MONSTERS IN DISGUISE: Rob Zombie Critiques the Slasher
by Lisa Marie Nohner
Traditionally, the slasher, a subgenre of the horror film, is notorious for its exploitation of female bodies. Most female bodies present in the standard slasher are subject to gratuitous nude scenes usually followed by a murderous blood bath. Generally, these expendable female bodies belong to characters limited by their lack of backstory, development, and other modes of characterization afforded female roles in other genres. Often, their motivations or reasons for being are egregiously hedonistic in nature and inextricably linked to the pursuit of sex (Clover 33). Based on the conventions of the slasher, she who is identifiably feminine in her gender performance beckons the hand of death. In this way, the female supporting cast of the slasher is indeed comparable to members of the walking dead. Though female victims may serve as a pleasurable site of identification for young adult male spectators, these oversimplified impressions of feminine victim-characters present a very limited series of identifications for female spectators. The genre presents female bodies not belonging to the Final Girl as caricatures; they are weak, hysterical women whose giddy, reckless responses to sexuality and danger are designed to reflect the behavior of “average” women. Such women are unworthy of Final Girl status based on their choice to embrace stereotypical femininity. This type of film prizes a certain type of woman: the Final Girl, or she who most closely conforms to patriarchal values–presumably for the benefit of a male spectatorship.
Rob Zombie’s Halloween II (2009) seems to echo this sentiment in its recognition of the slasher as a puritanical mode of storytelling designed to exclude and punish feminine characters in such a way that is monstrous, or socially harmful. It would appear that Halloween II is a direct comment on the destructive gender binaries and regulations imposed by the traditional slasher narrative. In order to critique the conventions of the traditional slasher and expose its monstrousness, Zombie transforms what is ostensibly a sequel to his 2006 film Halloween, (and by turns a remake of John Carpenter’s 1981 slasher of the same name) into a monster film. Through investigating Zombie’s directorial choices in characterizing both Michael Myers (Tyler Mane) and Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton) as monsters, and discussing his decimation of the film’s Final Girl, Annie Brackett (Danielle Harris) we may reveal how, in crafting a monster movie disguised as a slasher, Zombie has effectively established the slasher as a problematic text; one which desensitizes the audience to the reality of suffering and problematically favors spectacle over “real” feeling (Briefel 16).
Halloween II opens with a frame of text regarding the image of a white horse in dreams. The frame explains the image of a white horse is “linked to instinct, purity, and the drive of the physical body to release powerful and emotional forces, like rage with ensuing chaos and destruction,” quoted from The Subconscious Psychosis of Dreams. The scene follows with an obvious revision of Zombie’s original Halloween text. In this particular scene, young Michael is not played by Halloween’s Daeg Faerch, but by a new actor, Chase Wright. However, it is clear that the film is trying to establish the scene as something that occurred during the diagesis of the first film; primarily because Michael’s mother, Deborah Myers (Sheri Moon Zombie) is still alive and visiting him at the asylum. During her visit she presents him with a white horse figurine. Young Michael explains that he had a dream about a white horse the night before, accompanied by a vision of his mother dressed in white, standing beside it. This scene functions to establish the significance of the white horse as a central element of Michael’s twisted psychology. It is important to note that while Michael was a killer in Halloween, the portions of the film colored by his own narrative perspective did not include any ruminations regarding a ghost-like image of his mother, or a white horse. His perspective in this film, however, consistently does.
If the white horse is important to Michael in Halloween II, but had no part in Halloween, we might infer that the sequel is trying to tell us something new about Michael’s character. Fans of the original Zombie film will recall that it concluded with an image of Laurie Strode sitting atop Michael, after having shot him in the head. After the brief, aforementioned contrived flash back to Michael’s memory of his mother giving him the horse, Halloween II attempts to resituate us in the events that immediately follow the first film. Thus we are confronted with a gore-splattered, tearful Laurie Strode, wandering the streets of Haddonfield in total disarray. A concerned Sheriff Brackett collects her and sends her to the hospital, presumably to recover. Meanwhile, the lifeless body of Michael Myers, mortal head-wound and all, is declared dead and carted off in an armored car to the nearest morgue. However, when the two distracted male attendants hit a passing cow on the road, the vehicle rolls and Michael escapes, mysteriously alive, despite his fatal blow to the head. After killing the attendants, he stalks off into the woods, at which time he sees a vision of his mother, Deborah, his childhood self, and a white horse.
