Guillermo del Toro is one of the most interesting contemporary people working in genre. He brings a philosophical, mythical, and religious depth to reflection on the material as revealed in these video clips.
I recently became aware of a television three-part series on the BBC that presents a fascinating twist on zombies, called In the Flesh. The program’s website provides a summary of the plotline:
In The Flesh is an exciting new three-part drama for BBC Three that tells the story of zombie teenager Kieren Walker (Luke Newberry) and his reintegration back into both the local community and the heart of his family.
After his death four years ago, his friends and family thought they’d never see Kieren again. But then, shortly after his funeral, thousands of the dead were re-animated; and now, after months of re-habilitation and medication, the zombies are gradually being returned to their homes.
Now known as PDS sufferers (Partially Deceased Syndrome) – and since the passing of the PDS Protection act – the government have set an agenda of acceptance and tolerance, one that is at odds with the communities abandoned at the time of the rising, and the bloody battle between zombies and humans that ensued.
A cauldron of brutal anti-zombie sentiment and the source of the ‘rotter’ hating Human Volunteer Force (HVF), Kieren returns to his home in the rural village of Roarton. Here he is forced to confront his family, the community that rejected him and the flashbacks that continue to haunt him of what he did in his untreated state.
Kieren’s parents, Steve (Steve Cooper) and Sue (Marie Critchley), are undoubtedly pleased to see him, but his sister, Jem (Harriet Cains), isn’t so ready to pick up where they left off.
Meanwhile, the HVF, led by violent Bill Macy (Steve Evets) and backed by local churchman Vicar Oddie (Kenneth Cranham), are ready to take action against any PDS Sufferer reintegrated on their patch.
This novel twist on the zombie narrative allows the exploration of various ideas, from social ostracization for things like mental disease to physical deformity, and religious apocalyptic narratives used to explain various cultural events. I’ve tracked down segments of this on YouTube, including some very creative videos simulating a government educational program on dealing with zombies and PDSD, and am intrigued enough to try to find the whole thing. In case you haven’t heard of In the Flesh, check it out.
I have had a long-time interest in horror on television, and have discussed specific aspects of it previously on this blog. With this post we take up the topic again, through an interview with Lorna Jowett and Stacy Abbott, authors of the wonderful volume TV Horror: Investigating the Dark Side of the Small Screen (I.B. Tauris, 2013). I encourage readers to consider Lorna and Stacey’s thoughts on TV horror, to pick up a copy of the book at the link above, and also click on the links in the interview below for related discussions.
TheoFantastique: Lorna and Stacey, thank you for your willingness to participate in this interview. I loved your book and found it a helpful contribution to the study of horror on television. How did you come to develop personal and academic interests in this topic?
Lorna Jowett: As a child, I read a lot and was always drawn to stories involving the fantastic, so in some ways my interest in horror now is a development of that. As an academic, and a fan, I’m particularly fascinated by the way horror can deal with issues about society or identity while appearing to be about something else. It’s fairly obvious that horror frequently deals with taboo subjects like death and sex but it can also have much to say about how those subjects figure in our society and culture and therefore about who we are. The werewolf, ghost and vampire in Being Human are just trying to do what the series title says, after all.
Stacey Abbott: I guess my personal interest grew out of growing up watching horror films (whether made for TV or cinema) on television – a little black and white TV which I had in my bedroom in fact. I loved the spookiness of watching horror films on my own in my room. It was so creepy. I have distinct memories of watching Dan Curtis’ The Curse of the Black Widow on TV as a child. It really scared me and I loved it. I love the emotional rollercoaster that the genre offers. This then grew up into my adult fascination with the genre. I am fascinated by what scares us and why. How the genre speaks to different generations, different cultural context…, how it evolves aesthetically. I initially became interested in horror on film as I am a film scholar by trade but increasingly I found that what excited me about horror – what seemed truly original and transgressive was what was happening on TV…with shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Being Human and Jekyll. It was then our shared interest in the genre that led to the book.
TheoFantastique: In general, what types of developments does horror on television make as it progresses over the decades starting in the 1950s?
