Editorials
Rob Zombie: A Defense and Retrospective
Few figures in modern horror are as controversial as the infamous rocker-turned-director, Rob Zombie. Heralded by some as one of the few true “auteur” filmmakers working in the genre today, while simultaneously considered a talentless hack by others, there’s quite the disparity in opinions regarding Zombie within the horror community. While he still benefits from a loyal fan-base, his last few films have been extremely divisive, leaving many to wonder if his early cinematic success was merely a fluke.
As a matter of fact, the once celebrated director of neo-grindhouse classics like House of 1000 Corpses and The Devil’s Rejects has recently come under fire from even the most devoted of fans due to his latest endeavor, the crowd-funded slasher 31. Even as a long-time admirer of Zombie’s work, I can’t quite bring myself to defend 31 as a good movie in and of itself, but it’s obvious that the horror community’s treatment of Zombie after its release is, at the very least, extremely unfair.
To understand why Zombie is still relevant (and perhaps even necessary) in the modern horror scene, we need some perspective on his cinematic upbringing. From the very beginning, the effects of horror on Rob’s music were unmistakable, and it was obvious that this was something he was passionate about. Before turning his attention to film, Zombie had already developed skills as a director with his music videos and concerts, which were all heavily influenced by classic scary movies like Frankenstein and The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. It was only a matter of time before he’d try his luck in a different artistic medium.
Originally filmed in 2000, Rob’s first film, House of 1000 Corpses, was released nearly 3 years later, as even then studios weren’t sure about how to deal with his brutal and unique vision. Although now it’s fondly remembered as the movie which introduced us to some of the only original and memorable horror villains of the 2000s, the film was a critical bomb at the time, only developing a cult following years later. Re-watching it nowadays and comparing it to Zombie’s most recent projects, the director’s inexperience is glaring, but the film still carries that messy, passionate charm that put Rob on the map in the first place. Also, Doctor Satan. You have to love Doctor Satan.

Run, rabbit, run!
Having found his footing in the 70s-inspired grindhouse aesthetic, Zombie soon moved on to what is largely considered his magnum opus, The Devil’s Rejects. While technically a sequel to House of 1000 Corpses, the film had its own unique visual and narrative identity and cemented the director as an influential force in the movie industry. This resulted in him being chosen to helm the notorious Halloween remake, which is arguably where most of the controversy surrounding the director began.
In all honesty, no matter who had been chosen to direct the remake, a great deal of moviegoers would still wind up hating the resulting movie. John Carpenter’s film is an undeniable classic, and no one could ever hope to replicate its success. This is precisely why I actually like Zombie’s take on the story, and especially the sequel. He knew that he could never truly duplicate or replace Carpenter’s talent or style, so he created an amalgamation of his own artistic sensibilities and Carpenter’s vision, producing a unique movie with some familiar elements.
These films may not be perfect, but I believe they succeed a lot more than they fail in their attempt to deconstruct the slasher genre by humanizing both Michael Myers and his victims. Strangely enough, the Halloween remake’s (and its sequel’s) biggest flaw might just be the eternal comparison to Carpenter’s original, as these movies, when viewed on their own, are actually quite fascinating. Halloween II is particularly ballsy in its artsy presentation of a deeply psychological story, even if it doesn’t always work or feel coherent. At the very least, Zombie dared to take a risk with the franchise, which is more than most remakes can say.
In between these films, Zombie also worked on the animated adaptation of his own comic-book, The Haunted World of El Superbeasto. While it’s certainly not on the Disney level of animated storytelling (or musical numbers, for that matter), it was an entertaining romp through a world of schlock and terror and gave us a glimpse of Zombie’s mindscape when making these movies. The film also featured some inexplicably smooth and stylish animation, almost incompatible with its low budget. While his films have always had darkly comedic undertones, this is his most humorous outing to date, and it makes me wonder what a Rob Zombie directed live-action horror comedy might look like.

Why even make a film if it’s not going to star Paul Giamatti as Doctor Satan?
