Is the Slasher Dead or Alive? Conflicted Genre Discourse and the Supposed State of the Subgenre
Over the last decade, the current status of the slasher film has been routinely debated across a variety of online spaces - from the mainstream press and prominent horror blogs, to Twitter threads and Reddit forums. A commonality across this discourse is that the slasher is either actively experiencing or is sorely in need of a “comeback,” “resurrection,” or “renaissance.” In contrast, many editorials and user posts regularly mourn the slasher’s supposed (and ongoing) death, even as others champion its seemingly perpetual return from the grave. While such varied claims seemed to intensify around the 2018 release of Halloween, the notion that the slasher is supposedly “back” (or at least needs to be in order to satisfy a hungry horror fan base or supposedly save a dying genre) has been a recurring theme for many years surrounding and independent of The Shape’s latest appearance. What becomes clear from this oft-repeated discourse is the precise lack of clarity in assessing the state of the contemporary slasher. There seems to be ample confusion over what defines these films, what counts as a “successful” entry into the subgenre, and what structures the contemporary horror genre writ large in ways that either opens up space for or delimits the prospects of the slasher. This paper considers the stakes of this conflicted and unsettled genre discourse, and claims that sifting through such conversations can help horror scholars better understand the complex and contradictory ways critics and audiences continue to make sense of the slasher film.
- Alex Svensson (Emerson College, US)
Over the last decade, the current status of the slasher film has been routinely debated across a variety of online spaces - from the mainstream press and prominent horror blogs, to Twitter threads and Reddit forums. A commonality across this discourse is that the slasher is either actively experiencing or is sorely in need of a “comeback,” “resurrection,” or “renaissance.” In contrast, many editorials and user posts regularly mourn the slasher’s supposed (and ongoing) death, even as others champion its seemingly perpetual return from the grave. While such varied claims seemed to intensify around the 2018 release of Halloween, the notion that the slasher is supposedly “back” (or at least needs to be in order to satisfy a hungry horror fan base or supposedly save a dying genre) has been a recurring theme for many years surrounding and independent of The Shape’s latest appearance. What becomes clear from this oft-repeated discourse is the precise lack of clarity in assessing the state of the contemporary slasher. There seems to be ample confusion over what defines these films, what counts as a “successful” entry into the subgenre, and what structures the contemporary horror genre writ large in ways that either opens up space for or delimits the prospects of the slasher. This paper considers the stakes of this conflicted and unsettled genre discourse, and claims that sifting through such conversations can help horror scholars better understand the complex and contradictory ways critics and audiences continue to make sense of the slasher film.
"John Carpenter Has Some Harsh Words for Rob Zombie": Fan Nostalgia, the Halloween Franchise, and the Authenticity of the Horror Auteur
In 2018 the Halloween franchise continued with a new sequel to the 1978 original film. This film ignored Rob Zombie's remake and that films sequel, but also the other seven instalments that followed John Carpenter's Halloween. The continuity of the Halloween franchise is particularly convoluted, which has led to a series of shifting positions and attitudes to the sequels from within the horror fandom community. This paper is interested in how the pre-publicity and marketing of Blumhouse Picture's new Halloween sought to position itself as a more authentic product. This was done by not only featuring the return of Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode, but more importantly, the name recognition of John Carpenter himself being involved. There has been an increasing desire for authenticity within horror fandom, with genre icons such as John Carpenter, increasingly held up as auteurs who have had their work stolen from them by greedy Hollywood studios. Blumhouse has utilised fan nostalgia as a promotional tool to reaffirm their own authority as creators. By wielding original actors, locations, creators, crew members, and even locations, as signifiers of their own authenticity, Blumhouse is able to win the support of the fan community. This paper will explore the rhetoric of authenticity, audience research into fan responses, and the positves and negatives of nostaligia-based marketing in horror.
