Creating A Monster

For decades the fictional monsters of horror have been both scaring and entertaining us. Throughout cinematic history audiences have found themselves inexplicably drawn to the images of death and destruction at the hands of unspeakable evil, brought to them as they sit collectively huddled in the dark. With a power to endure that is almost as incredible as the creations themselves, classics of the genre such as Count Dracula and Frankenstein's monster have found themselves surviving and adapting to continually entertain and thrill new generations of audiences. While a fresh and ever growing collection of diverse creatures join the task to terrify the willing viewer. But are these creations simply meaningless fun or do these conceptions reveal the deep rooted fears of the age that creates them? And is there more to creating a successful monster than simply big teeth, claws, and a passion for lurking in dark corners?

The modern horror that we are all so familiar with has its roots in 19th century industrial Britain, in the form of three novels. The first of this trinity is Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, bringing us the doctor who creates a monster. The second is Bram Stoker's Dracula, about the myth of the living dead which stalks the night time world feeding on those who cross its path. While the third is Robert Louis Stevenson's Dr Jeckell and Mr Hyde, which exposed the monster within and the release of the repressed elements in all of us. It is from these Gothic horrors first came the principle narratives which we have been retelling through film and literature ever since.

The first of these three tales to examine is that of Frankenstein, The Modern Prometheus. This engaging novel by Mary Shelly was created during a time that was fascinated with the development of new technologies. The rapidly increasing knowledge of electricity, anatomy and medical science provided the basis for the legend of the genius gone mad. The doctor who uses his abilities to challenge death itself with a fanatical lust to play God showed us the dangers of disturbing nature. While playing on the viewer's empathy of the grief that loss can cause and their own harboured wish that the end is reversible. The conclusion of the tale is that there is a price for trying to reverse the most basic truth, that what lives dies, and that death cannot be dictated to.

The creation was a result of what is considered to be one of the most heinous and disrespectful crimes possible, that of grave robbing. Gruesome imagery coupled with other visual elements such as the frequent use of nature to create atmosphere succeed in creating a world fit for such a novel monster. The bleak, glacial fields of the Alps and the mists of the Arctic serve to indicate the isolation of the two protagonists. Frankenstein and his creation are forced to live in such social isolation as both the original text skilfully depicts and film interpretations attempt to reflect. Although there had been film versions already created previously it is Universal's 1931 film that is generally considered the true beginning of the classic interpretation of the novel. The director, James Whale, drew much of his inspiration for the look of the film from German Expressionism. This is evident in much of the film, with its omnipresent shadows and forced perspective and even the monster itself. Early scenes depicting his confusion about what and who he is, close-ups of his tormented face and outstretched hands, particularly in the famous scene with the little girl whom he inadvertently murders give him a tragic sorrow that is unique to this Universal monster. So after being taken through the gradual obsession of a mad man, while being shown a tragic tale of sorrow and grief at existence we are finally brought to the inevitable climax. The death of the creator as a result of his creation.

The second in this innovative trinity is Count Dracula. The now renowned character who was the creation of the now equally well-known Bram Stoker. Although the basic legend had existed in many forms for centuries it was this novel which gave us the modern version that we now all know. Dracula is the aristocratic Count from Transylvania who infiltrates English society to suck the blood of his hapless victims. It is the myth of this parasitic being who lives on the blood of others, leaving nothing but a trail of death and destruction which captured the imagination so successfully.

He is from a dark, unknown corner of eastern Europe and carries with him forces of primitive, feudal darkness and tyranny into England, the modern country of enlightenment. But is eventually defeated by a group of educated middle class men, led by a man with superior knowledge of both science and Vampire lore. It is a true expression of the belief at the time that England was leading the way in new developments in science and technology. And the faith in the ability of these skills to triumph over the primitive forces from darker aspects that come from over seas. The Count also embodied the fear of the creature lurking in the dark that strikes with such insatiable intensity. That they must sleep in the earth from the graveyards of the Black Death, and will mercilessly play on their victims weaknesses are all details that add to the image of the evil blood sucking fiend. While carefully playing on the audiences own weakness to create the monster from their minds. The age when the novel came into being was one that had lived with the memory of horrors, from the disasters such as the Black Death to 'the year without summer'. To this generation these events occupied the same place in the back of the mind that events such as Hiroshima or the Cold War do to today's audiences.

