1. What’s
the
difference:
Between
good
horror
films
and
bad?
“When
the
things
we
fear
actually
happen,
we
experience
horror.
Horror
is
the
dark
realization
and
subsequent
revulsion
that
the
world
is
now
fundamentally,
shockingly,
and
permanently
altered,”
proclaims
an
over-‐sized
poster
inside,
“Can’t
Look
Away:
The
Lure
of
Horror
Film”
—
the
latest
horror
exhibition
at
Seattle’s
Experience
Music
Project
museum.
The
exhibit
itself
lies
at
the
bottom
of
a
winding
staircase,
the
walls
of
which
are
covered
with
portraits
of
people
screaming.
Throughout
the
exhibit,
glass
cases
showcase
props
from
some
of
the
genre’s
most
successful
films
—
Jack
Torrance’s
axe
from
“The
Shining,”
the
alien
from
the
“Alien”
series,
the
faun’s
head
from
“Pan’s
Labyrinth,”
among
others.
But
what
made
these
films
so
successful?
What
is
it
exactly
that
strikes
enough
fear
to
illicit
a
cult
following,
still
dissecting
a
movie
forty
years
after
it’s
debut?
Well,
it
may
be
helpful
to
first
understand
where
this
fear
comes
from.
In
the
most
biological
sense
of
the
word,
fear
begins
in
the
amygdala
—
an
almond
shaped
group
of
nuclei
located
deep
within
the
temporal
lobe.
It
processes
memory,
decision-‐making,
and
emotions.
It
tells
you
when
to
run
when
you’re
afraid.
When
to
freeze
and
when
to
suddenly
throw
your
popcorn
into
the
row
behind
you
while
watching
“The
Texas
Chainsaw
Massacre”
on
an
already
awkward
first
date
(based
on
actual
events).
But,
in
a
2010
brain
scan
study
conducted
by
Thomas
Straube
of
the
Friedrich
Schiller
University
of
Jena,
it
was
discovered
that
when
we
watch
scary
movies,
the
amygdala
doesn’t
light
up
at
all.
Instead,
it’s
the
parts
of
the
brain
associated
with
self-‐awareness,
visual
stimuli,
planning,
attention,
and
problem
solving
that
react
the
most
strongly.
Which
could
help
explain
why
some
of
us
like
it
so
much.
It
doesn’t
always
scare
us
the
way
a
life-‐threatening
situation
would,
it
scares
us
into
the
realm
of
imagination
as
we
try
to
piece
it
all
together.
So,
what’s
the
difference
between
horror
that
ignites
the
imagination
and
the
stuff
that
leaves
it
dim?
Well,
after
a
lifetime
spent
watching
and
over-‐analyzing
everything
from
Takashi
Miike,
to
Guillermo
Del
Toro,
to
David
Lynch,
to
the
stuff
that
somehow
got
funded
and
ended
up
on
Netflix
instant,
I’ve
seen
more
than
a
few
commonalities
between
the
good,
the
bad,
and
the
really,
really
ugly:
1. It’s
a
puzzle
–
All
the
best
ones
are.
They
make
us
work.
They
leave
Easter
eggs
in
all
the
nooks
and
crannies
of
their
most
dimly
lit
hallways.
They
have
us
thinking
for
days,
months,
even
years
afterwards.
The
worst
ones
explain.
They
make
it
obvious.
They
use
tropes
that
hold
up
a
sign
explaining
what’s
about
to
happen,
and
therefore
we
remain
not
stimulated
in
the
slightest.
We
don’t
invest
in
the
movie
because
there
is
no
more
work
left
to
be
done,
the
filmmakers
did
it
all
for
us.
2.
A
master
of
the
puzzle
was
director,
Stanley
Kubrick
and
one
of
his
masterworks,
“The
Shining.”
It’s
a
film
that’s
spawned
hundreds
of
conspiracy
theories,
as
Kubrick
was
known
for
his
meticulous,
artistic
nature.
