Monday, August 13, 2012

Ask JKM a Question 22: Horror Movies and Kids?


A reader, Cannon, writes:

“Follow up this link and give the video a whirl.”



“Now, I already have a very straightforward opinion on this matter, and yet I’m nowhere near the horror movie aficionado that you are. So I’m interested to read the insights of someone such as yourself who has devoted a good portion of his life to the cultural and sociological study of horror cinema.”

“Obviously, the news report here is quite dated, from somewhere back in the mid-1980s, but that’s one reason why I chose it. My question for you, John, is twofold:

1. How significant is the influence of horror films -- be it negative or positive -- on prepubescent and adolescent viewers? Is there a good and bad? Do they overlap?

2. Clearly, the 1980s saw the rise of home video entertainment that brought horror films of all kinds-and-quality into the late night living rooms of kids and teenagers, during sleepovers or when parents were at work. How has such an influence (from the previous question) changed from the 1980s to today’s home media, if at all?”

Cannon, that’s a terrific question. I’m glad you asked it.  It’s also something I think about almost every day.

Reviewing the Video:

First, I should acknowledge that so-called “news” segments of this sort are actually part of the reason I stopped watching network TV news-magazines some years back. 

I don’t remember this segment, specifically, but around 1994, I do recall seeing all the networks -- Dateline, 48 Hours, 20/20 -- trying to gin up audience terror for the eventuality of an asteroid collision with Earth.  It was a ridiculous news “fad.”  Sure, such a collision could happen, but was it really so news worthy that all the networks had to cover it as some kind of impending disaster?

I strongly suspect that the goal of such “news” programming is not providing important and timely information, but rather stoking fears (primarily in senior citizens), about the contemporary world going to Hell. 

Those young whippersnappers! With their horror, and their porn, and their VCRs!

At least horror films, by contrast, are up-front about their desire to terrorize, and don’t cloak their intentions under the guise of “news” or “important information.”

This 20/20 segment is extremely sensational in tone (far more sensational than the tone, say, of Halloween), which suggests to me the program’s desire to provoke hysteria rather than present the plain facts of the matter at hand.

In terms of strategy, this piece crafts a very questionable link between horror and porn, and even horror and the mob. It furthermore makes several false generalizations about the nature and direction of violence in horror films.

I’ll now debunk each of these points.

In the case of crime, the only fact that this story presents is that one horror film’s distribution had ties to a man who was considered a mobster by legal authorities.  That single connection -- out of thousands of horror movies -- does not mean that horror boasts any widespread link to organized crime, and it’s really despicable to suggest otherwise.   

There have been one or two notable cases of plagiarism in the last year or so, but not all writers are plagiarizers, obviously.  Similarly, this 20/20 piece suggests, erroneously, that because one criminal was involved with releasing one horror film, the whole genre is somehow criminal.

This is guilt-by-association, and furthermore, guilt-by-association done rather poorly.

Secondly, it would also be fair to describe films such as Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985) as a “graphic orgy of violence,” but notice how in this segment only horror – not the violent action genre – is singled out for scorn.   The implicit message of this is that it’s okay to kill a commie for Christ, so-to-speak, but as soon as you actually get into a genre that seriously discusses the morality of violence, it’s somehow corrupt or immoral. In other words, there's no depth here, and no attempt to apply a standard equally across all genres.  Horror is the target, pure and simple.

Most importantly -- again and again throughout this segment -- interviewees condemn the fact that horror films always feature a “female victim” and “always in a sexual context.”  I believe that’s an exact quote, or at least a close approximation.

This is a flat-out lie, and easily knocked down.

In fact, the video contradicts this idea itself, showcasing footage from Evil Dead II (1987), a film in which the majority of the violence is delivered upon the head of the male character, Ash (Bruce Campbell), not the female characters.  In fact, it’s the female characters in the Evil Dead series that do most of the tormenting and battering.

But let’s showcase some other prominent examples:

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre? Three men under attack; two women under attack. 

Halloween? One male victim, two female victims.  

Friday the 13th? Four male victims, four female victims. 

Night of the Living Dead? Four male victims, four women victims.

A Nightmare on Elm Street?  Two men, two women.