Throughout the film, Michael encounters the three aforementioned spectres in the company of other people (primarily victims), none of which can actually see these projections, so we know they are indeed ghosts. In essence, these three images haunt Michael; they communicate with him and instruct him about his potential return to his mother, and also his childhood self. Zombie has revised the original Halloween within Halloween II in order to communicate that Michael is now indeed both living and dead, as evidenced by his ability to communicate with his mother from beyond the grave. If Michael is both living and dead, then he is genuinely a monster, in accordance with Carroll’s theory of categorical interstitiality (55).
The three figures Michael encounters are all ghost-like in appearance, and function to represent Michael’s definitive cross over into the realm of the interstitial. According to horror scholar Noel Carroll, monsters of the genre are regarded as both threatening and impure (55). Michael is threatening due not only to his hulking, physical presence and ability to withstand tremendous amounts of pain, but he is impure if in Halloween II, Michael Myers is both living and dead. Though Carol Clover comments extensively on the male Killer’s perceived invincibility throughout the traditional slasher (35), I would argue that Rob Zombie has complicated this notion. Michael is not a supreme being; rather he is merely both living and dead. Zombie shows this through explicitly permitting Michael to have contact with actual ghosts. A physical description and brief explanation of each ghost’s importance is central to understanding them as a link to the afterlife.
Firstly, the ghost of young Michael is clothed in the same Halloween clown costume Daeg Faerch wore in the first Halloween when he committed the initial murders that landed him in the asylum.The image of young Michael in this costume when he appears alongside the ghost of Deborah indicates that adult Michael (Tyler Mane) in Halloween II has fully transitioned into a monster. The Halloween clown costume was the last outfit Michael wore prior to a lifetime of captivity that rendered him monstrous or inhuman. It is significant that he should see his former, childhood self clothed in this way because after having been shot in the head, it indicates the human portion of Michael is dead. He has fully transitioned into a monster, and the child that he was prior to captivity is now a mere ghost.
The ghost of Deborah Myers is clothed in a long, modest white dress. Her hair is also a stark white color; when she was alive was an ashy blonde. Additionally, she often wore sexually revealing clothing. Fans of the original Zombie text will remember Deborah was once a stripper. Her long white gown and white hair indicate that in death, she has been purified. Her pattern of speech, once grating and littered with curse words, is now soft and demure. Clearly, death has rendered her calm and serene. In death, Deborah has transformed from her earthly form as the archaic mother, “the mother as the origin of all life” to the pre-Oedipal mother. Kristeva identifies the pre-Oedipal mother in relation to the family and symbolic order (qtd. in Creed 48). If Deborah is no longer sexualized, then as the pre-Oedipal mother, she represents Michael’s Super Ego. However, because Deborah is dead, and a ghost, then we are to infer that Michael’s Super Ego is also a ghost. Essentially, like Deborah, Michael’s Super Ego is dead, rendering him more more animalistic and uncontrolled. In a word, he is more interstitial and thus monstrous (Carroll 55).
Finally, the image of the white horse itself is not nearly so important as the text that describes its implications. A deconstruction of the accompanying text listed in the beginning of the film is essential to understanding the role the white horse plays for both Michael and Laurie. Firstly, if the white horse is linked to “instinct”, its continual presence during Michael’s journey to retrieve his sister enforces the idea that his hunt is an instinctual and therefore primitive act, which lends itself to the idea of Michael as interstitial. Additionally, if the horse represents “purity,” when Laurie finally sees the horse at the end of the film during her death, we understand that death is a purification rite. If her death is a purification rite, then prior to her death, Laurie had achieved monstrousness– especially if, as scholar Shelly Stamp Lindsey asserts, in the monster film monsters die to re-establish the symbolic order and shore up existing ideas of normalcy . Lastly, if the white horse represents “the drive of the physical body to release powerful and emotional forces, like rage with ensuing chaos and destruction,” and is seen only by both Laurie and Michael, we understand both characters harbor the capacity for monstrous acts, which again reinforces their status as interstitial. However, it would be remiss to claim monstrousness operates in exactly the same way for both Michael and Laurie. It is important to note that while the white horse is equally significant to both characters, it does not function identically for each of them. With Michael, we must understand that his vision of the white horse, alongside the ghost of his mother and younger self, is mostly indicative of his interstitial, not living-not dead status. For Laurie, we must understand that the white horse symbolizes her own descent into monstrousness.
