Why do we watch scary films?

There are many theories that explain why we watch films that scare us, they all refer to emotional and conscious fears we have, both on individual and societal levels. 

1. Dolf Zillman

Excitation-transfer theory purports that residual excitation from one stimulus will amplify the excitatory response to another stimulus, though the hedonistic valences of the stimuli may differ. The excitation-transfer process is not limited to a single emotion. For example, when watching a movie, a viewer may be angered by seeing the hero wronged by the villain, but this initial excitation may intensify the viewer's pleasure in witnessing the villain's punishment later. Thus, although the excitation from the original stimulus of seeing the hero wronged was cognitively accessed as anger, the excitation after the second stimulus of seeing the villain punished is cognitively assessed as pleasure, though part of the excitation from the second stimulus is residual from the first.

 

2. Catharsis (from Greek κάθαρσις, katharsis, meaning "purification" or "cleansing" or "clarification") is the purification and purgation of emotions—particularly pity and fear—through art or any extreme change in emotion that results in renewal and restoration.

 

3. Sigmund Frued

The Psychoanalytic community, including Sigmund Freud himself posited that horror came from the “Uncanny” – emergence of images and thoughts of the primitive id that were being suppressed by the civilized ego. Jung thought that horror movies tapped into primordial archetypes buried deep in our collective subconscious – images like shadow and mother play important role in the horror genre. 

 

4. David J. Skal 

DJ Skal posits that horror films are a reflection of our societal fears. Looking at the history of horror you have mutant monsters rising in 50s from our fear of the nuclear bogeyman, Zombies in the 60s with Vietnam, Nightmare on Elm Street as a mistrust in authority figures stemming from the Watergate scandals and Zombies again in the 2000s as a reflection of viral pandemic fears.

 

5. Ernst Hartmann

Sees dreams as the brain’s sorting through the bits of information it’s gathered throughout the waking hours. But the images and connections we make while dreaming aren’t totally random, they’re guided by our emotions – maybe working through a recent trauma or dealing with angst and fear.

So perhaps watching a film is somewhere between being awake and being in a dream state. Much like play – films are a safe place where we can sort through stuff, learn skills to apply in everyday life. How do you defeat the a slow walking Jason Vorhees – you can’t outrun his slow stride. The only way is to face him straight on. Though a zombie apocalypse is a far fetched reality, the survivorship skills on display in a zombie horror film have some practical merit in our normal every-day world.

Horror movies require us to face the unknown – to understand it and make it less scary. They allow us to see our fears and put them into context, to play what if, and in doing so, they shape our belief systems, how we see each other and ourselves. They are a safe place to explore and for some just a good bit of fun.

Which of the five explanations do I agree with most and why?

I agree with Dolf Zillmans theory the most out of the five listed above. This is because I agree that seeing one stimuli that creates an impactful emotional response will make for an even dramatically greater response with a second stimuli as there is a residual of the earlier response. 

My decision is influenced personally by…

My decision is personally influenced by a film that I have felt this kind of response to, that movie is Jaws, the 1975 classic shark-thriller. Throughout the film, we see the Shark devour people, and one of those people is a child, from the “get out of the water” scene. This scene is frightening and creates a very impactful response as we are saddened to see the child’s mother seeing his deflated inflatable washed up on the beach surrounded by bloody water. 

(Jaws, 1975)

This means that during the film’s climax when the shark is slain, we feel an even greater emotional response because of the boost that the previous response to the stimuli earlier on grants. This gives the audience the 'pleasure' that Dolf Zillmans realizes within his theory, as the audience feels that the shark has been met with its deserved punishment.  

(Jaws, 1975)

Which of the five explanations do I agree with the least and why?