I actually find it difficult to name even one popular, culturally-significant horror film in which all the victims are female. 

And furthermore, in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Night of the Living Dead, Elm Street and Evil Dead II, there is no overt sexual context to the murders at all. 

The linkage between sex and violence that the 20/20 video suggests does not exist.

In TCM, for example, Leatherface and his cannibal clan show zero interest in the female characters as anything other than meat (the same way they view the men, in other words).

It’s true indeed that there are some sexualized situations in Friday the 13th, but generally in that series, the men and women engaging in sexual intercourse are killed together, so it’s not as if only the women are being punished or singled out for sexual activity.  It’s equal opportunity slicing-and-dicing.

As I’ve stated recently, there is indeed a bias in horror films about women, but the dirty little secret is that it’s a positive bias. 

The “Final Girl” archetype presents the female lead character as a more insightful, stronger, and cleverer individual than any of her (doomed) male cohorts.  People of both sexes die in horror movies with regularity, but it is the smart woman who most often survives the gauntlet. Shouldn't that count for something?

Halloween, Friday the 13th, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Hellraiser, Scream and even the Alien films are all examples of this trend. 

In fact, the horror genre is so pro-woman that these days the genre is feted as an entertainment with a larger female than male demographic in terms of audience.

After such blatant mischaracterization of horror films, this 20/20 piece also makes no effort to differentiate between the average horror film and something like Faces of Death

Again, there’s a pretty big distinction, and it isn’t even mentioned. 

The former (your friendly neighborhood horror film) is a fictional narrative with fictional characters and fictional threats.  The latter is a pseudo-documentary ostensibly showcasing “graphic” depictions of real people dying. 

It’s kind of like failing to notice the considerable format distinction between Platoon (1986) and Hearts and Minds (1974). 

The two films aren’t of the same genre or form, so it’s like comparing apples and oranges.

Kids and Horror

But getting to the meat of your questions: does horror have a significant effect upon children?  And is it a positive or a negative one? 

I am the devoted father of a five-year old boy, Joel, whom I love more than life itself.  He is the apple of my eye, and I do not allow him to watch horror films at all because he is not psychologically ready for them at this point.  He’s too little and too impressionable.

However, I do tell Joel ghost and monster stories on the way to school and at bed time (from the Twilight Zone, One Step Beyond, Ghost Story, Night Gallery, The X-Files, and even the Halloween, A Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th films). 

Why would I do this?

Because scary stories are Joel’s favorite thing in the world, and I submit there’s absolutely nothing wrong or perverse about that fact.  What else is Hansel and Gretel, but a horror story?  What else is The Gingerbread Man, but a horror story? The same fact is true of Little Red Riding Hood.  

Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and Where the Wild Things Are all feature powerful horror aspects as well.  There’s a long-standing historical link, I submit, between children and horror, and the kind of stories we tell our children.

Everybody loves to get up in arms about the things children are exposed to “these days,” but the fact is that kids enjoy (safely) testing their limits. It's part of their very make-up.

How fast can they run?  How loud can they shout?  How scared can they get?

I believe very strongly that it is developmentally important for children to know and understand that the world is not all sunshine and roses, or hugs and puppies, but that despite this fact they will -- by and large -- be all right.   

They will survive, even if they get hurt a little, or something bad happens at school.  Scary stories like Hansel and Gretel and monsters like Dracula or King Kong thus help inoculate a child against the scarier aspects of life in general.   The horror or monster film can actually be a “safe zone” for ready kids, because almost universally in horror the monsters are defeated and the forces of good prevail.  The message of horror, down to its most basic form is, simply: terrible things happen, but you will survive. You’ll be okay.

So I believe tolerable terror for a young child is just fine. I would have no qualms about Joel watching the original King Kong (1933) if he wanted to, or even the 1976 one.  He has already watched all the Ray Harryhausen Sinbad movies…which are filled with monsters.

Yet I adamantly don’t recommend letting little ones see horror movies they are not ready for

That’s what we have a ratings system for: as a useful guideline. When I saw Bride of Chucky (1998) in the theater, my wife and I were deeply disturbed to see that a woman had brought her toddler to see the film, and that the child was visibly upset by the action on screen.

Now, I ask you: whose fault is that?