- Mark Richard Adams (New College Swindon, UK)
In 2018 the Halloween franchise continued with a new sequel to the 1978 original film. This film ignored Rob Zombie's remake and that films sequel, but also the other seven instalments that followed John Carpenter's Halloween. The continuity of the Halloween franchise is particularly convoluted, which has led to a series of shifting positions and attitudes to the sequels from within the horror fandom community. This paper is interested in how the pre-publicity and marketing of Blumhouse Picture's new Halloween sought to position itself as a more authentic product. This was done by not only featuring the return of Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode, but more importantly, the name recognition of John Carpenter himself being involved. There has been an increasing desire for authenticity within horror fandom, with genre icons such as John Carpenter, increasingly held up as auteurs who have had their work stolen from them by greedy Hollywood studios. Blumhouse has utilised fan nostalgia as a promotional tool to reaffirm their own authority as creators. By wielding original actors, locations, creators, crew members, and even locations, as signifiers of their own authenticity, Blumhouse is able to win the support of the fan community. This paper will explore the rhetoric of authenticity, audience research into fan responses, and the positves and negatives of nostaligia-based marketing in horror.
"I’ve Waited for Him": Laurie Strode’s Evolution from Final Girl to Neoliberal Militant in Halloween (2018)
In interviews Jamie Lee Curtis positions Halloween (2018) as a #MeToo film. As merely self-serving publicity, this reading is far too simplistic. In Halloween (1978) Laurie Strode is victimized; she then assumes the role of the quintessential Final Girl as described by Carol Clover (1992). However, in the 2018 film, Laurie is no longer a victim. She assumes neoliberal militant characteristics; such that, a parallel is drawn between Laurie Strode in Halloween (2018) and Sarah Connor in Terminator 2 (1991). This intertextual relationship functions in both character and plot development. In Spectacular Bodies (1993), Yvonne Tasker argues that women in action films—such as Sarah Connor in Terminator 2—take on the characteristics of 80s action heroes. Thus, regressing to what Susan Jeffords discusses as the pre-“New Man” masculinity in Reaganite films (1995). Women in these films are muscular, tough, militant, and violent. I suggest that the political project of Halloween (2018) intertextually relies on a political transformation illuminated by Terminator 2. That film’s central protagonist, Sarah Connor, first introduced the type of hyper-masculinized female characters that Laurie exemplifies in the new Halloween film. My work adds to an existing body of research on female representation in genre films. However, I look at a film that does not promote the masculinization of women. Halloween (2018) critiques Laurie’s militancy by suggesting she is moral comparable to the monster, Michael Myers. She reverses the stalking she received in the original film; instead, she now attacks him. This critique is especially important in the current political climate.
- Khara Lukancic (Southern Illinois University, US)
In interviews Jamie Lee Curtis positions Halloween (2018) as a #MeToo film. As merely self-serving publicity, this reading is far too simplistic. In Halloween (1978) Laurie Strode is victimized; she then assumes the role of the quintessential Final Girl as described by Carol Clover (1992). However, in the 2018 film, Laurie is no longer a victim. She assumes neoliberal militant characteristics; such that, a parallel is drawn between Laurie Strode in Halloween (2018) and Sarah Connor in Terminator 2 (1991). This intertextual relationship functions in both character and plot development. In Spectacular Bodies (1993), Yvonne Tasker argues that women in action films—such as Sarah Connor in Terminator 2—take on the characteristics of 80s action heroes. Thus, regressing to what Susan Jeffords discusses as the pre-“New Man” masculinity in Reaganite films (1995). Women in these films are muscular, tough, militant, and violent. I suggest that the political project of Halloween (2018) intertextually relies on a political transformation illuminated by Terminator 2. That film’s central protagonist, Sarah Connor, first introduced the type of hyper-masculinized female characters that Laurie exemplifies in the new Halloween film. My work adds to an existing body of research on female representation in genre films. However, I look at a film that does not promote the masculinization of women. Halloween (2018) critiques Laurie’s militancy by suggesting she is moral comparable to the monster, Michael Myers. She reverses the stalking she received in the original film; instead, she now attacks him. This critique is especially important in the current political climate.