Before we delve any further into the nature of Rob Zombie’s use of monsters, it is important to note that his intentions are not quite so explicit as would make for a tidy paper about monstrousness. In reality, it is important to note that it is absolutely possible for a lay viewer to argue that spectral Deborah, young Michael and the white horse are psychotic hallucinations unique to Michael’s psyche, and unrelated to the afterlife. In fact, within the film there are several cues to support that particular kind of reading. Firstly, young Michael receives the white horse figurine within the confines of the asylum. Then, after taking a bullet to the head, Michael begins witnessing said hallucinations. Eventually, his sister, who is withdrawing from an anti-psychotic, mood regulating medication, begins to see the spectral figures of Deborah and young Michael as well. In short, Zombie has done all the work necessary to disguise and obscure the intention of this film. However, the white horse is central to understanding this film as a monster film. During the director commentary, Zombie states that Laurie is dead at the film’s conclusion, and only during the moments of Laurie’s death do we see Deborah and the white horse approaching her. Prior to her the moments before her death, the white horse was absent from Laurie’s visions of young Michael and Deborah. For Laurie, the white horse is a symbol of how she has become like Michael; she is finally a monster. Her death is very important to understanding this film as a critique of the slasher.
Fans of the John Carpenter Halloween franchise, and the slasher genre at large will find Zombie’s Halloween II a striking departure from convention. In his director commentary, Zombie states “This is more of a story about the emotional journey of Laurie Strode than it is a slasher movie about Michael Myers.” Despite the fact that she is meant to function as the series Final Girl or victim hero, Zombie’s Laurie Strode is only a victim in Halloween II. The original Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) carries on throughout the second Carpenter film; she never pauses to reflect on the gravity or trauma of her situation. Here, Zombie steps in and revises the original story. He humanizes Laurie to illustrate the trauma of her experience. He asks the audience to realistically consider the situation Laurie is in: can a Final Girl really experience such a massive amount of emotional and physical trauma and go on to live a well-adjusted life? Zombie argues through his depiction of Laurie Strode that no; she cannot. And moreover, we should not expect her to, nor should the slasher genre. This is especially important to understanding why Rob Zombie would create a monster film disguised as a slasher.
Zombie’s choice to turn Laurie into a monster seems to indicate his understanding that a human protagonist could not emerge unscathed from the scenarios featured in the traditional slasher, or even Zombie’s first Halloween. The traditional slasher almost always figures the Final Girl as a hero (Clover 24). However, the heroism in Laurie’s case cost her another human life, her heroism is a result of murder. While traditional slashers might make light of the emotional impact of having killed (or presumably having killed) another human being, Zombie refuses to. Laurie’s heroism does not grant her any sunny emotional benefit. If anything, it serves to send her deeper into a spiral of self destruction; it serves to begin her descent into monstrousness. The fact that conventional Final Girls traditionally do escape relatively unscathed is absurd. It is a lie designed to privilege patriarchal coping styles. Thus by humanizing Laurie and her situation, Zombie is depicting the truth of her character, the truth Final Girls have been written to disguise: she will indeed become a monster. Instead of expecting her to triumph and deal, we should anticipate her impending monstrousness and accept it. When the audience is confronted with the haunting reality of Laurie’s situation, we are presented with evidence that the traditional slasher is actually an elaborate contrivance motivated by patriarchal values.
