The stalker or slasher film is a phenomenon that began in the late 1970s with John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978), reaching nationwide markets during 1978 – 1981. Halloween inspired many stalker films which all share a set group of cinematic and narrative elements, put in place by Carpenter. Many directors copied its style in the hope of replicating its success. Vera Dika outlines the notion of the stalker film in an essay she wrote titled The Stalker Film, 1978-81. Dika explains the shared elements and the portrayal of a struggle between a killer who stalks and kills a young group of people, and a central character – usually a woman – that emerges from this group to subdue said killer. This woman is known as the “final girl.” My Bloody Valentine (1981) is one of the films that followed Halloween, and is also mentioned by Dika in her essay, which I will be analysing in relation to the concepts and ideas put forward by Dika.
Dika’s essay presents a wide range of concepts which pertain to what she describes as a “stalker film,” which I am going to outline. The cinematic and narrative elements help to build up the characters and set the atmosphere. Dika points out that the most distinctive characteristic within a stalker film is their representation of the killer. He is either kept off-screen or masked for the greater part of the film, which allows him to become depersonalised as his body and consciousness are hidden from the viewer (pg. 88).
There are multiple cues which indicate the killer’s presence within a stalker film. Firstly, the musical score tells us when the killer is present; both either on-screen or off-screen, though it appears creepier when the killer is not necessarily shown to us. In Halloween, the killer – Michael Myers – was represented by one repeated sound which played whenever Myers appeared on-screen or was lurking nearby. Secondly, another huge indication of the killer’s presence is a series of distinctive shots which work together to suggest a sense of stalking, hence the term “stalker” film. The most popular of these shots is the moving camera point of view shot. This allows the viewer to identify with the killer’s look as they join in stealthily approaching victims. However, this sequence of point of view shots can be misleading as there fails to be a reverse shot of the killer’s face. The viewer is only presented with a field of action within a space the killer could be occupying or not. Another point Dika mentions is that these shots can often be too long, or are more subjective in the way that they appear all of the place; behind doorways, or even dividing walls. It is rarely confirmed that the killer is actually there so the viewer is still left questioning the killer’s exact position. Since the viewer shares the point of view with the killer, it is often assumed that they are made to identify with the killer, however – seeing as though the character is kept depersonalised – the viewer is only meant to identify with the killer’s look and not his actual character.
The final girl, otherwise known as the heroine, is like the killer in the way that they can both see and use violence. Her ability to do this is why she survives and subdues the killer. Harper (2004) explains that the word heroine does not mean “female hero” and now many modern authors tend to use the word “hero” which enables it to mean male or female. He also adds that this works better as the final girl is definitely a hero “in the masculine mode, despite being female.” (pg. 31) Harper goes on to say that all final girls share basic characteristics: they are intelligent, smart and resourceful which enables them to see the signs of trouble much clearer and earlier than everyone else. In addition to this, final girls often have an inherent connection to the killer. Harper says it is often a blood relationship, though it “rarely stops him lusting after her blood.” An example of this is Michael Myers killing his sister in Halloween. (pg. 33) Whilst the final girl is also described as virginal, they are often occupied by a boyfriend and at least one of her friends is sexually active. Harper adds that this is not entirely accurate, but often carries some truth. In relevance to this, he explains that unlike some earlier horror films, the boyfriend within a stalker film is “rarely a rescuing knight who saves his beloved. In some films, he will die at the ends of the killer, slain trying to defending his girlfriend […] It is always left up to [the final girl] to save herself.” (pg. 37)
Aside from the killer and the final girl, other fairly important characters consist of the members of the young community, which are otherwise known as the victims. These characters are unaware of the threat that the killer presents and in turn are unaware of murder of their friends. This is due to their inability to see and use violence, which is why their characters die and the final girl does not. The victims also do not aid the narrative development as they remain static characters who simply participate in activities that fulfil the viewers’ voyeuristic enjoyment. Examples of these activities include bathing, frolicking, making love and involvement in sports.
Furthermore, Dika discusses points pertaining to assumptions made based on feminist theory, put forward namely by Laura Mulvey. The killer may be represented as either male or female yet they are dominant and supply a controlling vision, therefore making them “masculine.” The killer is able to control and generate the narrative because of this, and is rarely held as the object of another character’s or viewer’s gaze. The killer acts as a looker himself. The protagonist – the final girl – is most often presented as a woman, but there is an ambiguity to her sexual identity. It is described that she is presented with both male and female characteristics; male due to the fact she is able to see and use violence, as well as moving the narrative forward, just like the killer. Subsequently, the victims occupy a “feminine” position because “their narrative and cinematic enfeeblement has rendered them functionally ‘castrated.’” (pg. 90) These characters do not move the narrative forward and function simply as objects of gaze. They are deemed guilty, are investigated sexually and then punished brutally. The wound of their brutal punishment is, as Dika explains, symbolic of their castration.
