What
have the following names got in common: George Romero,
Tobe Hooper, Wes Craven, John Carpenter, William Friedkin,
David Lynch, Jeff Lieberman and Larry Cohen? The answer
will be obvious to any even half-aware genre fan:
they made great American horror movies in the 1970s.
Some of them made horror masterpieces. In the 1970s,
the US was the epicentre of cinematic horror, with
many new young directors using it as a calling card
to demonstrate their talents, rarely letting low budgets
get in the way of creativity. This level of determination
and invention gave birth to films such as The
Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Hills
Have Eyes, Martin, Dawn
of the Dead, It's Alive!, Blue Sunshine, Halloween and Eraserhead,
all terrific genre films, and all, I would argue,
essentially American. Here the horrors sprang not
from East European folk tales, but from urban terror,
from untrained remnants of the American West, from
the deadening power of consumerism, from the oppressive
industrial landscape, from the drug experimentation
of the 60s, from fears surrounding modern parenthood,
from a decline in faith in organised religion, from
the rise of the urban serial killer. Young, visionary
American directors were drawing on their own experiences,
their own fears and, most crucially, their own culture
and history to explore a particularly American notion
of horror, universal terrors with a specific cultural
identity. These were great days for the genre.
But
as we moved into 80s, the most important definition
of what made an successful film was not vision
of the writer, director or even studio, but how much
it made in its opening weekend. Drive-in screens, once
a ready-made market for low-budget horror film makers
looking to break in to the business, began to lose
their appeal as a movie venue, and the deadly influence
of post-modernism ensured that scaring an audience
became secondary to joking with them about the process
of doing so. It all started soundly enough – John
Landis most effectively blended comedy with horror
with the experiences of young Americans abroad in An American Werewolf in London, and
although Joe Dante named the characters in The
Howling after directors of previous werewolf
movies and peppered the film with ho-ho in-jokes,
he still remembered to serve up a few imaginative
scares and turn in a decent monster movie. But
by the time we got to The Lost Boys (Joel Schumacher 1988), scaring the audience had become
secondary repeatedly winking at them and selling them
the tie-in rock soundtrack album. Shouting "Boo!"
every now and again stood in for genuinely unsettling
or disturbing the viewer, and no would-be horror film
was complete without a tiresome collection of unfunny
wisecracks, usually referencing other and better films.
All of this reached its peak in 1996 with Scream,
a film that made no pretence about its post-modernist
measles, but directed as it was by the erratic but
sporadically brilliant Wes Craven, it also
delivered on its horror credentials.
But it sewed some tiresome seeds, as scary gave way
to funny and scary, and funny and scary gave way to Scary Movie and its ilk. The subtle,
atmospheric, fear-driven horror movie appeared to
have had its day.
Meanwhile
over in Japan, a new breed of film-makers not obsessed
with that opening weekend or with trying to be lamely
funny were drawing on their own horror literature
and cinematic past to create a new breed of genre
film, one that did not spell everything out for the
audience and which thrived as much on atmosphere
as on plot mechanics and sudden scares. In 1997 rising
star Kurosawa Kiyoshi made Kyua (Cure),
a genuinely disturbing study
of a seemingly emotionless young man who acts as a
catalyst for the release of dark thoughts in others.
It did little business beyond its native shores, but
was clearly pointing the way to what was to follow. The
following year, second-time director Nakata Hideo
adapted a short story by Suzuki Koji and made Ringu.
The film was a home-grown phenomenon and went on to
become the most successful horror film in Japanese
history. As it toured the festivals, word started
to get out that a horror film from the East was more
frightening than anything Hollywood had put out in
years, and that it achieved its aim without
showing a single violent act, without spilling a drop
of blood, and without referencing half-a-dozen other
films in the process. Hollywood may not initially
have taken notice, but they were about to be given
reason to.
In
1999, two cinematic events were to have a direct impact
on the floundering American horror genre, waking the
studios from their daze. A pair of enterprising young
film graduates, Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez,
took their knowledge of the immediacy and realism
of cínema vérité and created
a hoax horror documentary in The Blair Witch
Project, and a young first-time feature director
in Hollywood named M. Night Samaylan wrote and directed The Sixth Sense, an effectively low-key
chiller with no jokey referencing, no real violence
and no gore. Both were huge box-office hits, signalling
to Hollywood that actually scaring an audience was
back in vogue, and – crucially – that there was big
money to be made here. Blair Witch in particular was little short of a phenomenon, made
for a paltry $35,000 but grossing almost $30 million in
its opening weekend alone, going on to be the most
profitable horror movie ever made.