Lorna Jowett: One perception might be that horror is now more graphic or more shocking than in previous eras, though as we argued in the book, this isn’t necessarily the case. Different eras of television have seen certain formats enjoy popularity, so it might be fair to say that while the anthology show or single play contributed to TV horror in the past, the current era is dominated by horror as serial drama. Each period has addressed perennially popular horror tropes, though here too, we might identify certain tropes or maybe just ways of dealing with them, that are particular to a certain era. In the 1990s, for example, when outright horror was relatively scarce on television, several examples combined horror and science fiction, as well as other common TV genres or formats — The X-Files is the most obvious, maybe, but in the UK Jo Ahearne’s Ultraviolet took a similar, if distinctively British, approach.
Stacey Abbott: Yes there has been a distinct shift away from series masking themselves as other genres, whether science fiction or teen TV, to series like Supernatural, The Walking Dead, and American Horror Story overtly embracing their place as horror. As Lorna says, serial drama is the dominant mode of TV horror at the moment, but I am very interested by the American Horror Story which seems to be merging the serial drama with the anthology by having a seasonal narrative. Each season tells a self-contained story with a company of actors who come back each season playing different characters. This format allows them to explore a self-contained story in-depth but to then reboot for the next season. It has also allowed them to use horror to deconstruct a series of different cultural institutions: family, church, science, patriarchy. It is very exciting and innovative. I am curious to see how season 3, AHS: Coven, develops.
TheoFantastique: I grew up watching horror on the small screen in the 1970s, and it was this that created my initial interests in the genre, not only the replaying of motion picture horror, but also watching horror created specifically for television. I have a special fondness for television horror from the 1970s with efforts like The Norliss Tapes, and The Night Stalker. What stands out for you as a favorite time period, and why?
Lorna Jowett: There are various seminal shows that really sharpened my fascination with horror, like The X-Files, but I’d have to say now. There’s just so much horror on TV at the moment that there’s something for everyone, a real range of formats, levels and types, aimed at different audiences and aiming to do different things, from Supernatural’s mixture of melodrama and masculinity, to the more recent UK short series In the Flesh, which examines zombies as “Partially Dead Syndrome” sufferers in a divided society.
Stacey Abbott: Like you, I grew up watching TV horror in the Seventies so I have a real love of this period. In particular I’m a fan of Dan Curtis and shows such as Dark Shadows, The Night Stalker, and my favourite of his films Trilogy of Terror. He really made TV a scary place in my childhood. But in working on the book, I also really enjoyed revisiting the classic anthology series from the 1960s/1970s such as The Twilight Zone, Night Gallery, and Boris Karloff’s Thriller. These individual stories were wonderfully creative and became a great space to offer social commentary…without it being obvious that that is what they were doing. There has been much discussion of the contemporary series Mad Men offering a commentary on the construction of masculinity in 1960s America but Rod Serling did this so often in The Twilight Zone in such stories as “Walking Distance” and “A Stop at Willoughby.”
TheoFantastique: What strengths and weaknesses does television have in presenting horror as opposed to cinema?
Lorna Jowett: As we pointed out in the book, many people in the past argued that horror could never be effective on television, pointing to features from poor image quality to censorship and issues of taste in a domestic medium. Many of these ‘weaknesses’ have been overcome, and some applied equally to cinematic horror, and the upsurge in successful TV horror in the last decade gives the lie to this assumption. The key strength that I see in television horror is long form narrative: serial drama on TV allows for much more complex development and negotiation of horror tropes and strategies than can be achieved in a 120 minute film. Maybe one thing you’re forced into, almost, with cinematic horror is group viewing, which to me always adds to the experience of watching horror by sharing its shocks, startles, and suspense. This isn’t ruled out when watching horror on TV, but it takes more effort to organise.
Stacey Abbott: Yes but there is also something really unsettling about watching horror in the solitude of your own living room. This can be really uncanny. But I agree you miss out on the group viewing experience which can really add to the experience of watching horror in the cinema. But the seriality of television does allow for experimentation and creative mixing of genres which would be disruptive in a feature film. Can you imagine the characters in a haunted asylum movie suddenly bursting into song like they do in American Horror Story: Asylum?
