Making and Remaking Horror in the 1970s and 2000s

by David Roche

In Making and Remaking Horror in the 1970s and 2000s author David Roche takes up the assumption shared by many fans and scholars that original horror movies are more "disturbing," and thus better than the remakes. He assesses the qualities of movies, old and recast, according to criteria that include subtext, originality, and cohesion. With a methodology that combines a formalist and cultural studies approach, Roche sifts aspects of the American horror movie that have been widely addressed (class, the patriarchal family, gender, and the opposition between terror and horror) and those that have been somewhat neglected (race, the Gothic, style, and verisimilitude). Containing seventy-eight black and white illustrations, the book is grounded in a close comparative analysis of the politics and aesthetics of four of the most significant independent American horror movies of the 1970s--The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, The Hills Have Eyes, Dawn of the Dead, and Halloween--and their twenty-first-century remakes.

To what extent can the politics of these films be described as "disturbing" insomuch as they promote subversive subtexts that undermine essentialist perspectives? Do the politics of the film lie on the surface or are they wedded to the film's aesthetics? Early in the book, Roche explores historical contexts, aspects of identity (race, ethnicity, and class), and the structuring role played by the motif of the American nuclear family. He then asks to what extent these films disrupt genre expectations and attempt to provoke emotions of dread, terror, and horror through their representations of the monstrous and the formal strategies employed? In this inquiry, he examines definitions of the genre and its metafictional nature. Roche ends with a meditation on the extent to which the technical limitations of the horror films of the 1970s actually contribute to this "disturbing" quality. Moving far beyond the genre itself, Making and Remaking Horror studies the redux as a form of adaptation and enables a more complete discussion of the evolution of horror in contemporary American cinema.

Genres: Horror, Nonfiction

344 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2014

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.

David Roche is Professor of film studies in Montpellier, France. He is author of Quentin Tarantino: Poetics and Politics of Cinematic Metafiction and Making and Remaking Horror in the 1970s and 2000s: Why Don't They Do It Like They Used To?. He is editor (with Cristelle Maury) of Women Who Kill: Gender and Sexuality in Film and Series of the Post-Feminist Era.

Reviews

[Kelly Hager · Rating 3 out of 5]

First a caveat: I was expecting a fun discussion of horror movies, and instead this read like a PhD thesis. And this is published by a university press, so...clearly I'm an idiot. :)

But it's always fun for me to read about horror movies and this gave me a lot to think about.

He chose to focus on originals from the 1970s and remakes from 2000s, which means that many film franchises aren't qualified (Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street premiered in the 1980s). He chose to focus on the originals and remakes of Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Dawn of the Dead, Halloween and The Hills Have Eyes. Of those, I'm most familiar with the remakes of TCM and DotD and the original of Halloween.

He discusses the movies in terms of economics, gender, race and class differences and puts them in context of their respective eras.

I'd never really considered a lot of what he pointed out (especially TCM in terms of economics) and it was interesting and fun to think about these horror movies on a deeper level.

I'm not recommending this book to many people, mainly because most of my friends aren't huge on horror movies anyway, and especially would not be interested in majorly in-depth discussions of them. But if this sounds interesting to you, absolutely read it. I had a fantastic time. :)

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I received an electronic advanced reading copy of this from the publisher via NetGalley.

As a big fan of horror movies and someone that agrees with the sentiment that the originals made in the 1970s were more disturbing (and simply put 'better') than the remakes of the 2000s, I happily requested a chance to read this. Seeing the publisher is an academic press I figured it would have an academic tone, but didn't quite expect the degree to which this is an academic treatment. Its main weakness in terms of appeal is thus that it has portions that are incredibly detailed and dry. Nonetheless, for what it sets out to accomplish, this study does a fine job and will have appeal to certain audiences, particularly certain sections.

The opening chapter serves as an introductory overview or summary to the work as a whole, covering the 'question' of the study, the approach to address it, and a brief summary of the author's conclusions. The next chapters then contain analysis of the films that are considered in their broad purposes and interpretations. These are the chapters that are going to be of the most interest to an average horror movie buff. Even if you have seen all the originals and the remakes several times over, I suspect that there will still be interesting insights raised, particularly to interpretations of aspects of the films, that you may not have considered before.