For some of the enterprising producers of the 1970s,
such a success would have sent them in search of other new and inventive young film-makers with
imaginative genre projects to sell – after all, look
at the profit margin for such a small outlay. But
in modern-day Hollywood the response was to fund a
series of slapdash and derivative horror tales set
in woodlands or old shacks, none of which came close
to igniting at the box office. Worse still, The
Blair Witch Project became the subject of
a seemingly endless stream of tiresome satires, while
cinematically lazy film students the world
over began making their own universally terrible versions
of the film, driving lecturers and examiners to distraction
and filling them with despair for the next generation
of would-be film-makers. This thankfully short-lived trend was
brought to a resounding close by Myrick and Sánchez
themselves when they produced a sequel, Blair
Witch 2: Book of Shadows, which was so universally
disliked that serious attempts to emulate their original
project ground to a thundering and much appreciated
halt.
Having
really dropped the ball on Blair Witch,
which was made completely outside of the studio system,
there seemed a determination not to do likewise with The Sixth Sense. Initially, the signs
were good – in 2001 Spanish director Alejandro Amenábar,
whose 1997 thriller Abre los ojos (Open Your Eyes) was being remade
as Vanilla Sky, was hired to direct The
Others, another classy, atmospheric chiller
with a well timed twist in its tail, and one
also devoid of the excesses and distractions of the more
teen-targeted American horrors of the 80s and 90s.
It too made money, suggesting that a hunt for new
scripts and exciting new directorial talent to produce
a new wave of intelligent, original horror movies
would soon be under way. Well, no. That would mean
taking risks, and that is
something modern Hollywood is not too fond of doing. Rather than taking
inspiration from its recent successes, it seemed to
regard them as pleasant flukes, strokes of good luck.
What was needed now was another favourable roll of
the dice.
I can't be the only one who believes that Hollywood
functions a lot like the Microsoft, a giant international
corporation that all too often watches others do the
innovating, then repackages the idea as its own and
markets it to death as the finest thing since the
bagel, knowing that the majority of potential customers
also like to play safe and stick with the brand name.*
What Hollywood needed now was the film equivalent
of Apple or Google or Sony to come up with something
that they could rebrand and recycle as original products
for an audience too young, ignorant or lazy to hunt
out the originals. Which, of course, brings us back
to Ringu.
Ten
years earlier, Ringu would probably
have remained a particularly Japanese success, but
a rising interest in Eastern cinema was ensuring that
such films were being seen more widely in the West,
and with the new interest in scary horror over ha-ha horror, Ringu was finding
an audience far beyond its home shores. Thanks in
part to the rise of the internet, something that Myrick
and Sánchez had used so effectively to pre-sell Blair Witch, the strong word-of-mouth
on Ringu was circulating around the
film-watching world and connoisseurs were actively
hunting it out, in cinemas, on video, on imported
DVD.
It's
not hard to imagine the thought process that followed
at Dreamworks. The original is a genuinely scary film
with highly marketable qualities, any film exec could
see that, but it has three main problems for a mainstream
western audience:
- It's a little too low-key in places – no big action bangs;
- It's in the Japanese language and thus has subtitles;
- There are no western characters in the cast and no famous faces to stick on the poster.
After all, The Sixth Sense had Bruce
Willis and The Others starred Nicole Kidman
– what American audience is going to rush out and
see a film starring Matsushima Nanako? The mainstream
audience want the actors to be idealisations of themselves,
and the cast here not only don't look American, they don't
speak the lingo, meaning that there are subtitles
to read, something almost no mainstream audience will tolerate for more than a couple of minutes at a time. Well there's only one answer for any enterprising
American studio, and that's to Microsoft it – buy
the rights and do their own version. They can make
it bigger, more marketable and can push it to a far
larger audience than the original. Behold, The
Ring – it stars Naomi Watts, who is making
a name for herself as an actor and getting in all
the right magazines, it's directed by a man who's
made films the target audience will have heard of
(erm... Mouse Hunt) and, thank the
Lord, it's set in America, has a white faced American
cast and they talk in ENGLISH. It also has a big
advertising campaign, so that that popcorn brigade
can feel secure going to see a film that all of their
friends will have heard of. That this remake never
comes close to matching the creepy effectiveness of
Nakata's original, that it all too often shouts where
the first film whispered, that if feels the need to
explain things that were best left suggested, and
that it completely botches one of the most genuinely
frightening climactic scenes in modern horror is,
of course, beside the point. At least they're not
speaking in foreign tongues.
One
of the key advantages of such a project, of course,
is that the original has not been widely seen within
the remake's demographic. Sure, a fair number of critics
will make a damaging comparison, but not the ones
who feed the popular press, whose enthusiastic gushings
the advertisers will be able to lift compact sound
bites from to stick on the poster, which is the nearest a good
proportion of the potential audience will come to
reading a review. And if someone does point out that
the original was far better, just mention that it
was Japanese and watch the communication shutters
come down. To the mass audience there is only one
version of The Ring, and with Nakata's
film effectively consigned to the art house, the remake
almost manages to pass itself of as an American original,
especially given the sorry state of many of its English
language generic contemporaries. Perhaps the most
ironic aspect of all this is that thanks to the power
of the Hollywood Marketing Machine and Japan's own
fascination with all things American, Dreamworks were
able to profitably sell the remake back to the country
that had spawned and so enthusiastically embraced
the original.