In 2012, Zombie graced us with Lords of Salem, which is, to date, the biggest departure from his usual style. This one was also extremely divisive, with some fans calling it a Kubrick-esque masterpiece, while others deemed it an incoherent mess. Personally, I found it to be a thoroughly enjoyable picture, not to mention scary as hell, but the ending didn’t quite do it for me. Again, however, I feel that Zombie’s unorthodox approach to storytelling and creative execution make up for most of the movie’s flaws. Even so, I’m still not sure what the deal was with that freakish child-Satan thing.
Now, this brings us back to 31. At this point, no one can reasonably say that they expected this film to please everyone, especially when considering Zombie’s previous work, but this seems to be his most hated film to date. Naturally, in a definitive ranking of my favorite Rob Zombie movies I’d place this one last, but even then it’s not a completely awful experience. As is usually the case with Zombie’s flicks, there several creative elements that keep this from being just another bad slasher film (Do I even need to mention Richard Brake’s phenomenal performance?).
These recurring positive elements don’t always make up for the tangled scripts and overused psychotic hillbilly tropes, but they prove that even Zombie’s “failures” have some merit to them, and can still be worth a watch. Interesting flops, if made with passion, can sometimes be more rewarding than a formulaic success. Rob Zombie is one of the few horror filmmakers that managed to carve out his own path in the genre, and even when he stumbles, the result is always intriguing. In an age where audiences everywhere crave originality, what more could you ask for?
Ultimately, your opinion of Zombie’s body of work will depend on your definition of a good movie. More specifically, whether you think it’s more important for a film to take a risk and have its own identity, or to do its best at following a successful formula. At the end of the day, 31 is still a bad movie, but the horror community would do well to appreciate the fact that Rob Zombie is still willing to do his own thing in a world where most filmmakers are forced to either conform or give up. One bad movie doesn’t make him a bad director, and it sure as hell shouldn’t keep him from making more. For now, I’ll be here eagerly awaiting his next film.
Editorials
Before ‘The Blair Witch Project’, ‘Alien Autopsy’ Showed How Real Found Footage Could Feel
The line separating artist from con man is a lot thinner than you might initially believe. While I think we can all agree that lying for the sake of profit is actively malicious behavior, isn’t it also true that the faux documentary aspect of The Blair Witch Project is half the reason why that film became such a cultural phenomenon? After all, if there’s one thing filmmakers have in common with stage magicians, it’s that misleading and misdirecting audiences is simply part of the job.
That’s why I’ve developed a habit of mostly ignoring the moral quandaries behind many of film and television’s biggest “hoaxes” in favor of appreciating the narrative elements that drive productions like Mermaids: The Body Found and even Animal Planet’s highly underrated The Cannibal in the Jungle. However, if there’s a definitive case of a highly publicized broadcast fooling the world into taking it seriously, it has to be Fox’s infamous 1995 TV special Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction.
It’s been over three decades since that eerie footage first haunted television screens right at the peak of the ’90s ufology craze, and in that time, the video has taken on a life of its own. From countless parodies and references in everything from The X-Files to Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater (as well as John Dower’s recently released tell-all documentary The Alien Autopsy Scandal, which I’d highly recommend to genre fans everywhere), there’s no denying the legacy of the Alien Autopsy video. However, I rarely see the tape discussed as what it truly is: a highly convincing found footage film directed by a passionate stage magician and brought to life by masterful practical effects work.
That’s why I’d like to invite readers to join me on a deep dive into one of the most infamous broadcasts of all time in an attempt to reevaluate the footage as a fascinating narrative experience rather than a complete hoax.
The TV Special That Convinced Millions It Was Real

Ray Santilli next to Extraterrestrial replica in ‘The Alien Autopsy Scandal’
For starters, regardless of whether or not you believe that there was in fact an extraterrestrial crash in Roswell during the summer of 1947 and that some form of autopsy was performed on the victims, the producers behind the black & white recordings, Ray Santilli and Gary Shoefield, insist that their video was a “restoration.” Though I’d argue that the proper word is “remake”of genuine footage that was too damaged to air on television. That’s why the duo went on to recruit filmmaker and eccentric magician Spyros Melaris and sculptor/monster designer John Humphreys to bring their version of the autopsy to life and sell it to the highest bidder.
