Personal - Flinching with Delight

50 Silly Poems about 50 Scary Movies from the Last 50 Years

Posted on March 20, 2022 by Glen — 1 Comment ↓

So, this is my 50^th post here. Huzzah! Having started in September, it has now been half a year of publishing once or twice a week and I feel pretty good about what I’ve been writing. I don’t know how much I’ve necessarily built an audience, but Google tells me that there is some traffic, so someone must be coming to read these things. Unless it’s just bots, and let’s assume it isn’t.

Anyway, to mark the occasion, I wanted to do something a bit different and have a laugh with a little idea that ended up being a sizable project. As a celebratory game/writing challenge, I’ve composed 50 short, silly, somewhat Seussian poems, describing a movie a year for the last 50 years. These are not deep cuts – I’m not looking to really stump the reader, but just to offer a bit of fun in identifying the cinematic inspiration for each verse (there will be a key at the bottom). I hope you enjoy – I rather tickled myself putting them together. And I hope you keep coming back for the next 50 posts.

The 70s

1973

On an Island in Scotland, just short of May Day,
A fool Kingsman and virgin did willfully stray.
But when things got too hot, he could be heard to moan.
They were dancing outside, but he died all alone.

1974

When the door slams, it’s over. You need not ask why.
On meat hooks, with hammers – your friends will all die.
You will run through the woods and then scream your lungs raw
Till you’re covered in blood, mad. He raises his saw.

1975

Our Mayor wants us to stay open all summer,
Though dead kids can really be kind of a bummer.
These big yellow barrels do not keep afloat.
We are going to need a much, much bigger boat.

1976

If your mom sees your dress ‘fore you go to the prom,
You’ll get locked in the closet for sinful aplomb.
The pig’s blood in the bucket is going to fall.
Both gym teacher and bullies, you will burn them all.

1977

Count the steps late at night, all these witches suspicious,
Razor wire filling rooms and a guide dog most vicious.
Goblin’s score makes your ears ring with discordant harmn’y.
You may regret your choice: study’ng ballet in Germn’y.

1978

Annie’s killed in her car. Lynda’s totally strangled;
The poor dog’s neck is snapped. On a wall, Bob is dangled.
Doctor Loomis sees Lonnie and gives him a fright.
Laurie faces the Boogieman, Halloween night.

1979

An additional guest comes aboard the Nostromo,
It’s well lubed proboscis extending in slo-mo.
Though the grappling hook does get stuck in the door,
We see Ripley and Jonesy in stasis once more.

The 80s

1980

Down at Camp Crystal Lake, also known as “Camp Blood,”
Someone’s stalking the counselors, boots caked in mud.
Most of the teenagers, of course, end up dead,
But Alice with a blade, in the end, takes her head.

1981

All the roses are red and the violets are blue.
Harry Warden, it seems, he is killing anew.
Candy boxes with hearts and Mabel in a dryer-
Life in a small mining town can be dire.

1982

Norwegians hunt dogs in their Antarctic chopper.
A spider legged head is a real big show stopper.
All the rest of the base, by something, get got.
Are MacReady and Childs really human or not?

1983

Max Renn, seeking content for CIVIC TV
Discovers a cult/eye glass/arms company.
Brainwashed by a cassette in chest opened fresh,
He blows out his brains – Long live the new flesh!

1984

The sins of the fathers have come back a’haunting
The dreams of the children. To sleep now is daunting.
Up the wall, Tina’s dragged by an unseen assailant.
So Nancy, into survival, must grow more battailant. (it’s a word – thanks thesaurus)

1985

The third in a series of dead folks still walking –
The soldiers and scientists each other mocking.
Rhodes gets his comeuppance, Bub shoots and salutes.
Let’s fly to an island for tropical fruits.

1986

Seymour gave Twoey plant food, but it wanted blood,
Had a chance to lift himself up out of the mud,
But the murder and feedings were not his forté.
In the director’s cut, he becomes an entrée.

1987

A carton of maggots, a bottle of blood –
Nanook’s a good doggie and Sam is his bud.
The Frog brother’s give him Destroy all Vampires!
His grampa’s stuffed beavers don’t get many buyers.

1988

Gets her son a “Good Guy” doll from a homeless toy seller,
Not knowing a killer in this doll’s a dweller.
She may blow him away with a pistol attack,
“Ade due damballa!” He always comes back.