The movie’s fault? 

Or does the blame rest with the parent? 

I would suggest the latter.  Parents must be responsible in deciding what they allow their children to see, and be prepared for the consequences if they aren’t careful and vigilant. I learned this fact the hard way with Joel when he was four.  We were in Target shopping one day, and Michael Jackson’s Thriller came on the radio.  He listened to it and loved the song. It’s a perfect monster story!  So at home, I put the music video up on YouTube for him to watch…and the visuals scared him.  I turned it off quickly, and prepared for my wife (a therapist) to kill me when she got home from work.

I haven’t repeated that mistake.  For one, I don’t want Joel to be scared.  For another, I like my testicles where they are.

But there are definitely age-appropriate horror stories for young kids to enjoy. Scooby Doo for example.  Right now Joel is thrilled about going to see Paranorman and Hotel Transylvania and Frankenweenie.  

These are, in essence, the right horror movies at the right time in Joel’s life. He's ready for them, and I know he will love them.

Adolescents and Horror Films?

Older kids are a different story, but again, I think it’s the parent’s responsibility to gauge a child’s readiness, and to act accordingly.

By age twelve, I had seen a lot of scary movies, including, notably, The Funhouse (1981).  I was kind of scared to see it (with my friends, at party), but when it was over, I felt like I had run a marathon…and won it; that I had overcome the terror lurking in my imagination.  I came through the movie feeling stronger and more confident.  I came out feeling that the experience was valuable.

Watching R-rated horror movies in the safety of the family home is a good way for adolescents, honestly, to break out and rebel a little without doing anything physically or emotionally dangerous.  They aren’t drinking, they’re not driving, they aren’t doing drugs or having unprotected sex.  

Watching a horror movie at night with friends, during a slumber party, without parents around, thus gives teenagers the edgy thrill of defying authority, but with none of the physical safety drawbacks.

Again, you must be reasonable about this situation.  A twelve-year old kid should probably not watch Last House on the Left (1972).  But Fright Night (1985), for example, is a different story.  There's horror and then there's horror, if you get my drift.  

How does this paradigm play today?

I realize that many of the most dedicated horror fans despise PG-13 horror movies, but in some sense, these PG-13 horrors are a welcome bridge for today’s adolescence, landing somewhere between the kiddie horror I mentioned above and the hard horror that may still be too frightening. 

We just came through an era of so-called “torture porn” (a really unfortunate name for the form…), and again, I don’t think anyone at age thirteen should be watching films like Martyrs or Irreversible – as brilliant as those films are.  But stuff like Predators (2010) or Paranormal Activity?   Those movies would have been absolutely fine for me at age twelve, and they are perfectly in line for kids of the same age today.  

No problem, if you feel your child is ready.

I guess underlying all of these questions it the really important one: do horror movies turn people into killers?

No, of course they don’t. 

No more than Little Red Riding Hood, or Hansel and Gretel do. 

The sad fact is it is easier to blame horror movies for violence in our culture than it is for parents to look in the mirror and be accountable for what they teach their children. 

It’s easier to blame horror movies than to confront the NRA gun lobby and question why, precisely, it is that people need automatic weapons with 100 bullet clips for “hunting” and “sport.”

There’s a generational aspect to this equation too. Going back for a long time, every aging generation seems to hate the younger generation’s taste in music and movies.  So the old people who sit at home and watch something like this atrocious 20/20 video are the ones already pre-disposed, alas, to believe that slasher movies are evil, and that things will never be as good as they were in the good old days.  So-called "news" stories like this play into a pre-existing narrative, and preach to the choir.

My final and most significant point is that children require our attention and our care.  If you provide that attention and care, you’ll know pretty well what the threshold is for your kids regarding horror movies, or any kind of entertainment, for that matter.

And lastly, that 20/20 video is designed to scare people, and erected upon arguments that aren't even close to being true.  In fact, I'll go further.  Please pardon my directness.  That video is full of shit.

13 comments:

  1. As a matter of fact, I think I recall charges of misogyny from critics in regards to Carpenter's 'The Thing' having an entire male cast. The criticisms regarding horror films are wide, varied and generational.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trent,

      You are so right. Horror films are the favorite punching bag of many social critics, from the religious right, to die-hard feminists on the left. And in general, the arguments against horror films are as pretty dumb as the ones we see in this video.