Before we discuss the cues that lead to an understanding of Laurie’s monstrousness, we must recognize her role in Halloween II as a victim. Shortly after Sheriff Brackett has loaded her into the ambulance, we are treated to an overwhelmingly gruesome and realistic scene of a bloody, wounded Laurie. She sobs uncontrollably on her stretcher, asking repeatedly “Am I gonna’ die?” until she is sedated. Post sedation, there is a long and graphic scene of Laurie’s body in the operating room, having her clothing cut off and her body mended. We see the awful, dramatic and yet hyper-real physical and emotional ramifications of her last confrontation in alarming detail. In Halloween, Laurie’s adoptive parents were murdered, her friends were killed or wounded, and she was a victim of stalking and subsequent abuse. Recognizing Laurie as a victim is central to regarding her as a female monster, and the operating room scene establishes her as such. Scholar Aviva Briefel explains that female monsters become violent as a result of earlier abuse (20). Additionally, any and all evidence that would point to her continuing as the series Final Girl is eliminated within the first ten minutes of the film, while Laurie is on the operating table. Briefel explains that menstruation and the lack of bodily control it represents, often indicates the inception or recognition of female monstrousness (21). However, Laurie Strode is 17 and well past the point of menarche at the start of Halloween II. Inserting a scene about menstruation is unnecessary; the fact that Laurie is spread out flat on a table, covered in blood, being completely reconstituted by surgeons is enough to represent the horror of losing agency and bodily control, thereby passively succumbing to monstrousness (22). Thus her scene in the operating room stands in as a metaphor for menstruation, and signifies that she is ripe for monsterhood.
In this film, we are immediately introduced to Laurie as a highly disturbed young woman who has been through a deeply traumatic experience. Laurie’s obvious descent into monsterhood becomes apparent through a consideration of the criteria for Final Girls. Generally whomever is cast and written into the part of the Final Girl is only distinguishable from her fellow female cast mates because she differs from them in terms of behavior. This is not to say the Final Girl is any more attractive, intellectual, or inventive than her peers– however, she is generally figured as a “smart girl” by exercising a paranoid suspicion of strangers, dutifully performing what is requested of her, and resisting the urge to indulge in sexual fantasy (Christenson, 29). As stated previously, the Final Girl is she who follows established patriarchal guidelines most closely. Laurie Strode certainly met that criteria in Halloween, but in Zombie’s second film, she has devolved into the Final Girl’s polar opposite. To clearly illustrate Zombie’s abrupt resistance to Clover’s vision of the Final Girl, it is essential to look at the way Laurie Strode functions as a mirror for Michael Myers. If Laurie is figured as heroic in Halloween, it would seem that in the sequel, heroism doesn’t merit psychological reward. Zombie has taken great care to ensure that the cards are stacked against Laurie in terms of returning to an emotionally stable life. In the director commentary Zombie explains, “This girls’ been through hell. Whether she is likable or not is irrelevant to me. This way, it plays much more real. She’s sinking even deeper and losing a complete grip on reality.”
Laurie’s loss of sanity likens her to Michael Myers, and increases in power and gravity throughout the film. Firstly, a year after the events of the first Halloween, Laurie looks nothing like the previous incarnation of herself. Where her hair was once short and well kept, in this film she has long greasy dreadlocks. In the first film, she wore makeup, glasses, and dressed stylishly. In the sequel, she is bare faced, scarred, scowling and generally avoids wearing glasses. Additionally, she dresses in a grungy style- most of her clothing is mismatched and shabby. Her bedroom features graffiti and Alice Cooper posters, as well as a large Charles Manson mural. She shares a bathroom with Annie, and her side features tons of profanity in the form of graffiti. On a visual level, we can see how deeply Laurie’s trauma has affected her. Interestingly, in her shift toward the monstrous and away from the characteristics that would distinguish her as Final Girl, Zombie has established Laurie as more human than a traditional Final Girl. Here, in monster form, she is more accessible than other Final Girls who continue on with their lives as if nothing deeply disturbing has befallen them.