This is where the story of the Alien Autopsy as a narrative experience really begins. Melaris claims that his approach to the faux recording consisted of striving for extreme period accuracy in both shooting equipment and setting while also planting subtle details that would initially seem like mistakes but could later be revealed to actually fit the time period. That being said, the filmmaker was under the impression that the short would be released for free as a PR stunt, with the team later producing and selling an informative documentary chronicling exactly how the footage was faked and commenting on how easy it is to manipulate public perception with a good old-fashioned magic trick.
This obviously isn’t how things went down, and that’s likely the reason why Melaris has since distanced himself from everyone else involved with the project. Yet, no amount of behind-the-scenes drama can undermine the genuine effort that went into making the short as impressive as it is. From the sourcing of real animal organs from a local butcher to make the organic part of the creature more lifelike to the highly detailed sculpt that made use of a hollowed-out underlayer that could be filled with fake blood and assorted viscera, there’s a reason why so many Hollywood specialists are still impressed with the artistry on display here.
Of course, the believability is only half the story, as I think that the best part of the autopsy is how Melaris builds on the existing tension by obscuring certain details and often embracing the chaos of what a real examination of extraterrestrial life could feel like. The camera often goes out of focus at just the right time to make certain effects hit even harder, and we can only speculate as to what the hazmat-suited doctors are gesticulating about during the operation. There’s a real air of mystery to the whole thing that almost makes it feel like a cosmically terrifying, cursed film containing forbidden knowledge that civilians were never meant to see.
So when Fox’s Fact or Fiction brings in the specialists to comment on the film and its otherworldly subject, it’s no surprise that we end up with one of the most memorable mockumentaries of all time – albeit one where the participants are unaware that the footage they’re commenting on is basically a large-scale practical joke. A joke that the network was obviously in on, as many participants claim that the TV special cut out significant portions where guests point out that they believe the footage to be an elaborate hoax.
The Lasting Impact of the Hoax Turned Cultural Event

Regardless, I remember going to bed terrified after watching reruns of the special and thinking about the respected pathologist who claimed that the body was almost certainly inhuman, with even effects maestro Stan Winston commenting on how difficult it would be to recreate some of these visuals through practical puppetry. That’s not even mentioning Jonathan Frakes’ dramatic hyping up of the disturbing imagery as if he was talking about the tape from The Ring, with his spooky demeanor here likely being responsible for his later role as the host of Beyond Belief: Fact or Fiction a few years later.
Personally, I’d argue that the Alien Autopsy phenomenon had just as much of an impact on me as a horror fan as The Blair Witch Project, a film that was almost certainly influenced by the success of this immensely popular hoax (to the point where they even produced their own TV special commenting on Heather’s found footage). Even if Fox didn’t intend to produce a narrative feature about the aftermath of the Roswell crash, the end product still holds up remarkably well as a highly entertaining mockumentary exploring the idea that we may not be alone in the universe.
While neither Santilli nor the rest of the production team has ever commented on this, I also think it’s very likely that the idea of a faux Alien Autopsy could have been influenced by Dean Alioto’s The McPherson Tape/UFO Abduction. I’ve already written about how this granddaddy of found footage was co-opted by rogue ufologists who began selling bootlegs of the tape at conventions as if it were real evidence of a close encounter, so it’s not that much of a stretch to imagine that Santilli and company could have heard about this phenomenon and been inspired to come up with their own highly profitable hoax.
At the end of the day, it’s unlikely that the Alien Autopsy film is recreating any real footage from Roswell, but I can still appreciate the short and the accompanying television event as a standalone horror story that still influences the way we see found footage to this very day.
After all, the possibility that something could be real is often much scarier than finding out for sure – and that’s why I think Alien Autopsy: Fact or Fiction is still worth revisiting three decades down the line.
You must be logged in to post a comment.