Additional characters within stalker films consist of those who act as an outgroup to the young community. For example, parents, teachers, psychiatrist or policemen. These characters are typically friendly and offer concern towards the welfare of the members of the young community, who are known as the ingroup. However, despite their best efforts, they have no power over the events of the film no matter how much authority they appear to hold.
Dika mentions that the low production values of stalker films help to create the distinction between the final girl and the rest of the young community. The victims are most often played by unknown or inexperienced actors, which reduces their value as on-screen objects. Their lack of star quality in comparison to the more selective casting of the heroine shows how privileged her character is. It is often that the actress chosen to play the final girl brings specific characteristics that make her stand out much more than the other members of the young community. Another beneficial motif caused by the low production values is the setting. Stalker films are mostly placed in a middle-class American community, which creates an extent of likeness to the viewing audience – or even just their American ideal – which brings the action close to home. With that in mind, the entire action takes place in a single, exclusionary location, separating the young community from the rest of society.
Dika puts forward a two-part temporal structure for stalker films, stating that these films “always” present this two-part temporal structure. (pg. 93) The first part – the past event – happens at the beginning of the film, or perhaps in a flashback, which presents an event that happened years prior to the present day of the film. In this past event, the killer is either driven to a state of madness or is seen as “already mad” due to extreme experiencing trauma. This trauma is caused by his viewing of, knowledge of, or participation in a wrongful action that has been carried out directly or indirectly by members of the young community. The killer then experiences a loss and responds with rage, which is expressed immediately in an act of vengeance or withheld until the second part of the film.
Summary of the Past Events:
- The members of the young community are guilty of a wrong action.
- The killer sees an injury, fault, or death.
- The killer experiences a loss.
- The killer kills the guilty members of the young community.
- An event commemorates the past action.
- The killer’s destructive impulse is reactivated.
- A seer warns the young community.
- The young community takes no heed.
- The killer stalks the young community.
- The killer kills members of the young community.
- The heroine sees the murders.
- The heroine sees the killer.
- The heroine does battle with the killer.
- The heroine subdues the killer.
- The heroine survives but is not free.
In the second part – the present day – the killer returns to act out his revenge on the guilty parties of the young community (or their “symbolic substitutes”). A “seer” eventually warns the community of an impending doom, but the young community take no notice or dismiss it as frivolous. The killer begins what Dika refers to as his “bloody task” by observing the actions and the bodies of his young victims before he kills them. This is when a heroine – the final girl – emerges from the young group, sees the killer and then battles with him. She manages to subdue the killer – or even kill him – but even then she is still not free.
Summary of the Present Events:
In relation to the two-part temporal structure, Dika says that the opening sequence “always presents a woman’s death and/or an image of her mutilated body.” My Bloody Valentine follows this as the beginning shows a man dressed up in a mining gear with a blonde woman who he kills with his mining pick; it goes straight through her heart.
The past event section begins with the members of the young community being guilty of a wrongful action, however in My Bloody Valentine it is the supervisors who are guilty of a wrongful action. The supervisors are not members of the young community as they appear to be a lot older. Nevertheless, the wrongful action committed by the supervisors caused a mining accident. They left work early to attend a Valentine’s dance and failed to check for dangerous levels of methane gas, leaving four men to die and one to survive by means of cannibalism. This event occurs 20 years prior to the present day setting in the film. The next is the killer sees an injury, fault or death. The killer, Axel, does in fact see a death as he witnesses his father be killed by Harry Warden when he was a young boy. Axel’s father was one of the negligent supervisors. The killer experiences a loss is as Axel experiences the loss of his father. The killer kills guilty members of the young community is the final point in the past event section, but this does not fit in with Axel as the killer in the past event. It does, however, fit in with Harry Warden as the killer in the past event as he comes back to kill the supervisors, though again they are not necessarily members of the young community. An interesting point to note is that the members of the young community seem to be in their twenties rather than teenagers.