Supernatural is a great example of this. It is wonderful horror through and through but it is also very creative with comedy. This doesn’t take away from the horror as there is a lot of space within the series to pause for a comedic episode like “Bad Day at Black Rock,” which features outstanding slapstick comedy or “Changing Channels” where the Winchesters get thrown into TV land and must negotiate the rules of other examples of genre TV, including a wonderful parody of CSI Miami. Or you can have episodes like “Mystery Spot” that merges comedy and horror in very creative and disturbing ways. TV seriality provides creators room to play and experiment, particularly once they have an established audience who are prepared to sit back and enjoy the fun.
TheoFantastique: What stands out for you as the most significant expressions of television horror, both in terms of programming and auteurs, in shaping it, nurturing further developments of it, and perhaps creating an environment for the plethora of contemporary expressions on the small screen today?
Lorna Jowett: Quatermass and Dark Shadows are important early examples. The first because even though copies of the TV serials no longer exist, it is often cited as influencing subsequent horror and science fiction creators, as well as becoming a part of British cultural history. The second because it’s maybe the only early example of daytime TV horror, and again became part of many people’s experience of growing up with horror on TV. The figure of Barnabas Collins in Dark Shadows is arguably one of the first sympathetic or reluctant vampires now so popular in television. These shows, and other classics we covered in the book, are cited often by creators of horror, whether in fiction, film or TV.
Stacey Abbott: I agree with Lorna, in particular because of the creative authorship of Nigel Kneale and Dan Curtis (creators of Quatermass and Dark Shadows respectively). They were the first TV auteurs to stand up and assert their position as creators of TV horror or telefantasy. That wasn’t all they did by any means, but it is what many people will remember them for. As a result I think they, along with Rod Serling, created the auteur space that has been subsequently filled by the likes of Joss Whedon, Tim Minear, Bryan Fuller, Joe Ahearne, and Stephen Moffat as creators of fantastic TV horror. In terms of television series, I would also add Twin Peaks and The X-Files. They both pushed the boundaries of visual/aural style of television, demonstrating that you could create visually and aurally expressive examples of horror for television. As we discuss in the book, Twin Peaks brought surrealism to TV horror which led to such shows as Carnivale and Les Revenants, while The X-Files paved the way for the intermixing of stand-alone episodes and the long narrative arc, a model taken up by Supernatural and perhaps, even, new shows like Grimm and Sleepy Hollow. Also, the episode “Home” from The X-Files stands for me as one of the scariest things I’ve ever seen – whether on film or TV and it is good to be reminded that television is not the less scary option.
TheoFantastique: How has the expansion of television offerings from cable and satellite impacted television horror in relation to its initial expressions on networks?
Lorna Jowett: The kind of horror to be found on pay-channels might be more in your face, like HBO’s True Blood, but there is plenty of horror to be found on network or mainstream channels. NBC’s Hannibal is only one example which offers very sinister, grotesque and macabre material on network TV. Moreover, explicit gore, sex and violence don’t have to be integral to horror, as seen in Hannibal creator Bryan Fuller’s earlier series Pushing Daisies, which combined horror with romantic comedy and elements of film noir. Perhaps the expansion of channels just makes it easier for a show to be targeted at a more specific audience.
Stacey Abbott: I agree. The expansion of channels has created more space for niche programming so that you can have more diversity of programmes. In the network era, programmes had to appeal to the majority but now cable channels don’t need to appeal to everyone, they simply need to identify a target audience and appeal to that group. As a result, producers are prepared to take more chances. Cable channels like Fox or AMC are capitalising upon the loyal genre fans to come back each season to watch these programmes. And TV horror gets a lot of attention now. Even if you don’t watch The Walking Dead or American Horror Story, the odds are you have heard of them, which is good for a cable channel trying to make some noise.
TheoFantastique: Why do we seem to be enjoying a boom in television horror, even while horror on the silver screen seems to be struggling, at least in America?
