Anyway. He talks about the enduring appeal of the slasher film, etc, etc.
"Slasher films, as a consequence, have always done rather well. The classic slasher flick is produced at high speed, on a squeaker of a budget, and bows briefly for an anointing of critical scorn before going on to make piles of money. With a bit of luck, that critical scorn will be amplified into cultural censure—1980’s rape-revenge slasher, I Spit on Your Grave, for instance, was widely and windily reviled, to the enduring profit of its makers."
He then goes on to mention the fact that there's a remake of I Spit on Your Grave in the works, which begs a whole post unto itself. (How does one even try to remake that film? How are we expected to "update" it for today's audience? Because, honestly, updating is expected. Really, we could begin an endless discussion about remakes in general here . . .)
Maybe, as is suggested, the slasher genre endures because of its ability to pull in money. Maybe not. (He also touches on the Hostel and Saw franchises, bringing up the idea of "torture porn." Which, as you'll soon realize, isn't really my brand of movie. Give me Jason Voorhees over Jigsaw almost any day of the week.)
Parker's article is, however, definitely worth a read, doing homage to the guys this blog is more or less dedicated to:
"Your hockey-masked machete artists, your chain-saw assassins, are cinematic iterations of an ancient and venerated principle. If they unsettle, if they horrify, if they augur the end of the Western world, they’re only doing their job. They are a company, a guild. Leatherface, Jason, Michael Myers, Freddy, Jigsaw, and the sportsmen of Elite Hunting—traditionalists to a man."
[READ THE ARTICLE HERE.]
+002+copy.png)
No comments:
Post a Comment