1989

Heed the warning of th’jogger who’s hit by a truck:
Resurrecting the dead’s gonna bring you bad luck.
If you bring back the cat, it’s a real bad trend setter.
Just trust me, ayup, sometimes dead is better.

The 90s

1990

A Vietnam vet eyeing disturbing sights,
Maybe drugged by the army to do well in fights.
But his chiropractor quotes Meister Eckhart –
These angels, not devils, some peace do impart.

1991

Finding cannibal children who live in the walls,
Fool fights “Daddy” (and “Mommy,” as his sister he calls).
Gold enough for the rent and for mom’s operation –
It’s kind of a fable of gentrification.

1992

“Be my victim,” he sighs while he’s scrapping his hook,
Drawn to her as belief Helen’s research has shook.
Their mouths close together, his quite full of bees.
In the end, they are only just ash on the breeze.

1993

On motorbikes sex acts are to be deterred,
But when your girlfriend is dead, Trioxin’s the word.
With long spikes, nails, and glass, Julie’s pierced and adorned,
But the young undead lovers are tragically burned.

1994

A new meta spin on a dream master classic,
Placating the force that inspired the past flick:
So now Robert is painting, and Wes writes a script.
Into Heather’s real life, this night terror has slipped.

1995

In the Mojave desert, the Puritan’s cult
Try to sacrifice someone but flub the result.
Now, thirteen years later, D’Amour gets a case.
Dorothea’s dead husband puts Nix in his place.

1996

Poor Bonnie has burn scars all over her person.
Her bully’s blonde hairdo, Rochelle seeks to worsen.
“We are the weirdo’s,” Nancy tells the bus driver.
Though Sarah’s tried suicide, she’s the survivor.

1997

A Gainesville attorney who has never lost
Will do what he has to no matter the cost.
Though his temptations lead him t’the edge of perdition,
He seemingly foils John Milton’s ambition.

1998

John Stewart succumbs to the pen in his eye.
To prove yourself human, take this and get high.
Only run when you’re chased, dehydrate the queen squid.
In the end, you’ll give in to conformity, kid.

1999

In the woods of north Burkittsville, there’s some folklore.
Kids wanting to film there are seen nevermore.
While you may be tempted to be a map scorner,
If you do, you might find yourself stood in the corner.

The 2000’s

2000

Metaphorical menses, Canadian lupine –
These two teen sisters now face a lunar length deadline.
They used to do art projects morbid and gory,
But do Ginger and Brigette deserve their sad story?

2001

A live bomb in the courtyard, dead boy in the tank.
Hide the gold with the orphans and not in the bank.
The ghost blood floating upward, Jacinto’s the cause.
He will get what he’s due, for the killer he was.

2002

These are real angry monkeys – let’s not set them free,
Or from the infected we’ll all have to flee.
To survive, Jim will have to succumb to his rage.
To kill rapey soldiers, free the one in the cage.

2003

It’s New French Extremity – big third act twist.
This guest with a straight razor wants to be kissed.
She will kill your whole family and more in the end,
While she still really thinks that she is your best friend.

2004

Diet Coke and an ice cream to start the day right,
Then get Liz and your mother before taking flight.
At the Winchester, wait out this plague of the dead
And then finally hang out with Ed in the shed.

2005

A tragic car accident – one ill-placed pipe.
Will this cave dive help Sarah or is it just hype?
Juno’s not to be trusted – see, Beth has her chain.
Out of blood, Sarah rises to bring on the pain.

2006

Mockumentary horror: the dawn of a slasher
Who will get his head crushed in an apple juice masher.
That she’s really the final girl is a surprise.
After filming his exploits, she did not surmise.

2007

Respect the traditions the night of Samhain
Lest your cervical vertebrae be sliced in twain.
Leave eight Jack o’ Lanterns to honor the dead
Or the ghosts of the children your hot blood will shed.

2008

Just a lonely young Swede, who is bullied by all,
Tap a message in Morse code on your bedroom wall.
Your alluring new neighbor of uncertain gender
Is a ruthless vampire, both brutal and tender.

2009

Velvet ribbons adorning her wrists and her neck,
With threats to keep worried new siblings in check.
Piano playing’s impressive – her painting’s real wild,
But obsession and wrath are the strengths of this child.