                                                                                                                                                       

I disagree with Ernst Hartmann's theory the most because I think that whilst there is relevance to our own personal fears, based on past and traumatic experiences, scary films are frightening on much greater scales. What I mean by this is that I personally think that scary films are more like the way that David J. Skal describes them - Frightening on more societal levels. I don't entirely disagree that everyone will be fearful of things individually, but it makes more sense to me that a scary film will be more terrifying to a wider range of people.

Fears and Monsters in Media

 Fears & Monsters

Fears

Psychologist Glen D Walters believes that in order for a film to be scary it must have the following elements:

1) Tension and suspense must be created through the manipulation of film language.

2) The fear must be unreal - the audience must able to enjoy it without fearing for their safety.

3) The fears must relevant and so be based on existing societal and personal fears.

People are scared of a lot of things and most of the scary things are very different. People might be scared of certain things because of past experiences or trauma, and people might be scared of things respective to their age. So its important to know what is scary and how it can be effective at frightening our audience within film and media. And so I thought about what scared me the most, as well as the people around me such as my parents and the majority of society around me. 

Things that scare individual people:

- Animals

- The 'Unknown' 

- Small & Restricted Spaces

- Death

Things that may scare society:

- Terrorism 

- Crime

- War

- Apocalypse

- Death

Monsters

Scary things and people's fears can be translated through monsters within film, representing different aspects and types of fear for a film-maker to scare the audience with, and to leave a more lasting impression on viewers. Many monsters have made a name for themselves, all thanks to the fears that they represent...

Godzilla

Godzilla is the pinnacle of the giant-monster category within film and media, with many different adaptions, he has been making his name present since his debut in 1954's Godzilla which sparked a new style of monsters in movies.

(Godzilla: King Of The Monsters, 2019)

(Godzilla, 1954)

(Tomoyuki Tanaka)

Godzilla is great at creating fear because he is something that challenges human instinct, a monster such as Godzilla would simply knock us down from the top of the food chain, which reflects our fear of anything bigger and greater than us. However, Godzilla represents fear on a much wider and realistic scale, but in order to fully understand we have to go back to Godzilla's origin. He is a Japanese monster created by Tomoyuki Tanaka, and he is a reflection on the atomic bombs dropped of Nagasaki and Hiroshima during World War II. This is implied as Godzilla's key features consist of being an awakened creature empowered by nuclear radiation, proving that he is a metaphor for Nuclear weapons. Therefore, Godzilla's representation of fear is in fact a representation on war, which in itself is related to the fear of death. 

   Count Dracula

Count Dracula is the most well-known vampire, and vampires are some of the most well-known monsters, making the Count the king of monsters. Unlike more modern monsters, Count Dracula made his cinematic debut in the 1931 film, Dracula. However, the character was originally introduced in the 1897 novel Dracula, written by Bram Stoker.

(Dracula, 1931)

(Bram Stoker's Dracula, 1992)

Dracula is a great source of emitting fear as he is a more realistic take on a monster. In some ways, Count Dracula is a very human monster in the sense that he fits within a troupe of male representation as he is a wealthy white male who specifically victimizes poor virgin peasant girls. This archetype that he fits within can be used to create a very patriarchal character which is presented as he uses his power to corrupt and exploit the poor. Whilst the realism to his character certainly poses as an instrument of fear, his terrifying nature comes from his need to suck the blood of his victims. This main monster-like attribute is backed up with the scariness of his age, being hundreds of years old and living within a dark haunted estate. The fear that dwells within the audience comes from the realization that Count Dracula could easily kill as he pleased, relating his monster-ness to the fear of death. 

Zombies

Among monsters such as Vampires and Frankenstein, Zombies are undoubtedly the most infamous. With countless film and television franchises revolving around them, they are the scariest, most world-ending that exist. 

