Why do we like violent films and horror movies?

[GEddie]

Someone may have said this before but: My take is that overcoming danger makes one feel more alive. Since most of us do not live in situations of acute physical danger, we crave that stimulation by seeing it on-screen.

ICXC NIKA

 

[MindOverMatter2]

Someone may have said this before but: My take is that overcoming danger makes one feel more alive. Since most of us do not live in situations of acute physical danger, we crave that stimulation by seeing it on-screen.

ICXC NIKA

Soooooo…you are saying that deep down we would all like to be chased down the street by a zombie?

 

[GEddie]

Soooooo…you are saying that deep down we would all like to be chased down the street by a zombie?

Not really. We want to feel more alive than we do; but most of us don’t want real danger, else we’d take up some dangerous sport activity; so we subconsciously compromise, knowing that the cinema provides the sense stimulation, while being altogether safe.

It was alluded to in Huxley’s BRAVE NEW WORLD.

ICXC NIKA.

 

[Nec5]

Because unlike our current pollyannish non-confrontational culture, violent films usually have direct confrontations between good and evil. People intuitively seek out these relationships and recognize them (this is part of what Paul is talking about when he describes faith as being inscribed on every human heart), but these type of “judgments” are largely frowned upon in our modernist society. Consequently, we look to entertainment for a type of catharsis for this conflict and righteous triumph whose very existence is denied.

In this sense, these types of movies ironically serve as both thrilling escapism and a venting mechanism for what we know to be real (the often violent struggle between good and evil).

Edit: And if you don’t believe or understand any of that, then just chalk it up to all the gratuitous sex scenes included in action films for no apparent reason other than to draw eyeballs.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

Please describe 100% negative way? What do you mean by this?

I mean it’s not just in a sense that a given war was tragic and evil. Sometime God gives great victories to his favored armies or even individuals (think David and Goliath), and sometimes rather martial language is even used regarding God Himself. Sometimes violence and war is even depicted as a prefigurement of the victory of Christ, such as Moses holding up his arms to bring the victory of the Israelites in a battle. Because of this I think it’s pretty far fetched to condemn any and all depiction of violence, though obviously this doesn’t mean any and all depictions of violence are ok either.

 

[1sicht]

MoM, outstanding question. I’ve often wondered about a related issue: people who’ve gone through real horror (war, rape, mugging, torture, Gulag, Auschwitz, etc.), do they enjoy violence and blood and gore in entertainment? (Ditto for Halloween ghouls and skeletons: if you had actually seen people emaciated into skin and bones, what effect would bone-men dangling from houseporches and trees have on you?)

According to a psychodynamic approach to psychology we like violent or scary movies because they act as a catharsis in releasing pent-up aggression from within the psyche.

So, if I loathe violent or horror movies, does that mean I’m a lamb inside? (Actually, it’s probably just that we Cholerics express our ire more readily. )

Bible has an awful lot of violence in it, and it’s not all portrayed in a 100% negative way either.

But it’s never gratuitous, unlike in most modern films and novels.

Please describe 100% negative way? What do you mean by this?

I take that to mean that it’s not all condemned as wrong/evil.

Why do you find meaningless violence entertaining?

Indeed. It reeks too much of the same bloodthirst of those who attended gladiator games. (I suppose the Darwinist could use this penchant in man as a “proof” of our purely mammalian nature. snort)

For people who are bored with life, any kind of emotional stimulation can seem good, even if it’s only fear or disgust.

Good point: anyone forced to fight wild animals and poisonous snakes (like natives from the jungle or the pioneers on the frontier) would most likely not want to sit through modern violence or horror movies. They lack the ennui that goes with overabundance and ease. I wonder if anyone’s done a study on guys who’ve been through combat and whether or not they can stomach films with a lot of violence, blood and gore, etc.

 

[Aelred_Minor]

MoM, outstanding question. I’ve often wondered about a related issue: people who’ve gone through real horror (war, rape, mugging, torture, Gulag, Auschwitz, etc.), do they enjoy violence and blood and gore in entertainment? (Ditto for Halloween ghouls and skeletons: if you had actually seen people emaciated into skin and bones, what effect would bone-men dangling from houseporches and trees have on you?)

I have a friend who had some traumatic experiences as a Marine in Iraq but loves playing shooting games like Halo, watches violent movies, etc. This is only one anecdote though. I’m sure different people respond to traumatic events in very different ways.

 

[Bl_Pope_Pius_IX]

It was alluded to in Huxley’s BRAVE NEW WORLD.

I HATE that book. HATE.

I did like that indian “savage” fella though.

Anyway, I don’t like scary movies cause…well, they scare me they just aren’t my thing I guess.