Having already viewed the films helps. I've seen them all save for the Dawn of the Dead films (though I have seen the original "Night of the Living Dead" which comes up in discussion as well). I found myself skipping even the general analyses of the Romero film and its remake then, both because references were unfamiliar to me and I didn't want some aspects of the story 'spoiled'. I've seen "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" however, countless times, and appreciated its discussions greatly. To be fair, many of the analyses of this section are not Roche's per se, but summaries and responses to a previous academic study on the topic he is taking up here.

The latter part of the book is taken up with chapters that go into increasing detail into the construction aspects of each film (most interesting to me discussion of the film scores), eventually becoming a literal shot-by-shot summary comparison and analysis between the films. These sections, being less about the plot as much as the process of making the horror films, would be of tremendous interest to anyone wanting to create a work of 'horror'. Even discussing what the term 'horror' means and how that compares to 'terror' or other concepts, these chapters are noteworthy of interest not just to those wanting to film horror, but even to those who strive to write a work of horror or suspense.

So, although academic, there is plenty here for a general audience, particularly if reading selective sections. For the horror fan, it may even re-inspire you to watch some titles, as it did for me. Out of all the remakes, Roche appears to look most favorably on Rob Zombie's Halloween. I recall thinking it had the strongest voice, but was more "Rob Zombie" than "Halloween", truly his take on it, which had led me to really dislike the movie. With time and consideration of Roche's book I think it is the one film worth reconsidering now with time of having some merit despite being a less 'disturbing' remake.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was fascinated when I found out about the subject matter of this book. The horror movies of the seventies were a staple of my formative years and fueled the passion for horror that I hold so dear. The slew of remakes of seventies and eighties horror have often caused me to groan. The book is certainly not a shallow attack on remakes but a legitimate examination. David Roche looks at the similarities and differences in themes and wider meanings drawn from the films. Horror films are in many cases a reflection of the issues of the day, and although some problems remain from the seventies to today, others have changed what with societal changes and different audiences and all.

I should point out that this is an academic text, rather than one of the more casual horror movie non-fiction books you can pick up. It is heavily footnoted with reference to articles and critics’ discussions. For me, this made me seek out the original articles as I wanted to know more. It is incredibly in-depth. Themes that are key areas of the book include race, class, family, sexuality and gender. Whether a film is considered good or bad is a somewhat subjective discussion, so Roche used criteria to compare and contrast the original with the remake beyond that. The main question Roche is seeking to answer is: Are the movies of the seventies more disturbing than the remakes? The analysis is based on criteria including economic success, technique, what the films tell us about about the period or genre, emotion (fear), and originality.

Although other films that were remade in the 2000s are given mention in the book, the focus is on The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974 & 2003), The Hills Have Eyes (1977 & 2006), Dawn of the Dead (1978 & 2004), and Halloween (1978 & 2007). There is much to discover about these titles with the viewpoints of a variety of critics along with quotes from creators and producers of the films. Personally, I found the discussion of The Hills Have Eyes the most interesting, although I’ll admit that Halloween is my favorite of the films he talks about.

Thanks to this book, I have a greater appreciation of the meanings and subtexts of the films, including the remakes. It brought up aspects of the films I’d never picked up on despite many viewings of the originals. I don’t agree with every conclusion Roche reaches but that’s ok; that’s the beauty of discussing horror films. I’m now going to re-watch the originals and the remakes and look at them in a new light. It’s not light reading; it’s for students and dedicated fans of the genre. Are the originals more disturbing than the remakes? Most horror fans are quick to dismiss the remakes. That’s up to you, but reading this thought-provoking book will make you consider it more carefully.

[Richard Cosgrove · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have to admit I’m in two minds about this book. The premise is one that suits the horror fan in me right down to the ground, namely looking at (primarily) four classic horror movies from the 1970s and their 2000s remakes. The movies covered are The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Halloween, The Hills Have Eyes and Dawn of the Dead, three of which I adore both the originals and remakes, with only Rob Zombie’s Halloween reboot letting the side down as far as I’m concerned.

David Roche has taken an in depth look at various themes that permeate all of the movies and broken them down to their most basic components, leaving no intellectual stone untouched. However, this is where I have mixed feelings about the book, as while all of this dissection and discussion is undeniably thorough, it’s also very dry and business like where I had been hoping for a lighter and more conversational look at the movies.

This isn’t Mr Roche’s fault, though, as to be fair the book is published by a university press. That said, it did make me feel as though I was studying the text rather than deriving pleasure from it, and as a result I found it hard going to read for pleasure, but utterly fascinating from an academic point of view.