The 2010s

2010

To their fix-er-up cabin come two backwoods buds.
Due to misunderstanding, the gore comes in floods.
College students keep killing themselves for no reason.
It seems nitwits are something they need expertise in.

2011

The harbinger warns to turn back on your path.
At this rustic cottage awaits a bloodbath.
It is all orchestrated to keep evil packed in.
Just one piece of advice: You should not read the Latin!

2012

A sound engineer who could not be more British
Around these Italians gets really quite skittish.
Watermelons are smashed and a cabbage is stabbed.
Out of their nest, chicks are brutally grabbed.

2013

On just one night a year, all the laws are suspended.
The New Founding Fathers, all crime have commended.
Tightly locked in your castle to wait the night through,
If your neighbors don’t like you, you’ll sure get a clue.

2014

Ling’ring grief for a husband, a difficult brat –
A new picture book summons a spook in a hat.
Try as hard as you like, he will not go away,
But he’ll oddly become a queer icon one day.

2015

Post expulsion by Puritans with a black goat,
Keep your eye on the baby, or his blood will broom coat.
Coughing up a whole apple, give milk to a crow –
Wouldst thou like taste of butter? Sign here, up you go.

2016

Explore under the surface – there’s hist’ry of crimes.
Invested with power to avenge Salem times.
Neither father nor son really at all to blame –
That their end is so gruesome is rather a shame.

2017

Quite uncomfortable visiting whites over-friendly,
Brain-swap-slavery scheme and a family most deadly.
Block the sunken place out, cotton picked from your seat –
Your friend always says TSA can’t be beat.

2018

Susie lives in Berlin now – yes that includes her.
Be the hands of the troupe – the new Volk lead dancer.
The dark drive to power, the ghosts of fascism –
Which mother to follow? A company schism.

2019

Depressed sister chose family asphyxiation.
This could be an odd time for a Nordic vacation.
You should warn your bad boyfriend to try more to care,
Or he’s going to wind up inside of a bear.

The 2020s

2020

Get stabbed by a psycho and th’next day you’ll see
What it’s like to be fright’ning and stand while you pee.
Try convincing your friends that you don’t mean to maim
While the killer with your face tries doing the same.

2021

Disappear if you want – break your nose, cut your hair.
Your adoptive dad grooves when he hears She’s not there.
And though many a needle into ear is shoved,
It’s really a story about being loved.

2022

A reflexive re-quel, about what it is,
Discussing “the rules” of the horror film biz –
The legacy trio returns to Woodsboro
To fight killers in masks; it’s a story they know.

Ok, yeesh. Poems are hard work. I hope you’ve had some fun – there’s a key after the pic.

KEY: 1973 – The Wicker Man; 1974 – The Texas Chainsaw Massacre; 1975 – Jaws; 1976 – Carrie; 1977 – Suspiria; 1978 – Halloween; 1979 – Alien; 1980 – Friday the 13^th; 1981 – My Bloody Valentine; 1982 – The Thing; 1983 – Videodrome; 1984 – A Nightmare on Elm Street; 1985 – Day of the Dead; 1986 – Little Shop pf Horrors; 1987 – The Lost Boys; 1988 – Child’s Play; 1989 – Pet Sematary; 1990 – Jacob’s Ladder; 1991 – The People Under the Stairs; 1992 – Candyman; 1993 – Return of the Living Dead III; 1994 – Wes Craven’s New Nightmare; 1995 – Lord of Illusions; 1996 – The Craft; 1997 – The Devil’s Advocate; 1998 – The Faculty; 1999 – The Blair Witch Project; 2000 – Ginger Snaps; 2001 – The Devil’s Backbone; 2002 – 28 Days Later; 2003 – High Tension; 2004 – Shaun of the Dead; 2005 – The Descent; 2006 – Behind the Mask; 2007 – Trick ‘r Treat; 2008 – Let the Right One In; 2009 – Orphan; 2010 – Tucker and Dale vs. Evil; 2011 – The Cabin in the Woods; 2012 – Berberian Sound Studio; 2013 – The Purge; 2014 – The Babadook; 2015 – The VVitch; 2016 – The Autopsy of Jane Doe; 2017 – Get Out; 2018 – Suspiria; 2019 – Midsommar; 2020 – Freaky; 2021 – Titane; 2022 – Scream