Lorna Jowett: Perhaps it’s because, as some of the earlier questions and answers demonstrate, television has changed more than cinema in the last decades. New technologies have narrowed the gap between image quality and special effects in cinema and television, for example. The expansion of television also means there’s more competition, not necessarily for bigger audiences, as in previous eras, but for the ‘right’ audiences. Horror in cinema has often been aimed at teenagers: TV horror might be aimed at children, or be much more grown up, moving away from the stereotyped juvenile version that often dominates horror movie-making. In addition, seeking a more niche audience can, sometimes, lead to greater risk-taking and more creativity in TV drama. TV horror lends itself to the kind of edgy productions and distinctive branding both distributors and consumers are looking for.
Stacey Abbott: I agree with Lorna. TV seems prepared to be edgy at the moment. They seem to recognise that what is working for contemporary TV drama is innovation rather than familiarity. So rather than simply look to repeat tried and tested formulas – which is what we see in cinema with the releases of Sinister 2 and Last Exorcism 2 – TV are taking chances on riskier material. A few years ago who would have thought that NBC would be airing Hannibal, not only a series based upon Hannibal Lecter, but a daring and imaginative series that is deeply unsettling and very graphic and yet on network television. These are exciting times for horror – long may they continue.
Lorna Jowett: Absolutely. The fantastic range of horror on TV is why we first wanted to write the book, nearly 10 years ago, and now there is even more great stuff out there. We hope TV Horror is just the start of publishing on this topic.
TheoFantastique: Lorna and Stacey, again thank you so much for your fine book and your time in answering these questions. Your book is a great read on a fascinating topic and I encourage readers to order a copy through the TheoFantastique Store at the links above, elsewhere online, or their local bookstores.
Help TheoFantastique continue to expand understanding of the fantastic by making a donation today.
I was privileged to be a part of the first Symposium by the Emory Center for Ethics on Zombies and ‘Zombethics,’ where I made a brief presentation via Skype as part of a panel. I am pleased to see the second symposium for 2014.
There is a very interesting piece at thegrio.com titled “‘I, Frankenstein’ writer discusses lack of black filmmakers in science fiction.” This topic is worthy of discussion anytime, but most assuredly in October which is Afrofuturism month. The article shares the thoughts of genre writer and actor Kevin Grevioux, known previously for work on the Underworld series of films. He begins by discussing how he left graduate studies in science behind to pursue writing for comic books. Along the way he gets to the thrust of the article borne out by the title, and notes that the African American experience can bring a missing dimension to much of current science fiction. Grevioux goes on to mention his own work as an example, and how in Underworld he incorporated concerns over fears on interracial dating and division over physical differences.
Another interesting facet of this essay is Grevioux’s mention of biblical influences in his latest project, the forthcoming film I, Frankenstein:
“Here you have a monster created by man, created by God, who basically didn’t ask to be here,” Grevioux remarks. “Yet, basically, Dr. Frankenstein didn’t do for the monster he made like God did for Adam. He did not teach him right from wrong. What you have is basically an abandoned son who is trying to find himself in a world he never made.”
Mary Shelley’s novel has a long history of mutations in expression (as Susan Tyler Hitchcock discussed with TFQ previously), and Grevioux’s is but the most recent, along with his incorporation of theological ad metaphysical commentary. After viewing the trailer the viewer can see that, much like Grievoux’s previous work in action-horror, I, Frankenstein appears to come down more on the side of the former in that hybrid genre. One can also see the continued expression of the postmodern monster filled with angst and seeking to do good, and the conflation and identification of the name of the creature’s creator with the monster himself.
If I, Frankenstein is half as entertaining as the Underworld series was, then viewers are in for a treat. But regardless, he’s given us something important to think about.
Yesterday a friend of mine mentioned that a writer and blogger he enjoys has a PayPal donation button on his site, and he suggested that I do the same. Why not? TheoFantastique has been fortunate to find its niche and to reach a unique audience. If you enjoy the posts, writing, commentary, interviews, and the way in which TheoFantastique combines a fan’s appreciation with a deeper exploration of all things fantastic, then please consider making a donation to support this blog. Just click the “Donate” button in the right hand column.
