Tag Archives: slider

Restorative Violence in Meir Zarchi’s ‘I Spit on Your Grave’

In 1980, Roger Ebert posted a review of the “sick, reprehensible” rape-revenge flick I Spit on Your Grave. His evaluation reads like many of his horror movie reviews do—full of an innate disdain for the genre alongside harsh judgment upon those who willingly engage with it. “There is no reason to see this movie,” he claimed, “except to be entertained by the sight of sadism and suffering.” The renowned film critic is correct, though not in the way that he probably intended.

Meir Zarchi’s I Spit on Your Grave released in November of 1978 to immediate and sustained controversy. In addition to critical sentiments like Ebert’s, the MPAA grudgingly gave the film an R rating, only for a producer to add “sexually violent” footage to earn the infamous X rating. Overseas, the Director of Public Prosecutions placed Grave on the “Video Nasties” list, effectively banning it from home video sale and distribution under Britain’s Obscene Publications Act. It is rape revenge through and through, and as such, contains a whole lot of sexual violence and a whole lot of physical violence in kind. 

Grave sees New York author Jennifer Hills (Camille Keaton) taking a solo writer’s retreat to an isolated cottage in Connecticut. She is unassuming, but a group of local men— Johnny (Eron Tabor), Stanley (Anthony Nichols), Andy (Gunter Kleeman), and Matthew (Richard Pace)— take notice of her and stalk her briefly before abducting her. The men pressure Matthew, who is intellectually disabled, to rape Jennifer but he refuses at first. The men proceed to rape her instead and when she crawls back to her cottage, they descend upon her again; this time, Matthew participates in the sexual assault.

After he is ordered to kill her, Matthew loses his gumption again and leaves her for dead. She does not die. Over the 102 minute runtime, Jennifer proceeds to dispatch each of her tormentors one by one. Matthew’s death is relatively merciful; Jennifer willingly lures him to a lakeside spot and hangs him. Andy gets an axe to the back, and Stanley gets ripped apart by her boat motor as she speeds away. Each death holds a cathartic power in its own way, from their screams of pain to Jennifer’s spoken callback to her assault with “Suck it, bitch.” But the moment that gets the most attention among fans and detractors alike in Grave is when Johnny takes a bath.

Poor, poor Johnny—couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. After she recovers, Jennifer returns to the gas station where the men work and entices Johnny to get in her car. On the way home, she stops and orders him to undress at gunpoint. After some back and forth with him, she changes her mind and brings him back to the cottage for a bath. Weaponizing the very seductive nature that Johnny blames her rape on, Jennifer hops in the bath with him and proceeds to stroke him until he reaches the edge of orgasm. Then she castrates him with Matthew’s blade and leaves him to bleed to death in her tub. Classical music fills the air, competing with his screams. Jennifer is fully zen throughout; after Johnny dies, she dumps his body and burns his clothes.

The scene is shocking for many reasons, one of which is the screen time given to a male victim (playing fast and loose with that term here) mewling and sitting with his violation. So many male victims in rape-revenge are dispatched quickly, in the time it takes Jason Voorhees to spilt a teenager in twain, while the female victims usually have prolonged rape sequences. I Spit on Your Grave devotes over 20 minutes to Jennifer’s living nightmare. In fact, torture scenes involving male victims tend to be the most memorable parts of horror movies like The Loved Ones, Audition (which could be argued as a rape-revenge movie), even Hostel. This isn’t necessarily due to bias on the viewers’ part, but a relative scarcity within genre content. It’s just not done as often. 

To contextualize the brutality and the bloodshed, it’s necessary to look at the genre as a whole. The rape-revenge film is generally defined by two major elements: they are victim-centric and they involve violent extrajudicial justice. Plenty of movies utilize the rape of a woman to catalyze their male hero into an uber-masculine agent of vengeance, but if they still privilege a male protagonist’s point of view (like, say, Sudden Impact wherein Clint Eastwood tracks a serial killer dispatching her gang rape assailants), they’ll be received as action or drama films and not strictly rape-revenge, where the rape survivor’s arc is paramount to all others. One of Shakespeare’s most violent tragedies sees Titus Andronicus going full Michael Myers on everyone onstage after his daughter Lavinia is raped and mutilated, but the story is his and not hers; not rape-revenge. 

It’s more of a guideline than anything else—two films that are widely included in rape-revenge conversations, Wes Craven’s The Last House on the Left (a loose adaptation of Ingmar Bergman’s The Virgin Spring) and Toshiya Fujita’s Lady Snowblood, have a set of parents and a daughter avenging the rape of a family member in each of their respective stories. Scholar Alexandra Heller-Nicholas notes in Rape-Revenge Films that I Spit on Your Grave, despite “a complex and competitive relationship between the men,” turns its eye primarily upon its woman survivor; “it is her experience,” Heller writes, “that consistently remain the core of the film’s interest.”

The other trapping needed to make a rape-revenge film proper is a protagonist who enacts their own street justice—either after the system has failed them, or with the knowledge that the system will fail them. This is one of the reasons why Abel Ferarra’s nun-with-a-gun joint Ms. 45 is considered to fall under the label while The Accused, in which Jodie Foster seeks resolution through the court system, does not. Again, this isn’t an ironclad rule—the upcoming Promising Young Woman, written and helmed by Emerald Fennell (a woman filmmaker behind a rape-revenge movie is a depressingly rare but welcome sight), plays around with post-assault revenge within and outside of the justice system. Most definitions of the genre have both of these loose criteria: a violated victim (usually female) seeking vengeance for a sexual assault, and she carries out that retribution away from the judicial structures available to her.

Embroidered within all of that is an individual power blitz for the rape survivor. That blitz necessitates violation traded for violation given; assault for assault. When Jennifer was gang-raped by a group of men, she lost a sense of personhood. Sexual assault is a multifold offense: in addition to the physical trespass, there is a spiritual one that dehumanizes its target. Survivors often struggle with feelings of worthlessness, as though a valuable piece of them has been stolen. So, in many films of this flavor, death itself is not enough to replace the valuable piece lost—he must lose something of value to him, and he must suffer the whole time as she suffered. What’s more valuable to a man than the bodily extension that history has considered the single greatest symbol of his manhood?

In wild contrast to movies like Ms .45, I Spit on Your Grave insists that a gun cannot bring restoration to the survivor in the way that it can for the average Death Wish male avenger—the castration is an integral part of the cathartic process. In film crit bible Men, Women, and Chainsaws, Carol J. Clover elaborates:

“Knives and needles, like teeth, beaks, fangs, and claws, are personal extensions of the body that bring attacker and attacked into primitive, animalistic embrace. All phallic symbols are not equal, and a hands-on knifing answers a hands-on rape in a way that a shooting, even a shooting preceded by a humiliation, does not.” 

Carol J. Clover

A concession: as restorative as the scene may be, neither the film nor the rape-revenge genre as a whole have quite achieved equilibrium in terms of traded transgressions across the gender spectrum. The Nice Girl trope heavily intertwines with the male gaze, and male nudity in rape-revenge is still privileged with off-screen or obscured violence at the moment of penetration. When Johnny gets his comeuppance, gruesome as it is, he is still given a degree of modesty. The actual castration is performed underwater and thus away from the view of sensitive eyes that watched Jennifer’s merciless rape without any such visual veil.

Still, all is not hopeless; Coralie Fargeat’s 2017 crowd-pleaser Revenge not only treats its rape sequence with far less leering salaciousness than vengeance films of decades past, but the film also features a climax chase scene with a fully nude, fully vulnerable male assailant pursuing and being pursued by the bikini-clad survivor/mistress he tried to kill earlier. Perhaps the genre would benefit from more women at the helm, just a thought.

Upon retrospection, Ebert was right. The sight of “sadism and suffering” is part of I Spit on Your Grave’s value. Jennifer could have simply shot every one of the hooligans who hurt her; then again, she could have simply filed a police report and gone through the old, tired channels. Would that have gotten her true justice? Zarchi doesn’t think so. Whatever follows her rape is merely ruthlessness returned in kind, and it is fully justified in the film’s eyes. In fact, as the movie’s tagline gleefully asserts, “No jury in America would ever convict her!”

