The first rule to make a slasher film is to make the victims have likability or a reason to live so that when they are in peril, the audience can care for them and engage into your film.
I disagree with this point. Most of the time slasher movie characters fall into specific social stereotypes (the nerd, the prankster, the blonde, the goth, the jock etc.). I don't really understand the idea that slasher movie victims need to be likeable. There's nothing wrong with them being likeable, but I don't always think it's the case; nor is it necessary.
If you think about most slashers, like Friday 13th, The Burning, House On Sorority Row, Funhouse, The Boogeyman, Don't Go In The Woods, Don't Go In The House, Sleepaway Camp, He Knows You're Alone etc., the characters are by and large annoying and irrational, or just simply forgettable.
For me the aesthetic of a slasher film is the most important aspect. It's the setting, camera-work and overall tone that can make or break it. Not to mention the killer and his/her disguise.
So I absolutely love Slaughter High. The abandoned school is a great setting, particularly in the chase scenes with Caroline Munro's character towards the end. Also, Slaughter High is late '80s, and knows it is playing to an audience that is likely overly familiar with the genre. As a result, its tone is tongue and cheek, and not necessarily meant to be taken seriously. This means it can get away with quite violent death scenes without disturbing its audience too much, in the same way as Peter Jackson's Dead Alive or Evil Dead 2.
I could watch Slaughter High every day. It gives me that slasher 'buzz' that for some reason I don't get from most modern slasher films.
reply
share
RavenRyy
11 years ago
I would have said the same, only not as well sir.
I just watch Slaughter High, and it's definitely one of the best slashers I have seen.
For me, a good slasher should be done as a myth, like the stories children and teenagers tell each other involving the friend of a friend of my cousins sisters uncle and the promise that it really happened.
The difference between a debate and an argument is one is noble and one is idiotic. Chose wisely.
reply
share
fulcis_beard
11 years ago
Yeah I like the 'myth' element of slashers. I suppose it comes from the tradition of telling kids stories in order to make them behave. Cropsy from The Burning is a good example, as is The Boogeyman. The old Myers House in Halloween is clearly an urban legend in Halloween, as is Crystal Lake in Friday the 13th.
Come to think of it, loads of slashers play on the urban old urban myth idea. When A Stranger Calls is another one!
reply
share
RavenRyy
11 years ago
That's right man! The reason that slashers work is that they are unbelievable but but possible! That's why the they tend to keep to the same basic tropes while still surprising us and keep us engaged.
Hell, Nightmare on Elm Street was based on a case of young men falling asleep and dying from nightmares (or so Wes Craven claims). Texas Chainsaw Massacre was based on Ed Gein's crimes, but Toby Hooper didn't know that, he thought it was just a story.
The difference between a debate and an argument is one is noble and one is idiotic. Chose wisely.
reply
share
fulcis_beard
11 years ago
I never knew Hooper wasn't actually aware of the Ed Gein stuff. Thought it was a direct influence. Ed Gein also influenced Psycho apparently.
Supposedly Freddy Krueger was based on a guy Wes Craven saw from his bedroom window as a kid. I wonder what that guy must've looked like!
reply
share