Thursday 27 October 2011

excuse me, I fell asleep on the platform.

My third year film dissertation topic: Britain photographed and representing itself and its fears (subconscious claustrophobia and paranoia) in contemporary horror.

This is a topic I've had in my head for about two years. I remember the first time I watched 28 Weeks Later. It wasn't the images of apocalyptic Britain that I found to be terrifying, the loss of an entire group of human beings that I relate with, and their unique culture. It was the aftermath that 28 Weeks Later covered, and in particular the presence of America; the way in which they "heroically" descend upon the lost city and their vision of themselves being the total antithesis to the London setting and English people.
Thinking about this further, I came to the conclusion that post-apocalyptic films like 28 Days Later and 28 Weeks are distinctly different offerings to what you'd expect from an American film with the same kind of screenplay. The British idiosyncrasies are so clear not only in the direction of the plot (the cynical keep calm and carry on attitudes and endings where most of the characters die) but are interwoven into the location choices, mise-en-scéne, and even just the photographic framing.

So, I'm taking this idea further and investigating the claims I've just made, in a series of three contemporary British horrors (not just post-apocalyptic), analysing their photography, characters and stories for evidence, and also there standing in a historical context. Is this subconscious fear, claustrophobic paranoia, something that's been inherent in British people since we first became isolated habitants of a tiny, self-contained island? Or is it something newer? Does the constant reminder of the modern global village and the saturation of corporative American media do nothing but remind us of how we will always be physically seperated from it?


Core film texts (as of Oct 2011)

The Descent (dir. Neil Marshall, 2005)

This isn't a popular film among my peers it seems. But I think it's an effective horror film, with the ideal equilibrium found between aural fear and visual fear. I don't need to explain much in terms of why I've chosen this, surely? Most of it is set inside a cave, filmed in small crevices and tunnels, in nothing but torchlight. But not only this - even the exterior scenes are filmed in a distinctly small scale, claustrophobic way. American horror films usually exaggerate the landscape, make it rolling and endless. In this, even the great outdoors is confined, the frame full, the mountains and trees are intimidating rather than a symbol of freedom and fresh air. I can also talk about the kind of "monsters" here. British horrors usually have a very clear type of monster and reasons for said monster existing, and I've chosen my other core films for their similar monster types.

Creep (dir. Christopher Smith, 2004)

The London Underground. A ripe setting for a confined, tight and dark horror film. We have the same kind of aural scares in Creep as you find in The Descent - the screeching, incoherence of the "monster". Like I explained before, Creep maintains the 'minimal survivors' rule, and at no point does any character really try to act the hero. Actually, the self-contained, independent and slightly self-obsessed characters represent quite well Britain as a whole, and how it sees itself.

28 Weeks Later (dir. Juan Carlos Fresnadillo, 2007)

I chose 28 Weeks Later especially for the American presence in the film, and how we can compare that to the British side. America likes to present itself as grandiose and as brave as possible. Britain is effectively the opposite, and I love how these subtlely play against each other in the being of 28 Weeks Later. In the end, we can argue Britain wins out...

Maybe I'll prove my own theory wrong.
Ask me in May 2012.

No comments:

Post a Comment