Visit our Editorials page for more articles like this. Ready to support more original horror criticism? Join the Certified Forgotten Patreon community today.

Mitchell Lichtenstein’s ‘Teeth’ Is a Movie for the Dentata-Positive Among Us

In a genre typically considered “for the guys,” it’s time to give a nod to the ladies. Uterus Horror is a subgenre of horror films that focuses on the uniquely female experience of puberty and the act of coming into your sexuality, using horror elements to emphasize and/or act as a metaphor for that experience. These films are often ignored in theaters but quickly develop cult followings. Columnist Molly Henery, who named and defined the subgenre, tackles a new film each month and analyzes how it fits into this bloody new corner of horror.

In September, we rocked out by exploring the convergence of trauma and sexuality in Slumber Party Massacre II. For October, given that this is the spookiest time of the year, we wanted to give you all something special for #Hallowiener. That means we’re going to talk all about the Uterus Horror film that might feature the most wieners, albeit severed ones, Teeth

This 2007 indie darling was the feature-film debut of writer and director Mitchell Lichtenstein (Happy Tears, Angelica). The film follows Dawn (Jess Weixler), a high school student who has made a promise to God that she will remain a virgin until marriage. After a sexual assault, she discovers there is something inside her acting as a defense mechanism. This results in a slew of severed penises as Dawn discovers her own body and the power she possesses. 

While there are people in the world who mirror the personas depicted, for the most part, each character is an exaggerated caricature. Dawn O’Keefe is so pure and virginal that she has never even wondered what female anatomy looks like, let alone glanced at her own genitalia. The school allows textbooks to show only male anatomy and the teacher is incapable of saying the word “vagina.” Then there are the men Dawn encounters. With the exception of her stepfather, all of the men in the film are predatory. 

Dawn meets her first crush, Tobey (Hale Appleman), who also made a vow of abstinence. Yet he attempts to sexually assault Dawn, which triggers her internal defenses: vagina dentata. Her vagina takes a bite out of her attacker, leaving him to bleed out, penisless. With each subsequent encounter, Dawn leaves a trail of severed penises as she learns more about her body, both as a woman and as someone with a unique adaptation.

Throughout Teeth, the origin of Dawn’s vagina dentata is kept a mystery. It could be a mutation caused by the nuclear power plant always looming in the background by her house. It could be a natural step in the evolution of female humans in response to the threat of men. Or, it could be an ancient myth come to life. One thing we as the audience know is that this adaptation is something Dawn has had her entire life, although she doesn’t learn about it until she’s a teenager. 

The events of Teeth allow this film to fall into the Uterus Horror subgenre not just because it’s about a young woman’s genitalia, but because of the deeper meaning behind the plot. I’ve stated on many occasions that I chose to call this subgenre “Uterus Horror” because I knew it would be a term with the ability to make men uncomfortable. Many men have an inherent fear of female genitalia and female sexuality. This is a common theme throughout Teeth.  

After Dawn’s encounter with Tobey, she researches what could be wrong with her. She finds a website that details the myth of vagina dentata. It reads, “The hero must do battle with the woman, the toothed creature, and break her power.” It goes on to explain that these myths are born of a primitive male fear of female sexuality. Because Dawn has embraced a strict Christian, abstinence-only way of life, she believes her next step is to find a “hero” to save her (rather than her saving herself).

Dawn even meets someone she believes is the hero of her story, only for him to be less than gentlemanly. This is how Dawn learns she can control her vagina dentata. Up until this point, her teeth were activated during sexual assaults. With her “hero,” the sexual encounter starts out pleasurable, so her teeth never chomp down. She thinks her vagina dentata has been vanquished, until her feelings of anger and betrayal sever yet another penis. 

Dawn then understands the power of her sexuality. She knows sex is a natural, pleasurable thing, as long as it is on her terms. She also knows she has complete control over her vagina dentata and can use it to her benefit. As we saw in other Uterus Horror movies like Carrie and Raw, Teeth conveys how empowering understanding yourself can be, and how strong young women become when they’re able to harness their sexuality on their terms.

Here’s where Teeth veers closer to a superhero or vigilante origin story. Dawn decides to get revenge on her demented stepbrother, Brad (John Hensley), after his negligence leads to the death of Dawn’s mother. Brad is the epitome of a man afraid of female sexuality. He even refuses to have vaginal sex with a woman, instead favoring anal sex because of his deep, subconscious childhood memory of Dawn’s vagina dentata. Yet his desire for Dawn is too strong, and she convinces him to have sex with her. Unfortunately for him, he realizes the truth too late and loses his penis as a result. After that, it is strongly implied that Dawn goes on the run and continues her life using her sexuality, and her teeth, to better the world by biting off the penises of evil men (and I, for one, would have watched a franchise based on that premise). 

As we commonly see with Uterus Horror films, Teeth was generally well regarded by film critics, but was not beloved by audiences at the time of its release. Rotten Tomatoes currently has the film at an 80% Tomatometer score and only a 45% Audience Score. While I couldn’t find a definitive number for the film’s budget, Wikipedia lists it as $2 million. Teeth barely made that amount back, grossing $2.34 million worldwide, only $347,578 of that in the US box office according to IMDb. The film did fairly well on the film festival circuit, earning multiple nominations and two award wins. A special jury prize for dramatic performance went to Jess Weixler at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival; the film also won the special jury prize at the 2008 Gérardmer Film Festival. 

Teeth takes a very in-your-face approach to Uterus Horror. It doesn’t hold back as it uses exaggerated characters and situations to show how men have historically feared not only female genitalia, but the power a woman holds when she is in control of her sexuality. Lichtenstein throws our heroine, Dawn, into extreme situations to have her quickly go from unaware, innocent virgin to a strong, powerful, feminine being. This is why Teeth has become a beloved film among horror fans, especially women who adore the genre; it is quintessential Uterus Horror that lets young women know they can, and should, be in control of their bodies, and that control makes them the hero of their own stories, leaving a trail of severed penises in their wake.

Visit our Editorials page for more articles like this. Ready to support more original horror criticism? Join the Certified Forgotten Patreon community today.

https://youtu.be/J-qd-k0Vg7s

The Evolution of Male Nudity in Rape Revenge Films

The rape revenge genre is known for its sexual violence and exploitation of the female body. Women are brutalized by groups of strange men, who rape and beat victims during excruciatingly long sequences. Importantly, these female protagonists are often shown fully nude, letting viewers take in their entire bodies, ogling their bare breasts and pubic hair. What there isn’t is naked men.

Become a Free Member on Patreon to Receive Our Weekly Newsletter

Even when the wronged woman gets revenge, her rapists are typically given some semblance of modesty whether through clothing or the suds of a bubble bath. Male nudity has been explicitly avoided for decades. But a shift is upon us. From I Spit On Your Grave to Teeth to Revenge, directors tackling the subgenre have moved away from continued exploitation of the female body and instead switched to objectifying the male form. The ever-present male gaze is being questioned.

The Origins of Rape-Revenge

Let’s start at the beginning with Meir Zarchi’s 1978 film I Spit On Your Grave, often called the most controversial film of all time. It earns that epithet as a young writer from the city named Jennifer Hills (Camille Keaton) becomes the target of a group of local boys. About 50 percent of the film’s runtime is dedicated to her torture, rape, and humiliation. Her clothes are ripped off, leaving her naked body to be smashed against a giant rock in the woods. Jennifer is exploited and treated like a piece of meat for both the characters and the viewer.

While Zarchi may not have intended to create enjoyment in these horrific sequences, audiences were still reported cheering for her rape and were excited at the idea of this city girl getting what she deserved. In exposing her entire body, Jennifer is exposing herself to the entire world to be leered at, consumed, and mocked.