An Exorcism Exception

Posted on February 25, 2022 by Glen — No Comments ↓

So, while I love a wide variety of horror content across all sub-genres and media, one kind of story tends to rub me the wrong way: the possession-exorcism (though just last week, I did write about an interesting take on the subject). Sure – they can be really creepy, there are a couple of classic examples that are really great, well made movies, and it is a very, very popular theme, but it almost always turns me off. They often leave an aftertaste of proselytization, seemingly advertisements for the Church, Catholic or otherwise (in recent years, the Warrens led Conjuring films have been notably unpleasant examples, though they primarily present as hauntings).

Now, there are other kinds of films dealing with demonic or diabolical elements or religious imagery that don’t do this. I think it is because, while they may contain religious elements, they are not about (or even particularly in support of) religion the way an exorcism film can be. Van Helsing holding up a cross to ward off a bride of Dracula I can accept as a simple trope of Vampire fiction without feeling like it’s supposed to teach me to let Christ into my heart. Films can directly feature the Devil as an antagonist, but somehow Pacino in The Devil’s Advocate, reveling in his bombast, or Black Philip in The VVitch asking if Tomasin wouldst like to live deliciously, don’t make me feel uncomfortable, as if I’d made the mistake of inviting in two polite, well-dressed chaps who want to give me the good news. I mean, sure, I generally want horror to make me uncomfortable – but not that way.

So what is it about this story? Why does it have this particular effect on me? On one level, a possession film is so often about someone in denial about the “truth” – that radical evil is real and that we are helpless against it without faith, specifically faith in “the Lord.” The story is all about this horrific realization on the part of a protagonist, whether the mother of the demoniac in question or a priest who has lost his faith and must regain it to prevail (both from the Exorcist), who only after accepting this knowledge has a chance of casting out the evil presence. Scientific methods may be used to try to diagnose the problem, but they will all fail until the only remaining solution is that of the holy man with a cross. And oddly enough, I feel the filmmakers often may not even intend such a message or experience – they are just trying to tell a scary story and are thus leaning on certain generic conventions, but in so doing, the resultant film can have the vibe of a church basement Halloween Hell House – where they are having great fun creating horrible things (because that is, of course, fun), but it is all in service of scaring the visiting kids away from sin.

Maybe I’m overstating it, but it’s the feeling I get personally.

So if I’m so put off by possession narratives, why am I even writing about them? Well, because I have an exception here – a book that takes the story in a really different direction and delivers a totally distinctive tone. And sometimes, when you find a really good book, you just want to go door to door and tell people about it.

My Best Friend’s Exorcism (2016) by Grady Hendrix

First, I have to say – it is very hard to impossible to really get into what I think is so great about this novel without explicitly discussing the ending, and I feel it features a turn that really can be spoiled. I’ll give a fresh warning before I get to that part and if you think you might like to read the book, do yourself a favor and go pick it up before finishing this text. It’s a really quick read – the first time I did so, I tore through it in one sitting on a flight from Warsaw to NYC, only pausing for meal and bathroom breaks.

Ok, so this is the story of Abby, whose best friend, Gretchen, gets possessed by a demon, which in turn, must be exorcised. By the end it is. Hooray. Simple, right? But where it is special is in the relationships between the girls.

We start when they first become friends on Abby’s tenth birthday party: an E.T. themed event at the local roller rink (spanning the years 1982-1988, 80s pop culture looms large in this story, very much the air that these friends breath, the idiom they speak – sometimes in shouting misheard Phil Collins lyrics, sometimes in playing Madonna dress up and getting in trouble with one religious mother who does not approve of the material girl, or in this case, just needing E.T. everything). Gretchen, the new girl in class, is the only one to show up, rather than going to a much fancier party being thrown by another kid she doesn’t know; somehow kismet strikes and they really click, thus starting a lifelong friendship. The book takes its time with this utterly non-scary but equally foundational episode, and then carries on taking its time with the next 5 years of the girls’ lives and friendship. I was surprised on re-reading it to find that this only makes up about 50 pages of the book – it had felt like so much more; really getting the connection between them, from running jokes to secrets shared, to embarrassing details of parents’ lives uncovered.

