The Babadook: who knew pop-up books could be so terrifying?

It’s Halloween! Yay! In honor of the best holiday ever, I checked out DEDfest, my town’s horror/sci-fi/cult film festival a few days ago. I saw some pretty wicked films (whose reviews will be posted later), but my favourite was saved for last. Closing the festival was the Aussie horror film The Babadook. I had anticipated this film for a while now, not only because it looked genuinely terrifying, but because it’s directed and written by a woman. Female directors are vastly underrepresented, especially in the horror genre, but can do amazing things when given the right tools. It also featured a mother-son dynamic, which piqued my interest. On a side note, it was totally wonderful to see the theater packed to the rafters. It’s a small local theater that plays a ton of wonderful, old movies, and I get super sad whenever I go there and it’s nearly empty. Not that night! Anyways, I digress…

Amelia, left alone after the death of her husband, is falling apart. She’s dealing with crippling grief, a demanding job, and a child, Samuel, whom she can’t seem to control. Essentially, she’s barely keeping it together. To top it all off, Samuel is terrified of the monsters he thinks are out to get him. One night, during a routine bedtime story session, Samuel discovers a large red book called The Babadook sitting on his shelf. It’s in a word, it’s in a look, you can’t get rid of the Babadook, it reads. Afterwards, Amelia begins to think someone, or something is following her.

It’s legitimately the most unsettling popup book ever, and gets scarier as the movie progresses.

Holy shit. I really liked this one. I love scary movies, and like many of you, I was feeling a little let down by the genre in recent years. The Babadook is a wonderfully creepy little film that pays attention to the characters and their emotions, giving us interesting people to root for. Essie Davis, as Amelia, delivers a knockout performance. Director Jennifer Kent gives us the lesser-seen side of motherhood, one that is plagued with frustration, disappointment, and not a lot of sleep. I’m not a mother, but I imagine it’s not all sunshine and rainbows and wonderful feelings of nurturing all of the time. Kids can be little demons. Mad props to Noah Wiseman, as her son Samuel. As far as child actors go, he did pretty well. The Babadook switches back and forth between Amelia and Samuel dealing with unseen (and eventually very real) forces, and Kent keeps us on our toes by giving us dual perspectives

Kent really places us in Amelia’s shoes. We feel her stress, her sleep deprivation, and her fear. The Babadook works so well because it combines all of the best elements of the horror genre: it’s psychological, but we get some genuine terror from the things that go bump in the night. It also doesn’t give us too much of the monster – we see just enough to freak us out. Refreshingly, there’s not a lot of jump scares and the standard horror movie score of ominous sounds and screeching violins is mostly absent. Whether or not this is a movie about psychosis or the boogeyman is up to you, but half the thrill is trying to figure that out.

The Babadook has been cursed with poor distribution, so if you happen to have a showing near you, I highly recommend checking it out. It is definitely one that I plan on revisiting in the near future. Don’t be surprised if you develop a fear of pop-up books afterwards.

The Thing: not even 32 years can make this less gross.

As a horror movie lover, I’m ashamed to admit that up until a few days ago, I had never seen John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982). I knew there was a remake (or is it a prequel? Or a sequel?) with Mary Elizabeth Winstead. I knew that Kurt Russel was in it. And I also knew that it was a benchmark film in horror movie history. I can safely say that, despite over 30 years since its inception, The Thing has retained its ability to make you anxious, squeamish, and – I’ll say it – a little terrified.

When it was released in 1982, The Thing wasn’t exactly a hit. It received mixed reviews from critics and audience members, and generated mediocre figures at the box office. A few critics labeled it too disgusting and too bleak. I’ll admit – they’re not wrong. It is a depressing movie. It’s clear early on that there are minimal chances of survival for the group, and it ends with an even slimmer chance of rescue. Despite the rough start, The Thing has secured itself as horror royalty.

What makes a movie truly scary? For me, it’s not always blood or serial killers or ghosts or monsters or creepy children. It’s believing that what I’m seeing is plausible. Don’t get me wrong, a suspension of disbelief in horror films is almost a necessity. I’m not saying that I believe there are aliens that have been buried in ice ready to steal my identity (in the most gruesome way possible). It’s all about the reactions of the characters. I can’t count the number of times a blonde co-ed has gone into the basement, while the theater is screaming “do NOT go into the basement!” Those moments can be make-or-break for a scary movie. But in a movie like The Thing, there are very few moments when someone makes a really stupid choice. The reactions are either smart and proactive, or a method of self-preservation. Yet that damn Thing keeps picking them off. As a viewer, you want to be able to place yourself in the same situation. The Thing pulls that off beautifully. The distrust each man has in everyone else is also a strong theme for horror. Carpenter successfully confuses us in who is infected by the dog and who is still human throughout the film. However, by doing that, Carpenter sacrifices emotional connections the audience potentially could have had with the characters. They’re not exactly likeable – in fact, most of them are dicks. Carpenter doesn’t waste time on emotional manipulation with unnecessary back stories; he won’t trick us into liking these men. Unfortunately, level-headedness is where the characters max out. It seems that Carpenter was too focused on atmosphere and visuals, and forget to create interesting, diverse scientists. Their characterization doesn’t go deeper than a stereotypical face value. Maybe it’s because he doesn’t care about making them interesting, he just wants to get things movin’. Luckily, we’re too busy grimacing to really care.

What the movie is best known for is its grotesque special effects. I thought it couldn’t get much grosser than The Fly, but watching a decapitated head pull itself with a tongue-like appendage across the floor is something I won’t soon forget. It’s impressive for an 80s movie to be remembered favorably for its special effects and The Thing has contributed some famous scenes to horror movie history. The beauty of The Thing is that it doesn’t try to win us over. It wants to be unpleasant. It wants to gross you out. And it succeeds pretty damn well.

Is The Thing on your list of best horror movies? Or is just a gross-out film lacking in substance? Let me know in the comments!