As expected in this two-pronged subgenre, Jennifer does get to enact her delicious revenge, from hangings to the castration of the gang’s leader. However, even in the film’s climactic castration, her rapist Johnny is still given a veil of privacy as his penis is hidden under the water. While the viewer was allowed to openly look at Jennifer,  Johnny’s own body is kept from the camera, as if prioritizing and maintaining male modesty.

Jennifer does castrate him in the bathtub and reclaims her power, destroying the very thing that violated her. But in reducing the graphic spectacle around the moment, men are protected from actually seeing that violence. While Jennifer’s rape is very explicitly shown over a prolonged period of time, her rapist’s castration happens in a matter of seconds. Here a statement is subconsciously made about whose bodies are meant to be the true objects of the male gaze.

Change in the New Century

Several decades and hundreds of exploitation films later, a shift begins in the late 00s with Mitchell Lichtenstein’s 2007 film, Teeth. While perhaps not a traditional rape-revenge film, Lichenstein creates a play on the subgenre as a devout and abstinent Christian girl, Dawn (Jenn Wexler), is forced to reckon with her sexuality.

Dawn is molested as a child and raped as a teenager, and her body reflexively fights back with a special adaptation called vagina dentata, or a toothed vagina. When she is forced to have sex or be penetrated, she shows her teeth, literally, to punish those who violate her. The punishment is not just a little scratch — it’s complete penile removal.

Unlike the covert castration of I Spit On Your Grave, nothing is left to the imagination. Severed penises are shown laying on the ground while men are screaming, covered in their own blood. As Dawn begins to understand her body, she begins to understand her power and what she can do with vagina dentata.

Again, like in I Spit On Your Grave, there is a climactic castration as Dawn voluntarily removes the penis of her stepbrother who molested her as a child. At this moment, she is in full control of both herself and her stepbrother. She is no longer afraid as she is shown dropping his penis onto the floor. With a satisfying thump, Dawn is no longer someone to be manipulated.

The sexuality she was so afraid of becomes her way to exert control over her life and her body. While she is shown getting sexually assaulted, Dawn is never shown nude, as the nudity pendulum swings drastically in the other direction. Her body is chaste and hidden, while she spits out dismembered members from her vagina.

The male body is visibly disfigured as the camera makes sure to capture close-ups of the detached genitalia lying on dirty floors. However, the naked male body is also never filmed to be objectified or to indicate a switch in the gaze. It is about the separated body part more than showing the male body. Regardless, men are rendered vulnerable. That perceived object of fleshy power is thrown away like trash, just as men throw away women’s bodies.

The Male Body as Spectacle

Then comes Revenge, Coralie Fargeat’s 2017 vision of rape-revenge that works to acknowledge then refute the male gaze. That pendulum of nudity is swinging back again, but not towards the extremes of I Spit On Your Grave. Rather, Fargeat does not make the ruined penis the object of our attention. She ruins the entire male body, in full-frontal views. 

Fargeat knows exactly what she wants to achieve as she manipulates both the camera and the audience to look in specific ways. She does not outright reject the male gaze, but uses it to trick the viewer. The character Jen (Matilda Lutz) is filmed like a sex object, enticing someone to believe she is just something to be looked at. From close-ups on her exposed skin to her seductively licking a lollipop, Jen is established as a Lolita character with an open mouth.

But just as a prickly tree pierces Jen’s flesh, Fargeat shoves her cinematic fingers into our eyes. This woman is not a sexualized body, but an agent of violence in the name of justice. While Teeth worked to hide Dawn’s body, Revenge is all about showing off the bodies of both men and women. This way, the viewer can better understand the gendered expectations of nudity in rape-revenge. 

Once again, the use of male nudity is prominent in the film’s climax, although this does not include castration. Instead, the naked male body of Jen’s boyfriend Richard (Kevin Janssens) is placed on a level playing field with Jen. The power dynamic between the two of them has been stripped away as both are mostly or completely nude. Their standoff becomes the most basic confrontation of who can catch the other and who can shoot faster.

Caught by surprise, in his birthday suit, Richard is now objectified. The exploitative and well-known male gaze is replaced with a new way of seeing as the camera visually devours his muscular body. At the end of Revenge, no longer is the ruined female body the object of attention; the male body now becomes the spectacle.

Conclusion

Importantly, all of these films – from I Spit On Your Grave and Revenge – are also seen as empowering and honest, never shying away from the horrors of rape and depicting survivors as broken victims. The exploitation of Jennifer Hills’ body is appreciated, never trying to hide the nightmare.

While I agree with that stance and find strength in the rape-revenge genre, there is no denying how the uses of nudity have evolved and challenged preconceived notions about who can be naked on screen. No longer is the traumatized female body meant to be an object of desire. It is finally perceived for what it is: a site of rage, violence, and strength.

‘Webcast’ Marries Found Footage and Folk Horror

Cults, rituals, and paganism are well-known in the world of horror, especially in the folk horror subgenre which includes films such as The Wicker Man, Midsommar, and The VVitch. With a combination of bewitching visuals and a violently unwavering dedication to Pagan gods, these films are aesthetically and narratively rich. But there is a piece of folk horror, Paul McGhie‘s Webcast, that doesn’t conform to typical expectations of flower crowns and elaborately staged rituals.

Become a Free Member on Patreon to Receive Our Weekly Newsletter

Webcast is a movie unlike any other, a folk horror movie combined with found footage. This is a description that should make any horror fan’s mouth water. With the familiar tropes of folk horror and the intimate aesthetic of found footage, McGhie creates a creepy, underappreciated, and effective gem.

Setting the Stage

Student filmmaker Chloe Webber (Samantha Redford) is working on a documentary with her soon-to-be boyfriend Ed (Joseph Tremain). She has become obsessed with trying to solve the mystery of her aunt Amelia’s disappearance 30 years ago. As she interviews neighbors and digs through photo albums, Chloe is determined to make sense of Amelia vanishing without a trace. However, as they dig deeper, they begin to realize something sinister is happening in this small British village.

Chloe claims her kindly old neighbors hide a secret that involves naked rituals and special apples. As is customary in found footage, the camera keeps rolling to prove Chloe and Ed’s seemingly ridiculous claims while they document the conspiracy that has plagued the village for decades.

As a horror movie, Webcast makes sure to include a few folk horror staples that mark its inclusion in the subgenre, such as women buried alive as part of some kind of ritual and giant flower masks that signify the group’s dedication to nature. What sets it apart from other comparable subgenre titles is its first-person perspective and deeply personal story that is able to capture the slowly growing madness caused by a cult’s gaslighting.

Technology as Metaphor

The personal aspects of Webcast come from its portrayal of the intersection of generations through technology. This isn’t just about Chloe and Ed using the latest DSLRs. Their modern filming techniques are placed in direct contrast with an old projector and a Super 8mm camera. This outdated and grainy footage is able to capture the past and reveal truths that Chloe and Ed could not previously access, particularly Amelia’s final moments filmed by the cult.

In this way, Webcast becomes meta as we watch a found-footage horror film about two people finding footage. They act as an audience proxy as their reactions to what they discover dictate the expected emotional reaction to each new clue. This intertwining of old and new recording devices adds another layer of complexity to both film and the preconceived notions about found footage.

The use of older technologies also addresses a desperate clinging to the past and an inability to move beyond tragedy. Chloe stays in her aunt Amelia’s old room, which has gone unchanged for 30 years. All of her belongings remain on her dresser, her bed is impeccably made, and her clothes still hang in the closet.

Her Camera, Her Prison

The room is a tomb that marks the family’s reluctance to move forward over the last 30 years. Only through Chloe’s interviews and persistent questioning is any part of the past dissected and processed; trauma would rather be ignored and locked away than discussed among friends and family.

Tragedy is not just found in Amelia’s disappearance. Chloe is wracked with guilt after a vicious attack on her grandfather has left him in a vegetative state. Her desire to film a drug deal nearly kills him and she processes that trauma through the camera lens. Creating this documentary is her coping mechanism, an attempt to make something better for her family. 

