The Sub Genres Of Horror
Horror is an impressive genre of fiction, which holds centuries worth of works under its belt. In less than 100 years, however, horror as a genre has become largely synonymous with film. As horror has grown in popularity over the years, so has the number of sub genres it boasts, since the the 70’s we have seen horror take new forms ranging from slashers to psychological horror to horror comedies. However as the sub genres grow the lines between each sub genre become more and more blurred. And as such we can begin to ask how we should categorise horror.
One horror film that seems particularly hard to categorise is the first saw film, as it does not properly fit under the sub-genre it is so often associated with. The Saw franchise is often thought to be synonymous with 'torture porn' which is defined by Collins dictionary as 'a genre of horror films in which sadistic violence or torture is a central aspect of the plot'. This sub-genre may be an appropriate to categorise many of the Saw movies and franchises inspired by it (such as Hostel), as they tend to focus solely on achieving the most gruesome death scenes, body horror and conjuring up the worst torture devices for one to be stuck in. Paying little attention to the general plot or producing well rounded characters. Yet, at the centre of the first Saw movie, isn't a ton of gore or the torture devices themselves but a mystery. While the audiences are shown a few successful saw traps which do invoke a sense of physical torture these are but glimpses into the greater mystery the detectives are trying to solve. Indeed, the central aspect of the first Saw plot isn't sadistic violence or gore but of two men stuck in a room with no means for escape and a detective trying to hunt down a serial killer before it’s too late. The two men, the main characters, are by no means physically tortured like many of the victims in the later Saw movies, the worst display of violence being found in a man sawing off his own foot. Whilst still horrific, a character cutting off their own limb is by no means more gory or violent than many scenes in regular horror movies or even the drama 127 hours. Indeed, the torture the main characters face is more so psychological than physical, as the scenes of physical torture are mainly shown in flashbacks to other traps which there are only a few of. As such it seems like we shouldn't label the original Saw as torture porn, rather it seems far closer to a psychological horror, given the psychological terror the main characters face and the mystery the detective has little time to crack. The conclusion we should draw from this is that we cant class Saw as torture porn despite it most often being cited as the first torture porn film. Indeed, this shows just how difficult it is to completely understand horrors sub-genres and how hard it is to place films in them.
Furthermore, it is not just categorising certain films that we have trouble with but it also becomes difficult to distinguish what films, if any, fall into a certain sub- genre. Such is the case with Horror Comedies. Whilst Scream is known for being a light parody of the horror genre, in that it haves characters break the forth wall with their inside knowledge of horror films, it is hard to say how much a horror comedy it actually is. Indeed, Ghostface is placed up there with the more serious horror movie killers such as Michael Myers or Jason Voorhees, often being taken as a serious threat in video games and other media. Ghostface is also parodied by scary movie, indicating that it is not comical enough to not be made fun of itself. But then what makes it a horror comedy? It can't be simply that it contains jokes as most horror movies are funny in places to ease tension. Is it because it is a light parody of other horror movies? Then this would make ‘Scooby Doo monsters unleashed’ a horror comedy. But of course Scooby Doo 2 isn't really all too scary, and more importantly it doesn't try to be considering it is a family movie. Is Scooby Doo 2 just a comedy with horror themes? Or can we state that it doesn’t contain any horror elements at all, in virtue of its kids movie status? But then that would mean children films such as Coraline or Scary Stories To Tell in the Dark would no longer be horror movies. Indeed, then it seems to be extremely difficult to understand why some movies are placed in a horror sub-genre and others aren't.
Similarly, it has become increasingly difficult to properly define certain sub genres such as the Slasher, one definition states that a ‘Slasher film is a horror sub-genre that meets certain criteria, including an effective killer, a high body count, and non-firearm weapons’. Yet, this definition seems to capture too wide a scope and allows for films which are almost universally thought not to be horrors to be Slashers. For example, by this definition alone a film like Se7en, which is most often classed as a psychological thriller or mystery, could be classed as a Slasher film. Indeed John Doe is an effective killer who does not use guns, so surely this should mean that Se7en is a slasher and is thus a horror, despite our best intuitions claiming otherwise. Perhaps, we could argue, however, that Se7en does not meet the part of the definition which states the killer must have a high kill count, yet both Norman Bates and Freddy Krueger have a lower kill count on their first outing, despite the latter being considered one of the most iconic slasher movie killers. Therefore, if we count Norman Bates as a slasher killer then the murderers kill count need only be 2 or more people (4 if we only count Freddy). As such, to separate Se7en from the Slasher and horror movie genre in general, we would need to provide a stricter definition. Does the Killer have to wear a mask? No, unless we discredit Freddie Krueger or the cannibals from Wrong Turn. Does the majority of the deaths have to happen on completely on screen? No, otherwise we discredit many PG Slasher movies, as many show build up to the deaths or after effects, leaving much of the killing offscreen, like in Se7en. Maybe then we would have to determine a Slasher as a film that includes a killer who stalks victims from a main group of protagonists for which the film follows. This would ultimately determine that Se7en is a thriller or mystery, not a slasher, as the main protagonists in Se7en are not stalked then killed by John Doe but instead a random group of people are the victims who have very little screen time. Yet this would lead one to question as to whether other films are Slashers. For example, is Jennifers Body as slasher, despite it often not being considered one, given that Jennifer isn't some mysterious killer but essentially a victim of a sacrifice gone wrong. Nevertheless, she still stalks her victims whom are all part of a main group of teenagers we follow. This then means that we need an even more specific definition of a Slasher movie which would be quite difficult to determine. And even if we were to accept Jennifers Body as a Slasher then it seems that we have reduced slasher down to a bare bones definition of ' a film which features some being stalking a group of protagonists and then killing at least 2 of them, without using guns'. Having a definition such as this one seems to be completely void of emotion and by intuition does not seem to capture that which is at the heart of what a slasher is. Furthermore, it seems to be an arbitrary definition as there are surely slashers out there that don't fit this definition or films which fit this definition but aren't slashers. Indeed, this goes further to prove just how difficult it is to place horror movies into sub-genres.
As such to answer the question, how should we classify horror?, I must respond with 'I don't know'. Much like trying to define Philosophy it seems that in order to place certain horror movies into certain horror sub-genres, we must either place a certain movie in a sub-genre that doesn't make sense either intuitively or logically or we must define a sub-genre in what seems to be in an arbitrary manner.