If you go into this text forewarned and prepared for the desert dry prose and clinical discussion, then David Roche will knock your socks off with the arguments and information in the book, but if you want a light, entertaining look at the subject then this may not be the book for you (as it wasn’t really for me).

Hence, the four stars is in respect of the depth of knowledge of the subject, but not for the enjoyment factor.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is exactly what I have been starving for for years. An brilliant take on, not just the horror genre, and its perceived problems over the decades, but also film as an intellectual style that begs to be analyzed deeply. What one will get out of reading this is a new, and sometimes audacious, way of approaching horror films, past and new. Taking the originals and remakes of Dawn of the Dead, Halloween, The Hills Have Eyes, and Texas Chain Saw Massacre and breaking them down to their core components in hopes to come to some kind of conclusion for the adage, "They don't make Horror films like they used to."
One does not have to agree with all the points that Mr. Roche is making, one does not have to have a penchant for the horror genre, to achieve an intellectual growth from this book. It is a literary and intellectual look at a genre of film that has been treated as the ugly step-child of cinema for far too long. What this book does is give the reader permission to take that horror film they love (or hate) as something that deserves a closer inspection; Horror films, B-movies, popcorn action films, et al, deserve the same critical viewer as any Academy Award winning film. The same rules apply.
Using Text, Context, Subtext, and intent, Mr. Roche digs deep inside each film in hopes to find the reason why one film was more "disturbing" than another. In other words, what makes a better horror film.
A smart read, that changed my views on some of the films entirely.

Highly recommended.

James C.

[Julie Dawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

In Making and Remaking Horror in the 1970s and 2000s author David Roche takes an academic look at four of the genre’s arguably most famous movies and their subsequent remakes; The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, The Hills Have Eyes, Dawn of the Dead, and Halloween. Roche seeks to answer the question of not the originals are better than the remakes, but why do both fans and critics consistently believe this to be true.

Roche looks at not just the technical aspects of the films themselves, but the cultural context in which the originals and remakes were created. Instead of examining each film in a void, he looks at how cultural shifts in race, ethnicity, gender issues, the nuclear family, and other influences shape our perception of films in both the time period they were first released and the nostalgic quality of rewatching them decades later.

Though at times dry and heavy with academic jargon, horror aficionados will find things to love (and argue over) in the book. The black and white illustrations alone make this a great coffee table book or gift for the horror or movie buff in your life.

[Jenny · Rating 2 out of 5]

I like horror movies and all, but boy was this an in-depth look at horror movies.

The author took a couple classic horror movies from the 1970's and compared them to the remakes of the 2000's. That sounds like an interesting enough idea, but this book was just way too dry to be enjoyable. I couldn't bring myself to get into this book because it was too analytical and too dry.

The author writes as if this is his PhD thesis (I noticed that another reviewer mentioned that and I think it fits perfectly!). This definitely doesn't read like a nonfiction book about horror movies, the author is just way too analytical and dull.

I'm a fan of horror movies, especially the classics, so I can't say that this book was a total waste of time. I found the topic to be interesting but I just can't say that it's worth it to read this book unless you are a die-hard fan of classic horror movies and their contemporary remakes.

I received this book for review purposes via NetGalley.

[Rabbit {Paint me like one of your 19th century gothic heroines!} · Rating 4 out of 5]

Disclaimer: This ARC was given to me for free in exchange for an honest review from Netgalley.

If you are expecting easy reading about horror films and pop culture do not read this book. It is an academic book that reads like a dissertation.

That out of the way, I really liked this. It covers the cultural and subcultural times of the era when the originals and also of the remakes. It states that the remakes are not necessarily bad, but they reflect the change of the times between the two decades. That said, some of the horror films discussed (a la the remakes) failed with their execution of the era that they were made, and the homage to the earlier film. It some cases the originals were not as good as the remakes, maybe simply because of budget, the acting, or the effects.

[Kai Charles(Fiction State Of Mind) · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've asked myself the question in the title of this book a lot. As a horror fan since the late 80's I've seen the genre rise and fall dramatically .Films like the first Friday The 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street. And Night of The Living Dead, are very different from the slash fests of today.

David Roche knows his stuff and is able to breakdown the hidden meanings in many films as well as exploring why he feels Horror films have changed over the years.

[SquidXIII]

Great Book! Awesome text for philosophers of horror! Check out my full review here: http://interrogatingideologywithachai...