She believes she is able to control her story if she views it from behind a screen; she can distance herself from reality while also becoming obsessed with her subject. Using the found footage aesthetic, Webcast is able to dig deeper into the undercurrent of trauma often seen in folk horror films such as The Ritual and Hagazussa

A Cult for All Seasons

Compared to other horror movies, Webcast is a slow burn, yet it is still full of extremely disarming moments that dangle the carrot of mystery in front of you. While the truly creepy aspects are brought in towards the end of the film, Webcast never fails to deliver unsettling moments that keep you engaged and invested in Chloe’s investigation.

Right at the film’s beginning, Chloe and Ed unexpectedly encounter a young woman screaming and running out of a neighbor’s house. Previously, the film has seemed to be a rather run-of-the-mill amateur true crime investigation that is often seen on YouTube and heard on podcasts. Her pale figure emerges from the darkness, a shocking image that marks a crucial shift in Webcast and indicates something deeply sinister and wrong.

From here, these disarming moments only multiply as Chloe and Ed learn more about the cult. In one of the most unsettling scenes, the pair walk into the woods that they believe Ameila often visited. As they pass through the trees, they start hearing something which builds to a disembodied cacophony of screams and howls.

This moment is reminiscent of found footage classic The Blair Witch Project as invisible forces attack the group’s tent and young children are heard laughing. Both films weaponize the vastness and fear of the woods and personify it into immediate and supernatural danger.

The Horror of Helplessness

Webcast does not rely on jump scares or excessive night vision to play up its fright factor. Instead, its use of body horror through a first-person perspective amplifies the physical toll the film is taking on Chloe.

Despite a low budget, practical effects are used sparingly to add in sprinkles of body horror. As they get closer to the truth, Chloe begins to puke up dozens of cigarette butts and boils cover her skin. These scenes are small but extremely effective in playing up the dangers and power of the cult.

This is a cinematic journey that’s amazing on the first watch and even more complex on subsequent viewings. You connect the dots and realize the inevitability of this entire film, not unlike Kill List and Hereditary. Each of Chloe’s actions is predicted and intercepted by the cult as they work to make her seem crazy and dispose of her entirely.

Just when Chloe and Ed feel like they’ve somehow figured out the mystery, they hit a brick wall erected by the cult. Even when they discover the truth, it is already too late. Webcast is a movie steeped in helplessness as you want to scream at Chloe and Ed to run away.

Conclusion

Admittedly, this is an easy film to scroll past on Amazon Prime, the only platform where Webcast is available. From a title that seems to reference screen life horror to a poster that features a twisted screaming face, Webcast’s movie marketing does a great film a huge disservice. Its promotional appearance conveys a generic found footage title when in reality, this is something that has really never been done before.

Paul McGhie caters to the lovers of folk horror and proves the creative possibilities within found footage stylings. As Halloween peers over the horizon, Webcast should be on the top of your October watchlist.

Reclaiming My Grandmother’s Superstitions: ‘Bulbbul’ and South Asian Horror

One of my favorite childhood photographs is taken on my terrace, my hair open and sulking at the camera. Frozen in that frame is the memory of my grandmother. Moments after the photo was taken, she dragged me away to beat the setting sun. “Girls do not roam with their hair untied after dark,” she would tell me, “then the chudails [witches] catch hold of them.” It’s one of the many stories and superstitions I grew up with that I still instinctively follow today.

Become a Free Member on Patreon to Receive Our Weekly Newsletter

Chudail, the supernatural subject of Anvita Dutt’s Bulbbul, is the ghost/spirit of a woman who either died while pregnant, suffered sexual violence, or survived a miscarriage. Traditionally, these spirits are said to have upturned feet and have an appetite for men’s blood. While they have been the staple of uncountable horror films in India, the makers of Bulbbul have chosen to revisit the origin of that folklore itself and subvert it from a feminist lens.

Set in the late 1800s in colonial Bengal, Bulbbul spans two decades of the title character’s (Tripti Dimri) life as a child, a young adult, and a woman. Early in the film, Bulbbul, who is married to Indranil (Rahul Bose, who also plays his intellectually disabled twin brother, Mahendra), finds her closest companion in Satya (Avinash Tiwary). Satya is her husband’s youngest brother; the two meet when Bulbbul is just seven years old, and their companionship blooms as they grow older. They write short stories together, climb trees, and serve as their only friends in the lonely mansion.  

Premised on the murder-mystery of Mahendra and other local men, the film unravels the murders occurring in the present simultaneously with Bulbul’s harrowing past. We watch as it explains her growth from an innocent child to the lonely mansion’s imposing matriarch. The deeper we go within the story, the more we realize the little girl we had seen in the beginning is gone.

The splendor of this period drama – Bulbbul is set in 1883 Bengal – disguises the presence of horrors that are consistently relevant today. It is, at once, intensely familiar and completely alien. This dichotomy is a signature of Anushka Sharma’s new production house, Clean State Filmz, and their Bollywood horror-experiments. Much of their work is rooted in folk literature, retelling dominant narratives of villains and witches. 

In India’s postcolonial imagination, the folkloric method of passing down indigenous belief systems often contrasts with our English education. These belief systems are reflected in our storytelling, framed mainly around the folk tradition of theatre and epic storytelling. This is why Indian cinema has always been dependent on stock characters in the moral binaries of good and evil. 

So, too, is Bulbbul’s horror anchored in a set of binaries: science vs. superstition, goddesses vs. devils. Fairy tale imagery abounds – in one scene, a flying witch is juxtaposed against the tragic drowning death of a woman who has been rejected by her husband. The upturned feet – a staple of the witch in folklore – are given scientific reality in the violent breaking of Bulbbul’s feet by her husband, leaving one wondering if all descriptions of terrifying she-demons are perhaps birthed in similar real-world circumstances.

Since Bulbbul spans a child-bride’s lifespan to adulthood, the filmmakers choose to show her growth through her position on the screen. She evolves from a marginalized figure that always appears at the edge of the screen – like a bird poised to fly away – to the woman who stands at its center. Just as she straddles the narrative’s past and future, so will Bulbbul, fully attired in her Thakurian regalia, stand in the center of the screen, leaning back against the house’s giant walls.

Her centrality in the film is an evidential reversal of the authority of Men Of Reason, the intellectual class that dominated this period. After all, the Indian Independence movement’s cultural backdrop consisted of these Bengali upper-class intellectuals, Western Educated Men of Science and Logic. These men were to espouse highbrow notions of freedom, but just like their Western counterparts, left their women out of it. 

Rape-revenge fantasies are tiresome tropes, but this is a country where the death penalty and fake encounters are normatively understood as justice. Too many movies offer the trope of a woman who is transformed by rape – always lengthily shot – who then comes and takes revenge on the bad guys. But most sexually violent scenes are merely added for their shock or trigger value, without any conversation around them. 

The retributive violence in Bulbul is a palpable undertone. You see the murders happening, but the fact that all of these men were killed because they were wife-beaters and pedophiles is a pattern that emerges only in the end. It denies viewers the catharsis of watching a rape-revenge fantasy by conducting the revenge before we have an active knowledge of the violation. In a way, we are left feeling like those outsiders who are aghast at harassment allegations against their favorite artists. ‘How can such a good man be canceled so horribly,’ we ask, never knowing the horror they might have perpetrated behind the scenes.

The most gruesome scene in Bulbbul – the physical beating of the titular character – is captured only through the soundscape. We hear the hot poker whipping down and the screams of a horrified child. In the scene, blood splatters onto a painting of one of the most iconic moments in the Hindu epic Ramayana. It is a pictorial depiction of Sita-Haran, the abduction of Sita by Ravana, frozen at the point where Sita is struggling within the flying chariot, and a bird called Jatayu tries to foil Ravana, and so he strikes it down.

After such a gruesome scene of domestic violence, many critics have noted that the film did not need an additional rape scene, especially one perpetrated by a person with a disability. They argue that her husband’s physical abuse should have been enough of a trigger for her transformation (I wonder if we must rely on abuse as a trigger for empowerment at all, and not see them as actual possible incidents that happen in the lives of women instead). We see Bulbbul crawl to the center of the frame after the brutal beating from her husband. In terms of the narration, her self-actualization here is complete, therefore it is wrong to assume she is ‘empowered’ by her sexual violation.

