usual, safe, everyday world we inhabit is not the same as the world that the people on the screen inhabit. The people on the screen may be subjected to something monstrous.

I'd agree Shaun of the Dead isn't horror, though. Its tone is silly, and the monsters depicted are mostly presented as something to laugh at. Zombieland isn't horror either, because of the detached silliness of the narrator (IE, how casual he is about death). But I totally get why some people would classify both those things in the horror genre. They've got monsters in them. Sometimes, for some people, that alone is enough. And I'm okay with that.

[Legato Endless]

So, here's what I would like to discuss. Why is it that movies that include monsters, aliens, etc. always end up being labeled as horror? Wouldn't it make more sense to place them in the genres where they belong? Or are there some people who really find The Host, Shaun, or Let The Right One In horrifying?

Yes.

Genres are nothing more than marketing conventions. Trying to make them anymore logical or sensible is an exercise in futility. Horror and comedy especially defy orderly demarcation as it's based on trying to evoke an emotional response. The buffs can natter about what makes the true genre within the genre, but until they manage to divide the public consciousness, it's just hair splitting.