Horror and Belief: Shaping our Perceptions

In the previous class we discussed the aspects of horror movies. We talked about some of the key features that make horror movies what they are, and one of the common ideas that we all presented was the idea that a fictional monster was not the qualifying thing about horror movies. Contrary to what Carroll believes, there are other aspects besides the presence of a monster that can be the focus of a horror movie. This being said, I would like to jump into the idea of realist horror. Cynthia Freeland writes about the topic of realist horror and highlights its relation to Aristotle’s Poetics as well as Plato’s critiques on tragedies. She touches on what I believe Carroll misunderstood, “First, in realist horror like Henry, the monster is a true-to-life rather than supernatural being” (Wartenberg & Curran 262). In the article by Carroll, he seems to disbelieve that a human can be qualified as a monster by definition, and limited the category to only supernatural entities that possess some sort of power. Freeland further defines the term “monster” as a malevolent being with unique but dangerous features. This certainly seems to be a better fit because not every supernatural being is considered a monster (i.e. God, Santa Claus, etc.). A monster seems to be more universally defined as a being which chooses not to be morally righteous. A monster can indeed be supernatural and is often portrayed as such, but in the case of realist horror the monster can just be an average human.

A curious aspect of realist horror is the issue of whether the “monster” is actually choosing his/her/its actions. In movies about psycho slashers or charming murderers, a lot of people like to suggest that the person has some sort of mental illness. Maybe they are schizophrenic, or suffer from some intense and unbearable trauma. This is a defense so that people who watch these films, or hear about similar events in real life, will not be led to believe that such a thing could happen to them, or to anyone for that matter. In this sense, realist horror can be even more terrifying than the classic horror genre in that even if mentally ill, these sorts of humans do exist.

Within the story of The Exorcist you see a little of what I mentioned above. For those who have not seen or heard of the movie, the plot of the movie centers on a single mother, her daughter, and a local priest. The mother is an actress and so she and her adolescent daughter live a relaxed life. It is not explained how, but the daughter eventually becomes possessed by an evil entity (Or maybe multiple ones). The mother eventually seeks the help of the priest after modern medicine has no effect on the girl’s condition. The audience is led to believe with very little doubt that the daughter is possessed, but the doctors in the movie are not quite convinced at first (even after the mother reports the entire bed shaking). This issue of belief seems to play a big part in many horror movies, both within the context of the movie and also in the viewpoint of the audience. The way in which people perceive certain situations affects the classifications that are placed on them. For example, in the movie the doctors firmly believe that the daughter’s symptoms are simply due to physiological and psychological anomalies. Their lack of evidence for her drastic behavioral changes only leads them to believe that there is nothing wrong with the daughter. The mother is not religious, but the overwhelming number of impossible events led her to believe that there is a supernatural presence. If one who does not believe in exorcisms watches this movie, does the movie cease to be a horror film? Or is it through suspension of belief that such people can watch movies like this even though they don’t believe that the certain phenomena can occur? Actually I think the obvious answer is that people suspend their beliefs when watching films so that the movie remains what it is. What about in the case of movies that don’t clearly allude to a certain explanation? For example, Donnie Darko is one such film that the audience can explain in two different ways. There is the psychological explanation and there is also the parallel world explanation. In a nutshell, some people think that because of Donnie Darko’s psychological instability, the entire movie is just his imagination going wild. Others, however, believe that the events in the movie are “real” and that Donnie Darko travels through time at the end of the movie. The explanation that a person chooses affects the way the movie is perceived, either being a movie about time travel or a psychological thriller of sorts. Horror movies have this belief aspect within them as well. Realist horror, even though lacking supernatural beings, contain this too in the way that one perceives the human “monster” and whether we classify the person as crazy or if we see the person as normal but morally corrupt.