From time to time this blog has explored art related to genre and Halloween, and with this post I want to promote the work of an artist I just discovered. This piece is titled “Halloween Frolics,” found at Etsy.com by Grayson Fogg of The Autumlands, a great piece for this holiday season. Here is the website’s description:
In The Autumnlands, Halloween is a month-long celebration that culminates on October 31st with a variety of activities, from solemn to raucous, depending on the region. Processions and parades are held throughout the month, with some being grand, annual events, while others–particularly those involving faeriefolk–arise spontaneously. Here we see a blend of fey folk and assorted spirits out cavorting under a swollen harvest moon. It almost makes one wish you could fly, to join in the fun.
The flying festivities are painted in colorfast watercolor, acrylic, and colored pencil, on a 17″x6 3/4″ sheet of acid-free illustration board, and sealed with multiple coats of clear, archival fixative.
The artist lists several other great works of art by Fogg. Take a look.
My friend, colleague, and co-editor with J. Ryan Parker of Joss Whedon and Religion (McFarland, 2013), made me aware of this call for papers for an intriguing conference at Brown University. It is titled “Beasts Monsters, and the Fantastic in the Religious Imagination.” From the website:
An Interdisciplinary Graduate Student Conference
Hosted by the Department of Religious Studies at Brown University
February 28-March 1, 2014
With a keynote address delivered by John Lardas Modern, Franklin & Marshall College
Beasts and monsters populate the religious imagination. From ancient cosmogonies and classical fairy tales to modern horror films and contemporary apocalyptic narratives, depictions of the strange and fantastic shape and challenge the categories by which human beings order their experience. Encounters with beasts and monsters in religious discourses can both undermine and reaffirm conceptions of what it means to be ordered or chaotic, native or foreign, and natural or unnatural. They often are invoked as a means to constitute and uphold human communities.
Representations of the radically other often have moral valences and serve as mechanisms to highlight the constellation of virtues (and vices) that define the brave (and often flawed) hero or heroine. Such archetypes can delimit a spectrum of human behavior and, in doing so, reinforce certain conceptions of religious and ethical formation. Encounters with the monstrous may also be moments of transcendence in which strangeness itself signifies the divine.
Depictions of beasts and monsters both attract and repel, always provocatively expanding the boundaries of the religious imagination. This conference aims to interrogate the role of the beast and monster across a wide range of religious discourses and to examine these figures in political, social, theoretical, and ethical contexts.
Possible topics may include, but are not limited to:
Abstracts for conference papers should be between 200 and 250 words, are due November 1, 2013, and should be emailed to the conference committee at BrownRSConference@gmail.com. Proposals should include the title of the paper, the presenter’s name, institutional and departmental affiliation, and any technology requests. We will notify applicants by December 1, 2013.
Infographic Created by HalloweenCostumes.com
I recently learned about a documentary that is currently in production, “Why Horror?,” that takes a point of view perspective through the life of Tal Zimerman, as probes the international and cultural phenomenon of horror deeply. Zimerman discusses the film below, and includes a way that you can get involved in completing this effort.
TheoFantastique: Tal, thanks for making time to discuss your documentary. The idea of probing horror more deeply certainly resonates with what this blog is all about. To begin, in the trailer for the film you describe yourself not only as a fan, but that it is also a lifestyle for you as a part of fan culture. What began your personal journey in horror, and why did you decide to probe it more deeply?
Tal Zimerman: It’s funny, the movie that really piqued my initial interest wasn’t a horror movie at all. It was Carl Reiner’s SUMMER SCHOOL. In it are two hyper-active delinquent geeks, Chainsaw and Dave, who live to watch horror movies and gross people out with special effects. They agree to study in exchange for being allowed to screen THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE for their class. I thought they were the coolest dudes. I went straight to the little convenience store located in the same mall as the theatre and picked up my first Fangoria magazine. I was 12 years old.
But the real journey began a few months later when I first saw DAWN OF THE DEAD. Those two-and-a-half hours is the dragon I’m definitely chasing. That’s when I felt it really spoke to me.
