Archive for the ‘Scary Stuff’ Category

Alright, so last night I thought I’d celebrate “Aasif” getting published by watching a scary movie (if you have no idea what I just said, please head to the last post). What movie did I watch? Candyman, a horror film involving a guy with a hook who appears when you call his name Bloody Mary-style. Did I enjoy it? Not really; there were so many things just wrong with it. This has led me to this post, where I will go over things from the point-of-views of both a fan of horror and a writer of horror and say what I think you should do when you’re making a horror film.

So, for those readers not really interested in horror, so very sorry that this post isn’t aimed at your interests. For those of you who are fans of horror, please take notes and let me know if I missed anything, so that i can do a follow-up post if necessary. Alright, on we go. Here’s some things you should avoid if you’re making a horror film:

1. Don’t go crazy on the sequels: Yes, I know I’ve already had time to complain about the nauseating amount of sequels out there these days, but horror movies are the worst offenders, and as the number of the films gets higher, the quality of the films get lower, which is why most of these films end up becoming direct-to-DVD after a while. Seriously, after a few films, you gotta know when to stop. After all, movies aren’t like novels; you can only pack so much into an hour-and-a-half to two-and-a-half hour show, especially if you’re doing a slasher, where it’s heavily reliant on blood and guts to scare your audience and less about character development.

2. Make it believable: I once read an interview in which a fantasy writer was asked what makes a good setting. His answer (and I’m paraphrasing a bit): “You have to make it believable. You can’t write a story and say, ‘I’m going to have a world where everyone has guns but nobody uses them’. It just doesn’t make sense.” The same can be said of just about anything in storytelling: make it believable. That’s what’ll keep people interested in your work. Otherwise you’ll have a lousy time at the box office. A good example of this is Priest, which came out last year if I remember right. The problem was, if your species is being eradicated by a bunch of monsters, you wouldn’t put the monsters on reservations, would you? I don’t think so, and that’s why the movie failed.

Another example is the movie Leprechaun, whose titular character was too comical to be scary (and I still have no idea why there was five sequels). That was a major reason why that movie was panned by critics. And Candyman also had some trouble in the scary villain department. Our killer ghost looks like a well-dressed African-American man in nice clothes, so even with the hook on his arm he doesn’t seem all that intimidating. It’s only until you see what’s underneath his clothes that you start to get why he’s a monster, but you’re still not scared. Honestly, would it have killed the filmmakers to give him some scary contact lenses to accentuate his ghostliness? Even better, make his face swollen and covered in honey, because after all he died by bee sting.

3. Motive: This goes back to the “make it believable” thing, and was something I thought a lot about while watching Candyman last night. Our villain seems preoccupied with making sure people fear him. Why? That’s not explained very well. I I were the ghost of a man who was murdered by racists who cut off my arm and caused a hive of bees to attack me, I’d be more into getting revenge…on anyone I can get my hands on. Yet Candyman still wants people to recognize him. Okay, but what’s the purpose of that?

Point of the story is, make sure you have a motive that people can understand, and if you don’t, explain it, or do what Prometheus did and make it so that even if you don’t know the motive, it doesn’t matter, there’s other stuff going on right now.

4. Know what your audience has come to see: This was my biggest problem with the remake of Friday the 13th. We all went to that film to see Jason tear up the screen anew. What we got was more like a bunch of hypersexualized co-eds parading around naked while a serial killer watched and picked them off every few minutes. Yes, the Friday the 13th films are famous for their sexiness, but that’s supposed to be an added bonus, not the main attraction. What we come for is to get scared. If the filmmakers had focused more on building tension and making the deaths more dramatic and less time on filming bare-breasted girls, I think we’d hear me rant less on this film.

5. Recycling is bad: Boy, that sounds bad out of context. However it’s important to keep coming up with new stuff. You can’t expect people to be satisfied with the old chase-and-kill scenario twelve times in each film. You’ve got to make each film unique so that the moviegoers can gush about an individual scene afterwards. Take Scream 2 for example: there was that moment where Sidney and her best friend were trapped in a police car with an unconscious Ghostface and the only way out was to crawl over him. That scene scared the heck out of me! That’s why the second film in that series was better than the first. However, the filmmakers didn’t seem to do that four films 3 and 4, and that’s why I don’t like those films.

So don’t recycle. And if you have to, try to make it look like it’s not.