      I couldn't agree with you more.

      best,
      John

      Delete
  2. I have a bit of my own perspective to add here on the issue of children and horror films, being on the younger side of the spectrum.

    I started watching horror films at an extremely young age. When I was five and six years old I was watching movies like Gremlins, The Monster Squad, Ghoulies, Critters, and The Gate on repeat, degrading my VHS copies to an unwatchable state. Before I had reached the tender age of ten I'd seen most of the genre staples that my local video store had to offer: Halloween, The Blob, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Jaws. By age twelve I was deeply into the R-rated pantheon, and by fourteen I had attended a Bruce Campbell book signing. From then until now, few things have been able to pique my enthusiasm like the horror film has.

    So I'm not sure it's necessary to protect a child from horror films if that's where her interests are leading her. I wouldn't argue that that sort of early exposure is acceptable for everyone, but I've yet to discover a way that it has harmed me. True, I occasionally had thoughts that kept my younger self up at night (that the Blob was stuck to the ceiling over my bed, or that Jaws was inexplicably lurking under the carpet by my feet), but these were less scarring experiences than formative ones. I was more interested in discerning why I was scared and uncovering what about the films made me feel that way. In short, I believe horror films helped to make me a critical thinker. They are the first cultural products I can recall taking an interest in that went beyond treating them as mere entertainment. This critical interest I'd developed eventually expanded to literature and cinema in general, but the root would always be horror films.

    I'm now 24 years old and watch more horror movies than ever. I teach College Composition and am about to graduate with a Masters in English Lit, with the likelihood of continuing to a PhD program in the near future. I've recently started a horror blog (http://nessuntimore.blogspot.com/) where I like to look at the films I'm watching from many perspectives, but predominantly those of genre and feminist theory. In addition, I'm in the early outlining stages of a scholarly text on the Found Footage movement in contemporary horror. So, while I don't believe my early childhood exposure to horror had an adverse effect on me, it's undeniable that it has shaped the course my life has taken. Whether it's all been for better or worse, we shall see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jeffrey,

      I loved reading your comment, and learning of your experience. I see horror very much as you do, as something that can encourage critical thinking, and also imaginative play. I'm thrilled that my son is interested in monsters and ghosts and things like that.

      However, I do think it all comes down to parents determining if their kids are ready for some of the scarier movies. Obviously, you were. I was too. It sounds like Cannon is as well, though I haven't read part two of his comment yet, as I go through the responses here. The danger, I think, is pushing a kid before he is ready. I have shown Joel about 60% of Gremlins at this point, and he loves it. That's where I come to, there's horror, and then there's horror. He would (rightly) have no idea what to do with something like I Spit on Your Grave, or Last House on the Left. But the Freddy movies...I mean, they are updates of Dracula style movies, in a sense. I can see him watching those in a few years and being fine.

      There's a big difference between being five and being eight, in other words, and I just recommend really considering where you kid is on the "readiness" scale.

      Great comment!

      best,
      John

      Delete
  3. Wow, great question and great response! This 20/20 piece reeks of the type of scare tactics the religious right were practicing in the mid 1980's. Reminds me of the PMRC hearings that resulted in albums being labeled for (so-called) indecent content.

    While my parents let me start watching horror movies at a young age (I was traumatized by Jaws for years!), I got equally, if not more, scared from reading Stephen King. I remember being petrified of our basement after reading Salem's Lot.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Chadillac,

      Cannon outdid himself with this question. He did an awesome job, and he really got me thinking about this subject matter again.

      "Scare tactics" is a perfect description for this lame 20/20 video. It seeks to provoke hysteria, and even, it seems to me, a level of violence. The way 20/20 makes it sound, horror movies are just the MOST AWFUL THING EVER, and SO DANGEROUS TO YOUR CHILDREN. It's really...silly.

      They should go back now, after all these years, and note for the record that this segment is full of shit.

      I saw some horror movies at a young age (but not Jaws, thank goodness...), but my own son, Joel, somehow seems younger to me at five than I did, if that makes sense....

