Horror Films: A Dead Genre?

Horror Films: A Dead Genre?
by Steve Finkelstein

It’s funny how the original intent of my articles keeps mutating. I had intended this article to be a review of the current film Exorcist: The Beginning. However, I found the film to be too minor to devote an entire piece to (just as I did last week, when my review of Alien Vs. Predator morphed into a critical overview of both of those sci-fi film series). Exorcist: The Beginning brings up a larger issue, which I will deal with momentarily; but first, a brief synopsis and review of the current installment in the Exorcist franchise.

Exorcist: The Beginning is a prequel to 1973’s The Exorcist, which dealt with the case of a child being demonically possessed. The title character of that film was Father Merrin (Max Von Sydow), who engaged in a titanic struggle of good and evil to cast Satan out of the body of a pitiful child (Linda Blair). I'm pretty sure most of us have seen that film. If you haven't, you may want to stop reading and head immediately to your nearest video store.

Exorcist: The Beginning jumps back 25 years in time to 1949 Kenya, where Father Merrin initially encountered the demon (this previous confrontation was mentioned in the 1973 film). In Kenya, Merrin is at the site of an archaeological dig where a 1,500 year old Christian Byzantine church is being unearthed. Underneath this church is the subterranean lair of an Assryian demon that, when unearthed, wreaks hellish havoc on both the archaeologists and the natives.

Since this film had no advance press screenings, I was fully prepared for a disaster of the magnitude of Alien Vs. Predator. While it’s not a good film, Exorcist: The Beginning is not the turkey that AVP was. In fact, I was rather surprised at some of the elements that made this horror film an interesting failure. The film was directed by Renny Harlin (Die Hard 2 ) and he handles the film intelligently and atmospherically, doing his best to liven up a disjointed screenplay. Likewise, the acting is quite good, with Stellan Skarsgard excellent in the role previously helmed by Von Sydow. Yet with all these quality elements, the film doesn’t work because its script doesn’t fulfill its potential. Various plot elements don’t coalesce, and characterizations and dialogue are woefully underdeveloped. Because of these flaws, the film is not particulary compelling, vital, or most importantly, frightening.

This was definitely not the case with William Friedkin's The Exorcist, which pretty much scared the crap out of its baby-boomer audience. Adapting his novel into a Oscar-winning screenplay, William Peter Blatty crafted a story that brilliantly managed to deliver heart-pounding chills, while at the same time created a cast of characters that audiences were vitally interested in and empathazied with. The original is dated to a certain degree, but it certainly has its fans among today’s crop of younger film goers. A recent audience survey conducted by the E! cable channel listed it as the Most Frightening film of all-time--a pretty good stunt for a thirty year old film, one which the current installment falls short of by a wide margin.

If it seems I’m giving the current film a short shrift, it’s because I’d like to give some attention to recent horror films, which indicate the genre may be moribund. (If you want to read a more detailed review of Exorcist: The Beginning and its troubled production history, go here.) We are now a few years into the 21st century, which has only produced a handful of good major horror flicks: Shadow of the Vampire, Dracula 2000 (a guilty pleasure), Brotherhood of the Wolf, Blade 2 and Dog Soldiers. The case of Dog Soldiers was particularly disappointing, as it went straight to video. It’s a Scottish horror film that deals with a group of National Guardsmen that does battle with a pack of werewolves in the forest. I recommend that you go out and rent it.

If the paucity of good horror flicks recently is disturbing. Just think about the junk that has littered theatres over the past four years: The 9th Gate, The Mummy Returns, Ghosts of Mars, The Ring, Ghost Ship, Dreamcatcher (AWFUL!), 28 Days Later and Van Helsing (I didn’t find this last film particularly objectionable, but many horror purists despised it, part of which contributed to its lackluster box office showing; in any event, it was something of a disappointment, which is why I’m including it on the “junk” list).

Horror is a great film genre that I dearly love (I'm not being altruistic here; I’m currently pushing a horror script), and I can't understand why the genre has been in decline for so many years. Audiences loved to be scared, and I’m convinced they would really like to see a first-rate horror film. Does anyone out there agree with me? Would you fork out $10-20 bucks to see a quality horror film? Send me an e-mail with your opinions on the topic, along with your votes for the greatest horror films of all-time.

My final thought is this: if Hollywood doesn’t turn out a group of quality horror movies in the near future, the genre will soon be as dead as the western and the musical, if it isn't already.

See ya soon.

Steve Finkelstein can be reached at steve@babblog.com.