In
“Room
237,”
a
2012
documentary
that
explores
the
very
theories
surrounding
“The
Shining,”
some
of
the
most
prominent
ideas
were
discussed.
Bill
Blakemore,
a
television
correspondent
and
author,
thinks
it
might
be
about
the
Native
American
Genocide.
Geoffrey
Cocks,
a
professor
of
history
at
Albion
College
in
Michigan,
feels
there
is
enough
evidence
to
suggest
it’s
about
the
Nazi
Holocaust.
Jay
Weidner,
author
and
filmmaker,
says
it’s
clearly
about
the
faked
moon
landing
that
Kubrick
himself
helped
stage.
And,
there
is
the
mysterious
“impossible
window”
as
it’s
come
to
be
known
—
a
window
with
sunlight
streaming
in,
in
a
room
where
there
should
be
no
windows.
Curiouser
and
curiouser.
Then,
there
are
others
that
feel
there
is
nothing
puzzling
about
the
film
at
all
and
that,
in
fact,
it’s
a
pretty
straightforward
film
about
the
stresses
of
working
to
hard
and
neglecting
your
family.
Who’s
right?
Well,
that’s
really
up
to
you.
2. It
has
a
message
–
A
child’s
loss
of
innocence
in,
“The
Exorcist.”
An
individual’s
loss
of
their
individuality
in,
“The
Stepford
Wives”
—
the
1975
version.
The
world’s
loss
of,
well,
planet
earth
in
every
zombie
or
alien
film
ever
made.
Sweeping
loss
and
sudden
loneliness
seem
to
be
a
major
theme
in
many
of
horror’s
most
profound
films.
And
how
we
are
the
catalysts
to
our
own
inevitable
destruction
seems
to
be
the
message.
One
film
with
a
particularly
well-‐executed
message
was
Kiyoshi
Kurosawa’s
2001
thriller,
“Kairo,”
or,
“Pulse,”
as
it
came
to
be
known
after
its
remake
in
the
U.S.
five
years
later
—
a
remake
that
was
not
well
received
by
audiences
or
critics
alike.
Now,
what
was
the
difference?
If
they
were
based
on
the
same
story,
didn’t
they
have
the
same
message?
No,
not
really.
“Kairo”
spoke
about
individual
loneliness
during
the
late
90s,
early
2000s
rise
in
technology
in
a
world
that
already
seemed
to
have
too
many
humans
and
not
enough
human
contact.
“Pulse”
took
that
idea,
slapped
a
blue
camera
filter
on
it,
added
some
too-‐
tight
t-‐shirts,
got
rid
of
that
idea
all
together,
and
cranked
up
the
volume.
Like,
they
literally
made
the
music
louder.
Essentially,
bad
horror
is
too
much
amygdala
(jumping
out
of
our
seats)
and
not
enough
dorsal-‐medial
prefrontal
cortex
(finding
the
message).
3. Which
brings
me
to
my
last
point.
3. It
doesn’t
rely
on
special
effects
–
Great
horror
sets
us
up
to
imagine.
It
gives
us
crumbs
without
showing
us
the
bread.
It
sweeps
the
camera
across
a
field,
just
for
a
frame
showing
us
something
that
we
aren’t
sure
we
actually
saw.
In
other
words,
when
it
comes
to
horror,
our
imaginations
are
more
powerful
than
anything
modern
technology
can
CGI.
If
the
rise
of
the
hand-‐held-‐camera
technique
beginning
around
the
time
of
“The
Blair
Witch
Project”
(which
cost
$25,000
to
make
and
grossed
nearly
$250
million)
taught
us
anything,
it’s
that
reality
is
what
scares
us.
Over-‐the-‐
top
special
effects
remind
us
that
we
are
watching
a
movie.
A
shaky
camera
capturing
footage
of
real
people
makes
us
feel
as
though
we
are
the
ones
doing
the
running.
And,
if
it’s
any
good,
we
are
left
to
wonder
from
what.