To have a person with a disability portrayed as a rapist also confronts our preconceived notions of who can and cannot commit an act of sexual violence in these stories. While it is important to note that people with disabilities are disproportionately the victims of sexual abuse, not its perpetrators, Bulbbul uses its historical precedent as a challenge to the rationalizations that follow an act of sexual assault.

In his review, Hindustan Times’ critic Rohan Nahaar called the film “pretty but problematic.” Not only did he call out the unnecessary duration of the rape sequence, he insists that the storyline is unoriginal and the rape a cliche, adding that “there’s a reason why the rape-revenge subgenre of horror is considered outdated.” But given its folkloric roots, I would insist that in Bulbbul’s case, it is in the absolute banality of the story we have heard a hundred times before that the real horror emerges. 

At times, Bulbbul reminded me of Revenge by Coralie Fargeat, a French-American Netflix original. Rohan Nahaar himself extolls this movie for having the same theme as he derides in Bulbbul; both films keep the hyper-violent format of the rape-revenge fantasy intact but lean heavily into the fantastical as a statement on how “angry-assassin-on-a-rape-revenge-rampage” IS a toxic masculine fantasy. In reality, women don’t turn into chudails, nor do they get their revenge when they suffer violence. Films like Bulbbul reframe the folklore of our grandmother’s stories which taught us that women being abused, tortured, and murdered somehow made us the monsters.  

In retrospect, when I think about my grandmother’s superstition about keeping my hair up, I think of how keeping one’s hair down is a sign of beauty. Culturally, children were expected to keep their hair tightly braided, and only as “women” being socially deemed ‘sexually available’, take pride in their tresses. The possibility of men taking advantage of a girl in the dark seems like the only logical conclusion to the strict rules we had about not leaving our hair open after sunset. 

Therefore, all I would like to leave the reader with is wishful thinking. That when we retell stories like Bulbbul, it teaches us not to force little girls to tie their hair in braids, but instead acts as a warning to men who dare pull them.

‘Slumber Party Massacre II’ Is the Ultimate Rock and Roll Hoochie Koo

Last month, I examined a modern classic and how it relates to Uterus Horror with Raw. This month, I’m taking you back in time. The year is 1987. The film is Slumber Party Massacre II. This campy cult favorite was written and directed by Deborah Brock (Andy Colby’s Incredible Adventure, Rock ‘n’ Roll High School Forever). Slumber Party Massacre II was Brock’s debut as both a writer and director. She was hired to quickly make a follow-up to the 1982 slasher favorite, Slumber Party Massacre.

Become a Free Member on Patreon to Receive Our Weekly Newsletter

In the first Slumber Party Massacre, we watched as a deranged maniac known as the “driller killer” brutally murdered teenagers at a slumber party. The only survivors of that attack were Trish and sisters Valerie and Courtney. When we first met Courtney, she was a young girl, likely in middle school, starting to show interest in boys. Slumber Party Massacre II jumps ahead a few years. Courtney (Crystal Bernard), now a senior in high school, is coping with the mental and emotional aftermath of the first massacre while also dealing with normal teenage troubles. 

On the one hand, Courtney still has nightmares about the driller killer and feels guilty that she is living her life while her sister, Valerie, is locked up in a mental institution. On the other hand, she wants to be a normal teenage girl, partying with her friends, playing in their band, and dating boys. The band goes to stay at a vacation house in Palm Springs. It’s here that Courtney begins to see things no one else can see. Is she dreaming or is this real? Her strange and gory visions come in the form of an attractive, sinister rock star (Atanas Ilitch) who wields a gnarly electric guitar fitted with a deadly drill at the end of it. In the climax of the film, this new rock ‘n roll driller killer escapes the dream world to kill all of Courtney’s friends. It leads to gore, breakdancing, catchy tunes, and plenty of bloodshed. The final moments show Courtney in the same institution we saw her sister in, clearly out of her mind, with the driller killer continuing to torment her.

So how does this film connect to Uterus Horror? Going into Slumber Party Massacre II, we already know Courtney has experienced a lot of trauma from the events of the first film. She was just a kid when she witnessed some truly horrific deaths at the hands of a maniac. While on the surface she seems more well-adjusted than her big sister, Courtney is clearly dealing with PTSD symptoms. This is why we see her dreaming of the first driller killer, and why later on she dreams of a new, rock star driller killer. This new driller killer is the physical manifestation of Courtney’s trauma, co-mingled with her budding sexual desire.

There is a gradual progression throughout the film. It begins by showing us flashbacks of the first driller killer in Courtney’s dream. Then we are introduced to Courtney’s hunky crush, Matt (Patrick Lowe). This is when her image of the driller killer changes as well. Courtney pictures him younger and good looking. She loves music so now he’s a musician, but he’s still evil, because the driller killer she knew was evil. Every time Courtney experiences sexual arousal, typically when dreaming of Matt, that arousal turns into visions of the new driller killer. As her arousal becomes stronger and more frequent, the killer’s powers grow. At first, he is only able to manifest in Courtney’s dream, very similar to the much-beloved Freddy Krueger. Later, he is able to make Courtney see grotesque and horrifying things while she’s awake, but none of her friends can see them. The moment Courtney and Matt are finally about to have sex, all hell breaks loose, literally. This encounter finally allows the killer to break into the real world, wreaking havoc on Courtney’s unsuspecting friends. 

Slumber Party Massacre II is generally regarded as a cheesy 80’s B-movie with a nonsensical story and fun practical effects. Yet, if you look at it as a Uterus Horror film, the pieces begin to make more sense. Courtney bottled her emotional and mental suffering and buried it deep down. Her interest in Matt, and their increasing connection, intertwined with her troubled past to create a dangerous new killer; this eventually allowed a physical manifestation of what was inside Courtney’s head to break into the real world. There are even arguments that Courtney’s manifestation of the driller killer relates to her closeting her queer desires. This argument suggests the manifestation of the driller killer happens because Courtney is trying to “play it straight” and can’t come to terms with the fact that she is attracted to women. Ariel Fisher is one writer who takes a stab at explaining this point of view in her article on SlashFilm. Whether you agree or not, it still goes back to Courtney’s budding sexuality, making it another fantastic addition to the Uterus Horror club.

Unfortunately, there aren’t enough reviews for Slumber Party Massacre II to have a Tomatometer score on Rotten Tomatoes. Scrolling through the reviews shows that a majority of them are marked Rotten, and the film sits at a sad 37% audience score. Likewise, IMDb has the film currently sitting at a score of 4.6/10. I was unable to find any confirmed numbers for the film’s budget and box office numbers, but one can assume the budget was relatively small. As for how it did at the box office, considering the track record for Uterus Horror films, one could surmise it wasn’t a blockbuster hit.  

Despite the seemingly low scores and likely mediocre box office earnings, it still has quite the cult following. Fans of Slumber Party Massacre II can easily find t-shirts and other memorabilia related to the film for sale online and at conventions (when it wasn’t COVID times and conventions were still a thing). The film was even featured on The Last Drive-in with Joe Bob Briggs for his Summer Sleepover special in August, which introduced it to a host of new fans. I was also a guest on The Blood Buddies Podcast to discuss the film with the two hosts, Brian and David. 

Slumber Party Massacre II uses humor, camp, and dreams to convey the marriage of trauma and sexuality in a teenage girl. It’s a surprisingly serious topic considering how this film is generally regarded as a cheesy teen slasher. The nuanced underlying theme of trauma and attraction can be taken a step further if you consider the theory that Courtney might also be questioning her own sexuality. Between this subtle messaging and the iconic look of the new driller killer, it’s no wonder horror fans are drawn to Slumber Party Massacre II. Not only is it part of a franchise that represents some of the only slasher films written and directed by women, it also delivers a layered plot that allows for the viewer to interpret the film in their own way. If people are still talking about and analyzing this film after over 30 years, it’s obvious this Uterus Horror film has more to offer than meets the eye. 