Then, when they’re 16, Gretchen gets possessed and everything goes wrong. The horror elements come quick and hard in this middle stretch: ominous, shadowy figures in the woods, owls bloodily slamming into windows, the feeling of a hand on the neck when no one’s there, creepy voices on the phone at night, beloved pets murdered, white fleshy worm things vomited out. Hendrix pulls no punches in delivering revulsion and shock. But he manages this while at the same time maintaining a somewhat blackly comic tone (I’ve read comparisons to Heathers). But the worst thing is in no way supernatural, but rather just the simple horror of your closest friend changing, betraying your secrets, becoming cruel, becoming someone you can’t trust, someone who hurts people, who is downright evil, and whom you somehow still love. Friendship and love necessarily entail vulnerability, and Abby has no walls to guard her from Gretchen’s malice. She doesn’t need much convincing to believe her friend is possessed by a demon.

So she finds herself an exorcist and now’s a good time to go pick up the book if you think you might like to read it. I’ll wait.

…

Ok, so here is where Hendrix’s book really distinguishes itself from the exorcism pack (and I’ll describe it even though you hopefully just finished reading it). Abby finds an exorcist, Brother Lemon – an earnestly absurd Christian weightlifter with whom she kidnaps, in order to save, her friend. In the process of the exorcism, the demonic presence reveals itself and we get all the typical supernatural spookiness and fluids. Now, Lemon knows all the steps but has never done this before and comes close to killing Gretchen before Abby stops him. He leaves in disgrace and Abby, alone with her friend and something else, has to finish the job.

She starts by following his playbook, reciting prayers and such. It’s kind of working, but she doesn’t believe these words. They are empty symbols for her, and finally, unable to abandon her friend, determined to go down with her if she has to, she finds the words that are true: the misremembered lyrics of a Go-Gos song that played at her 10^th birthday party, a litany of singers or actors or shows or jokes or games they have watched or told or played together. The power of Christ might not compel this demon to leave, but maybe the power of Phil Collins can. The power of all the little references and memories, things they have loved and laughed over, secrets they have entrusted one another with. These are authentic things. Absurd and silly and seemingly inconsequential, and real. It is an amazing, exciting, moving sequence.

And it manages to make this the rare exorcism that works for me by basing it on something I can actually believe in. Faith may be necessary for the procedure, but faith need not be religious. Abby acts out of faith, not only in her friend, but in the very concept of Friendship, actualizing not only the love between them, but Love, itself: making out of the frivolous detritus of childhood, icons of power. This was the second time I read it and while the middle section of horrible events lost some effect without the element of surprise, the climax landed just as hard as it had the first time, on a plane, trying to both stifle guffaws and ugly crying – cause that’s kind of embarrassing sitting next to a stranger.

Grady Hendrix has been a really enjoyable discovery for me in the last few years. This was the first book of his that I’d read, but since then I’ve worked through the rest of his available output (some are sadly out of print) – covering a range of horror topics, but all with a kind of light touch – not necessarily comedy, but something humanistic and, for lack of a better word, fun. Whether exploring a haunted Ikea in Horrorstör, a Faustian heavy metal parable in We Sold Our Souls, following middle aged housewives hunting the undead in The Southern Book Club’s Guide to Slaying Vampires, or most recently, delving into the life changing trauma of being a survivor in The Final Girl Support Group, he offers interesting and entertaining spins on well-worn ideas, that come alive in character without sacrificing the horror. My Best Friend’s Exorcism is no exception.

Delightfully Flinching in the New Header

Posted on February 5, 2022 by Glen — 1 Comment ↓

So, this has been in the works for quite some time, and now I’m happy to finally announce a brand-spanking new header for the site. If you’re on a mobile device, you may not see it, so here it is (with apologies to desktop users for the duplication):

Particular gratitude is due to the photographer, Klaudia Bałazy, and the models, Gabriela, Julia, Ola, Kasia (who also had the idea for the image), and Magda, all of whom I’m happy to collaborate with in La Folie – Retro Cabaret Show. Thanks all – I think it’s pretty groovy!

The image (at the top of the page – or if you are an e-mail subscriber – click through to check it out) grows out of a cabaret sketch we did for a Halloween performance. The idea of the sketch was to recreate the style of a silent horror film – all women in incongruously elegant gowns (ala The Old Dark House), exploring a creepy old manor by candle light, discovering a shrouded figure, and, fingers trembling, reaching out to reveal his monstrosity (ala Phantom of the Opera), before screaming in a building terror that edges on madness (ala Metropolis) – but funny.