6. It’s not about the kill, it’s how you film it: Too many times have I seen a character attacked and murdered and not been freaked. Why? Because the lead-up to it and the way it was filmed wasn’t terrifying in the least! There are brilliant scenes in movies like Final Destination and The Woman in Black that you didn’t know was going to happen until it happened, and that’s what made them scary. This can also be applied to just building up for a small scare, such as in the Paranormal Activity films. If you study those films and see what they did, you can scare so much more easily.

Otherwise, you may make a film like some others I know where everybody’s like, “Oh, she’s gonna get it, it’s coming soon…she’s dead. Oh well.”

That’s all I have for now. Got any other ideas? Let me know, I’ll write another post on this subject.

I decided that I wanted to do a little studying of psychopaths, since I’m writing a novel involving serial killer. I heard about a book by journalist Jon Ronson called “The Psychopath Test” and decided to take a look at it. I learned a lot (but I won’t be doing a review of it for my own reasons):

For instance, while “psychopath” and “sociopath” are practically interchangeable terms, “psychopaths” and “serial killers” aren’t, which I think some people believe. Serial killers may suffer from any of a hole host of mental disorders besides psychopathy (bipolar, delusions, schizophrenia, psychosis, etc), or they may just be motivated by the usual suspects for committing crimes: greed, anger, or for a thrill. Psychopaths are individuals who are unable to feel emotions, probably due to a problem in their amygdala.

I also learned a few things about diagnosing psychopaths, including checklists used to identify psychopaths (which, if you should get your hands on one, you should not use thinking it’s a wonder tool for diagnosing killers; only trained professionals can really make use of those checklists, and usually in tandem with several other tools, including history of violence, interviews with patients, and several other factors. It still didn’t stop me from trying to diagnose real and fictional people, though). And the theory of psychopaths as some of the top people on Wall Street and in major corporations was explored, with some very interesting conclusions.

So, how does this relate to Snake? Well, I can say this much; my serial killer is not a psychopath (though another character certainly is!). However, he probably is suffering from another mental disorder, and I have no idea what it could be, so I’ll have to check it out once I find somebody who can give me an idea of what a profiler might think of my character based on just his murders. If you know anyone like that who could help, please don’t hesitate to tell me.

I know thrillers are supposed to have short chapters but I never expected it to be this simple to finish! I mean, it’s just the prologue, and it’s only four chapters, but it still seemed to fly by. No wonder people like James Patterson can get several novels published in a year, averaging 1 novel per series they write in: they have the time of day to spend on several different projects!

Anyway, the first draft of the prologue of Snake is done. It seemed to flow through my fingers onto the keyboard, I tell ya, and I enjoyed writing it (though writing out the torture scene so as to arouse terror in a possible reader was difficult, I’ll admit). Overall, the entire prologue was 15 Microsoft Word pages, a little over 4,000 words, and the average amount of time it took to write a chapter was maybe an hour to an hour and forty-five minutes.

If you want to read a little of Snake, you can head back to about two days ago, where I printed a small excerpt from the first chapter. Warning, there are bad words in it, so if you object to such things, I suggest you ignore this final paragraph. Once again, happy 4th of July!

I and most of Central Ohio lost power Friday, so I haven’t had Internet all weekend. Plus when I tried to use a public computer, the Internet was soo slooow that before I knew it, I had to be at my next thing before I could finish reading posts or checking my dashboard. Well, I’m making up for that right now, and I’m doing it by first writing this post, which has a small excerpt from my new novel-in-progress Snake.

I managed to write this Saturday night, using what little power I had left on my laptop. As I wrote by candlelight and computer screen, feeling almost like a modern-day Edgar Allen Poe, I felt the words flowing through me, from my fingertips to the computer. It was exhilarating, and I managed to finish the chapter before I had to turn off my computer to conserve the battery.