But The Ring made a lot of money, and
ultimately that's what it's all about in La-La Land.
What Hollywood needed now was another product they
could reprocess as their own, especially as there
was so little to shout about with the home-grown product
– Samaylan was heading down a creative cul-de-sac and
reprocessing the same ideas in different skins, Myrick
and Sánchez were still looking for a way to
right the wrongs of Blair Witch 2 (and still are, as it happens), and the surviving
old hands of the 70s were either no longer working
in the horror genre or undergoing creative self-destruction.
But wait a minute, what's that happening across the
Pacific? More horror films? More GOOD horror films?
Aha...
But
something was about to change, something rather odd.
The Remake Machine not only wanted the cash, it wanted
critical respectability. This is an aspect of Hollywood
we more cynical observers often choose to ignore,
but it's actually true. They want the money, sure,
and they want the power of course, but they also want
people to tell them they are wonderful. A LOT of people.
I forget which who it was who first made this observation,
but it has been calculated that if you took the annual
production budget of any major Hollywood studio and
simply stuck it in the bank then you would make far
more money than you would by sinking it into feature
films. Sure, there's the hope that one of those films
might be another Titanic, but if you want to gamble
then the stock market is still a safer bet. No, they
don't want to be seen just as greedy venture capitalists,
they want to be regarded as artistic visionaries.
So every now and then it's good politics to fund a
small movie that stands a good chance of achieving
critical respectability and maybe launch a promising
indie director on a Hollywood career. It doesn't cost
too much and can pay for itself many times over in
good PR and awards. This is the Prestige Project.
And you don't get successful Prestige Projects by
giving them to the director of Mouse Hunt,
no offence intended. Which brings us back, for a second
time, to Ringu.
They
must love Nakata Hideo in Hollywood. Not only did
he give them the raw material for their version of The Ring, but he had made a couple
of other movies that the studio executives clearly
believed could be Microsofted into American products.
First up there was Dark Water (Honogurai
mizu no soko kara 2002), his gripping tale
of motherly love in horror movie clothing, an easy
sell in the US through its association with The
Ring (it was based on a story by the same
author, Suzuki Koji, something that curiously handicapped
the original a little when people went expecting a
retread of Ringu). Although this
had clear potential as a commercial rather than a
prestige project, the studio clearly saw no harm in
attempting to combine the two and hired respected
Brazilian filmmaker Walter Salles, he of Central
Station and The Motorcycle Diaries (whose widespread success and acclaim must have had
the remake producers hugging themselves with joy at
their good fortune) to direct. A cynical view would
see this as an attempt to quieten those critical of
the whole remake process by placing someone of artistic
standing in charge of the project. You may have even
heard the conversation:
"Have
you heard? They doing a remake of Dark Water!
Can you believe it?"
"Yeah,
but Walter Salles is directing it! At least
you know it won't be the usual crap with him
in charge!"
A more generous (and perhaps accurate) view would
see Salles given the project in the hope that he would
bring an outsider's sensibilities to the project and
deliver something more that just a hack job, which
should, well, quieten those critical of the whole
remake process. Oh do you think so?
Keen
to eat all things Nakata, his 1999 Chaos,
a brain batteringly
complex tale of kidnapping and deception, was also bought up for an American
remake. But even in English and with American stars,
this is a film that would likely bemuse the multiplex
crowd, at least without a considerable rewrite and
a large dose of dumbing down. Given that the film's
structural complexity, as with Christopher Nolan's Memento and Shane Curruth's Primer,
is what makes it special in the first place, this
would seem to be a pointless exercise. But wait a
minute, the studio has been looking for that ideal
Prestige Project and here it is. All they need now
is the right director, someone who has had a big art-house
hit in the US, and they may have a potential award
winner on their hands. Enter Jonathan Glazer, the
talented young director of Sexy Beast,
the very man to give the story a few coats of class,
tease out some fine performances from a doubtless
respectable cast, and clarify a few of the more obscure
plot points, while just keeping it clever enough to
get it talked about at all the right dinners. That's
prestige taken care of, let's get back to the dosh.
Fortunately
there were other Eastern projects that were soon swallowed
up by the Remake Machine, including the Pang Brother's
unnerving The Eye and Shimizu Takashi's
super-creepy Ju-On: The Grudge, both
of which had already proved hits on their home markets
and developed their own fervent cult followings. In
the case of the latter film the absorption process
was stepped up a gear, with Shimizu invited to helm
the remake himself. Now although this at least keeps
the original filmmaker firmly in the loop, it's no guarantee of continued quality, as anyone who was
creeped out by George Sluizer's 1988 The Vanishing (Spooloos) but gobsmacked by the
tackiness of his 1993 US remake will testify.
