For what it’s worth, I don’t really look for conflict in personal life. I’m not a big fan of extended online arguments, and really don’t even like debating in person. I came of age in the social media age of the late 00’s and 2010’s. I’ve gotten into extended Facebook arguments with randos. I’ve seen the bottom depths of Reddit. I’m good.
As such, exposing my OPINION on a STRONG TOPIC on the INTERNET for ANYONE TO SEE feels like an invitation to any and all trolls lurking underneath the proverbial digital bridges that connect us all.
On the other hand, as a writer, it’s on me to grow a thicker anti-troll skin if I’m going to be throwing my opinion out on the world wide web for all to see.
So now, let’s talk about the film genre ‘Elevated Horror’!
If you google search for ‘elevated horror’, you’ll find any number of opinions, on top of links to all the latest A24 horror movies. There’s a lot out there to sift through, so let’s summarize: A lot of people hate the term ‘elevated horror’.
But why? Do they hate all films labeled as ‘elevated horror’? Do they hate fun? Are people getting up in arms over nothing? Do they have a point? What even is ‘elevated horror’?
Let’s unpack this.
History of Elevated Horror
For as long as people have been making movies, there have been horror films. Even Thomas Edison made an adapatation of Frankenstein. As cinema craft grew, so did the horror film. Works like Night of the Living Dead and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre stand among the highlights of cinema history.
Arthouse horror, so to speak, has also always existed. Consider films like Rosemary’s Baby, Night of the Living Dead, and The Exorcist, to begin. Horror films especially lend themselves towards new and emerging filmmakers, as they can be made relatively cheaply compared to other films and often provide a significant return on investment. As such, a filmmaker might seek to make their mark with an artsy horror film outside of the norms of slashers, ghosts, and monsters.
The rise of ‘elevated horror’ is really intertwined with the rise of A24, the independent movie studio responsible for works such as Lady Bird, Moonlight, and Everything Everywhere All At Once. At the same time as these movies were being created, filmmakers like Ari Aster and Robert Eggers were also creating works like The Witch (or VVitch, if you’re into artsy fonts), Hereditary, and Midsommar, all under the A24 banner.
Beyond those movies, Jordan Peele’s Get Out, Us, and Nope further established the ‘genre’ while also competing for and winning Oscars, while other filmmakers like Zach Cregger further pushed into new territory with works like Barbarian and Weapons.*
*As a follow up to our previous post, Amy Madigan did indeed nab an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress! It’s a relatively wide-open category this year, so she may even have a chance to take home Oscar gold!
So – what makes a movie an ‘elevated horror’ film, beyond what studio or filmmaker created it? In fewer precise words, an ‘elevated horror’ movie is usually rich in thematic depth, often dealing with trauma, grief, racism, sexism, or other prevalent human conditions. These themes are coupled with more artistically challenging cinematic choices. In Far Out Magazine, Michael Gordon notes that “Films like Midsommar, Saint Maud, It Comes At Night, Men, and Talk to Me were all compellingly new, original movies that aspired to prompt discussion as much as they made an audience shriek in fear.”
So, ‘elevated horror’ is the latest evolution of arthouse horror. So what’s the issue?
Problems With Genre Labels
The problem for many horror fans and critics rests in the word ‘elevated’. The idea that these films are ‘elevated’ implies that they are necessarily ‘above’ other horror movies. And that doesn’t sit well with people. If anything, it’s a degradation of the horror genre at large.
Some writers argue that the term deliberately confuses the types of films that might fall under this umbrella. Consider this stance from Horror Obsessive writer Lor Gislason:
I’m also not sure why it’s even used at all, considering there has been a term for this type of horror for many years—psychological horror. Elevated is such a broad term that it could be applied to things that don’t necessarily fit the label, and disagreements as to what fits and what doesn’t confuse people—especially since elevated horror is sometimes described as “horror for non-horror fans.”
