Quantcast
Connect with us

Editorials

‘Scream’ – Looking Back at the ’90s Horror Landscape Before Wes Craven Changed the Game

Published

on

Scream

Scream was the first horror film I can remember there really being a buzz about in school. Granted, I was in the sixth grade when it was released, but it was the first time I’d heard someone in the hallways say “You have to see this” about a horror movie. It was probably an eighth grader who’d been lucky enough to witness it. That or he was lying and his older sister or brother had just told him about it. Personally, I had to wait for the VHS to come out but man, those alternate VHS covers were sweet, weren’t they?

If you’ve watched any behind the scenes featurette for Scream (likely on the 25th anniversary edition that just released), you’ve likely heard it said how important Scream was to a horror genre on the ropes. Scream was not only a cultural phenomenon but unleashed with it a brand new interest in horror among the masses and spawned a whole new subgenre.

Sure, most of the slew of copycats that were released after ranged mostly from decent to awful but people were paying attention again. The idea that one of these monsters could be a high school kid or for that matter any next door neighbor rather than an unstoppable supernatural force frightened us. It made it possible for us to be the victim in our own kitchen when our parents were just up the road. Maybe what should have frightened us was the amount of money we were spending on POGs or the fact that we actually did the Macarena but I digress. Scream had us all interested in being scared at the movies again.

Scream was released on December 20th, 1996. But was horror really in all that bad of a place when Scream was released? The short answer is “Horror in the pre-Scream nineties was flashing its shit all over town like it was Sharon Stone or something. But let’s face it, Sid. Horror was no Sharon Stone.”

Let’s take a look at the two years in horror that preceded Scream. Just a little disclaimer before we get started: The following information was garnered on IMDB.com and BoxOfficeMojo using the parameters that those websites listed them under the genre “Horror”. Which is why as one example, you won’t see the movie Seven included. Though I see it as a horror movie myself, I just figured we’d take out the subjective and go with cold hard facts like box office numbers and official genre classification instead.

In 1995, there were around only fifteen horror movies released in theaters. Starting in January with Tales From The Crypt’s Demon Knight, which pulled in the second highest US Box office for a horror movie that year with $21.09 Million. The most successful horror film that year? Species, raking in over $60 million in US Box Office.

The Prophecy franchise was also started that year, with Christopher Walken’s film coming in number four in horror for the year, pulling in $16 million. Number five was Dimension’s Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers with $15 million. (The Scream inspired follow up, H20 would make more in its opening weekend alone just three years later.) Eddie Murphy-led A Vampire In Brooklyn would take over the three spot at just under $20 million.

There’s your top five for the entire year in horror. Now, let’s take a deep breath and have a look at the other ten wide release horror films that released in 1995: In The Mouth of Madness, Hideaway, The Mangler, Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh, Village of the Damned, Tales from the Hood, Lord of Illusions, Mute Witness, Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation and The Addiction

There’s a few gems in there depending on how you feel about John Carpenter’s In the Mouth of Madness or Tales from the Hood. And a couple of big name sequel titles with Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Candyman. But there were a lot of middle of the road horror titles released in 1995 and even less that did well at the Box Office.

Now, let’s take a look at 1996 up to the release of Scream

‘From Dusk Till Dawn’

The year of 1996 released only eleven official horror movies in theaters.

Even then, that number is skewed considering one was more of a comedy with The Frighteners pulling in $17 million and half-horror movies The Island of Dr. Moreau and Diabolique taking two of the top five spots at $27 and $17 million. The year did start out with a bang however, with From Dusk Till Dawn ($26 million) opening in January. Another surprise was The Craft ($25 Million), taking over the number two and four spots.

Stephen King’s Thinner was THE ONLY horror movie released in theaters during the month of October and couldn’t notch the top five or even top Hellraiser: Bloodline’s March release ($16 Million), tallying just a touch over $15 million.

The rest of the year in horror was rounded out by Screamers, Mary Reilly, Dellamarte Dellamore and Bordello of BloodThat’s it. That’s the whole year in horror. Except…

The number one ranking horror movie via box office in theaters in 1996? Wes Craven’s Scream, which grossed $103 million at the US Box Office. That’s more than the next four films (From Dusk Till’ Dawn, The Island of Dr Moreau, The Craft and Diabolique) combined.

Think about this: The most successful horror film not named Scream over the course of the previous two years was Species at $60 million. In comparison, eight different horror movies topped that mark post Scream’s release from 1996 to 1999. Two of them directly related to the sub genre Scream had just created with Scream 2 and I Know What You Did Last Summer.

The third most successful horror movie over that time period, The Island of Dr. Moreau ($27 million) was topped a whopping NINETEEN times at the US Box Office from the course of 1996 to 1999 with six of those movies (Scream 2, I Know What You Did Last Summer, I Still Know What You Did Last Summer, The Faculty, Urban Legend and H20) all having heavy Scream influences.

All of these numbers have me feeling a little woozy here. But, I think we all knew that Wes Craven had once again breathed new life into the horror genre when he unleashed Scream upon the world. Just in case, though. The numbers are there to remind us.

Now, let me ask you this…..if you were the only suspect in a senseless bloodbath would you be caught standing in the horror section? Get out of here!