On a narrative level, Laurie’s point of view offers a look into her nightmares and delusions. The two begin as exclusive events, but eventually the Michael Myers themed nightmares Laurie has experienced bleed into her waking life as the story goes on. When the nightmares emerge during Laurie’s waking life, she encounters the spectral images of young Michael and Deborah the ghost– effectively demonstrating that Laurie is becoming like Michael: like him, we understand she is not living-not dead, and therefore interstitial. These nightmares are like the bread crumbs a viewer might follow to understand that the white horse of rage and destruction that exists inside of Laurie is unmanageable and coming to permeate the surface.
When the nightmares exist exclusively within Laurie’s consciousness, we recognize that she is no danger to anyone but herself. However, as the narrative progresses and Laurie fails to manage her pain, she starts enacting the nightmare scenarios in her waking life. We know her monstrousness is surfacing, and because she is a female monster, and unable to control or manage the pain that empowers her, we know that her narrative expulsion is impending (Briefel 22). Laurie’s total descent into monstrousness is achieved when Annie Brackett, ostensibly this film’s only living example of a potential Final Girl, is murdered.
If, as stated previously, female victims in the slasher film are murdered post-coitally, that is not the case in Halloween II. Female victims in Zombie’s particular vision of Haddonfield only expire because they stand in the way of Michael’s ability to isolate Laurie. The most significant female victim of this story, Annie Brackett, is a carry-over from Zombie’s first Halloween. During coitus with her boyfriend, Annie was attacked by Michael and nearly killed. In Halloween II, Annie and Laurie live together with Sheriff Brackett. Both girls have scarred faces and obviously they share a kind of post traumatic stress. However, Annie is far more like the Final Girl to this movie than Laurie Strode is, primarily because Annie’s entire role is to demonstrate that she has learned, via the events of the first film, how to be more like a patriarchal vision of the ideal woman.
Annie’s character in the first film was sexually interested, very feminine in her gender presentation, and clearly reckless. While she loved Laurie, her attitude toward her was certainly not nurturing in any respect. In Halloween II, the traumatic events of the first film seem to have changed her character to reflect a caution about life she did not previously possess. Now, she lives with her father. She is a dutiful daughter who cooks, cleans, and cares for him. Also, her behavior toward Laurie is very nurturing and motherly. Essentially, she has come to embody the favored good-girl qualities the traditional slasher bestows only on its Final Girls. In this film she is stable, thoughtful, smart, kind, and caring. She is modest and considerate. When Laurie goes out drinking and partying on Halloween night, Annie opts to stay inside by herself, cooking and later preparing to call it an early night. By the logic of the traditional slasher, Annie should survive this movie. She has earned the right to survive by transcending her wild, socially unapproved feminine style and behavior. When Laurie began transforming into a monster and pursuing potentially harmful activities (drinking, partying, etc) Annie definitely stood in as a contender for the role of the film’s Final Girl. However, in order to critique the slasher, Zombie opts to let Michael kill Annie Brackett. Her death is necessary to Zombie’s critique for several reasons.
As stated previously, Zombie’s decision to fundamentally alter Laurie suggest that traditional Final Girls aren’t human, or realistic depictions of humanity. Their female bodies have been regulated and their behaviors changed to represent an ideal model for the ramifications of patriarchal acculturation. It seems that in transforming Annie’s character into a “good-girl” or Final Girl in Halloween II, Zombie is commenting on the fact that her original spirit and unique self has been punished into submission by the events of the first film. Essentially, to let Annie in this Final Girl role live, is to reward her for becoming a slave to patriarchal values, to applaud her for “learning a lesson”–when in reality, Michael Myers initially attacked Annie for exercising her basic human rights and demonstrating her agency. Allowing Annie to become the Final Girl would imply that Annie is apologizing for her own victimization, and atoning for the “sin” of her feminine gender representation in the first film.
