Connect with us

Editorials

What Makes a Great Horror Ending? 

Published

on

The ending of Jordan Peele’s Get Out is satisfying, well executed, and it does not last a single second longer than it needs to. Peele brings his story to its appropriate conclusion and then promptly cuts to credits, not wasting the audience’s time with a useless epilogue or with one last scare. These closing minutes are refreshing, and they highlight how disappointing endings in horror typically are. So what is it about horror films in particular that too frequently end with a whimper and a shrug, and what makes a truly great final scene?

In recent years, one of the most frustrating types of horror endings is what can be referred to as “the screamer.” After a stretch of silence, the villain of the piece lunges at the camera, sometimes breaking the fourth wall to do so. This is a relatively new phenomenon ushered in by the found-footage boom, but it’s a natural evolution of the decades-old principle of ending on one last scare. The idea is to startle the audience with a jump or a twist directly before the credits so that they are given a rush of adrenaline and they return to the theater lobby visibly shaken like the passengers of Splash Mountain returning to Magic Kingdom completely drenched.

It makes sense, but unfortunately, there are so many examples of films falling apart as a direct result of their director trying to fit in an ending scare where one does not belong, and too often does the last scene cheapen the work as a whole.

The most prominent example of this in recent memory is Paranormal Activity. When Oren Peli’s film premiered at Screamfest in 2007, the ending was perfect: after killing Micah off camera, Katie returns to her bedroom and sits on the floor, rocking back and forth. The footage cuts ahead to show Katie remaining in this exact spot for nearly 24 hours, ignoring concerned phone calls and never once sleeping or eating. When police arrive, she walks towards them with a knife and is shot and killed. The picture fades out, and the movie closes on photos of Katie and Micah as a tribute to the deceased couple.

In addition to being creative and scary, this ending is a natural extension of the relatively subdued movie that came before. But it’s also more restrained than we typically expect from a wide release, and sending audiences out on this note would be a huge risk. So the ending was scrapped in favor of a more conventional but less effective one in which Katie crawls towards the camera, her face morphs, and she lunges at the viewer as the picture cuts to black. The audience screams, laughs, and leaves the theater on a high as they might leave a haunted house.

But that high quickly wears off. This ending is cliché, it looks silly, and it is so thoroughly at odds with the rest of the film, which until that point played out like something we could reasonably imagine being recorded on a person’s home video camera without any Hollywood effects. Suddenly, the movie has all of the subtly of a screamer video found on eBaum’s World in 2003. Katie jumping at us may provide a brief thrill, but it’s not what the story needed, and it ultimately leaves us wanting more.

Six years after the release of Paranormal Activity, another film was nearly ruined for almost the exact same reason, although this time there was no alternate scene. Leo Gabriadze’s Unfriended follows a group of high school kids on a Skype conference taking place on the one year anniversary of the death of their friend Laura, who committed suicide after being cyberbullied. In the last act, it is revealed that (spoiler alert!) the lead character, Blaire, is the one responsible for Laura’s death.

As soon as that information drops, we can feel the movie building towards an interesting and unique ending. After Laura has killed all of Blaire’s friends, she uploads to Facebook proof that Blaire was the one who drove her to suicide. Now, Blaire’s reputation has been destroyed, and she has been cursed to suffer the same fate she inflicted upon Laura, a fate which may be worse than death. It’s the ideal kind of ironic twist: one that we do not see coming but that in retrospect is clearly the way the movie always had to end.

Yet at the last moment, Gabriadze goes for the boring Hollywood ending we originally expected. Instead of leaving Blaire alive to suffer the consequences of her actions, Laura just kills her, meaning Blaire only has to experience her reputation being ruined for about 60 seconds. Some punishment, huh? Maybe this is how Gabriadze always imagined the ending playing it, but it sure seems like the whole reason this major plot point happens is because the movie had to end on a big jump, and the only way to do so would be to have Laura kill Blaire. Once again, the need to shoehorn in one last scare has hurt a movie rather than helped it.

