Laughter
of the Living
- Peter Callstrom -
The
concept of reanimated corpses of people (that can turn you into one, too) is
one of the most shocking ideas to imagine, which is something that can be
almost directly linked to the fear brought on by the Frankenstein monster. This
is exactly the reason why zombies have remained so popular since George Romero
made them so, and it’s a particular interest of mine in the horror genre.
Trying to imagine this sort of thing coming to life would assuredly put me
rocking in the corner with my knees glued to my chest, but many film and
television characters seem to brush off such a thing. Though there is the
initial shock shown in the characters’ faces of the zombie revelation in George
Romero’s Dawn of the Dead (1978), primarily
with Roger and Peter, the rapid development of the zombie presence from fearful
to fun is a peculiar thing to witness.
When
Roger and Peter are in the midst of the apartment complex outbreak during the
SWAT raid, the audience sees Roger rush to a sink, as if he’s going to evacuate
the contents of his stomach. Soon after, him and Peter have to execute a room
full of feasting zombies, and they do so with great looks of dread. Francine
and Stephen (Flyboy) have their early moments, too, but when the group reaches
the mall, all dread seems to exit the mall doors as they make their way in.
Sure,
the group seems despondent upon their isolation in the supply room, and their
discussion over the plan to make their way through the many zombies in the mall
to gather other things they can use among the many stores sounds serious
enough, but as soon as they reach their first success and Roger and Peter are
in the safety of a sealed store, the group seems to become more comfortable
than they seemed to be surrounded by larger groups of living people. This
effect can be assisted in explanation through Steven Shaviro’s “Contagious
Allegories” in the passage discussed in class, “The zombies do not…stand for a
threat to social order from without. Rather, they resonate with, and refigure,
the very processes that produce and enforce social order. That is to say, they
do not mirror or represent social forces; they are directly animated and
possessed…they are also mimetic figures,” (138). With this, I see the zombies
serving to turn people into figures not far from zombies, which is emphasized
by the human-zombie home-mall dynamic. The people chase zombies out for
conveniences and security, while the zombies chase people for food (almost
making their chase more noble).
The
quick shift from fear to fun is illustrated no better than the pies in the
faces of the zombies (something we discussed in class), and that rapid shift in
the main characters of the film is an interesting take on humanity in the face
of death. Any perceived criticism on this could be a reflection of my experience
with the more modernized takes on the zombie apocalypse scenario (i.e. The
Walking Dead), but I quite enjoyed Romero’s second in the zombie trilogy. The
blend of comedy and horror made it clear that a persistent psychological scar
of seeing the dead walk the earth and bite into human flesh wasn’t going to
happen, and the movie prospered for it. The setting of the mall causing an
obvious mixture between consumerism and survival was a joy to watch, and the
highly stylized action, sequences, and sound effects all added to that effect
on myself as an audience member.
Though
I, myself, would be rocking in a corner, murmuring to myself about the
resurgence of the dead back to life, that kind of reaction to the zombie horror
isn’t as entertaining as punching one square in the jaw on the way to the
department store, and Romero clearly knew that.
--- As for my impression of the
course, I’ve enjoyed it quite a lot. I have always enjoyed horror films, but I
never thought they could be examined through as many lenses as we’ve looked
through. I think the process of slight discussion at the beginning of class and
then moving right onto the film rather than heavy discussion and then the film
is a great format for the time spent in the class, and is one that makes any
discussion more enjoyable to hear. I also have really enjoyed the process of
moving through the history of horror, starting all the way back in the late
1800’s. That perspective adds a lot to any more modern examples of horror, and
also provides perspective on how aware different directors were of the
inclusion of different themes and images. I don’t know what films I’d add, as I’ve
enjoyed the blender of examples that we’ve witnessed in class (Shadow of a Doubt vs. Texas Chainsaw Massacre), which shows
great breadth in the flexibility of the genre. Overall, I’ve enjoyed pretty
much every aspect of the class and can’t think of a better way to view or
discuss the material we’ve gone through.
No comments:
Post a Comment