- David Cronenberg
I have long been fascinated with the use of gore and body horror in film. It's a device, like any other, but does its excessive nature actually stop people from appreciating the meaning behind it and what is that meaning? As I am most interested in the thoughts of people who either know little about or dislike the subject, so as to ensure I don't alienate people with nerdery, I am going to consider two films I have only just seen: Shivers and Suspiria.
*SPOILERS!!*
Brief Summaries
Suspiria (1977, Dir. Dario Argento)
My Score: 9/10
A young American ballet dancer, Suzy, comes to a European ballet academy to train - her arrival coincides with some strange events culminating in the mysterious death of another student. Bizarre occurrences and noises continue and as her suspicion heightens there are more sudden deaths. Suzy works out that, while the staff say they leave the school during they night, their footsteps tell a different story.
Shivers (1975, Dir. David Cronenberg)
My Score: 7/10
Set on a luxury island near Montreal, the onsite doctors have been experimenting with the use of parasites to take over from failing organs. It is discovered that one of the doctors has been secretly breeding a parasite to free people of their inhibitions. His test subject is unable to handle the sudden release and becomes wild and promiscuous - infecting several others. With the parasite taking hold, a cast of characters attempt to combat the hysteria while not loosing themselves to it as well.
Body Horror
Firstly, it was exciting to see how different two horror films can get within only two years of each other. Shivers is like a time capsule of the 70s; Cronenberg reportedly drew on the realism in underground New York cinema when making this film. The characters are all conventional people living ordinary lives who have a parasitic catalyst thrown into their midst. Suspiria, on the other hand, is completely outlandish in almost all respects. The characters are exaggerated, the sets are mad, the lighting is invasive - but it works wonderfully and was a very exciting film for these reasons.
It is difficult to say which is a better setting for body horror: realism encourages empathy whereas melodrama takes the viewer out of the story and possibly into a more speculative frame of mind. I think the differences between Suspiria and Shivers hark back to the discussion of Brechtian and Stanaslavski storytelling in an earlier film review. With regard to gore, I think a Brechtian style piece (i.e. Suspiria because the audience is constantly reminded it's a film) is able to display its intentions more clearly; however, I don't think one can value either style over the the other as it just comes down to personal taste.
Right: let's get grisly. An ideal moment for comparison sprung out at me - not only was the violent act the same, it was even filmed in a similar way: a throat slitting in extreme close up. I have to say I was more repulsed by the one in Shivers, probably due to the realistic lighting and mundane setting. Although less disgusted by the shot in Suspiria, I felt a more heightened sense of fear because the lighting was so extreme and the music was so relentless and bizarre. It seemed to me that the melodrama in Suspiria made it an emotional experience whereas the realism in Shivers felt more like watching an autopsy.
The differing use of blood was also of interest. While featuring some pretty horrific images of parasites and writhing innards, Cronenberg used blood relatively sparingly - I think this comes from trying to base the film in reality so masses of blood would have been out of place. Because of this, when blood was present it was all the more unsettling and it's presence increased towards the climax. Contrastingly, I think Suspiria may have hired the Hammer Horror effects team as the whole thing was awash with the most vibrant blood you've ever seen (funnily enough, the director Argento cited early John Ford and Disney animations as the inspiration for the lurid colours in Suspiria). I found that I became relatively desensitised to the blood as a result of this and it became more of an addition to the colour palette. Suspiria is red. Everything is red. RED. So the blood becomes one with that; for this reason I thought the film felt a lot more like an expressive painting than a narrative. Whereas I believe Cronenberg is trying to express an ideology, it felt like Argento's intention was purely to take us to an vivid emotional place - something he certainly achieves. Possibly this explains the differing use of blood: Cronenberg saves it for moments of significance to highlight his intentions, Argento uses is to keep the viewer in a heightened state of emotion and fear.
Two very different films, with very different intentions and yet these are expressed predominantly through the same device: body horror. I appreciate many people are immediately sceptical of any argument professing the intelligence behind any gore films but don't just listen to me: Shivers was funded by the Canadian Film Development Corporation, a government run organisation, and was also passed uncut by the BBFC (British Board of Film Censors) on its 1975 release. Argento has gone on the become a horror film legend and has influenced filmmakers even outside of the horror genre.
Now, I will hold my hands up and admit that the barrage of mainstream, gory tripe being churned out at the moment is abominable; but those aren't the films I'm talking about. Any device used without a heart or intention falls flat. Personally, I feel just as cheated by a rom-com which is all goo and no heart as I do by a horror which is (albeit graphic and literal) goo and no heart. I appreciate that just as I will rarely be buzzing to watch a romance film, equally there are people who are never going to enjoy watching a gory film; but my intention is not to convert - only to hope people will understand the genre. The transient gore films of today only exist to capitalise on the masterpieces that have gone before it. And masterpieces they are.
Fancy getting intellectually gory?
- The Fly (1986, Dir. David Cronenberg)
- Inferno (1980, Dir. Dario Argento)
Fancy getting rip-roaringly gory?
- Braindead (1993, Dir. Peter Jackson)
- Evil Dead (1981, Dir. Sam Raimi)
No comments:
Post a Comment