Connect with us

Editorials

Bind You From Doing Harm: ‘The Craft’ and Portrayals of the Sinister Side to Magick

Published

on

In his review upon its release, Roger Ebert wrote of The Craft:Here are four girls who could out-gross David Copperfield in Vegas, and they limit their amazing powers to getting even.”

Of course, that’s a bit reductive. The seminal 1996 film that piqued a cultural interest in witchcraft for young viewers everywhere, especially women, is more than that. When four girls quite literally join forces to create their own coven and summon the power of the fictional deity Manon, they’re searching for freedom— freedom from physical and emotional scars, abusive parents, racism, classism, loneliness, grief, assault— topics that were seldom tackled in teen horror movies, let alone ones originally intended for PG-13 ratings.

However, Ebert wasn’t wrong. At its core, Andrew Fleming’s The Craft is a morality tale about finally gaining autonomy before ultimately abusing it— taking magic(k)al gifts meant for empowerment and deducing them for selfish or petty reasons. Like most teenagers, while each of the girls carries heavy loads, all four get caught up in the trivialities of high school life as well— just like how anything and everything feels like the end of the world at that age. Newcomer and naturally powerful Sarah (Robin Tunney) yearns for a peer’s attention (at his expense) after he spreads an embarrassing rumor about her; Bonnie (Neve Campbell) wants outward beauty and desirability after feeling like a “monster” for a large chunk of her life; Rochelle (Rachel True) wishes for revenge against her racist bully; and, well, Nancy (Fairuza Balk) just wants to be as powerful as the god she worships— the exact opposite of how she’s viewed as and treated by her school peers and family. “The Craft” is their means of control— no matter how seemingly minor or detrimental the issues are that convolute their lives.

And who could blame them? Beyond the luring glamor that movies deduce it to be, historically, witchcraft has always appealed to the disenfranchised— those who viewed themselves as powerless or those who were told their power was wicked or immoral, searching for reclamation of that power in other ways. Witchcraft and magick (the ‘k’ added by British occultist Aleister Crowley to differentiate from the “magic” of magicians’ and illusionists’ entertainment stage shows) has long been considered a respite from conventional, organized Christian religions. With varying subdivisions and an embracing of individualism that isn’t commonly found within more “traditional” religious practices, witchcraft has been a suitable match for otherness, often emphasizing the potential of what can be done with one’s power now, as opposed to Christianity’s fixation with what should be done to reach the afterlife. Interestingly, Fleming places Catholic iconography in shots around their school that watches the girls wherever they go.

Wherein lies the issue that movies have either understood or completely neglected, however, is the myth of “black” magick versus “white.” Historically, the term “black” magick was largely used to describe the alleged invoking of demons or placing hexes, curses, and voodoo upon others, while “white” magick was considered more pure. However, according to many modern practicing witches, magick itself is neither bad nor good— the consequences of the magick come from the intent of the person conjuring it. “Using magick for selfish gain or against someone negatively will only hurt you the most in the long run,” Jessica. B.,* a practicing pagan, explained. “Hollywood has made it seem like you can get away with bringing harm to others, but it’s just the same as if you were to physically go and hurt someone. All these books that fly off the shelves that have petty little revenge spells in them are doing way more harm than good to beginners— it’s causing more chaos.” Ned T.,* a member of an online community group for Goetia practices, simplifies: “(Magick) is a tool, like a knife. Is a knife evil? Only if the wielder is evil.”

And perhaps because of its consultation with actual Wiccans on set, The Craft indeed acknowledges this. The girls are told by an elder witch, “True magick is neither black nor white. It’s both, because nature is both— loving and cruel, all at the same time. The only good or bad lies within the heart of the witch. Life keeps a balance all on its own.” She also warns, “Understand this: whatever you send out, you get back times three.” A combination of being left to their own devices and failing to listen to the little guidance they do have is what ultimately leads to everything going to shit after getting what they wished for. Bonnie, now scar-free and beautiful, makes a 180-degree pivot from timid to unbearable narcissist; Rochelle’s bully develops alopecia; Sarah’s love spell “humiliates” the jerk she’s crushing on, which, according to the movie’s logic, is what causes him to assault her (which is not her fault and could be interpreted as a glaringly wrongful message to send out about victim blaming); and Nancy aggressively believes she has the right to make the men who’ve wronged her perish. All of it is a deadly combination of not having any agency at all to taking advantage of it when it comes— even if it can’t necessarily be blamed on the magick itself.

That’s both the beauty and the bummer of the film: watching once-relatable, but flawed characters succumb to their darkest recesses. Witnessing a sisterhood of weirdos in awe of how powerful they are together in a game of “light as a feather” and bonding over calling the corners (and being heard) eventually tear themselves apart feels like a gut punch. When Rochelle watches Laura Lizzie’s (Christine Taylor) hair fall out in clumps, her reflection in the mirror is facing away instead of looking back at her— she can’t even recognize herself or her own actions, even though she’s better than that. Her and Bonnie only realize how far they’ve gone when Sarah tricks them into seeing uglier versions of themselves in a mirror by film’s end. Nancy is last seen strapped to a bed in a psychiatric hospital, still likely unable to grasp the consequences of her actions. (It’d be interesting to see an alternative ending for the Nancy-equivalent character in The Craft: Legacy.) Sarah, the token “good” witch of the four binds Nancy from doing any more harm— the only one whose powers remain.

The Craft is relatively easy on its protagonists in comparison to other films, namely Adam MacDonald’s Pyewacket or even De Palma’s Carrie that have more dire ramifications. Carrie White (Sissy Spacek) possesses natural powers and abilities, but it’s her decision to set the school prom and all its attendees ablaze that leads to her demise. Pyewacket‘s Leah (Nicole Munoz), who takes an interest in the occult and consults a book called “Black River, Black Magic” after her father’s death, performs a ritual to kill off her mother out of anger (spoiler: it works, and she regrets it). Grieving and hurting from her mother’s insults and choice to uproot her life, Leah chooses to use magick for hateful reasons instead of trying to make her life with her mom better. The mercilessly bullied Carrie is righteous before recognizing she can use her powers for revenge. Like the girls in The Craft, both are victims of terrible home/social lives and are arguably cornered into making the poor decisions that they do with magick, and it’s tragic watching them give into their darkest desires.

That’s why The Craft continues to speak to us almost 25 years later: we all sometimes feel powerless in our lives; we all have possessed dark desires; and we all have a curiosity of just how far we’d go to obtain power over those things that seem helpless. A practicing witch who wished to remain anonymous summarizes it best: “What I like about The Craft is the natural power and magick of women. When a woman embraces her own innate, magickal power and comes together with other women who are the same— it can be very powerful.”

Let’s just hope she uses her power for good.

Journalism/Communication Studies grad. A24 horror superfan- the weirder, the better. Hates when animals die in horror films.

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading