Editorials
Generational Sins: The True Horror of “The Fall of the House of Usher”
A sexual encounter between two teenagers turns into a bloodbath with one or both of them no longer amongst the living. A few friends passing the dutchie discover how hazardous smoking is for your health when a maniac with a crossbow turns their bodies into compost. And so on, and so on. Horror films traffic in people paying for their sins. Most importantly, the genre redefines sinful behavior as time progresses and societies shift like tectonic plates. Those teens having sex and friends smoking weed fare better today than 40 years ago.
But the one transgression that horror consistently confronts? Generational sins. Netflix’s The Fall of the House of Usher continues the genre’s tradition in which older family members make momentary decisions with little or no regard for the future. And when push comes to shove, the past catches up to their progeny, leaving blood stains and residue in its wake. Mike Flanagan’s latest reinforces the belief that those charged with protecting us don’t always have our best interests at heart. And the scariest thing is how far they go convincing themselves that they do.
Obviously, this article spoils The Fall of the House of Usher.
Roderick and Madeline Usher make moves that serve them well. Are they ethical or morally correct? Not even remotely. But like anyone dabbling in dubious deeds, they rationalize every scheme and maneuver. They go along for the ride even when told the terms of this proverbial handshake with the devil. It doesn’t matter that their entire family tree wilts if just one of them dies because, like so many horror villains, the ends justify the means. But their actions are more insidious than Hannibal Lecter or even Krug Stillo from The Last House on the Left because their attacks go beyond a few people on a random killing spree. The Usher brother and sister damn an entire group of people and give them no shot at a long life filled with mistakes and second or third chances. Without even knowing it, Roderick’s children and grandchild live on his terms. And worst of all? He doesn’t care until it’s too late.
Regardless of one’s politics, the parallels between the Ushers ordering everything on the menu and leaving the bill with the kids are deafening. While many debate the argument’s finer points, one look out of a window paints the picture clearly: Millennials and Gen Z see themselves as worse off than their parents and grandparents. Some see homeownership, once the golden ticket into the chocolate factory that is the middle class, as a pipe dream at best. They’re mired in about $1 trillion student loan debt that increases as interest accumulates. To say nothing of the rising tuition costs for current and future students. And some even put off continuing their family legacy because they can’t afford it.
The adults in charge created a world focused on winning today rather than prospering tomorrow. Like Madeline and Roderick, they became enamored with filling their bank accounts and saw no stop signs on the road to riches and diamond rings. They, too, did what they considered the right thing at the moment, whether that meant eliminating financial safeguards, allowing universities to raise tuition to the point that a four-year education costs more than a brand-new house in some states, or simply making that vaunted “American Dream” more attainable for those willing to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” while ignoring the fact that the costs of that metaphor increased over 40 years and that these days, only a privileged few know the secret handshake for access to said boots.

Films like A Nightmare on Elm St., Sinister, My Bloody Valentine, and the Paranormal Activity series echo that shortsightedness. They all feature older folks doing what they think is best for the youth in one way or another. Sometimes, it’s covering up the past or omitting truths for “the greater good,” but they all examine the emotional and physical fallout from making choices that look misguided in hindsight. While many no doubt empathize with the parents in A Nightmare on Elm St. and understand why they took justice into their own hands, the denial and delusions once Freddy Krueger returns put them on the wrong side of the ledger. Like Roderick Usher, the Elm St. parents ignored the truth because it made their lives easier. Rather than confront their pasts and own their choices, they hid from them while their children suffered.
But it’s not just the devil deal-making that put the Usher lineage in jeopardy. It’s never just the one thing in horror; it’s multiple things. Selling out a younger generation sounds awful, but it’s an entirely different beast when one nurtures their worst qualities. Roderick, the parent, represents an institution, one of those foundational bricks upon which society functions. The businessman Roderick runs a drug company that works with the medical community, another trusted institution. And in both facets, he perverted them both for his own self-interest. The Usher patriarch corrupted his first two children with his wealth. And he did so, initially to coax them away from the only positive influence in their lives, their mother.
The more kids he sired with various women, the more that corruption spread like a virus. While that doesn’t make the Usher crew blameless victims or remotely saints, it makes their deaths more tragic. They never stood a chance, even without their father forfeiting their lives. That belies a fiercely cruel form of evil: A parent who drags their children to their level rather than helping them rise above. Horror almost exclusively deals with the broken kids’ side of that equation, and in another story or franchise, Usher’s children are the main baddies. They’re the Billy Loomis types who blame everyone but themselves for their misdeeds. Fall of the House of Usher inverts that trope and shows that it really is on the parent. Usher killed his children the minute he showed them that who they are as people means less than how many commas sit in their bank account.

In business, Roderick and his sister exacerbated (or caused) the opioid crisis, effectively dismantling the trust between doctors and patients. Horror often turns trusted entities into monsters because it shows nothing or no one will save us. Rosemary’s Baby revealed amoral gynecologists. Cat People wrestled with shady psychologists. George Romero’s zombie flicks featured untrustworthy law enforcement officers or an entire government that checked out of the whole living dead situation. And The Dentist…well, that’s self-explanatory. Through their influence and promises, Roderick and Madeline reveal that even doctors aren’t above reprieve. An institution responsible for caring for a generation hurt them with higher costs and turned them into dependents in the name of the almighty dollar.
The Ushers, like so many in their age group, established their wealth by slowly but surely chipping away at every boundary designed to protect the world from people like them. They did it so well that the younger cohort paid dearly when they and their ilk grayed or retired. Unfortunately for Roderick, those losses became more than simple statistics when he watched his seeds and his innocent and far too-good-for-this-world grandchild perish in front of his eyes. Like many well-meaning members of an older generation throughout horror history, he lamented his mistakes a tad too late. While his sister Madeline essentially said she’d do it all over again. Even with her nephews and nieces underground and all the devastation they caused to the country writ large, she regretted nothing because she got hers. It’s not quite Nero fiddling while Rome burns, but it’s close enough.
It’s a horror tradition that society’s elders screw over those younger than them, even if it’s not on purpose. Those stories revolve around the latter cleaning up the former’s mess and establishing a new normal. Or at least making their best attempt. However, The Fall of the House of Usher presents a situation where rebuilding isn’t an option. Unfortunately, the story’s prescience makes it less of a cautionary tale and more of a crystal ball. One hopes there’s enough time to fix our rotting house before it collapses on top of us. Optimism is a premium in times like this, so stashing some away for a rainy day sounds prudent. Sometimes, it feels like everyone after Generation X got the short end of the stick before most of us took our first breath. Thinking the generations before you are the worst is a rite of passage worldwide. Most of the time, it’s an exaggeration. This is one of those moments in history where it’s more than likely true. And that’s terrifying.

Editorials
Not Another ‘Scary Movie’: Revisiting Forgotten Parody ‘Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th’
After Scream (1996) made a killing at the box office, as well as won over critics and audiences, a lot of folks in the movie biz thought they could do the same thing (and yield similar results). That thing, of course, being a slasher. Most of these opportunists wound up being pretty straightforward; they were low on humor or commentary. Yet others, like Scary Movie (2000), saw the potential for spoofing Scream, and acted on that impulse with both haste and excitement.
A few months after the Wayans’ comedy first hit theaters, Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th landed on the USA Network, as part of the channel’s “Shriek Week” programming. That straight-to-cable (then home video) destination is possibly why many people still don’t know about this one. Or they simply chose to forget. Whatever the reason, only one of these two horror parodies came out on top—and it’s certainly not the movie where Coolio channeled Prince, and Tom Arnold saved the day.
Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th previously went by the name of I Know What You Screamed Last Semester. That Trimark acquisition then settled on a wordier title, just so it could avoid the litigious wrath of Miramax Films. Folks may or may not remember that Columbia Pictures was sued over the “implied connection” between I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997) and Scream. So, yeah, there was no way that this competing Scream parody wasn’t going to be kept on a tight rein.
A Heavy Reliance on Late ’90s TV References

Simon Rex, Julie Benz, Majandra Delfino, Harley Cross, Danny Strong, Tom Arnold and Tiffani-Amber Thiesen in Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th.
Naturally, there would be similarities between Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th and Scary Movie—their scripts are built on the backs of the same two movies. It goes without saying that the other big slasher of the 1990s, I Know What You Did Last Summer, was as much of a target as Scream. However,the film pads itself with more TV references than Scary Movie did.
Half the cast coming off of (and in some cases, returning to) a WB show could be a reason why. Dawson’s Creek is particularly zeroed in on, based on how there’s a central character named “Dawson Deery“, and how the teen drama’s teacher-student affair plotline is satirized to the nth degree. As if there weren’t enough nods to television, Baywatch, VH1’s Pop Up Video, and even those cheesy Mentos commercials all serve as joke prompts.
Shriek director John Blanchard and writers Sue Bailey and Joe Nelms all hailed from television, so it’s understandable that they would stick close to home. The movie’s humor in general makes more sense, in light of learning that Blanchard worked on SCTV, Kids in the Hall, and MADtv. The writers, on the other hand, were each fairly green, with Bailey being the most experienced of the two; she wrote and produced the game show BattleBots. Nevertheless, they, plus Blanchard, churned out a passable, joke-a-minute movie. The whole thing is staggeringly of its time, but no one here was aiming for longevity.
Having seen enough of these kinds of movies, we know to expect jokes of the low-hanging fruit variety. That’s the parody’s whole prime directive. From the characters having names like “Screw Frombehind” and “Doughy Primesuspect”, to stereotyping that feels taboo nowadays, this is a movie from a different era of comedy. Its coarse, corny, and unapologetic sense of humor won’t sit well with everyone in these more enlightened times. In which case, Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th can be treated as a time capsule.
Does Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th Humor Still Hold Up Today?

“You may already be a victim”—Someone receives a most peculiar threatening piece of mail in Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th.
Although Shriek doesn’t live up to its own claims of being so funny that you’ll die of laughter, its bawdier parts could still lead to some nervous laughter. For instance, after this movie’s parallel to Drew Barrymore’s Scream character is done in—not by the killer but by a bug zapper—the movie throws a newspaper next to the victim’s fresh corpse. The headline? “Popular slut killed! Football team mourns”.
We then move on to the wacky and inappropriate goings-on at Bulimia Falls High School, home of the Hurlers. At this nexus of constant absurdity, indecency, and surrealism, students are seen fornicating on the lawn, cheerleading squad applicants are advised to be comfortable with partial nudity, and terrorists openly prepare for an anthrax attack. It can be a tad jarring to watch, especially if you didn’t grow up witnessing this style of comedy firsthand. Hell, even if you did, you may still have a “what the hell were they thinking?” reaction.
It’s not just the aggressively edgy humor here that can make you chuckle—the slapstick, the sight gags, and the ribaldry all have a decent chance of landing. The movie’s own villain, whose hockey mask was instantly transformed into a crudely Ghostface-esque one after coming in contact with an open flame, commits more cheap laughs than kills. His and his victims’ chase sequences, most of which are cartoonish in nature, left this writer grinning. The Scooby-Doo fan in me also totally ate up that clever unmasking joke.
Final Thoughts on This Forgotten Horror Parody

Shriek If You Know What Did Last Friday the 13th
Now, the jury is still out on whether these comedies are to blame for the death of the first slasher revival. There is more to consider than some parodies. At the very least, the likes of Scary Movie didn’t exactly encourage big studios to put their money on a trend that was being derided to death (and not as profitable as the spoofs). These sorts of movies also felt unnecessary at the time, given how their principal inspiration is already a deconstruction of the genre. But like anything else that quickly becomes popular, mockery is unavoidable.
Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th is indeed a movie nobody asked for, much less needed. As a sample of pre-millennium humor and cultural attitudes, it’s not always precise. But as I’ve laid out, your mileage may vary. Horror parodies typically don’t have the best track record, so managing one’s own expectations here is recommended.
Upon rewatching, I for one laughed a bit more than I did back then. Only this time, I responded to the jokes that my younger self didn’t notice or find all that amusing. So it just goes to show that the movies don’t change—we do.

Harley Cross and Majandra Delfino must unmask the killer a number of times in Shriek If You Know What I Did Last Friday the 13th before learning their true identity.

You must be logged in to post a comment.