It was with this aspect to the character that the first cinematic creation was to emerge in the form of Count Orlock in the horror classic Nosferatu (1922). It's director Murnau drew from a history that links Vampires to unexplained deaths and fuelled the concept of the 'un-dead' in Europe. The belief that rat-borne diseases were responsible for many of the plagues dominated scientific thinking. While relying heavily on the Vampire Lore established in Bram Stoker's novel the result was a creature un-like the handsome, dashing vampire that became the later interpretation. This character was more suited to its pitiful past and a man suffering from a curse rather than a flamboyant actor. Marnau brought us bat ears, nails like talons and fangs in the middle of his mouth like a rodent, which together fashioned a very different image to that of the vampire we now recognize. Yet again the presence of German Expressionism in the thinking behind the film is present. Murnau himself was a pioneering member of the movement and the dreamlike quality of his work is testament to his skill in this area. By intercutting negatives and using time warping camera techniques he transforms a simple forest road into a truly bizarre land of phantoms. The stark interiors of Count Orlock's castle that frames its owner with striking archways and hides a coffin shaped secret neatly at the bottom of a rickety, winding stairway is just one of the impressive locations that truly make this film.

The film also did not have to suffer from the clichés, spoofs and constant re-workings of the main story that later versions do. It is widely regarded as the template which subsequent films aspire to, while very few copies of the footage survived the wrath of Florence Stoker. Who, as a result of a copyright dispute over the film succeeded, with the assistance of the British Incorporated Society of Authors, in destroying the original negatives and most of the prints of Nosferatu. Luckily for us, vampires have a habit of coming back to life and several copies surfaced again after the death of Florence Stoker and were snapped up by Universal, along with the copyrights to Dracula and has enjoyed many re-releases ever since.

The final of the three is that of the struggle to discard that which we find undesirable. Dr Jeckell and Mr Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson is the tale of the doctor who creates a concoction which he hopes will eliminate his baser instincts that he finds so repelling. But in a cruel twist it instead splits him into two different individuals, the respectable Jeckell and criminally insane Hyde. Once successfully managed on film the gradual transformation of the moral and physical character of Dr Jeckell from the admirable gentleman and scholar to the ferocious Mr Hyde provided a visual achievement as well as a new experience for the viewing public.

The concept of the dopelganger is closely linked with the developments of psychology and later became highly influenced by new medical theories. These new theories on exactly what constitutes a person were being developed and the growing understanding that there is an unconscious side that is part of human. The acknowledgement that the parts of a person that may at first seem an undesirable weakness should not merely be discarded but instead be integrated with all the other aspects within us. This went hand in hand with the idea of pure evil hidden within a person that the horror film developed. So although during the first high popularity of the horror film the classic tale of Dr Jeckell's exploits was retold as often as the other two myths its progress took a different turn in its gradual evolution. While Count Dracula and Frankenstein carried on into fresh revivals the basic narrative of the conflicting personalities gradually became very embedded within the psychological horror.

But while America was defending the world against wave after wave of invading aliens, British audiences were witnessing the revitalisation of the traditional Gothic Horror. Between the late 50's and early 70's Hammer films remoulded the traditional tales to make them reflect a new style and vitality of a country emerging from the post war influences. These films began to rewrite the rules of the Universal horror films from previous decades. The first major difference was the use of colour. For the first time audiences were exposed to horror in Technicolor, and at last saw deep red blood against pale flesh. This lurid, visceral quality to the images was an encounter they were not used to. The other major change was sex. This rebellious nature while pushing censors newer more relaxed attitude created victims that became less repressed as a result of the Vampires bite. Forays into lesbian sex and the introduction of a more sexual element to the traditional figures led to a gradual increase in the power for the female roles. This steady increase in importance led to the first female predator on screen in the form of Countess Dracula.