(White Zombie, 1932 - Trailer)

(Zombies from White Zombie, 1932)

(Zombies from The Walking Dead, 2010-2022)

Zombies make their first appearance in the film, White Zombie from 1932, now 90 years ago. The story follows a woman as she is transformed into a zombie by an evil voodoo master. Despite this film sounding funny and slightly ridiculous, it is what drove the zombie-monsters into the main stream line of cinema. However, for the sake of a more accurate response I will only discuss monsters from cinema within the last 20 years. Zombies are a strong way to implement fear into an audience as they are a pure representation of death symbolizing the end of the world. By being virus contaminated humans, they are bordering onto a real world fear, especially within the past few years, adding an additional sense of fear to them. As Zombies travel in slow moving hoards that always manage to catch up, they outnumber their victims, driving them into corners, giving the audience a sense of being claustrophobic, yet another real world fear implemented into Zombies. I previously mentioned that Zombies are a representation of death, whilst this is true, the way that they display death is through the representation of smoking addicts and old age, which are both things that kill you more and more, making you slower and older, just like the Zombies. Therefore, because they are a play on humans, they become all the more terrifying as they have the single minded goal of killing, infecting and devouring live humans, and yet again, this relates these monsters to the fear of death.

The Alien (Xenomorph)

Aliens are notorious as they are the monsters of Sci-Fi, with a wide range of different creatures spanning multiple film franchises the Xenomorph's from The Alien franchise is the most distinguishable. 

(Xenomorph from Alien, 1979)

(Alien, 1979)

The Xenomorph debut's in the classic Sci-Fi horror film, Alien (1979), and displays itself as the opposing force to Ripley and the rest of her crew. The Xenomorph is spectacularly terrifying for all audience's as they are from outer space, the vast and infinite unknowns to humankind. Similarly to Godzilla, the Xenomorph is a superior being to humans, and therefore, it overpowers us and marks itself as the head of the food chain, creating the sense of fear that there could be greater beings in a place we know nothing about. However, I personally think that the frightening nature of the Xenomorph comes from the actual design of it, with an ugly skeleton-like body and an elongated head. The ugliness of it is unsettling and disturbing, but what takes the design further is the inclusion of the second mouth. Having it acts as a somewhat inner voice to show that the Xenomorph is no different to humans, it eats to survive and continue its race. Comparing monsters to humans and finding the similarities is what is truly frightening about them, what we share in common scares us in itself. For the Xenomorph, that similarity is the power to kill, relating monsters back to the fear of death. 

Titans

The hit show Attack on Titan (2013-2022), is what it is today because of the fear Titans instill within the audience whilst captivating them at the same time. They one of the most easily recognizable faces in media and pop-culture within the last ten years. 

(Attack on Titan, 2017)

(Attack on Titan live action, 2015)

(Attack on Titan, 2013)

Titans make their first appearance in the manga series Shingeki No Kyojin (2009-2021), and making a TV Anime debut in 2013, with several live-action films to follow just a few years later. Titans are terrifying because of so many things, their design, nature, mystery and the fact that they are mindless giants with the only goal of eating humans. Their design symbolizes humans, but on a far greater scale, with unsettling body shapes and movements, and because the design is so symbolic of humans, it is a metaphor for true human nature. They are completely unknown to the last surviving humans, nobody knows where they come from or what their goal is, which relates the titans with the fear of the unknown, which is also implemented into the world of Attack on Titan, as the world outside of the walls is a vast land of unknown. This also plays into the fear of apocalypse, as the world the survivors live in is filled with constant running and hiding, which also reflects the fear of restricted spaces as anywhere outside the walls are immediately dangerous. All of this associates the man-eating monsters with the fear of death, making them immediately frightening for audiences.