By allowing Michael Myers to kill Annie in Halloween II, Zombie is communicating that gender performance and adherence to patriarchal codes of conduct cannot save her, nor can it save female spectators of the slasher genre. He establishes that monstrousness, as exhibited via Michael Myers, is linked to the psyche of the murderer himself; a claim reinforced by the fact that interstitial Michael communicates freely with his dead Mother and his childhood self. Thus what Annie does with herself and her body are irrelevant to the psyche of a monster like Michael Myers. To allow her to live on in this renewed, Final Girl state, would be to posit female spectators can control their potential victimization if only they were more appropriately masculine in their gender presentation. This choice communicates that Zombie understands the traditional slasher’s implication, that women should force themselves to be more like inhuman, unfeeling Final Girls, is an example of oppression.
Annie’s death also operates as a severance of the final thread that connects Laurie to her sense of humanity. When Laurie discovers Annie lying in the bathroom, slashed to death, the entire scene is a blood bath. In her final moments with Annie, Laurie becomes drenched in Annie’s blood. Earlier we addressed the poignancy of menstruation in establishing a female monsters (Briefel 24). While Laurie’s operating table scene serves to prime us for her Frankenstein-esque monstrous transition, Annie’s blood bath is the final menstruation metaphor that signals Laurie’s fully crossing over the threshold into monstrousness. This is indicated by Michael Myers sharing the screen with Laurie directly for the first time in the film, during this scene. When he begins to break down the bathroom door, Laurie, doused in Annie’s blood, flees the scene. It is not insignificant that she is covered in blood, running across a moonlit field – the atmosphere of the scene itself points to its representation of menstruation.
The story’s conclusion reveals the slasher’s status as a harmful text, by making the monstrousness of Laurie explicitly clear. Michael finally catches up to Laurie and takes her to a shack in a field, where both characters simultaneously experience the presence of both Deborah and Young Michael. Again, this is an indication that like Michael, Laurie has become interstitial: she is experiencing the undeniable presence of ghosts. Young Michael holds Laurie down by her arms while Michael himself looks on, patiently. Dr. Samuel Loomis bursts into the shack, presumably to rescue Laurie. However, this scene confirms Laurie’s monstrousness: Dr. Loomis tells her, “Laurie. Get up. It’s time to go.” To which she responds, “I can’t, he’s holding me down!” in reference to the ghost of Young Michael. She is physically experiencing the gravity of her transition.
In a fit of rage, Michael Myers removes his coveted mask and speaks for the first time in 20 years. He grabs Loomis and they burst through the wall outside of the shack. Michael stabs him to death. Moments later, a firing squad of police officers shoots Michael to death. When he dies, the spectral version of Young Michael lays down, dead beside him. However, when Laurie slowly emerges from the shack, the camera is in her point of view. She has a wry smile on her face, much like the smile Michael had as a child, prior to making a kill. She slowly approaches Michael’s dead body and removes the knife from his grasp, and encroaches upon the lifeless body of Dr. Loomis. She moves in a trancelike way, and the implication is that she is prepared to stab him. Before she can, she is shot multiple times by a trigger-happy police officer. In her discussion of how female monsters exert violence, Aviva Briefel explains that female monsters generally kill or exert violence on themselves because they cannot control their impulses and therefore understand the threat they present and strive to eliminate themselves (22). The eerie calm expressed by Laurie as she wields a knife before an enormous crowd of gun-toting police officers indicates that she possesses an awareness of the danger she is in. In this way, we might read Laurie’s expulsion from the narrative as an act of self-destruction. The choice to wield a knife and finish Michael Myer’s slaughter of Dr. Loomis, after seeing him shot and killed, implies Laurie knew she was putting herself at risk, and perhaps welcoming the gunfire that would destroy her, and her unmanageable monstrousness.
Zombie states that the closing moments of the film are meant to represent Laurie Strode’s last conscious visions before her death. After she is shot down, the scene cuts to a psychiatric ward. Laurie sits on a bed, wearing the same disturbed expression so familiar to young Michael in Halloween. From a distance, the pre-Oedipal mother, the ghost of Deborah Myers. She leads a white horse. This marks the first and only time in the film Laurie witnesses the white horse. If Deborah Myers, as the pre-Oedipal mother represents a return to purity, and as stated earlier the white horse signifies purity, then we are to read this scene as confirmation of Laurie’s death as a purification rite. Because she has been eliminated, her monstrousness has been eliminated, and the symbolic order is as it should be.