Although Gothic novels were written mainly to evoke terror in their readers, they also served to show the dark side of human nature. They describe the nightmarish terrors that lie beneath the controlled and ordered surface of the conscious mind. And it was these authors careful sculpting of myths that became the building blocks for future creations. As the haunting tales of cold blooded murder radiate out of the screen it is all too often echoed in the world around us. The fear that the monster can be within those we know and love, that the psychopath can lurk behind a mask of normality and strike at any moment has resulted in an obsession with the psychopath that reaches back to the earliest days of horror. One of the best modern examples for the progression and gradual evolution of these myths is The Silence of the Lambs. This is one of the few horrors that incorporates elements of all three narratives as well as creating a monster that was both new and truly disturbing to the audiences that first viewed it. Firstly, the tradition of the horror films strong connection with the literary world was also maintained by this tale of murder, the chase and troubling eating habits. Secondly, the protagonist is a deranged genius with an exceptionally strange grip on an obsessive reality. A passion for human flesh and feeding on the innocent and finally the idea of the normal side to the personality that hides a darker more primitive influence all play parts in the creation of one of the most renowned monsters in modern horror, the character of Hannibal Lecter. The true embodiment of the Gothic horror.

There is more to this world of make believe fear, however, than just knowing what we collectively urge to suppress or control. The techniques of making these shadows become living breathing terror, which reaches out of the screen towards its both captive and captivated audience, is more than a question of showing us an image of our own making and saying be afraid, it's what you fear. Though as a genre the technical side of these films was barely even acknowledged for being worthy of discussion till the 1970's, from the earliest days painstaking effort has gone into scaring us, with no more than light and sound as the tools to create the myth.

The structure that has emerged in the horror film is a complex system of narrative techniques and plot developing details. Classic narration supports the story while the plot itself develops in a specific way. The onset of the plot as it introduces the threat, the discovery, as the characters begin to realise it's presence, the conformation of the problem and what must be done to survive it and finally the confrontation as the protagonist confronts the monster. The techniques behind these plots relies on creating the correct image for the viewer. The isolation of the monster and audience, later films take away that barrier. But one of the best tension creating devices is literally nothing, otherwise known as a Macguffin. A creation of Hitchcock, the Macguffin is simply a plot device or element that is important to catch the viewer's attention or drives the plot without actually having any real relevance. The role is important but the element itself is only usually important to the character and merely gives some vague explanation for their actions. A good example of this is the theft in 'Psycho'. It may drive Marion's actions but is fairly unimportant to the actual events that occur around it.

However a large amount of the effect the plot developing can have is achieved in the editing process. Intercutting is a popular technique that is used to great advantage within the genre, the ability to compare the events in one area with those of another allows the director to present contrasts between two separate events. Such as the wedding of Mira and Harker in Bram Stoker's Dracula, with the Count's attack on Lucy. Two events that could hardly be more different suddenly find themselves thrown together for the benefit of the audience in a comparison of good and evil. Fades and lap dissolves not only allow the passage of time but also a connection to be established between characters and events. While the enforced point of view for the viewer is a popular technique that allows the director to draw the spectator in with a privileged view of the action. And can make us identify and even sympathise with the character whose view we have temporarily usurped.

The mise-en-scene of the film is a careful balance of aspects such as framing, depth of field, lighting, and composition to be combined in the edit suite to create the desired feel of the film. From the opening shots of Vlad Tepe's battle against the Turks to a backdrop of a blood red sky in, Coppola's modern interpretation of the classic Dracula, followed by the subsequent impaled victims silhouetted against this crimson sky. The decision of exactly what goes where and when can have a dramatic effect on the way a scene is perceived by the viewer. An example of this is the infamous shower scene in "Psycho". The film that spawn a generation of inferior 'slasher' films is remembered by most for this scene. Up until this point in the film where the murder occurs we have no idea of what is about to unfold before us. Unlike modern horror films, the knife is never actually shown striking flesh. There are no wounds, and although there is blood it is only in restrained quantities. The film was shot in black and white because Hitchcock believed that the audience could not stand so much blood in colour. The equally important slashing chords of Bernard Herrmann's soundtrack act as a substitute to the more grisly sound effects that could have accompanied the scene. The closing shots of the scene are less graphic, but no less powerful. As the blood and water spirals down the plug in an anti-clockwise direction the camera closes in and as the shot cuts to an image of Marion's dead eye the expression reaches out to the helpless viewer. The scene also uses the effect that the corners of the screen can have on the atmosphere. Action and movement can be used to create tension, either by the covert movement of characters within the space to hide from the others on screen or to move the events to a different perspective. The gradual descent of Marion of the edge of our screen is a direct reflection of her connection lessening with the audience as she slowly dies, alone and desperate.

