It's Not a Horror Film If It Doesn't Scare You?

Yeah, I know how you're feeling there, dude.

Boy oh boy, don't you know how fun it is to be a horror fan? We can communicate with another about our love for classic films, wax over nostalgic childhood horror memories, and we can all collectively be divided over whether horror movies are actually horror movies. That's a thing that happens. It happens a lot, sadly, and another writer I respect immensely gets a lot of shit for standing up against that sort of thinking. After seeing some new idiotic comments on his work, I decided that I wanted to write on the subject...then got sick and he wrote about it while I was retching in the bathroom. Seriously though, it's a great article that you should go read.

And this is my face when I realized I have to follow up that well written piece. Fuck my donkey.

Let's be clear, I don't want to just repeat what John said because that would make this a pointless experience. I want to instead talk about why so many horror fans seem to be like this. A good starting point would be something I saw pointed out already: perhaps they hate films like It Follows and Get Out because they're popular and critically acclaimed? Now, the train of thought here is that the backlash is a result of horror possibly not being as niche now that it is experiencing some major success. Horror movies don't typically get nominated for Academy awards, for example, and yet now we've got Get Out and The Shape of Water, Guillermo Del Toro's horror love story, both up for Best Picture. It seems to have stirred up a lot of controversy with people who seem to feel as if these movies shouldn't be called horror because they equate their success with "selling out".

Someone tell Pepsi I am totally ready to shill for them, by the way.

Here's the problem with this thought process: those films didn't succeed by pandering, which is generally what comes with selling out. Those films succeeded because they were creative and different, both tapping into something in audiences that truly made them worth remembering. No, an actual instance of someone pandering would be something like bringing back a dead slasher movie villain because the studio knew it would make tons of money. That's a thing that has become a staple of slasher movies too, yet is rarely decried. But it's acceptable to attack newer films that do well because...they're different? Hmmm...in a weird way, I guess that makes these vocal asshats spouting hate the same as Michael Shannon in The Shape of Water. He's a douchebag who lashes out at what he deems as aberrant, like say deviation from repetitive movie tropes and overused reliance on gore to sell a film.

"Real horror films are the way I want them to be and no other way! If they're different then they aren't really horror!!"

Now, looking at the title, you might not follow how we got here from there. You see, the major thing all the moaning rabble often fall back on is two major beliefs: a horror film must be scary and it must be gory. My issue with that is that most horror films don't scare me at all. I grew up on them and ,even as a kid, only a handful ever really scared the shit out of me. And trust me, none of the films that scared me then are ones that scare me now, nor really should they. The single film that sent fear up and down me as child? Monster in the Closet, the horror comedy that was actually a very thinly veiled allegory for gay people living closeted lives.

Oh yeah, this movie was my personal childhood nightmare.

I had dreams where I played with Freddy Krueger in my backyard, a guy who was a child murderer, and that's largely because I wasn't scared of his films. After all, he killed teenagers, so he was alright by me. Saying that a movie has to be scary to be a horror film ignores the fact that not everyone experiences fear at the same things. The scariest film I saw this past year was actually a period piece about actual people being murdered by racist corrupt cops. I would honestly say that movie is borderline a horror film, because it is much more horrifying seeing these events take place than it is seeing a bit breasted girl get chased down by a slasher. Thus, I say that the "has to be scary to be horror" argument is idiotic.

Idiotic. Kind of like the people who keep complaining.

Moving on from that thoroughly unrealistic argument, there's the other supposed sticking point of these horror films not being real horror because they lack gore. Ignoring the fact that one of the targets of this hate parade is IT, a film that has a lot of gore in it, it really is a terribly confusing claim in general. Remind me, are John Carpenter's Halloween and The Fog considered horror? Because neither film is particularly gory, yet I've always thought of them as horror classics. How about Texas Chainsaw Massacre? The original film has less gore in it than either It Follows or Get Out, which are both films that have been getting shit for "not being real horror films". Gore does not a horror film make. If it did, then Eli Roth would be the singular king of horror rather than people like Wes Craven, John Carpenter, or Tobe Hooper.

The only thing he's the king of is creating annoying characters.

My basic take on all of this is that horror movies are horror movies and bitchy fanboys are invariably bitchy fucking fanboys. The same can be said when approaching horror, comics, video games, and even sports. Regardless of where you go, you're going to run into these annoying mouthy dog turds who only care about being negative shitstains within their community. It's probably best to ignore them, but not me. I like calling them out, because I'm the sort of person who enjoys seeing them stumble to defend their paper-thin arguments before ultimately being buried by more intelligent members of the community. It may take a while, but it always happens eventually. Because ultimately, they're just a vocal minority and we will always stand up to their bullshit.

Yes, we will finally be going down that road this year.