It was a comedy bit after all, and the idea was to both pay homage to the visual sumptuousness of the silent era and to have some fun with the over-the-top-ness of the premise. One woman shrieking in fear might be scary. Four women, one seemingly straight laced husband, and the hideously deformed creature chasing them all sequentially startling each other like classic Scooby Do shtick and then silently shrieking in alarm was hopefully pretty funny.

It was a treat to work on and I think the effect achieved with relatively simple means (LED candles and one technician with a close handheld light source) was stylish, atmospheric, and playful. It is a real pleasure – a delight, you might say – to bring to life even a small idea that really tickles your fancy. And out of it was born a visual concept for this blog that took a few months to finally execute, but with which I’m really happy: five women, in chic dresses, screaming like something out of a classic film.

So, let’s talk about that. Once I finally finished assembling the image, I couldn’t help but notice that gender had been (perhaps inadvertently, but nonetheless, prominently) foregrounded. I mean, it is such a long standing criticism of the genre that it focuses on and fetishizes images of female suffering. Whether or not that critique is totally accurate has been fairly challenged, but perhaps the very fact that I didn’t include any guys – it just wouldn’t have been the iconic look I was after – does imply the persistence of a trend and suggest that it should be discussed.

On one level, this is evident throughout the history of the genre – looking at classic horror cinema from the silent era, the 30s Universal horrors, Val Lewton in the 40s, monster movies of the 50s, up to the slasher boom of the late 70s-80s, and beyond, a woman screaming is just such a central image. For some critics, this is a sign of an inherent misogyny – the viewer is invited to sadistically and vicariously get off on looking from the POV of the masculine threat at his prey. Others perceive a different, but not necessarily less misogynistic, approach – the woman is the endangered protagonist because her gender implies a vulnerability which makes the threat that much scarier – now, vicariously identifying with the female body situates us, the viewers, more as “victims.” Still others defend the trend as pure style or aesthetics (thus opening themselves up to new criticisms of objectification) – Dario Argento once famously said, “I like women, especially beautiful ones…I would much rather watch them being murdered than an ugly girl or man.”

And others have read this totally differently. You could certainly take the degree to which the woman is in the middle of the horror narrative as positive; regardless of the reasons for it, compared to the majority of other genres, horror’s number of female protagonists (final girls, scream queens, imperiled ingénues, or what have you) is effectively quite progressive. Sure – women might be centered so that the protagonist can display “weak” traits that are unfairly coded as feminine (fear, hysteria, physical weakness). I’m pretty sure I remember Carol Clover describing how, in the figure of the “final girl,” the audience can have its cake and eat it too, identifying both with her feminized fear and with the moment when she stands up and fights back, taking on what are read as masculinized characteristics (and, of course, striking out with some penetrative sharp phallic object – Freud is all over this stuff).

But I think what this all really speaks to is how unrealistic the “strong” traits coded as masculine are. In a moment of real crisis, I expect most of us are more likely to freeze up, be incapable of acting, and hide in a corner weeping until ugly death comes for us. Exceptionally few would have the chutzpa to really rise as some hyper-masculine action star and lay waste to the threat, whatever it might be. I think these maligned traits, supposedly feminine, may actually be just the most realistic traits for any character to have. Facing true horror, honestly, who wouldn’t scream?

A striking example here is Barbara from Night of the Living Dead. The presentation of her character has oft been denounced as unfair to women. Of all of the figures in the seminal zombie classic, she is particularly useless, spending much of the film either hysterically freaking out or in a state of near catatonia. George Romero even took the criticism to heart and in the 1990 remake, which he wrote but didn’t direct, she was a total badass to make up for it. That’s fine – it’s actually a kind of good movie in its own right – but I think Barbara from the original rings so true. Here’s this young woman who sees her brother killed in front of her, gets chased by some weird madman to a house in the middle of nowhere, and comes to realize that the dead are rising and eating the flesh of the living! If there’s a more appropriate time to snap under the pressure, I can’t think of one and I think that put in her position, more people (men and women) would behave exactly as she does.