The decision to probe it more deeply probably started when I noticed how widespread the culture had become. There was a really vibrant community of horror fanatics bubbling up here in Toronto and I felt that finally, here’s a group of people who will actually understand what the hell I’m talking about when I babble on about which part of THE GATES OF HELL is most gag-worthy and which Goblin soundtrack is best. And they did. Through social events and message boards came a million conversations of that nature. It became easier than ever to submerge myself in that world and many of these conversations evolved into deeper discussions. Tastes are swapped, vocabularies expand- it was, and still is an excellent time to be a horror fan. And every so often someone asks me why I’m so committed to it I can get quite defensive about it, partly because the tone of the person asking ranges from genuinely curious to openly derisive. But other than asking back “why does anyone like anything”, I could never offer an intelligent or sane sounding answer. It’s quite hard to describe one’s tastes to someone who just doesn’t “get it”. And the fact that I couldn’t answer it for myself, damn what anyone else thinks, annoys me to the point of really wanting to know.
TheoFantastique: What made you decide to take your person journey and make it into a documentary?
Tal Zimerman: I had initially pitched a Toronto-centric horror doc to a TV company I had worked with as an actor, which is my other job. The thing I walked in the door with talked about fan culture in Toronto and how there’s always something to do here for a horror fan. Then they asked me why I was so into it and again, I had nothing to say. And then it his us; that was our doc. That’s why it’s called WHY HORROR?.
TheoFantastique: Who are some of the folks on your production team?
Tal Zimerman: I’m working alongside Don Ferguson productions, who produce comedy for TV here in Canada. The directors of WHY HORROR? are Rob Lindsay and Nic Kleiman who have worked together on TV projects for a number of years.
TheoFantastique: What types of perspectives and disciplines have you explored thus far to capture a multifaceted understanding of this complex cultural phenomenon?
Tal Zimerman: It’s really broad and that’s something we all knew would make this a strong statement. We’re looking at cave art, video games, and everything in between, trying to understand the function of scaring ourselves and each other- it seems to have been with us since before we could talk. Most of our interview subjects so far have been with film makers, but we have had lots of conversations with sociologists, psychologists, writers, artists, actors, and journalists. We still have more brain science types to speak with, in addition to historians and video game developers. People who can not only answer the question of “why” but also those who could help us chart its enormous rise in popularity.
TheoFantastique: Any “aha” moments for you during production as you’ve interviewed people?
Tal Zimerman: There have been several excellent, eye-opening quotes from people expressing why they as individuals love horror, but the real “aha” came through talking to a social psychologist named Joseph Hayes, whose main field of study looks at people’s responses to their anxieties over death. He, as an outsider, was able to look at the culture of horror as I know it and describe it as not unlike other cultures’ rituals of processing death. Like it’s a culture that exists to oppose the larger mainstream society that has it’s own ideas about death and given those ideas, it makes sense that there would form a culture that would challenge those ideas through art. As exciting as it was to talk to people like George A. Romero and John Carpenter, and believe me these are bucket list moments, talking psychology is really blowing my mind.
TheoFantastique: You have a Kickstarter campaign that is launching to fund the movie. What can you tell us about how to get involved in that?
Tal Zimerman: It’s true. We have some funding, but we want to go a little bigger. Everything we have shot has taken place in Toronto and we’re lucky as a city to host big genre conventions and film festivals. We want to take the story to parts of Europe, Asia, and the US and try to show as much as, if not more than we tell. If we can get 40 fantastic interviews standing still, imagine what we could do when we’re mobile! We want to see the Goyas and the Boschs, film the locations that birthed the Gothic movement, and talk to people from the diverse cultures that have had a pronounced output of horror. It’s ambitious, but we think it’s the kind of film that is interesting for fans and non-fans alike. To get involved, visit out kickstarter page at www.kickstarter.com/projects/whyhorror/why-horror-a-new-documentary. We also have a website – www.whyhorror.com and a Faceboook page www.facebook.com/whyhorror.
TheoFantastique: I wish you the best of luck with the film. I can’t wait to see what the final result looks like, and I hope it contributes something important to fans who want to think more carefully about this passion, and that it might also be a resource for academics studying culture, genre, media, and fandom.