The present day section begins with an event commemorating the past action, but there is not a past action to be commemorated in My Bloody Valentine. Nevertheless, it would be the anniversary of Axel’s death on Valentine’s Day. The killer’s destructive impulse is reactivated is a point that does not particularly fit either, as his impulse is simply just activated rather than reactivated. A seer warns the young community follows as an old guy who works in the pub warns the young community about the tale of Harry Warden, and once Chief Jake Newby realises what is going on, he too warns the young community. They are warned to not throw any Valentine’s parties. The young community takes no heed follows the previous point. They do not listen and dismiss the tale, going ahead with the Valentine’s party anyway. The killer stalks the young community happens as Axel does stalk his friends. The killer kills members of the young community. Axel does kill members of the young community as he kills his friends. He also kills other people within the community, such as Mabel who works in the Laundromat. The heroine sees the murders. Sarah does see the murders, especially one of her friends, Patty, whilst they are trying to escape from Axel in the mines. The heroine sees the killer. Sarah not only sees the killer, but she has dated him which provides an interesting character. The heroine does battle with the killer. Jesse battles with the killer the most, although Sarah does remove the killer’s mask in an attempt to save Jesse, which reveals the killer’s true identity to be Axel and not Harry Warden like we are lead to believe. The heroine subdues the killer, Jesse is the only to subdue the killer, with a fairly big rock, not Sarah. The heroine survives but is not free is one that really follows through in My Bloody Valentine. Sarah and Jesse survive but they are not free as Axel escapes, failing to be caught by the police.
There seems to be two representations of the killer within this film. We are mislead into believing that Harry Warden is back, only to find out that is it Axel who is the killer. We are told the story of the mining accident from the beginning which sets up the character of Harry. Harry was found alive and eating the flesh of his colleagues in order to stay alive. He was then taken to a mental hospital and escapes a year later on Valentine’s Day, killing the two supervisors responsible for the accident. He takes their hearts and puts them into decorative Valentine’s boxes, using them as warnings to not throw Valentine’s dances anymore. This backstory shows that Harry is seen as psychologically disturbed for his cannibalism and murder of the two men, in addition to displaying their hearts in the boxes on what is meant to be a loving holiday. We are set up with the idea that Harry is capable of such tasks and he has a motive for coming back.
Both Harry and Axel kill wearing the full mining gear and with a mining pick. As mentioned previously, Dika explains that the killer is kept off-screen or is masked for the greater part of the film, which is true in this film due to the masking from the mining gear. However, we of course see Axel as himself, unmasked and going about his usual business, when we are lead to believe that it is Harry who is back. We never suspect Axel as he is in plain sight all along, which is never expected of these stalker films so it is a great way to play about with this twist.
The final girl is Sarah, but she is not the only survivor as Jesse also survives along with her. Harper (2004) says that “not every slasher movie has a Final Girl or, indeed, a Final Boy,” whilst Clover (1996) says that “from 1974 onwards, the survivor figure has always been female.” Whilst Harper is correct in his statement, Clover is blatantly wrong as in My Bloody Valentine, there are two survivor figures – a male and female – and other stalker films present odd alternatives. For example, Sleepaway Camp (1983), the female protagonist is revealed to be male, and actually dies. Clover also describes the final girl as “boyish” but Sarah does not look or dress any differently from the other girls in the young community. Harper adds that the final girls “are all intelligent, smart and resourceful” which appears to be true for Sarah. She speaks with intellect throughout the film and is resourceful to some extent as she quickly injures Axel in order to save Jesse. Final girls are also described as “virginal” although they may still have a boyfriend. In Sarah’s cause, we see her in a relationship with Axel, but on screen chemistry shows us that she and Jesse were in a relationship prior to this and neither of them appears to be over it. Sarah wears lots of blues and browns and appears quite shy or reserved at times, which is different from how the other girls act so this makes Sarah stand out. As previously explained, Harper discussed the “inherent connection” between the killer and the final girl. Whilst is it not a blood relationship in this case, Sarah definitely has a connection with the killer, who is revealed to be her ex-boyfriend Axel. Harper also talked about the boyfriend character, being Jesse in My Bloody Valentine, rarely being a saving knight and saving his girlfriend, and the girlfriend having to save herself. However, Sarah does not manage to save herself without the help of Jesse, as he in this case does come forward as the “rescuing knight.”
My Bloody Valentine reflects the period in which it was made with its low production value. The film was made in the early 80s and reflects the mining period of the 60s until its decline in 1985, so its audience will relate to such a popular and well known thing at the time of its release. As mentioned previously, Dika that the setting creates an extent of likeness which brings the action close to the home of the viewer, which is exactly what the setting and focus on mining achieves in this film. The entire concept of My Bloody Valentine is built on mining. The killer comes from the negligence of the supervisors; the accident happens inside the mines and the killer wears full mining gear when he kills, and uses a mining tool to do it. The film was shot in Canada so it was cheap to make and had a budget of $5,672,031. A lot of the film is shot in the mining tunnels around the Princess Colliery Mine in Sydney Mines, Nova Scotia, which closed in 1975. This would definitely bring the action close to home for any viewers who are familiar with this area and maybe even once worked down there.