      Excellent thoughts here, Chadillac.

      best,
      John

      Delete
  4. Part I

    Like Jeff Camino I, too, started my horror movie exposure at a markedly young age. So young, in fact, that I really have no memory of NOT being allowed to watch this or that; Alien stems back to my earliest days of tripping out in front of the TV set. But I’m still normal. Mostly. I don’t set kittens on fire or rip the tags off mattresses or anything.

    Popular Publications was one of the largest publishing companies of pulp magazines back in the 1930s, whose content often included mystery/horror tales. An editor for the company, Roger Terrill, once opined on the subject matter: "Horror is what a girl would feel while watching a ghoul practice diabolical rites from a safe distance; terror is what she would feel if she knew she were going to be the next victim."

    There is truth to this, methinks.

    Terror is something physical, something real. Following the instincts of self-preservation, terror is an immediate response to an impending danger of one kind or another. Horror, on the other hand, is something far more abstract [insert ellipses] ...that’s why they’re called Horror Movies.

    My verdict is this: kids need horror. It’s important; healthy, even. Of all human emotions, none entice the imagination more powerfully than fear. Our ancient born fear of the dark -- the first fear any child experiences -- is precisely what causes us to imagine that which we cannot see. As with the classic stories of the Brothers Grimm (and Poe and Lovecraft and King etc.), horror movies offer a fountain of imaginations fully realized on screen. Kids love being scared within this context because it exercises their sense of wonder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think I could possibly say it better than you did, here, Cannon:

      "My verdict is this: kids need horror. It’s important; healthy, even. Of all human emotions, none entice the imagination more powerfully than fear. Our ancient born fear of the dark -- the first fear any child experiences -- is precisely what causes us to imagine that which we cannot see. As with the classic stories of the Brothers Grimm (and Poe and Lovecraft and King etc.), horror movies offer a fountain of imaginations fully realized on screen. Kids love being scared within this context because it exercises their sense of wonder..."

      Amen, brother. Amen.

      Delete
  5. Part II

    Even beyond supernatural monsters like Dracula or some flesh-eating space creature, a disturbingly pedestrian menace such as Michael Myers, stabbing and strangling, allows younger viewers to imagine -- or partake in the imagining of -- such heinous acts. Why is this good? Because when you imagine something, you own it. You control it. Horror can be processed safely. I’ll even go so far to propose that horror is the first thing kids learn to intellectualize. The Boogeyman, in whatever-way-shape-or-form he appears, is the first thing that a child learns to reconcile, the first thing he/she learns to deal with internally. Children are surprisingly durable and self-sustaining this way: they work shit out on their own.

    Despite my childhood experiences, I’m sure there are reasonable limits when exposing your kids to the horror genre, as certain films depicting more realistic scenarios of homicidal violence are probably not such swell idea for younger prepubescents. Supernatural horror like, say, Poltergeist would make a better start, as kids can better identify the material as being straight fantasy. In fact, fantasy and horror often go hand-in-hand. Many films that are categorically non-horror nonetheless dish out some supremely horrific monsters or scenes of phantasmagorical mayhem, like Dragonslayer, The NeverEnding Story, Legend, Raiders of the Lost Ark or Ghostbusters. All PG films.

    Once you get into A Nightmare on Elm Street or Evil Dead territory, the frights become so outlandish, intended or not, they often spill into absurdity, which is why kids regularly giggle with devilish delight when watching such films. This is also why horror and comedy go together hand-in-hand. Nine times outta ten, extreme gore is just plain silly.

    As for that video, I agree 100% that its a purely vacant, fear-mongering excuse for journalism. I also think its fascinating that, as you pointed out, the news piece itself is a kind of horror movie intended for adults. Still, it’s a totally rad artifact of its time. Very nostalgic for me. I love seeing those video store shelves racked with countless cornball titles from the likes of Media Entertainment. And finally, I gotta give a shout-out for Cranston Jarvis (...Cranston...Jarvis ...awesome name!) at 3:36. Christ, that kid was me! He was all of us!

    Hell, he’s the real reason why I even emailed you the video link. Long live Jarvis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cannon,

      I want to thank you for contributing this great question to the "Ask JKM" series. It's already provoked a lot of great discussion, and I had a good time processing my own thoughts, regarding my childhood, and my son's.