The sublime terror of the horror film lies in the unseen: the careful use of mise-en-scene to capture the part inside us that constantly yearns for the fantastic and for the dark mysterious quality of the fear in the back of your throat. The dream-like quality that the best of these films embody, and the reflected belief of Expressionism that art comes from the inner vision rather than the naturalistic depiction of reality, have a power to allow the totally implausible to become real and belief to be contentedly suspended. The atmosphere that is built with careful intercutting, superimposed images and imaginative art direction gives us scenes where people wait on sand dunes covered in crucifixes (Nosferatu) or where the desperation of the dying victim silently crying out not to die alone reaches out from the screen (Psycho) is where the magic behind making these creations really occurs. But even with this attention to detail from the psychological to the implied visual why have the monsters of horror retained the same power over their audience?

The simple truth behind the success of the horror film is that we like to be scared. We have always created monsters, and as a result a legion of fictional creations stand ready to strike fear into the hearts of those who seek them. As we constantly find ourselves drawn to these films it seems the distorting mirror that horror holds up to the world has an intoxicating effect on its audience. So that although we may not be able to decide on the reason we are compelled to watch, we cannot seem to stop looking. Creating a world so governed by rules, where the vampire is killed by sunlight, the gates of hell bolted firmly shut at the end of the ride and the main protagonists survive mostly unscathed from their ordeal we finally experience the control we yearn for, over fears which in the real world we cannot even hope to influence. And while the majority of fears which influences the form of the horror film only exist for the people that create them, these tales remain engaging to an audience. Therefore there must be a more basic fear at work, which we all crave to control that is hidden, but remains firmly embedded within all the monsters we create, which fascinates and draws us to it with a morbid curiosity. We willingly hand over control to film makers and put ourselves in their hands, all for the hope of that adrenaline rush when the monster arrives and the struggle begins. It is the reward of safe fear and the chance to face what remains the most simple and basic fear of all, and that which we can never control, death. It provides both a fear and a fascination, and although these films reflect the darker side of our nature they also reveal the will to live and triumph over the monster. So in the legendary words of the most enduring immortal;

"To die! To be really dead! That must be glorious!"
Count Dracula (Bela Lugosi) 1931

Bibliography:

*York Film Notes, Dracula
Edited by Peter Bunten

*A Pictorial History of Horror Movies
by Denis Gifford

*The Oxford Companion to Film
Edited by Liz-Anne Bawden

*The Cinema Book 2nd Edition
Edited by Pam Cook and Mieke Bernink

*Film an Integrated History of the Medium
by Robert Sklar

Filmography:

*Frankenstein, directed by James Whale

*Bram Stokers Dracula, directed by Francis Ford Coppola

*Psycho, directed by Alfred Hitchcock

*Dracula, directed by Tod Browning

*Nosferatu, directed by F.W. Murnau (only selected scenes)

*Silence of the Lambs, directed by Jonathan Demme

Additional Resources:

*Inventing Monsters
BBC Documentary

*The Hellbound Web Multimedia Hellraiser Gallery and Resource
www.rexer.com/hel/

*Frameset
www.graveyard.ndirect.co.uk

*Nosferatu. A Symphony of Horror
www.nosferatumovie.co

*Imdb Glossary
//us.imdb.com

*CULT MOVIE REVIEWS
www.cultmoviereview.com

*Dracula by Bram Stoker
//website.lineone.com

*Psycho Master Shot
www.primenet.com

*Bright Lights Film Journal Film noir and neo-noir
www.brightlightsfilm.com

*Film and Meaning
wwwmcc.murdoch.edu.au

*The Art and Science of Film and Motion Production
www.acmeimage.com

*Horror Films
www.filmsite.org/horrorfilms3.html

Articles:

*The Silence of the Lambs
by Robert Ebert

*Nosferatu
by Fred Thom

*Murder and Suspense; Hitchcock's Established Reputation
by Martin Grams Jr

*The Director; The Trouble with Alfred
by Stephen Rebello

*Nosferatu, A Symphony of Horror
by Carlos Garza

*Nosferatu
by Roger Ebert

*Murnau's Magic
by Robert Ebert

*Psycho
by Roger Ebert