Episode 24: Jerry Smith Will ‘Cast a Deadly Spell’

Turn back the clock, my child, to a time when new movies released on premium subscription services were a thing of wonder. When second-tier leading men and up-and-coming Hollywood stars would work together to tantalize and amaze adolescent movie fans everywhere. Welcome to the era of HBO Originals.

READ MORE: Cast a Deadly Spell Captures a Bygone Era of HBO Originals

In this week’s episode, we look at Cast a Deadly Spell, the 1991 direct-to-cable feature from future James Bond director Martin Campbell. The film stars Fred Ward – of Tremors fame – and a young Julianne Moore as a star-crossed couple trying to navigate the magic-infested stress of mid-century Los Angeles. Equal parts H.P. Lovecraft and John Huston, Cast a Deadly Spell takes an outrageous premise and plays it as straight as an arrow, making it one of the better horror-comedies of the decade.

READ MORE: Pre-Code Queerness in James Whale’s The Old Dark House

We are joined this week by journalist and composer Jerry Smith, who opens up about his own experiences as a horror fan in the early ’90s and explains why movies like Cast a Deadly Spell were so influential to him as kid. So grab your smokes and throw on your fedora, because we’re headed back to the Golden Era of Hollywood.

You can stream Cast a Deadly Spell on HBO Max. Check out the rest of our podcast episodes on our Podcasts page.

https://youtu.be/mMte4btEG5M

‘Cast a Deadly Spell’ Is the Best of a Bygone Era of HBO Originals

As a kid, nothing was better than begging my father to stay up late so I could watch the latest HBO Original film. I adored my countless trips to my local theater and regularly took advantage of my video store’s Five Movies, Five Days, Five Bucks promotion, but watching HBO originals was my adolescent film school. Throwing TV clichés out the window, HBO offered films that covered all genres and types of storytelling.

Become a Free Member on Patreon to Receive Our Weekly Newsletter

As a lifelong lover of all things genre, it was a blast to have brand new sci-fi, action, and horror films delivered right to my television. Viewers could watch the Sam Elliott-led western The Quick and the Dead, the Ken Russell erotic drama Women & Men: Stories of Seduction, and so many other offerings. The futuristic Wedlock (starring Rutger Hauer) was such a ride to experience. Anthony Hickox’s 1993 film Full Eclipse, a mashup of werewolves and X-Men, was everything a monster and horror lover would want. Christopher Guest (of Best in Show) gave home viewers a hilarious remake of Attack of the 50 Ft. Woman

And while the possibilities for HBO originals seemed endless, the 1999 premiere of Martin Campbell’s Cast a Deadly Spell changed things for me. There was something special about a film noir that was knee-deep in both femme fatales and Lovecraftian magick. So, readers, grab your fedoras, light your smokes with magic, and let’s chat Cast a Deadly Spell.

Set in 1948, in a fictional world that combines Raymond Chandler and H.P. Lovecraft, Cast a Deadly Spell follows Fred Ward’s Harry Phillip Lovecraft (witty, right?), an old-fashioned private detective that hates all things magic and deems the use of such methods as lazy. Since Ward lives in a world where monsters are commonplace, and spells and sorcery are as familiar as driving a car, the film unfolds as a noir-heavy mystery.

Hired by the devious Amos Hackshaw (David Warner), a mysterious man searching for a former driver that holds the key to something terrible, Lovecraft takes on the mission with gusto. Viewers are presented with a love letter to all things ’40s Los Angeles, with songbird lounge sirens – an excellent performance by Julianne Moore, even with some of the most questionable lip-syncing around – and heavies played by Clancy Brown, and Halloween 4’s Raymond O’ Connor.

Oh, and there’s also enough face punches and double-crossing to please the most diehard fans of Detour or The Big Sleep.

What makes Cast a Deadly Spell so great is how it’s a wildly imaginative film played straight, without winking at its audience. The combination of classic noir film and a fantastical approach – little gremlin-like creatures, a police interview involving a goblin, and death by spinning cards – makes the film a blast to watch.

The humor comes off closer to The Naked Gun films – not as satire, but in Ward’s deadpan delivery. There’s almost a musical rhythm to the back-and-forth, fast as hell, and anchored in Ward’s performance. The actor is having a great time embodying Harry, and it shows. 

Harry is a character cliché we love to see. The Tremors actor relishes in the role, peeling back layer after layer of a giant conspiracy that involves bringing the elder gods into our world. But a lot of effort also went into writing an excellent story, as the characters feel fleshed out without being caricatures.

Even the silly gremlin-like creatures we see from time to time are more than a throwaway, showing how wonderful the film’s practical effects can be. A sequence involving Lovecraft questioning a mechanic with a monster problem in his engine is so dry and deadpan that as a viewer, you wonder how the performers didn’t break character every moment of it. 

Brown’s Harry Bordon character is your classic double-crossing villain, right out of an Indiana Jones film. The actor is relishing being the heavy to Lovecraft, with O’Connor doing a complete 180 from his creepy security guard in the fourth Halloween film. Tugwell is a right-hand baddie you almost want to root for, with a knack for using magic to do his dirty work. With each act of sorcery, Lovecraft’s patience lessens, and the tension between these two characters is always good for a laugh. 

Three years after Cast a Deadly Spell’s release, Paul Schroder (First ReformedTaxi Driver) would direct Witch HuntThis sequel replaced Ward with Dennis Hopper but lacked the magic (pun intended) of Campbell’s vastly superior slapstick-meets-satanic original. Cast a Deadly Spell knows precisely what kind of movie it is and revels in just that. It never tries to be anything aside from a film noir deep in Lovecraft’s magical world and the elder gods. 

HBO Originals never scoffed at horror/sci-fi storytelling, and instead of looking down on the genre that made Hollywood, they embrace quite literally ever type of film that their viewers would want to see. Some people pay tens of thousands of dollars to get lessons in storytelling and filmmaking. I sat down in front of a TV and learned the craft from films like this one.

Future films like Bright would try to achieve the same social satires with monsters living alongside human beings, but they fail to capture the charm and imagination that Campbell and screenwriter Joseph Dougherty conjured with this gem. A lesser-known film to some, but I can see Cast a Deadly Spell gaining a proper audience on services such as HBO Max. Like Halloween IIIPossession, and so many others, this movie screams to be watched. It’s a unique little diamond of a film packed with creatures, curses, and more imagination than you’d expect from a straight-to-HBO gumshoe reinvention billed as “Who Framed Roger Rabbit? with witches and zombies.”

Marriage Is Motherhood’s Original Trauma in ‘First Born’

The horror begins within.

A sense of the other. A lurking fear. A strange feeling that grows and grows until it finally explodes.

And suddenly you’re a mother.

Pregnancy has been a mainstay in horror films since at least Village of the Damned, when a town of English ladies all birthed spooky children with platinum hair. Rosemary’s Baby added Satanism to the mix, with an expectant Mia Farrow either starving herself or gobbling raw chicken livers. And then there was the killer infant of It’s Alive, a film which so disgusted its own studio they hastily withdrew it after its initial release and shelved it for three years.

Become a Free Member on Patreon to Receive Our Weekly Newsletter

Pregnancy horror is the original body horror, full of primal fears, whether they’re men’s nervousness about female power or women’s anxiety about loss of identity. Already outfitted with gruesome gore and cold technology, it’s ready for any genre, too. What is the entire sci-fi Alien franchise but the metaphor taken to its most loathsome conclusion, with a life-sucking parasite growing until it bursts free of its host and embarks on its own hungry, selfish rampage?

And yet almost all those films either focus on the months of expecting, or the little creature who comes afterward, a tiny 666 hidden under its baby-fine hair. What about the mother herself? What happens when Mom’s the monster? That’s not a subject many movies are willing to take on.

First Born, though, was different.