Clarice Starling - Analysis of a female protagonist in Thrillers

The Silence of the Lambs - Conversation analysis

 

Conversation Analysis - The First Meeting

During the conversation between Hannibal Lecter and Clarice, a power shift is shown with the use of framing and positioning. This is shown when Clarice takes a seat offered to her by Hannibal, which puts her in a smaller and lower position than the standing Hannibal making him appear larger to the audience. The framing and positioning further enhances this as it presents Hannibal Lecter as a larger and more intimidating person on the screen, this is done by having him take up more space in each shot by using close ups on his face. In addition to this, we also see Hannibal taking up more screen time compared to Clarice, as he is more present with more lines, leaving Clarice to be shown in reaction Sshots only. This means that the audience is exposed to Hannibal more, meaning he has a more interesting and significant role to play during this scene. One particular shot that presents this Is when Hannibal is shown next to Clarice in the reflection of the glass panel separating the characters, giving the audience the Impression that no barrier can block Hannibal Lecter from getting to you, as it looks like he is talking into Starlings ear. Due to the fact that this happens, the power is given to Hannibal to manipulate the situation in a way that will leave him coming out on top as the “winner” of the confrontation.

In addition to this, a power shift can be used with the use of Dialogue and the delivery of lines. This is shown to us when we first meet Hannibal who is presented as a calm, polite and collected person who speaks softly, however upon Inviting Clarice to take a seat, he speaks with a hasher tone, whilst still keeping the softness shown to the audience earlier In the discussion. His voice becomes more intimidating and he becomes more rude loosing the politeness previously shown, proving to the audience that he has gained more control over Clarice. Mocking her clothes and accent Hannibal proves that he has a higher status as the audience sees a reversal of roles and he begins to ask her, the interrogator, questions. During the beginning of the conversation, Clarice Is slightly shaky and uncomfortable whilst talking to Hannibal. The discomfort she feels develops into fear as Hannibal picks on her, making his stance as the dominant partner of the discussion more evident. By doing this it conveys to the audience that Hannibal is a the witty character that has the ability to manipulate any situation to the way he wants, showing that he is a victor.

 

It is apparent that the changes in the identified composition do match with the power shift that is apparent in the conversation. This is obvious due each different change Impacts the course of the conversation, making characters either more or less powerful and controlled. This means that the audience viewing the conversation can pick up on the change in dominance easily. This shows that the character, Hannibal Lecter was the most significant within the scene as he leaves the most lasting impression on the audience as a well spoken and domination man who can weave himself through a situation so that he can come out on top, as we saw in the confrontation he did It by turning the tides on the authority of Clarice, making her answer to him and making her a smaller and a more vulnerable character to the likes of Hannibal the cannibal despite being separated by a barrier. To conclude, the power shift in this scene is created through change, more specifically the change of dialogue used by characters, and the change of framing and positioning, making for a more lasting impression on the audience after the first introduction to the profound character of Hannibal Lecter.

 

The Silence of the Lambs - Analysis

The Silence of the Lambs

                                                                                                                                               

Narrative 

The Silence of the Lambs follows Tzvetan Todorov's theory on narrative, as it is a conventional Thriller structured into five stages.

Stage 1: A state of equilibrium at the outset.

Clarice, an FBI agent in training is assigned the task of obtaining clues from the cannibal, Hannibal Lecter, about the serial killer dubbed Buffalo Bill. Clarice struggles to get anything out of Hannibal, however, they begin to form a slight relationship. 

Stage 2: A disruption of the equilibrium by some action.

The body of a girl is found in a river, the FBI knows that it is the doing of Buffalo Bill. The feds work on the autopsy on the autopsy to find Bill's calling card - a moth that blooms in the victims mouth. Meanwhile, Clarice makes a deal with Hannibal Lecter to move him to another prison with a "view". 

Stage 3: A recognition that there has been a disruption.

Hannibal Lecter agrees to assist the FBI and find Buffalo Bill as well as his most recent hostage. Hannibal is kept in a high security cell, however, he steals a pen from an officer and escapes prison by wearing the face of an officer. The FBI believe they have found Buffalo Bill, however Clarice is not sold yet and asks a previous victim's friend some questions when she figures something out. 

Stage 4: Dealing with the disruption.