All
that aside, the whole process of the Ju-On remake, at least from an artistic viewpoint, always
struck me as peculiar. The man who kicked off the
remake was none other than Sam Raimi, a very talented
director in his own right and a huge fan of the original,
a film he reckoned was one of the scariest he'd seen
in years. He liked it so much, in fact, that he asked
Shimizu to come to America and give it another try.
Now hang on a minute. If the original was as good
as Raimi clearly believed, why exactly did he feel
it needed redoing? Oh, wait a minute, what language
is the original in again? Or more to the point, what
language is it NOT in? Precisely. In Hollywood, a
film is not really a film until it's in English.
Of course, this whole remake issue is one of the many
reasons that some commentators still will not take
film seriously as an art form – can you imagine the
likes of Leonardo da Vinci being commissioned to have
a second bash at the Mona Lisa, maybe tart her up
a bit this time, show a tad more cleavage and even
put her in an Adidas sports shirt? And it tends to
be a one-way process, the global dominance of Hollywood
acting like a creative black hole, sucking in all
it sees and making it part of its whole, then going
supernova and blasting its product back out into the
world on which it feeds.
As
this process of absorption and regurgitation continues,
the American horror film is not only losing its hard
fought-for artistic and generic credibility, but also
the very cultural identity that made the 1970s films
so distinctive and effective. Almost none of the remakes
have any specific cultural resonance, in part because
the stories they're based on originated outside of the USA.** Even when the
industry does try to reclaim the American horror film
as its own, the process is a predictably and depressingly
cannibalistic one, as technically proficient but heartless
remakes are trotted out of its own past generic successes
– Night of the Living Dead, The
Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Dawn of
the Dead, The Fog, House
of Wax, The Amityville Horror, The House on Haunted Hill and The
Hills Have Eyes to name a few, with The
Omen, Piranha, Friday
the 13th and When a Stranger Calls still to come. Elsewhere releases both borrow from
past generic successes and use them as touchstones
for audience recognition, e.g. The Exorcism
of Emily Rose (anything with 'exorcism' in
the title is guaranteed a connection by association
with Friedkin's masterpiece), Saw (borrows from Se7en, promises to
shock and has a title that remembers Tobe Hooper at
his best), The Cave (big blokes take
on dangerous monsters – Aliens anyone?), Cabin Fever (trapped in a cabin in
the woods à la Evil Dead), Final Destination (a series of prophecy-driven
grisly deaths that apes The Omen),
and so on. Even the rare films that have risen above
the mire appear to have done their share of plundering,
with Rob Zombie's The Devil's Rejects lifting from a whole number of the director's favourite
films, and the trailer for the soon to be released
(and, by horror fans, enthusiastically celebrated) Slither playing like Shivers meets Squirm meets Night
of the Creeps.
Despite
hopes to the contrary, it does seem likely that these
films and their inevitable, seemingly endless sequels
are where Hollywood horror is now set to trudge, at
least for the foreseeable future, while the J-horror cycle,
the fuel for a fair number of the remakes, appears
to be caught in a self-destructive spiral of repetition
and sub-standard imitation. On top of that, two of
its key directors now fully absorbed into the Hollywood
Remake Machine – Takashi Shimizu is hard at work on
the next two Grudge sequels, and
Hideo Nakata, having directed the remake of his own Ring sequel, is helming remakes of
both The Eye and Sidney J. Furie's The Entity. Kiyoshi Kurosawa, meanwhile,
has dropped the ball a bit with Doppleganger,
which displays little of the subtextual subtlety of
his previous films, and the Pang Brothers have made
one Eye sequel too many and are no
longer commanding the attention of discerning genre
fans.
As
for the remake of Nakata's Chaos,
the Prestige Project that was more about about the
film than the money? Well it would seem that Jonathan
Glazer, and just about everyone else associated with
the project, has found better things to do.
* Favourite examples include the X-Box,
which would never have happened without the phenomenal
success of the Playstation, the upcoming all-dancing
Zune media player, the result of rival Apple's storming
sales with their iconic iPod, the very vocal determination
to stomp all over Google with MSN Search, and of course
the whole Windows operating system, which was a response
to Apple's designer-friendly graphic user interface
(which itself was heavily influenced by work done at Xerox).
** Curiously, only Shimizu's own remake of The
Grudge includes a specifically cultural element,
built as it is around the experience of Americans
working in Japan, and it is largely these Americans
that fall foul of a curse that was first triggered
by an illicit interracial relationship, casting them,
somewhat unexpectedly, as unwelcome outsiders.
|