Perhaps that’s why it failed to find an audience. Written and directed by Isaac Webb in 2007, First Born went straight to video, despite decent production values and star Elisabeth Shue. Today, Rotten Tomatoes gives it an audience score of 19% and logs exactly one, lukewarm review; “A movie where anything could be happening,” complained the critic for DVDTalk, “and in the end, nothing is.” It’s mostly dropped out of sight since, although it hides on a few streaming services.

Yet First Born works. And what it delivers isn’t just edgy, but genuinely disturbing; while it stops occasionally to insert the obligatory horror-film clichés, its real horror is of a more slippery sort. This isn’t just a story about postpartum depression (or even postpartum psychosis). It’s about a woman’s loss of agency, of independence, of self. And while that story comes from a male writer (like this review), it’s not an exercise in mansplaining. It’s a film of empathy.

First Born begins with a dreamy credit sequence, as Elisabeth Shue — or, more likely, her dance double — strides across a stage en pointe and in silhouette, long legs propelling her with delicate grace. Her outfit — a body stocking, under a floor-length bolt of gauzy material — gives the impression of nakedness, making the scene look like a quieter, classier 007 opening. But the ghostly costume, mimicking both a wedding veil and a shroud, also hints at the film’s vision of marriage as loss of oneself.

We move quickly from there to backstage, and the sounds of Shue’s character — Laura — vomiting in a bathroom. Another story that links performance to eating orders, we assume. Check. Yet like the many conclusions the film will encourage us to jump to, it is absolutely wrong.

As Laura heads home on the subway, we get the first hints that this may be a horror film — Alejandro Martinez’s cinematography gives everything a sickly, sallow cast, and the train’s lights flicker fitfully, casting stroboscopic shadows. Looking down at the car, Laura sees a sad young woman with a baby — her face grim, her feet in cheap flip flops. Laura stares at her — with jealousy? Worry? Her expression is ambiguous, but it turns to anxiety when, the next time the lights come back on, the woman has vanished, leaving her baby behind.

Except, Laura discovers, it’s not a baby — just a doll wrapped in a blanket.

Oddly, Laura takes it home with her, stopping along the way to buy four different home pregnancy tests (an early sign of her blind, casual consumerism; throughout First Born, Laura will never buy one of something when she can buy an armload). Returning to her huge, cold, and all-white apartment (complete with its matching small, white dog) she takes a test, and confirms what her early bout of nausea hinted at: she’s expecting.

Her husband arrives home later, and when she tells him her good news, he’s genuinely pleased. But soon another side of him emerges.

Webb has been smart with his casting in First Born. Certainly, first of all, with getting Shue to star; admitted, she is, at 44, a little old for the part. But in films like The Trigger Effect, Molly, and, of course, Leaving Las Vegas, Shue always suggested a vulnerability that seemed ripe for exploitation. And casting Steven Mackintosh as Laura’s husband,  Steven, is absolutely perfect. The safe choice would have been someone paternal, assertive, dominant; instead, Webb chose a slightly younger Englishman with a polite, even diffident manner. It throws us off, at first. Steven seems like a loving husband. He doesn’t seem like some self-involved sexist.

But, of course, he is.

Because once we meet the workaholic Steven, we realize exactly who’s been paying for that gorgeous white-on-white apartment they live in and what he thinks that’s bought him. Once he finds out about the new addition to the family, he immediately springs into action, planning out the next act in their lives. “It’s time to get out of this city just like we always wanted,” he declares. “You mean just like you always wanted,” Laura corrects quietly. But within seconds, he’s gotten Laura to “at least think” about trading Manhattan for the suburbs. By the next scene, she’s already meeting with a real estate agent. Alone, of course; Steven is too busy to actually go through the work of choosing a home. That’s a wife’s job. His job is to write the checks.

At this point, First Born switches to Westchester, where Laura sees and immediately falls for an enormous old estate. (First cliché alert: The previous owners left suddenly, and are willing to sell cheap.) Cut to a few months later, with the couple moved in and Steven installing a baby-cam in the nursery while a visibly pregnant Laura looks on. The two have clearly found their dream house. 

Yet their new town feels like The Stepford Wives, minus the wives. There are women, of course — except for the usual authority figures like police officers or doctors, or blue-collar workers like exterminators, everyone that Laura sees from now on, from the real estate agent to store owners to cashiers to other shoppers in the supermarket, will be female. Yet, oddly, she has no friends. She doesn’t even seem to have neighbors.  She attends no Lamaze classes, and, after the child is born, no mommy-and-me groups, or local library storytimes. She is utterly alone.

Some of that may be due to scenes, and characters, lost in editing; tantalizingly, the credits mention actress Khandi Alexander, who doesn’t appear in the final film. Yet intentional or not, it only sharpens  the theme of First Born: a pregnant woman’s feeling of isolation, as she’s forced to focus on other things, while her career — and the world — moves on without her. 

Increasingly, Laura’s left alone in the large house, wandering its hallways barefoot and pregnant. Her days are marked by Steven’s departure in the morning and the dinner she cooks for him at night; her time in between is broken only by occasional, strained phone conversations with her mother, who lives thousands of miles away and seems annoyed her talented daughter has turned into a housewife, and a neglected one at that. (“He works very hard,” Laura protests. “He’s going to take some time off when the baby comes.”)

And soon (second cliché alert!) Strange Things Begin to Happen. Laura hears peculiar noises in the walls (eventually one mouse is found). Doors close and lock by themselves. Her dog is killed by the poison she put out for the mice — once again, Laura is compelled to buy one of everything the market had. She finds the hidden diary of a girl who used to live there (tauntingly, First Born shows us the book but never tells us what’s in it). The doll she saw on the subway, and brought to the new house, keeps disappearing, then reappearing in odd places. 

And then, while Steven is away at work, Laura’s water breaks. She drives herself to the hospital — she’s more capable than she knows — and has an emergency Caesarean.

The baby is fine. But Laura isn’t. In fact, things only get worse after they get home. Steven seems content with drive-by daddying, picking the infant up for a quick cuddle before heading to the office again. Meanwhile, Laura spends all day worrying she’s doing the wrong thing. “I have so much anxiety,” she confides to her mother. “I’m worried about every stupid little thing.” Yet when her mother again suggests Steven is taking advantage of the situation, Laura loyally, reflexively defends him. “He has a very responsible job.” It’s her job, she feels, to be her child’s primary caregiver. To be the perfect caregiver. 

That’s impossible, of course, and the more Laura tries to do everything perfectly, the more she makes mistakes. One day, she even locks herself in the basement, leaving the baby —– and isn’t it odd that the parents never actually seem to speak her name? — crying in its crib for hours. “She thinks I’m a bad mother,” a shattered Laura later confides to Steven. “She’s never going to forgive me.“ “She’s a baby,” he replies. “She forgave you the minute you fed her.” It’s meant to be comforting. But it’s also cluelessly, crudely reductive, minimizing his wife’s — and his daughter’s — hysteria, while reducing Laura to a pair of breasts.

Steven isn’t a complete sexist jerk; he realizes his wife is having trouble.  And yet he reacts in typical macho fashion, seeing this not as an issue to be discussed openly, but a problem he can solve on his own. Without even consulting his wife, he hires a childcare provider, then sends her out to the house unannounced. Played with marvelous ambiguity by the great Kathleen Chalfant, she is (final cliché alert!) a tall, gaunt and definitely creepy babysitter with an indefinable accent and a number of Old World superstitions. 

Laura reluctantly accepts her. But it’s clear by now she needs more help than this woman can give.

Because Laura is beginning to spin even more rapidly out of control, spiraling like the staircase she regularly climbs. After panicking when she briefly leaves the baby strapped into a locked car — an all-too-real-life horror story — she rushes to meet Steven at an important business function. But it’s another disaster.  She’s in a bright, floral dress (which sloppily fails to hide the black lingerie beneath it); everyone else is in formal wear. Other wives look at her disapprovingly and ask about her child.  (“You should have brought her along,” one says with a false smile. “I can’t believe you left her at home.”) Guilt-ridden, Laura tries to call ahead; when no one picks up, she rushes home again.

