This article talks about how horror films may have a subliminal message behind them and try to preach morality. It uses examples in a plethora of movies where the sinners die before everyone else. The article also states that this can also be looked at in science fiction and fantasy movies. The over arching thesis of the paper states that in every horror movie, the good person who follows obvious morals ends up still alive and the jock or drug user ends up dead or worse. Another example they bring up is curiosity, showing that those the most eager to go out and see something usually end up dead. It concludes by saying that people who see horror may do it for a taste of morality.
While this article does not directly relate to the effects we learned about in the reading, I think it has a lot to do with the topic of what attracts audiences to horror. In our class reading, Carroll states that what creates pleasure to the viewer is “not the tragic event in itself that impacts pleasure, but rather, the way it is worked into the plot” (277). This is a very enlightening idea that I think to be partially correct. No one wants to see blood and gore, but if done masterfully, pleasing many viewers. Dawson takes another approach, hinting that people enjoy horror for “messages and warning about sensitive or recent subjects without directly commenting on those subjects” (2). This idea, much like Carroll’s is a hypothesis to why horror is so well perceived by people and audiences. Personally, I tend to side with Carroll on this argument. The appeasing part of these movies, the stuff that make people sit on the edge of their seats, isn’t the message behind the story, but the art in making such a situation. While Carroll’s point is more reasonable, I find Dawson’s to be more original. I never for one second thought of a horror film to be a metaphor for sinning and doing wrong. But now that I am thinking about it, pretty much every horror movie that I have seen follows the same plotline when it comes to sex, drugs and violence. As correct as this may be, it is not the reason that people go out to see the film. The reason that they go is to see the events masterfully and artistically animated on the film. Sound and scene, as we discussed on our class website and through our “Buffy” example are extremely important in getting viewers to enjoy the film. They need to be fully invested in the film and a good plot and a good use of sound and image can only do this!
The second article that I am referencing is by Derbyshire and was posted in the British newspaper DailyMail. The article is very fascinating and has a lot to do with non-diegetic sound and what we learned about in class this last unit. It alludes to research done by many of the top scientists around the world that found out that one of the reasons we may be so afraid of horror movies is the music and sound, and more specifically the fact that it resembles the sounds of frightened animals. It states that we have found out that high pitched sound that shifts very quickly is what stimulates humans’ fright the most, and that “film makers intuitively realize that they can use these types of sounds” (1). The reason that I chose this article is because it is very similar to what we looked at in class, and uses science to talk about the effect instead of emotion, which is what is discussed in class.
By using the example of Buffy in the first assignment, I got see first hand the importance of non-diegetic sound and the role it plays in horror. Music, especially those of shrill violins and dark pianos, can easily make a horror movie even scarier. Through the class reading and examples, I got a very good background on what non-diegetic sound was and how, if used properly, would have a beneficial effect on the movie. The article that I just read however, goes a little beyond that, and answers “why” this works. It talks about how the shrill sounds are not random and “enhance the emotional impact of the scene”. It also brings up many examples of horror movies with famous sounds that scared the audience. It uses famous music in movies such as Psycho and Jaws as examples where the music was almost scarier than the action going on. The sounds are tapping in “to deep, instinctive fears” that we can do nothing about. Animal sounds that are shrill must have haunted us at some point during the evolution of humans. We are designed to be on alert when we hear such sounds, which is what I think this article is trying to bring up.
To summarize, this article took a deeper look into why non-diegetic sound makes us so afraid. We can not help but be afraid of some of the chilling music that is played during scenes because it resembles the sounds of terrified animals, something that humans were once afraid of when we still lived in caves. Dramatic and comedy films have a lot less of these sounds changes which make them much more relaxing to the viewer. I thought that this article is one of the most interesting that I have read because it brings a concept that we learned in class and puts some facts and science behind it. We learned about the appeal of this sound, now we know why this effect works so well in creating a sense of uneasiness.
Derbyshire, D. (n.d.). Ever wondered why the music in horror films scares us? The harsh sounds tap into instinctive fears . Mail Online. Retrieved August 3, 2014, from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1281385/Ever-wondered-music-horror-films-scares-The-harsh-sounds-tap-instinctive-fears.html
Left Field Cinema. (n.d.). Analysis: Horror Movies as Modern Day Morality Tales – Introduction. Retrieved August 3, 2014, from http://www.leftfieldcinema.com/analysis-horror-movies-as-modern-day-morality-tales-%E2%80%93-introduction