Horror films falling apart with the last scene is hardly a new problem, though; that’s the case even with some all-time classics. Just take a look back at the original A Nightmare on Elm Street, for instance. It’s a masterpiece of horror storytelling that revolutionized the genre, made an indelible impact on pop culture, and influenced an entire generation of filmmakers. But three decades later, the ending remains muddled and doesn’t quite pack the punch that it should.

At the end of the film, after defeating Freddy Krueger by refusing to give in to her fear, Nancy steps out her front door and into a completely new day. It’s implied that everything we just saw was a dream, as a car pulls up full of Nancy’s friends who were killed during the course of the movie. But then, suddenly, Freddy takes control of the car, the vehicle drives into the distance while the kids scream, and, finally, Nancy’s mother is grabbed by Freddy and pulled through the front door.

Director Wes Craven famously wanted the film to have an unambiguously happy ending. Nancy would wake up, go off to school with her very-much-alive friends, and that would be the end of it. But producer Robert Shaye thought there should be a twist that reveals Freddy Krueger is still alive. In the documentary Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy, Shaye explains that he felt that Craven’s version of the final scene “didn’t send the audience out with any great excitement.”

The behind-the-scenes conflict is evident in the film, which doesn’t fully commit to either Shaye’s or Craven’s idea. There’s a twist, but the logistics of what’s actually happening, and what parts of the movie were real and what parts were not, are unclear. Craven disliked the ending of his own movie so much that he seems to retcon it in A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors, in which Nancy is still alive as if the first movie had concluded with Craven’s happy ending.

In addition to being confusing, the ending unintentionally ruins the catharsis that came with seeing Nancy defeat Freddy by not giving into fear. There’s real power to that idea, but not when Freddy returns from the dead mere moments later. As Heather Langenkamp wisely observes in Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy, “It’s a confusing scene because with the ending that we now have, it doesn’t quite make sense. If I turn my back and that’s supposed to be a successful resolution, then the fact that Freddy comes back means I failed.”

The first Friday the 13th movie ends on a similar surprise twist that became the springboard for the rest of the franchise but that also inadvertently undermines the effect of the last act. The reveal that Jason Voorhees is still alive is not something we even think about as being a twist anymore, considering Jason soon became the driving force of the series, but if we were to place ourselves back in 1980 and imagine seeing Friday the 13th as a standalone horror film, would that ending not feel like a total copout?

Just as a way to scare the audience, the filmmakers have an undead Jason Voorhees, the son of the film’s killer, jump out of Crystal Lake out of absolutely nowhere. It appears that this was a dream, but Alice’s enigmatic last words are clearly meant to imply that Jason is legitimately alive. That takes away quite a bit from Pamela Voorhees’ story as laid out in the movie’s final 20 minutes. After all, the genius of the previous twist was that the mysterious killer wasn’t some lumbering madman or horrifying monster; it was a sweet-looking old lady who was driven mad when her child died in a relatively unremarkable summer camp accident. We can sympathize with her and her pain, but with the twist, the movie is no longer about a mother’s grief; it’s suddenly about an insane zombie child that rose from the dead in a crazy haunted lake. The Jason reveal adds very little to the actual movie other than leaving room for a sequel (which, of course, we’re now glad it did).

Like A Nightmare on Elm Street, this is also a last-minute twist thrown in solely for shock value that raises far more questions than it answers. Did Jason Voorhees never drown in the lake in the first place? Did he die but then somehow come back to life? Does Pamela Voorhees know that Jason survived? If not, why hasn’t Jason revealed himself to her? What has he been doing all of these years since the accident? Was that scene on the lake a dream? Was it a vision? The sequels really don’t clear any of this up.

This is not to say that it is not possible to send the audience out on a thrill in a way that is effective and jives with the rest of the movie. Just look at Sleepaway Camp, a movie which would likely have been forgotten if it were not for the infamous closing scene. The twist, that Angela is really a boy who was raised as a girl by an eccentric aunt, comes so comically far out of left field, and the scene in which this information is conveyed is like something out of a particularly strange dream. At the same time, this only illuminates what came before, shedding light upon Angela’s behavior and making the film more, not less, interesting.