Clarice find Buffalo Bill and chases him through his creepy basement as he turns the power and lights off. However, he has night-vision goggles and can see Clarice. However, as he clocks his gun Clarice hears it and shoots him.

Stage 5: A reinstatement of the equilibrium (usually an altered equilibrium from the one at the start).

Clarice obtains her FBI license and Buffalo Bill is dead. There is now peace in the state from his murders. However, Hannibal Lecter is free and is "Having a friend for dinner", he walks into the streets of a tropical country as a free man as he pursues his dinner. 

Introducing Hitchcock, Pure Cinema and Production Day

INTRODUCING HITCHCOCK -

Who was Alfred Hitchcock?

Alfred Hitchcock was a British-born director, notorious for his works within the thriller genre. He is most well known for his works such as Vertigo (1958), Psycho (1960), The Birds (1963) and many more including Frenzy (1972). 

His works have not only influenced many of the modern styles of thriller films, but they have inspired many directors and their own individual styles when it comes to film-making, and within his own time, he began a new age of cinema. Hitchcock is looked up to by many film enthusiasts as his style revolves much around a certain term he helped define known as 'Pure Cinema'.

PURE CINEMA

What is 'Pure Cinema'?

‘Pure Cinema’ is Alfred Hitchcock’s method to storytelling visually, and without the need of dialogue to move a plot forwards, since it is a lazy way of communicating story information. Hitchcock tells an interviewer in 1964 that modern films are just “Photographs of people talking, and there’s no relation to the art of the cinema”. This is because it was Alfred Hitchcock who believed that a truly good film could be enjoyed with or without sound/dialogue. And that is what the art of ‘Pure Cinema’ is.

PRODUCTION DAY

On production day, we were tasked with recreating some of Alfred Hitchcock's most famous techniques from his thriller films from over 40 years ago. As someone who really shaped the film making world as it was and still is today, we were really keen on creating the most perfected replications of some of his greatest works. 

Some of the notorious directors techniques that we needed to try and replicate were...

Hitchcock production day from Mediatts2021Coursewo

  

One of the tasks we were set was to do Silhouettes inspired by Notorious (1946) when Ingrid Bergman is poisoned.

My group and I decided to also primarily work in black and white in order to more closely replicate the original feel of Hitchcock's greatest works. For ease, we worked with still imagery so we could focus more on our work of lighting and composition.

From the video below, we managed to capture some very eye catching and striking shots, however, we weren't able to perfectly imitate the unnerving frames from Notorious.

I did learn from the results that to work with black and white footage you need to emphasis the contrast between the light and dark tones to create impact, but when it does work it can look atmospheric and professional.

Rather than use silhouettes in my work I may consider working black and white for my final film opening. This depends on my choice of sub-genre, whether it be psychological or action (etc...). 

 I find it really interesting to see films such as Parasite (2019) and Mad Mad Fury Road (2014) be re-release in black and white due to the impact it has on mood and tone of the films. I think this also presents the consideration that must be implemented in order to perfect the lighting so that exposure is just right, making the shot look at good as it can be.

Whilst my group and I experimented different ways to replicate Hitchcock methods of lighting, we decided to try a lot of flickering lighting, where one person would turn one light on and another person would turn the light opposite off. We did this to try and replicate one of Hitchcock's works by the name of Vertigo (1958), where the main character is having a terrifying dream/nightmare sequence as well as the green lighting shot shown below where the character shown has a half lit face. I think that this was the most recreation of any of the Hitchcock techniques 

(Vertigo, 1958)

(Vertigo. 1958)

Another element of Hitchcock's cinema that we were tasked with recreating was the pull-away from the British-set thriller, Frenzy (1958). The main focus was to try and nail the recreation of the long and eerie take after the two character go through the together and Bob says, "You are my type of woman". However, I don't think it was as successful, this is possibly due to the fact that we improvised the scene and so it then did not have the thrilling feeling that the original movie had.

(Frenzy, 1972)