The monster film is meant to reinforce a distance or boundary between the audience and the film’s diagesis; it exists to shore up the boundary between what is pure and impure. What does it mean, then, when a director remakes or reinvents a film that has is for all intents and purposes coded as a slasher film, but is actually structured to reflect the conventions and values of the monster film? Because the final scene is so symbolic, it would appear that Zombie’s Halloween II has figured the slasher as monstrous. The slasher and its patriarchal values, its puritanical ideology, is a monster to be killed. It is a tool that shames, oppresses, threatens, and harms female victims and imparts similar feelings on its female spectators. If this film was truly a slasher, and not just a monster film in disguise, then theoretically speaking the Final Girl should survive and carry this series into another sequel. Zombie has metaphorically destroyed the slasher by killing both the monsters, and the potential Final Girl. As it stands neither Killer, former Final girl, nor potential Final Girl have survived. The slasher is dead, and moreover, the series is dead because it cannot exist without its Final Girl. Essentially, Rob Zombie has dismantled the master’s house with its own tools.
Works Cited
Briefel, Aviva. “Monster Pains: Masochism, Menstruation and Identification in the Horror Film.” Film Quarterly 58.3 (2005) 16-27. Web. 2 May 2012
Carroll, Noel. “The Nature of Horror.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Critcism 46.1 (Autumn, 1987): 51-59 Web. 5 May 2012
Christenson, Kyle “The Final Girl versus Wes Craven’s A New Nightmare on Elm Street: Proposing a Stronger Model of Feminism in Slasher Horror Cinema.” Studies in Popular Culture 34.1 (2011): 24-39. Web. 12 April. 2012
Clover, Carol J. Men, Women and Chainsaws: Gender in the Modern Horror Film. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1992. Print.
Creed, Barbara. “Horror and the Monstrous Feminine.” (35-63) Web. 3 March 2012
“Director’s Commentary” Prod. Rob Zombie. Halloween II: The Director’s Cut. Dir. Rob Zombie. Dimension, 2009. DVD.
Halloween. Dir. Rob Zombie. Perf Tyler Mane, Scout Taylor-Compton, Brad Douriff and Sheri Moon Zombie. Dimension, 2007. DVD
Halloween II: Director’s Cut. Dir. Rob Zombie. Perf Tyler Mane, Scout Taylor-Compton, Brad Douriff, Sheri Moon Zombie and Danielle Harris. Dimension. 2009. DVD.
This Essay: My Director’s Cut… Deleted Scenes Below:
THE OUTLINE:
A) Rob Zombie made Michael myers a Literal Monster. b) Rob Zombie took the Final Girl, Laurie, SeriouSLY: insead of being a stupid bro dude who is just like ‘PEOPLE DIED WHO CARES” she turns into a monster, so she can’t be the Final Girl, because the final girl is a LIE that priveleges partriarchal coping mechanisms
c) The film can’t be a slasher because there’s no Final Girl. Annie Brackett COULD be the final girl, but Rob Zombie kills her. He also kills Michael and Laurie. Everyone dies.
D) Monster movies exist to shore up what is considered socially pure and acceptable. By destroying the monsters in the story, you keep society safe
E) Rob Zombie took slasher concepts, revised them to make a MONSTER movie, and killing everyone in the slasher is saying: THE SLASHER IS IMPURE CRAZY BULLSHIT
F) The slasher is a tool of oppression, so Rob Zombie used monster-movie tropes to KILL IT AND ERADICATE (in his own small, ineffectual way) the social ills and strange fucketry of the slasher. The slasher is the real monster.
G) This all comes down to how much Rob Zombie loves women and says “Girls, if a dude is going to kill you, it doesn’t matter what you look like or how you behave. You don’t have to be a masculine girl to avoid this, and being a girly girl doesn’t make you susceptible to murder, so the patriarchal values of the slasher are just that: bullshit. Don’t listen to them. Monsters are monsters and it doesn’t matter what you do: if someone wants to kill you, its about them, not you”