If we’re looking for a leading voice against the term ‘elevated horror’, look no further than Get Out director Jordan Peele. Here’s an excerpt from an interview with Peele over at The Verve:
“I don’t want people to think that I’m trying to make ‘elevated’ films. I think that’s a trap that I don’t quite appreciate because I, you know, I like making fucked-up films. I like making weird movies that I’m really just not supposed to make — and sometimes challenge people on the other side of things as well.”
It seems very telling when Peele and other directors of ‘elevated horror’ films dislike the term and are some of the leading critics of the term as applied to their work.
Many horror fans already feel proverbially looked down upon by high-brow film snobs and critics. Adding fuel to the fire unnecessarily will certainly run people the wrong way.
Counter-Point: It Doesn’t Really Matter
Let’s be honest for a moment – writers, cultural commentators, and fans are going to call these movies something. These films have all been released during a certain period of time, and share a few key themes and artistic styles. It’s only human nature to categorize these things together, both for general understanding and to keep better track of everything being released at this time.
At the end of the day, the term has some cultural ubiquity – is this a losing battle? We’ve already used the term ‘elevated horror’ thirteen times so far in this piece, and we’re just over half-way through. (That’s not even counting the four times I used the phrase without quote marks!)
There’s also an entire subgenre for horror literature that’s literally called ‘literary horror’. So the idea of ‘snobbery’, so to speak, is nothing new within the broader tent of horror media. Should we really be that upset over what is essentially a marketing tactic meant to shepherd horror fans back into the movie theatre?
…after a slew of mediocre flicks in the early 2000s, horror’s image was hitting a low point. I’ve often said that for every good horror film, there are a dozen bad ones….By rebranding horror, the industry was attempting to rejuvenate (in their minds) a stagnating genre and bring in more sales. Once The Witch was released, it launched a new wave of films that inadvertently birthed the term elevated horror.
Consider also this notion from leading film critic and former editor of RogerEbert.com Matt Zoller Seitz:
There is also the idea that the word ‘elevated’ is actually doing something incredibly useful! Samuel Morton discusses this in his piece ‘In Defense of “Elevated Horror”‘:
By giving horror films an “elevated” sheen, it adds prestige to movies many people would otherwise have no interest in, and presents a new branding opportunity. There’s no doubt that a countless number of directors have been able to pitch their movies to studios and audiences by promising an “elevated horror” experience, for better or worse.
It’s not a big stretch of the imagination to state that Get Out walked so that Ryan Coogler’s Sinners could run all the way to sixteen Oscar nominations, the most for any film ever.
At the end of the day, the name doesn’t matter. The movies live on, regardless of what we call them.
So having said that…where do we stand?
After considering both sides of the issue, my feelings are complicated. I agree with the notion that the term denigrates much of other horror and looks down upon a perpetually bullied genre. But I also think that hegemony wins out – it’s not that you have to lump these movies into a genre or category, but its in the very nature of horror to group and categorize films for understanding and marketability.
I do agree there’s a sense of hesitance to recognize horror films as true art pieces. Which is a shame, because there’s a long, long tradition of horror excellence in cinema.
I think this quote from Karina Wilson summarizes my feelings relatively well:
I regard the horror genre as a broad church. Multitudes flock through its doors, all seeking one thing: visceral thrills. Those thrills might come packaged with psychological intensity, violence, spirituality, catharsis, social commentary, tentacles, and/or naked breasts. However which way it lands, horror pushes you across the threshold by introducing a threat that triggers a fear response (fight, flight, freeze, or laugh) and increases your heart beat. It makes you feel something you don’t usually feel. It takes you out of your daily drag and makes you believe, for ninety minutes or so, that the things people choose or do or say actually matter, because if the characters in a horror movie make mistakes or behave like idiots, they die. In horror, actions have very satisfying consequences.
Let movies be movies. Let’s all get scared together. Call it what you will, but at the end of the day, we’re all watching the same thing.
Leave a Reply