The killer’s presence, as Dika explained, is shown by various cues, which include music and particular shots. These work together to create the eerie atmosphere of the killer, who is the most important aspect of stalker films. In My Bloody Valentine, the killer is symbolised by the sounds of heavy breathing in his mining mask. It is made clear in the film that he kills with the mining gear on so this sound lets us know that he lurking nearby. His presence is also represented by various other musical cues which vary from pitch adjusting flute sounds, drums and sounds relating to metal tingling. Most of these sounds can be attributed to altered sounds that you would hear in the mines whilst down there, especially of the pick tool hitting walls. Other than these sound effects, the film is pretty silent in terms of a musical soundtrack, unless the setting requires it. For example, in the pub and at the Valentine’s dance, there is music being played in the scene. This makes the other cues stand out because they happen within the quietness. Some sounds, however, can be misleading in terms of their representation about the killer. For example, there are piano sounds which suggest the killer is nearby, but it is revealed that he is not.
There are particular shots in the film which are used during the killer’s presence so we can, as Dika explained, identify with the killer’s look, but not him. This also alerts us to his presence and stalking of the young community. These appear to be the two types of effects that the point of view shots set to achieve. There is a POV of the killer’s hand when he puts down a Valentine’s box for Mabel, which is reminiscent of Michael Myers in the opening of Halloween. Other point of view shots display an observing and stalking manner which reveal the approximate location of the killer and where he is in estimate to the members of the young community. Sometimes POV shots are misleading which can work as fake scares. In My Bloody Valentine, one of the most prominent examples of this is when we follow a forward moving point of view shot as though it is the killer watching the young people of friends. The shot gets very close to Axel who is sitting in a car playing the harmonica. We then see a hand belonging to the person whose point of view we are seeing, which hands over a bottle of alcohol to Axel and revealing the person to be Jesse. The quick display of the bottle does startle Axel slightly and this all works as a misleading representation and a fake scare. It also may lead the viewer to question if Jesse is actually the killer which, of course, he is not. This is, however, a good way to make the revelation of the killer being Axel more shocking, because he is not a suspect here.
Framing too can also help to identify whether or not we are seeing the killer’s point of view. Some shots come from areas in which the killer can physically be in, although others seem to come from more tightly fitted spaces and even odd angles. The framing can even show the opposite side of where a point of view shot was first coming from which breaks the continuity of the killer creeping around in one defined space. However, there can also be some points where we do not see the killer’s point of view before we see him. For example, one of the characters goes into the kitchen and towards a boiling pan cooking on an oven. Suddenly, a hand appears out of nowhere and pushes his face down into the boiling pot. After this we instantly see the masked killer who appears to have come out of nowhere.
In addition to the point of the fake scare, the biggest misleading fake scare in My Bloody Valentine is when the killer is revealed to be Axel and not in fact this Harry Warden figure from 20 years ago. The setting up of the shock of the Harry Warden tale and then the killings happening mimicking this allows the characters and the viewer to suspect that Harry Warden is back. However, it becomes a shock once we find out that it is actually Axel because then it becomes another series of actual killings set up in the name of Harry Warden.
In conclusion, Dika’s analysis of the slasher film presents some interesting points, some of which carry an extent of truth, but most of which do not meet the criteria she has set. Many modern slasher films are of course even further away from her ideas – for example, Scream (1996) which brought back the slasher film – yet the period she analysed includes films such as My Bloody Valentine which still reveal problems concerning her essay.
Bibliography
CLOVER, C. (1996). Men, Women and Chainsaws: Genre in the Modern Horror Film. London: British Film Institute.
DIKA, V. (1987) The Stalker Film, 1978-81. American Horrors: Essays on the Modern American Horror Film. Edited by Gregory A. Waller. US: University of Illinois Press.
HARPER, J. (2004). Legacy of Blood: A Comprehensive Guide to Slasher Movies. Manchester: Critical Vision.
Filmography
Halloween. (1978) Film. Directed by John Carpenter. [DVD] US: Compass International Pictures.
My Bloody Valentine. (1981) Film. Directed by George Mihalka. [DVD]. Canada: Paramount Pictures.
Scream. (1996) Film. Directed by Wes Craven. [DVD] US: Dimsension Films.
Sleepaway Camp. (1983) Film. Directed by Robert Hiltzik. [DVD] US: United Film Distribution Company.
Leave a Reply