So, at the end of the day, sure – it’s impossible to deny that there are social inequities associated with the classic image of the screaming woman, but I think sometimes they are more linked with expectations that unjustly persist in society than with what the picture itself necessarily communicates. For my part, I really love the new image we’ve created here. I think it strikes a balance of terror and playfulness, with a classic cool vibe (and the gender focus is a part of that), celebrating the films themselves and reveling in the horror, while calling for some degree of reflexivity – some work of interpretation. Life is endlessly complicated and we are all probably ultimately unknowable to ourselves, so anything that suggests we take a moment for consideration is worthwhile.

In our sketch, it was finally one of the girls who enters into the house, finds the square jawed, masculine, husband type tied up in the basement, screaming for his life and saves him, before revealing that she’s actually a vampire and biting his throat. The point is that sometimes, you can be all things, having and eating your cake, enjoying the repeating image of the screaming woman and inverting that image to have one save the day, and inverting it once again to make her the monster. All of the aforementioned perspectives can be simultaneously correct – even when they contradict each other. Maybe especially when they do.

Polish Horror Series # 1 – Wilczyca

Posted on January 18, 2022 by Glen — No Comments ↓

So, back in 2008, I relocated to Poland. I’d been living in Chicago for the previous 7 years and felt the need to shake things up. My background being in the theatre, my only real association with Poland had been due to some theatre artists, largely already dead, who had made a deep impression on me and I just had the general sense that this might be someplace with interesting art and theatre and culture, so I signed up for a course in teaching English as a foreign language, bought a one way ticket, and took off. It wasn’t long before I met the woman who would later become my wife and found myself ensconced in my new life here.

Being a horror fan, I’d been very interested to sample the local fares in that domain. The only problem is that there aren’t many of them, and those that exist are a) hard to find and/or b) lacking English subtitles. (My Polish is passable in some contexts, but it should be better…) So, I was really happy to see that along with the excellent folk horror documentary, Woodlands Dark and Days Bewitched, which recently came to Shudder, there are two therein referenced Polish films (also included in Severin film’s box set, All the Haunts be Ours): Wilczyca and Lokis, Rekopis profesora Wittembacha. Wilczyca had long been on my radar but I hadn’t been able to find it anywhere, so I was really happy to finally have a chance to check it out over the weekend.

And with that, I’d like to start a recurring series here on ye ol’ blog. Of the really-not-many Polish horror films in existence, there are a few that I’d long ago given up on tracking down. I think that, as I’m not planning on moving anytime soon, I should finally dig further into this aspect of local culture and work my way through the limited catalogue (really, there are probably about 30-40 feature films to choose from in total and that includes some pretty cheap, student film looking entries). So, starting with today’s post, I’m going to occasionally highlight a Polish horror (or, more frequently, horror adjacent) flick. Sometimes that will be a longer text and sometimes, it will be more of a blurb length short review, depending on how much I can say about the given film. So, without further adieu, let’s get into…

**Wilczyca (She-wolf) (1982)**

Wintry and atmospheric, this is less the “Polish werewolf movie” that I’d heard tell of, and more a historical drama with folkloric/horror elements. Marek Piestrak’s film is also an interestingly small, and yet effective little picture, showcasing striking cinematography, key concerns of Polish history, and a couple of standout performances; all in all, an odd, sometimes enigmatic, sometimes sexually charged, sometimes outdated-in-terms-of-gender-politics little package.

In short, Kacper Wosiński, a veteran of an early 19^th century uprising (from the late 1700s until the end of WWI, Poland was off the map, its territory divvied up between Austria, Prussia, and Russia – during that time there were a number of uprisings, attempting to expel the occupying forces), returns home after a long absence to find his estranged wife, Maryna, dying due to complications from a botched self-performed abortion. On her death bed, she curses him, clutching a wolf’s paw, refuses last rites, and promises to return to haunt him, before finally passing. We don’t have the full story, but from some of his later dialogue, we understand that he had been some charming combination of abusive and neglectful, and her venom feels justified.