      I feel that you are a wise man sir (are you a parent?), and I especially like and appreciate this formulation: "Even beyond supernatural monsters like Dracula or some flesh-eating space creature, a disturbingly pedestrian menace such as Michael Myers, stabbing and strangling, allows younger viewers to imagine -- or partake in the imagining of -- such heinous acts. Why is this good? Because when you imagine something, you own it. You control it. Horror can be processed safely. I’ll even go so far to propose that horror is the first thing kids learn to intellectualize."

      I couldn't agree with you more. I tell Joel these ghost stories and monster stories, and I can literally see the synapses firing, I swear. He takes ownership of these ideas, and you can just see how exciting it is to him; how imaginative he is. I would never want to rob him of that.

      My big point with kids and horror is to go a step at a time, and figure out what they are ready for. I don't think Joel is ready for Alien or Jaws, but he is close to being ready for Gremlins. I know this, I enjoy seeing how much he digs horror stuff. I know he's going to love the movies when we dive in, ready to go.

      Thank you again, my friend, for your thoughts on this topic, and for bringing the topic to light here.

      best,
      John

      Delete
  6. It needed Doctor D Dave Schultz to show up and slap the piss out of the 20/20 people.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow, I remember these types of stories going around during the 80s and 90s. My folks owned a couple video stores and renting out horror films was always a tricky business. If the kids looked pretty young and there wasn't an adult with them, we wouldn't let them rent any R rated flicks. But heck they were happy with "Monster Squad" and "Gremlins" most of the time.

    But the "Faces of Death" series was another matter. We had a pretty strict rule about not renting those out to anyone not 18 or with an adult who understood what the movies were supposed to be (and at the time what we all believed they were).

    In a way, it made the whole "Faces of Death" series a kind of holy grail for my horror loving friends. I remember when one of my friends finally did get to see it and was really disappointed.

    As you point out horror can be a very personal thing too, what may scare one kid may not scare another. I remember seeing a black and white version of "Alice Through the Looking Glass" on television. It had a lot of very dreamlike filming techniques in it. It was like watching a dream unfold in front of my young eyes. Now I had some serious nightmares as a kid, so seeing a dream so vividly brought to life on TV scared the socks off of me. I've never been able to find that movie again, but I'm sure the effect wouldn't be the same. Still for me, that dreamlike feeling of horror has always been more potent than the blood and gut variety. It's also why I love David Lynch movies for their ability to attract and repel me.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous11:48 AM

    Fascinating question and answer - and one that in a broader sense I tackle myself on a regular basis, though more in terms of film in general rather than genre specifically. My older boys are 7 & 9 currently and they gaze frequently with envy at my segregated off wall of 'Daddy's' films. It's been a common occurrence to have them read off titles, while I chime calmly "not appropriate" in response.

    But as they get older, and more mentally ready for things - we've started stretching a bit and letting them go for, as you note, some of their boundaries - providing Dad is there to shepherd the situation. We recently watched "Labyrinth" together, which was enjoyed, and the other evening I screened "9" for them, giving them an early taste of post-apocalyptica. I admittedly had my hand within trigger distance of the remote's stop button the entire time - I was nervous about it - but they asked questions, I answered them - and they took in the narrative without any flinching or nightmares after. I was honestly proud of them. I think we'll do fine with this arrangement.

    As to my own childhood, my parents were good folks - but it did take them a little bit to notice that their 5 year old was doing the ninja-sneak downstairs at 4am to see what the brand spanking new cable box had on offer. I recall seeing the tail end of "Terror Train", that several million BC dinosaur/caveman flick, and a fair portion of "Motel Hell". Once they got on board - I was of course properly supervised. The deal I often brokered to see edgier fare involved reading the novelization first. I was only permitted to see Temple of Doom in the theaters after reading the tale in print. I used this same logic later to gain authorization to rent the original Alien.

    of course - I then later showed my 9 year old brother 'Aliens' - kids. :D

    We both turned out well, though. :)

    ReplyDelete

My Father's Journal, Epilogue: "My Cancer"

My friends, we have reached the final entry in my father’s journal of his battle with cancer.     I want to thank all the readers who have c...