When she gets there, of course, everything seems to be fine. Meanwhile, Laura and Steven soon lock into a bitter argument. She’s slipping into paranoia about the party. (“Didn’t you hear everyone talking about me? All the awful things they were saying about me?”) He’s reverting to chauvinist bully, angry that his spouse couldn’t simply “look nice and smile” as he’d asked her to, beginning to worry his trophy wife is, perhaps, no longer much of a trophy. (“You owe me an apology. You know how important this was to me. You show up late and you look like a mess.”)

And at this point, heading into its final third, First Born splits in two. What we literally see is from Laura’s perspective — she’s in nearly every scene — and echoes the last act of Rosemary’s Baby. She stares while the babysitter talks of curses, and how babies can “sometimes steal a mother’s soul.” She finds a strange charm the older woman has hidden underneath the crib. She starts reading books about the occult, and studying how dolls can be used in spells. She has horrible dreams. She sees mysterious intruders. She prowls the house alone, fragile in her white nightgown, a giant butcher knife in her hand.

Because that’s how Laura now sees her life — as a horror film she’s trying to escape.

But if we’re alert, we also notice different things. Like Laura’s increasing interactions with doctors, and the cold way one simply prescribes more pills. Like her mood swings, from self-destructive urges (really, now she takes up smoking?) to wild elation (talking about resuming her dance career). Like what the babysitter is really trying to warn her about (“You remind me of myself. I didn’t feel the way a mother should feel. I had terrible dreams. Even more terrible thoughts.”)  And — finally — Steven begins to notice too, reluctantly realizing that he doesn’t always know what’s best, that a wife is more than merely a decorative prize, that raising a child is not simply a one-parent job. 

And also, perhaps, that the damage is done, and the disaster preordained.

It would be unfair to say any more about the story, particularly one which was so ignored the first time around; better to leave the final twist unsaid, for a new audience to discover. Yet First Born deserves more attention, and respect, than it ever got, as does its Black filmmaker (Webb never directed another feature, although he has taught since, and produced the recent festival favorite, Burning Cane.) In its own, modest, B-movie way, First Born‘s view of a smothering marriage evokes Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s feminist horror-fiction classic, “The Yellow Wallpaper”; its portrait of a lonely woman whose blond beauty hides dark urges nods to Roman Polanski’s brilliant Repulsion. It’s earned a reappraisal. Sure, people didn’t take Laura’s story seriously when it came out. 

But people like Laura are used to that.

How Chito S. Rono’s ‘Feng Shui’ Is Diminished By Its Cultural Stereotypes

When I was still in middle school, my school had a tradition during the days before an end of the term. Each of the classrooms would have a television and a movie; during the final two hours of classes, you could go to any one of the classrooms and watch whatever was playing there. Typically, for us to engage with Filipino culture, the movies would all be local flicks. The offerings varied in tone and genre, ranging from the 80s teen comedy Bagets to the superhero comedy Lastikman. But one of the most popular films, and the one I almost always watched, was the 2004 Filipino horror hit Feng Shui.

Helmed by director Chito S. RoñoFeng Shui follows the story of a woman named Joy Ramirez (Kris Aquino), who finds a bagua mirror wrapped in a paper bag on the bus. When she hangs it on the wall of her home, good things – like lottery wins and promotions at work – begin to happen all around her. Unfortunately, good luck is often chased by bad, and the people who happen upon the mirror find themselves dying in mysterious Chinese Zodiac-related incidents. These deaths range from the mundane (a brawl at a cockfight), to the absurd (a woman falling and being impaled on Red Horse beer bottles), to the tenuously connected at best (Joy’s “dog” of a husband being murdered as the result of an affair). It is up to Joy to figure out the reason for these deaths and stop them before any more of her loved ones are claimed.

WATCH: The Balance of Exploitation and Empowerment in the Films of Sion Sono

The Filipino film scene has always been forced to clash with the timing of Hollywood releases. Hollywood blockbusters typically dominate locale cinema screens, relegating local releases to a handful of screens (at best). This means that so-called arthouse films are reserved for the Metro Manila Film Festival; the typical movie theater fare is either slapstick comedy or the edge-of-your-seat horror, with the occasional foray into hard-hitting drama or dramedies such as Crying Ladies or Heneral Luna. In terms of Filipino horror specifically, the genre is over-inundated with ghost stories, demon stories, or creature-based stories, with the most well-known being the Shake, Rattle, and Roll anthology at fifteen films in the series.

This helps explains how Feng Shui could become the perfect horror film for my preteen friends and I. In typical Filipino horror fashion, the movie was chock full of jump scares and surprises; Aquino’s shrill screams of terror still echo in my memory. It may not have been prestige cinema by any stretch of the imagination, but it served as a frequent source of entertainment. Still, there was always something about this film that rubbed me the wrong way. It wasn’t until I was older that I realized that what was eating away at me was how much the film tried to play on anti-Chinese fears to help sell its scares.

Chinese immigrants have been a part of Filipino history since the earliest days of its inception. Trade and travelers flowed in from China long before Magellan even stepped foot on its sandy beaches. In the past, China traded silks for Filipino spices, intermingling and becoming irrevocably part of our cultural fabric. Primarily emigrating from the Hokkien provinces along the mainland, Chinese-Filipinos are now an integral part of the local population alongside more recent immigrants from the Chinese mainland. Even so, there are undeniable tensions between Chinese immigrants, Chinese-Filipinos, and the Filipino community. Accusations of Chinese executives muscling out locals and Chinese-run Philippine Offshore Gambling Operators siphoning up real estate go hand-in-hand with anti-Chinese rhetoric that sees foreigners from the mainland as enemies or boogiemen.

That’s why the anti-Sino undercurrents in Feng Shui leave such a foul taste in the mouth. For one, the title choice is meant to invite terror or discomfort in a potential viewer, so using the name for what is a harmless or even beneficial practice of balancing energies demonizes the form. Feng shui is about creating harmonious balance, but here it is used in the same way ouija or voodoo have been given sinister connotations in the West. The logic behind the curse itself is also dubious at best: a ghost basing their kills around the Chinese Zodiac? It would be like a Greek ghost using the Western horoscope, or a French spirit favoring tarot-based kills – arbitrary and superstitious. Certainly, it helped make Feng Shui a much more memorable movie, but at the cost of combining Chinese superstitions in an arbitrary and oppressive way.

READ MORE: How National Trauma Shaped Alejandro Amenábar’s ‘Tesis’

Of course, the biggest offender here is the movie’s antagonist – Lotus Feet. The backstory behind her inception as a ghost is that she had her feet bound in the traditions of ancient China, making her a liability when her brother attempted to flee the revolution of Sun Yat-Sen. Out of fury and vengeance against their privileged owner, her servants killed her, and it is her curse that inhabits the mirror. In a cast dominated by Filipino characters, she is one of only two prominent Chinese characters featured, defined by her rage and by the shuffling of her bound feet in some of the film’s most tense scenes.

What feels particularly disappointing about Lotus Feet is that she is defined by her foot binding – something out of her control – and treated not as a figure of sympathy but as a being of vengeance. A more nuanced movie may have spent time helping her find closure or redemption, coming to terms with the injustice done to her by a culture that threw her away. Instead, she figuratively (and literally) looms over the whole proceeding as a nonliving jump scare whose contribution to the plot is to creep the hell out of anyone who approaches. Being half-Chinese myself, I think about her depiction now and wince at what it represents: the fear of the supernatural being conflated with the fear of the unknown. I watch it and have to ask myself, “Are my friends scared of me too?”

At its core, Feng Shui is a scary story for those secretly afraid of Chinese people and their Chinese ways. A more favorable reading might suggest that it is a parable about the woes of relying too much on Chinese fortunes for good luck; that ultimately, one must learn to make their own luck in an unfair world. Then again, maybe that’s giving too much credit to a movie whose main villain is called Lotus Feet.

Visit our Editorials page for more articles like this. Ready to support more original horror criticism? Join the Certified Forgotten Patreon community today.