His brother insists that a stake be driven through her heart before burial, doing so himself, as Kacper is unable. It is here that we first have a touch of horror. The folklore is not exactly precise – it seems that if not dealt with appropriately, there is the fear that she will rise – as something like a werewolf, or a witch, or a vampire, or something unnamed and undefined, but bad, and vengeful, and powerful. The scene is uncomfortable and effective. Kacper is not exactly sympathetic, but his reluctance to desecrate his wife’s corpse is emotional and the ugliness of the situation is solid. However, perhaps because Kacper couldn’t carry out this responsibility himself, the stake will prove ineffective.

After all this, Kacper leaves his home, never to return and reconnects with his friend Ludwig, a fellow veteran of the uprising who now has to flee the Viennese partition into Prussia, presumably due to revolutionary activities (apparently in the novel on which this is based, he was fleeing the Russian authorities, but as Poland was still under Communism at the time of filming, they had to change the bad guys to Austrians). After helping his friend to the border, and possibly seeing his dead wife/wolf/just-the-wind-and-fog at the crossroads, he returns to Ludwig’s estate to look after it for him and, in terms of Ludwig’s own young wife, Julia, to “protect his honor,” a task which he rather fails at as she immediately takes up with an old flame, Otto, a Viennese officer.

And here, we get to the heart of the movie, for Julia so closely reflects and even directly resembles Maryna (in fact, they are both played by Iwona Bielska, who is pretty stellar in the dual roles) that he comes to feel that she is possessed by the spirit of his wicked spouse, becoming a wolf at night, taunting him, haunting him, and possibly eating his beloved dogs (a warning: there is a scene with a wounded dog that looked concerningly realistic—I don’t know what filming practices were at the time, but I really hope it was ok).

For her part, Bielska is an absolute treat. While the film is not necessarily good to its two female characters (I’m not sure exactly how to read things, but I suspect we’re supposed to be on Kacper’s side, but are we, really?), she is gloriously villainous and deliciously cruel, with a spark of wicked intelligence twinkling in her eyes. Her performance really is quite magnetic – sensual, playful, and often kinkily evil (a nigh vampiric flashback of her lustily feasting on the blood of Otto’s wounded hand after a wolf bite comes to mind). There was even a surprising queer note as she is first introduced in an intimate moment with her maid (to be fair, it’s not exactly very positive representation, as it is perhaps meant to portray her selfish hedonism—but it was still a surprising inclusion).

Anyway, Kacper becomes convinced that she must be dealt with, being his responsibility twice over, and silver bullets in hand, he moves to do so, driving the film towards an unanticipatedly bloody climax.

As may already be clear, I’m not entirely sure what to make of this film, or how to read it. Is it a straightforward, folk-influenced historical drama about a man set upon by dark forces, rising to repel them? Is it a more complex story of that same man forced to reckon with the consequences of his own bad actions? Is Julia possessed by Kacper’s dead wife and definitely an evil supernatural entity (it seems clear that she is the “she-wolf,” but her taste for blood play that we see in the flashback with Otto certainly pre-dates Maryna’s death)? Are we supposed to read the two female characters as (however alluring and compelling) essentially wicked antagonists and cheer Kacper’s actions or are we to doubt his convictions and dread violence being done to Julia as Kacper is triggered by her infidelity reflecting that of his former wife?

Are the characters even really people or is it all perhaps allegorical? When Ludwig has to leave, Julia expresses frustration that his “patriotic” activities occupy him so much – do the women represent some natural, self-centered national impulse, focused on the body and sensual pleasure, which does not support and thus, undercuts attempts at revolution? Or is it possible that this is actually critical of those partisans who, in heady patriotic fervor, neglect the self, family, and actual people, as opposed to ideals? The film has a flavor of allegory, even if these readings are not intended, and the degree to which these questions abound, left it lingering in my mind.

All in all, this was an interesting watch, what these days would be called a ‘slow burn’ – rich in atmosphere and performances, sparse in terms of plot, drawing on a strong sense of place and history and character. It is only vaguely a “horror” movie, but it does have enough elements to be included: the staking scene, the appearance of Maryna (somewhat zombified) at the crossroads, the suggestion of the supernatural in terms of Julia, and her knowing, animalistic villainy. It’s never in a hurry to get anywhere, but I found it totally watchable throughout.

—

So, that’s the first of these. I won’t be doing one every week, but in the coming months, I’d like to return to this series periodically and both write about the other Polish horror films I’ve seen and search out some more that are new to me. Hey – if you happen to be Polish and have a suggestion of something I should look for, please drop a line!