I hope you like what you read. If I find any time or if I get my electricity back by this evening, I’ll do a little more work.

~~~

(Warning: The following preview features some very bad words, so if you have kids, I suggest you make sure they’re not around when you read this post.)

 

Paul felt a buzz in his pocket and looked down. Through the fabric in his pants Paul could see the light from his phone shining through. Paul reached into his pocket, pulled out his phone, and dove into a little alcove where he could take the call in peace. Without checking the number he pressed the talk button and brought the phone to his ear.

“Hello?” said Paul; on the other end all he could hear was a deep breathing. Paul raised his eyebrows suspiciously. “Who is this?” He checked the caller ID, and saw only UNKNOWN NUMBER.

Suddenly the person at the other end of the phone spoke. “Men in your line of business have no right to be in a church, Mr. Sanonia.”

Paul stared at the phone, surprised. Glancing quickly around the church, he saw only three people, and none of them were on their phones. How did this person know where he was and how did he get his number? He looked back at the phone and spoke into the mouthpiece. “Who the fuck is this?”

The man on the other end laughed, a deep, hearty laugh that for some reason chilled Paul’s skin. “When your cousin James Sanonia died, he was shot in the head.” said the man, his voice deep and affected with a heavy Russian accent. “Then several bones were broken all over his body. He was then taken from wherever he was killed and thrown in the Hudson. Dockworkers saw his body floating and pulled him up out of the water. By the time they got him though, there was nothing to identify your cousin’s murderer. Except for one interesting detail, that is.”

Paul froze, his heart beating loudly in his chest. Who was this guy? How did he know all that? “And what was that detail?” he asked through gritted teeth.

The man spoke, and Paul froze. “You killed my cousin.” he hissed angrily. “You killed Jamie.”

“Horrible thing, wasn’t it?” said the Russian man. “I couldn’t get what I wanted out of your cousin. But I’m sure you’ll be much more helpful.”

Paul was only half-listening; he was looking around the Church, trying to find someone—anyone!—on a phone. One of the other worshippers, a teenage girl with a skirt too short for the cold February weather, got out of a pew while texting. Besides her, no one else seemed to have a phone.

“Where the fuck are you, you crazy shit!” Paul whispered into the phone. “Come on out and face me like a man!”

“But there is no fun in that.” replied the Russian man. “Besides, you’re so much more amusing to watch.”

Paul stepped out of the alcove, looking around the church. “Watch?” he repeated.

“Oh, didn’t I mention it?” asked the Russian man. “I’m right in the church with you.”

Boy, doesn’t that sound like the title to a slasher sequel! But don’t worry, there won’t be any part 3 or 4 or 11 or anything. After all, I’m just doing Part 2 to cover three killers I missed last time. I also wanted a new category of posts to devote to horror-related stuff, so here’s the new category: Scary Stuff. Not exactly original, but the only thing original about slashers is what you put into them (if you think about that it does ring true).

DEATH

The film poster for “Final Destination” because as I’ve said, there’s no picture of Death.

Of all the slashers I’ve ever seen, this one has got to be the most supernatural of them all. I mean, how can you top Death Itself? And the kicker is you never see Death, except for a shadow reflected in certain surfaces. Most of the time you only see his handiwork, Rube Goldberg-like plots that kill anyone who evades Death when it deems you have to die. So creepy.

I’ve only seen the first Final Destination and parts of the second, but definitely see the first. It will blow your mind (not literally!).

THE MINER

Also known as Harry Warden, this killer hails from the Canadian film My Bloody Valentine and its remake. Nobody knows who is really behind that miner’s mask; is it the madman Harry Warden, who went on a rampage one Valentine’s Day and threatened to kill anyone should they try celebrating Valentine’s Day again? Or is it a copycat, someone demented enough to dawn that miner’s suit and kill all the teens in town?

I’ve only seen the remake so far, which but for the ending was good. However, I hear the good one is the original, which I hope to get my hands on soon. Hopefully before the next Valentine’s Day.

The Miner in the remake. Freaky!

GHOSTFACE

Ah, the Scream movies. Wait…let’s start that over. AAAAAAH! The Scream movies! Much better.

Bringing a renaissance to the slasher genre, Ghostface was the killer in every Screamfilm, and each time the person (not just the actor, but the character too!) behind the mask was a different character and had different reasons for wanting to kill main character Sydney Prescott and everyone around her. The killer wears a Grim Reaper cloak and a mask based on Edvard Munch’s The Scream (oh, that makes so much sense), which in the Scream universe is a costume available at any costume store. Also, the killer uses a special device that changes his/her voice to a single, murderous voice and calls the victim before killing them.

Ghostface; he’s much scarier than he looks.

The Scream films were part slasher, part mystery (who was doing the killing and why?) and part satire, as they examined all the conventions of previous famous slasher films, used them, and made fun of them. Still, don’t think these films are comedic–they’re anything but. If you want comedy, see the parody film Scary Movie, which is mostly based on Scream.

I reccommend the first two films, as they were good and scary. The other two just feel recycled, unfortunately.

CONCLUSIONS

So, here are my favorite slashers. If you want to know what makes a good slasher film, let me know. Otherwise I plan to not write again on this subject for a while so as not to scare off any conservative readers. All for now. Bye.

Oh, and check out my last post so as to vote in the poll I’ve set up, if you haven’t already.