Click to comment

Editorials

André Øvredal’s ‘Troll Hunter’ Remains One of the Best Found Footage Movies

Published

on

André Øvredal's Troll Hunter

In this day and age, the wordtrollis often used to describe various online nuisances. Yet as abundant and irksome as the modern troll can be, they aren’t usually as fearsome as their mythological counterparts. I’m not talking about the small and gentler versions that have become more common to see in media. No, there are much bigger and scarier trolls out there—and André Øvredal’s movie Troll Hunter is one of the best places to find them.

It doesn’t take long for Troll Hunter (or Trolljegeren) to dump the Blair Witch Project-esque setup and aim for something a lot fresher. The trajectory of the story is augmented by Otto Jespersen’s character Hans, the titular Troll Hunter. The second he comes barreling out of the deep, dark woods and shoutstrollat the camera, this movie takes a turn into what feels like uncharted territory. Not only subject-wise, but also conceptually.

For fantastical and made-up subject matter in cinema, found footage is a fast way to add a guise of believability. After all, what we accept to be the most crucial aspect of documentaries—the truth—rubs off on pseudo-documentaries, despite our understanding of the pretense involved. That is what Øvredal delivered with Troll Hunter: a movie so convincing that some viewers wondered if trolls really do exist. So, had this been straightforwardly made, it likely wouldn’t have been as effective. Conventional narratives would be more inclined to treat something like trolls as flat out unreal, and never try to convince the audience to think otherwise.

troll hunter

Hans petrifies the three-headed Tusseladd troll.

The viewers, like the characters trailing Hans, are quickly thrown into the deeper end of that extraordinary story. They have to process all this new information while staying on the go. So, although there is no significant amount of meandering, narratively or physically, there is still a good amount of atmosphere, not to mention tension building. It’s never anything frightful, but then again, Troll Hunter isn’t your standard offering of horror; it’s more on the low end of the dark fantasy spectrum. We aren’t ever spirited away to a faraway world—we stay in rather familiar surroundings, as well as dip into those less so. The outcome is a movie where you’re constantly more in awe than in terror.

As fantasy fiction might do, Troll Hunter prefers not to deal with incredulity. There is no time to waste on doubt, as interviewer Thomas (Glenn Erland Tosterud), soundperson Johanna (Johanna Mørck), and cameraman Kalle (Tomas Alf Larsen) all follow Hans around, recording whatever this character is willing to reveal about his bizarre job. Of course, the Troll Hunter himself is not an open book; in that respect, the diegetic documentary fails to fully capture and unpack the more interesting of its two subjects. Yes, all those giant, monstrous trolls are indeed incredible, but understandably, your mind wanders to their pursuer. What kind of person signs up for this gig and then chooses to stick with it for so long?

Reviews have called out Troll Hunter for its lack of character development. In regard to Thomas and his fellow documentarians, that criticism is valid, but bear in mind, they aren’t the focus of the story, either. Meanwhile, Hans is a well-crafted character. At least better than first realized. Before he was introduced, Hans had already grown tired of the troll grind. Fed up with that low compensation for his services, resentful of the bureaucracy, and wanting to expose his employer on a large scale, Hans’ discontent is glaring.

Then there are those finer details about the Troll Hunter, such as that indifference to both the natural splendor of his everyday surroundings and the affections of an obviously smitten colleague, that also suggest some level of despondency. So it is fair to say this movie doesn’t feature any sizable growth for its characters; however, the namesake isn’t underwritten. No doubt, putting a real-life character like Otto Jespersen in that role is partly why Hans is so fascinating—maybe even relatable.

Troll Hunter

Otto Jespersen as Hans the Troll Hunter.

There is always a small risk whenever using the termmockumentaryto describe a found-footage movie, as the word could imply humor where there is none. In the case of Troll Hunter, the term’s usage is appropriate. Some folks have claimed the English-dubbed version has the more comedic tone, however, the Norwegian cut isn’t exactly humorless. Apart from the trolls’ absurd appearances, this is a movie where the characters nearly choke on the monsters’ farts, and Christians are like walking targets. Hans’ complete apathy towards everything is another cause of laughter. Overall, the comedy is intentionally dry and inconsistent. Unfunny, though? Absolutely not.

In a movie where endemic creatures are maltreated, as well as disavowed from living freely and peacefully, it’s hard not to notice the ecological message buried beneath the story. In addition to that is the unmistakable political satire. There is this whole business about intrusive and unsightly power lines—like trolls, they’re big blemishes on the land—that leads to what is perhaps the movie’s funniest moment. The scene in question is that one where certain electric lines, the ones secretly being used to keep the trolls at bay, go in a loop and don’t actually send power to any residents. Yet the monitors of said lines don’t find this at all weird. So it stands to reason that Øvredal was having a go at those who accept the government’s doings without question.

Looking past the fact that trolls aren’t actually real, this movie is an enlightening source of information. And not just for international audiences; Norwegians, too, get schooled about their homeland’s own mythology. It’s also evident from everything on screen that Øvredal and his crew were enthusiastic about the topic. The creature designs are the most indicative of that zeal; those imaginative yet myth-accurate manifestations are equally amusing and grotesque. One second you’re laughing at their phallic noses, the next you’re white-knuckling during a hairy sequence. Most surprisingly is how well the trolls’ visual effects hold up after fifteen years. It’s not all spotless, but on the whole, they remain impressive.

Vouching for a mockumentary about trolls isn’t easy, but those who do come around and give it a shot will more than likely be grateful for the recommendation. For Troll Hunter is a real find in that vast and varied genre we callfound footage.

troll hunter

A bridge troll reaches up for food and finds Hans decked out in armor.

Continue Reading