Another exceptional horror ending is that of The Blair Witch Project, an example of a closing scene that makes, not breaks, the movie. After the slow build that is the first 75 minutes, we get an absolute explosion of terror in the abandoned house, yet we don’t see any monsters crawling on the walls or witches hiding in the darkness. Instead, the climactic moment simply involves a character standing still and staring at a wall, which is in line with the subtle nature of the rest of the film. It’s chilling, surprising, and it fits.

Recently, the ending of It Follows is also quite memorable. Jay and Paul walk down the street hand in hand, accompanied by no music, as someone lurks behind them. Is it the entity? Or is it just an innocuous stranger? That is the question Jay and Paul will be haunted by for the rest of their lives, and the film beautifully conveys that dread while being totally okay reveling in utter silence.

And, lastly, there’s Get Out, a movie which makes no attempt to scare us at the end, letting us instead pump our fist in the air and smile. Jordan Peele is perfectly comfortable not sending us out on a big scare or a twist, and the movie is better for it.

Ultimately, there are few hard and fast rules for constructing a great final scene. It can be over-the-top like Sleepaway Camp, eerie like The Blair Witch Project, enigmatic like It Follows, or cathartic like Get Out. But in all cases, it must, in retrospect, feel like it was always a part of the road trip the director was taking us on. Too often in horror is the ending a poorly-thought-through sharp turn that rattles us but does not serve the story, and that’s what films like Paranormal Activity, Unfriended, and even A Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th, get wrong.

Editorials

‘Amityville Karen’ Is a Weak Update on ‘Serial Mom’ [Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Karen horror

Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”

A bizarre recurring issue with the Amityville “franchise” is that the films tend to be needlessly complicated. Back in the day, the first sequels moved away from the original film’s religious-themed haunted house storyline in favor of streamlined, easily digestible concepts such as “haunted lamp” or “haunted mirror.”

As the budgets plummeted and indie filmmakers capitalized on the brand’s notoriety, it seems the wrong lessons were learned. Runtimes have ballooned past the 90-minute mark and the narratives are often saggy and unfocused.

Both issues are clearly on display in Amityville Karen (2022), a film that starts off rough, but promising, and ends with a confused whimper.

The promise is embodied by the tinge of self-awareness in Julie Anne Prescott (The Amityville Harvest)’s screenplay, namely the nods to John Waters’ classic 1994 satire, Serial Mom. In that film, Beverly Sutphin (an iconic Kathleen Turner) is a bored, white suburban woman who punished individuals who didn’t adhere to her rigid definition of social norms. What is “Karen” but a contemporary equivalent?

In director/actor Shawn C. Phillips’ film, Karen (Lauren Francesca) is perpetually outraged. In her introductory scenes, she makes derogatory comments about immigrants, calls a female neighbor a whore, and nearly runs over a family blocking her driveway. She’s a broad, albeit familiar persona; in many ways, she’s less of a character than a caricature (the living embodiment of the name/meme).

These early scenes also establish a fairly straightforward plot. Karen is a code enforcement officer with plans to shut down a local winery she has deemed disgusting. They’re preparing for a big wine tasting event, which Karen plans to ruin, but when she steals a bottle of cursed Amityville wine, it activates her murderous rage and goes on a killing spree.

Simple enough, right?

Unfortunately, Amityville Karen spins out of control almost immediately. At nearly every opportunity, Prescott’s screenplay eschews narrative cohesion and simplicity in favour of overly complicated developments and extraneous characters.

Take, for example, the wine tasting event. The film spends an entire day at the winery: first during the day as a band plays, then at a beer tasting (???) that night. Neither of these events are the much touted wine-tasting, however; that is actually a private party happening later at server Troy (James Duval)’s house.

Weirdly though, following Troy’s death, the party’s location is inexplicably moved to Karen’s house for the climax of the film, but the whole event plays like an afterthought and features a litany of characters we have never met before.

This is a recurring issue throughout Amityville Karen, which frequently introduces random characters for a scene or two. Karen is typically absent from these scenes, which makes them feel superfluous and unimportant. When the actress is on screen, the film has an anchor and a narrative drive. The scenes without her, on the other hand, feel bloated and directionless (blame editor Will Collazo Jr., who allows these moments to play out interminably).

Compounding the issue is that the majority of the actors are non-professionals and these scenes play like poorly performed improv. The result is long, dull stretches that features bad actors talking over each other, repeating the same dialogue, and generally doing nothing to advance the narrative or develop the characters.

While Karen is one-note and histrionic throughout the film, at least there’s a game willingness to Francesca’s performance. It feels appropriately campy, though as the film progresses, it becomes less and less clear if Amityville Karen is actually in on the joke.

Like Amityville Cop before it, there are legit moments of self-awareness (the Serial Mom references), but it’s never certain how much of this is intentional. Take, for example, Karen’s glaringly obvious wig: it unconvincingly fails to conceal Francesca’s dark hair in the back, but is that on purpose or is it a technical error?

Ultimately there’s very little to recommend about Amityville Karen. Despite the game performance by its lead and the gentle homages to Serial Mom’s prank call and white shoes after Labor Day jokes, the never-ending improv scenes by non-professional actors, the bloated screenplay, and the jittery direction by Phillips doom the production.

Clocking in at an insufferable 100 minutes, Amityville Karen ranks among the worst of the “franchise,” coming in just above Phillips’ other entry, Amityville Hex.

Amityville Karen

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Favorite Subplot: In the afternoon event, there’s a self-proclaimed “hot boy summer” band consisting of burly, bare-chested men who play instruments that don’t make sound (for real, there’s no audio of their music). There’s also a scheming manager who is skimming money off the top, but that’s not as funny.
  • Least Favorite Subplot: For reasons that don’t make any sense, the winery is also hosting a beer tasting which means there are multiple scenes of bartender Alex (Phillips) hoping to bring in women, mistakenly conflating a pint of beer with a “flight,” and goading never before seen characters to chug. One of them describes the beer as such: “It looks like a vampire menstruating in a cup” (it’s a gold-colored IPA for the record, so…no).
  • Amityville Connection: The rationale for Karen’s killing spree is attributed to Amityville wine, whose crop was planted on cursed land. This is explained by vino groupie Annie (Jennifer Nangle) to band groupie Bianca (Lilith Stabs). It’s a lot of nonsense, but it is kind of fun when Annie claims to “taste the damnation in every sip.”
  • Neverending Story: The film ends with an exhaustive FIVE MINUTE montage of Phillips’ friends posing as reporters in front of terrible green screen discussing the “killer Karen” story. My kingdom for Amityville’s regular reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) to return!
  • Best Line 1: Winery owner Dallas (Derek K. Long), describing Karen: “She’s like a walking constipation with a hemorrhoid”
  • Best Line 2: Karen, when a half-naked, bleeding woman emerges from her closet: “Is this a dream? This dream is offensive! Stop being naked!”
  • Best Line 3: Troy, upset that Karen may cancel the wine tasting at his house: “I sanded that deck for days. You don’t just sand a deck for days and then let someone shit on it!”
  • Worst Death: Karen kills a Pool Boy (Dustin Clingan) after pushing his head under water for literally 1 second, then screeches “This is for putting leaves on my plants!”
  • Least Clear Death(s): The bodies of a phone salesman and a barista are seen in Karen’s closet and bathroom, though how she killed them are completely unclear
  • Best Death: Troy is stabbed in the back of the neck with a bottle opener, which Karen proceeds to crank
  • Wannabe Lynch: After drinking the wine, Karen is confronted in her home by Barnaby (Carl Solomon) who makes her sign a crude, hand drawn blood contract and informs her that her belly is “pregnant from the juices of his grapes.” Phillips films Barnaby like a cross between the unhoused man in Mulholland Drive and the Mystery Man in Lost Highway. It’s interesting, even if the character makes absolutely no sense.
  • Single Image Summary: At one point, a random man emerges from the shower in a towel and excitedly poops himself. This sequence perfectly encapsulates the experience of watching Amityville Karen.
  • Pray for Joe: Many of these folks will be back in Amityville Shark House and Amityville Webcam, so we’re not out of the woods yet…

Next time: let’s hope Christmas comes early with 2022’s Amityville Christmas Vacation. It was the winner of Fangoria’s Best Amityville award, after all!

Amityville Karen movie

Continue Reading