How Not to Make a Horror Movie

I just got done watching "Insidious," a supernatural horror film that I though was going to be good and scary. It wasn't. Well, it was, but only for about half an hour. After that, it became painfully obvious that the filmmakers were using the exact same technique to try and scare the audience over and over and over again, completely ruining the film's second half. I should also mention that I'm not a huge fan of supernatural horror, because generally there's nothing the protagonist(s) can do to overcome what's haunting them (I.E. my problem with "The Grudge").

The first few scare moment were pretty decent, albeit the sound effects dragged them down somewhat. They were fairly standard frightening moments: Shapes in the background, faces suddenly popping up and creeping on a baby, an unseen intruder, and sudden appearances of bloody hand prints. Let me talk about one particular scene that really stood out to me, which came early on in the movie and really raised my hopes that this would be a good movie.

The unseen intruder scene was particularly well done, as it relied on different techniques to achieve a suspenseful sequence than pretty much every other scare moment. It relied on natural sound (the home alarm went off), mystery (the antagonist had yet to be revealed, so the possibility of an unexplained intruder really fit with the building creepy tone), the set lighting was revealed little by little (the house lights would only illuminate so much), and the choreography of Patrick Wilson (the lead actor) moving throughout the  house without the camera revealing too much as it moved from room to room. And thanks to a few earlier scare moments, the sequence felt genuinely frightening and suspenseful.

But unfortunately all the other scare moments and scenes after that  relied on the exact same techniques: jump cuts and sound effects. The sound would go down to near silence, the camera would do a close up on a particular actor, then quickly do a jump cut to whatever specter was haunting said character while at the same time a loud sound effect is struck up (just in case you blinked) to break the silence. Then the specter is gone. The filmmakers used this technique the entire second half of the movie. Every. Single. Time.

Pretty soon, you're jumping not because you're scared by what's on screen, but because of your innate reflex to the sudden loud sound effect that cuts through the silence. After a while you stop jumping because the moments aren't just the same technique, but they become entirely predictable. Once there's a brief period of silence, you're expecting a scare moment. The rest of the movie is effectively ruined (well, the horror aspect at least, though the rest of "Insidious" also kind of stunk; minor SPOILER ALERT: the twist ending didn't come as a surprise at all, thanks to the final act's soporific climax).

Foreground vs. Background

Jump cuts can work. Brief, incomplete glimpses of monsters can be incredibly frightening, as it really draws on each individual audience member's imagination to fill in what's missing. But they should be used sparingly. If I were to go back and watch "Insidious" again, counting the number of jump cut scare moments, I'd probably count at least two dozen different moments. Complete Overkill. You also don't need jump cuts to induce thrills. Take "Halloween," for example. That relied on the reverse: Long shots that emphasis the foreground versus the background, with Michael Myers always lurking in the corner of the frame. The scare isn't forced onto the viewer. (Also, "The Strangers" is a great example of this stylistic approach, though the ending of the movie sucked).

Well I think I've reached the end of my rant. I just happen to find it sad when something that has potential goes to waste. As I stated earlier, the first half hour of "Insidious" was great. But then it became formulaic and boring, not to mention the rather ridiculous supernatural elements that dominated the final act. Better luck next time, filmmakers.

Until next time, Orange Hat Guy