~ Pius :knight1:

 

[Dranu]

Because unlike our current pollyannish non-confrontational culture, violent films usually have direct confrontations between good and evil. People intuitively seek out these relationships and recognize them (this is part of what Paul is talking about when he describes faith as being inscribed on every human heart), but these type of “judgments” are largely frowned upon in our modernist society. Consequently, we look to entertainment for a type of catharsis for this conflict and righteous triumph whose very existence is denied.

In this sense, these types of movies ironically serve as both thrilling escapism and a venting mechanism for what we know to be real (the often violent struggle between good and evil).

Amen!

However, I guess this describes some violent films and fictions like Braveheart, LOTR, Dark Knight, etc., but then there is stuff like Saw or Kill Bill. The latter is probably just plain love of power without concern for its context, while the previous list of movies imperfectly express (I hesitate to use the word imperfect when it comes to LOTR ) good versus evil, the manifestation of justice, or the general virtues of spiritual warfare which we face daily but are not entirely aware of. I find this fiction (the former not the latter) can be a good thing on its own that I guess one can get too caught up in, but what can’t be taken to excess save the love of God?

 

[cooterhein]

I appreciate your answer, but i think it goes a bit deeper than that. Saying that we enjoy the feeling of being scared doesn’t tell me “why”. When is the last time you enjoyed being chased down the street by a creep holding a giant knife?

It’s the thrill. The adrenaline rush. And the fact that you’re actually quite safe, which is what makes it different from actually being chased by a creep with a knife. You get all the thrill and none of the danger.

It’s the same reason people enjoy roller coasters. Or, at a more extreme level, bungee jumping or skydiving. Does anyone really enjoy falling to their death? No, of course not, it’s one of the chief staples of nightmares (as are many of the things in horror/thriller movies). But it does allow for a shot of adrenaline, and people feel thrilled and invigorated purely by the fight-or-flight response of the sympathetic nervous system. It’s the same physiological response that you have when you truly do have to either fight or, um, fly. Run away. That thing. But you can enjoy it more in a controlled environment when there’s really no danger.

Additionally, it’s a cheap way to get an audience emotionally invested in a movie. You don’t need a great cast, you don’t need a great story, you don’t need great acting. As long as you have a sufficiently scary and mysterious perceived threat, you can keep everyone reasonably engaged until there’s some kind of climax and resolution (speaking in a literary sense). That’s part of the reason why we’ve been oversaturated with these things at different points over the past three decades- cheap movies of relatively low quality have been quite lucrative. The market has spoken; apparently, if you make a movie that does one thing well (and one thing only), the best thing you can do is do a good job of scaring people.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

“Classic” horror stories (Dracula, Frankenstein, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Faust, The Wolfman, The Tell-Tale Heart, The Phantom of the Opera, even the Exorcist although it contains some very disturbing and profane images) reflect the battle between Good and Evil, either externally or within man’s soul, which is the Big Story in which we are all involved and which is always interesting because it’s the story of our internal lives and souls writ large. The power of classic detective stories, westerns, mysteries, and war stories derive their fascination from the same dynamic, which Faulkner described as the only story worth the blood and tears of writing - the human heart in conflict with itself. The spiritual conflict is represented on-screen, often, as violence.

Modern horror movies, like Saw or most zombie films, are often just violence porn, which fetishes violent death while trivializing the Big Story.

 

[Sair]

“Classic” horror stories (Dracula, Frankenstein, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Faust, The Wolfman, The Tell-Tale Heart, The Phantom of the Opera, even the Exorcist although it contains some very disturbing and profane images) reflect the battle between Good and Evil, either externally or within man’s soul, which is the Big Story in which we are all involved and which is always interesting because it’s the story of our internal lives and souls writ large. The power of classic detective stories, westerns, mysteries, and war stories derive their fascination from the same dynamic, which Faulkner described as the only story worth the blood and tears of writing - the human heart in conflict with itself. The spiritual conflict is represented on-screen, often, as violence.

Modern horror movies, like Saw or most zombie films, are often just violence porn, which fetishes violent death while trivializing the Big Story.

I agree to an extent. I will say up-front that I utterly loathe torture-porn movies (a few of which I’ve been obliged to watch thanks to my job as a subtitler) for the simple reason that I find gratuitous and deliberate cruelty utterly reprehensible, and the one action I cannot forgive. I admit I cannot understand why anyone would enjoy it, except to consider, intellectually, that they are experiencing an extreme sense of schadenfreude - which may in itself have some evolutionary grounding, in the sense that to see another’s misfortune is to know that you are better off than they are, and more likely to survive.

Having said that, I have seen a couple of similarly-themed movies in the cinema (the first Saw and Wolf Creek) and I think there is just a bit more to them than gratuitous violence and gore (although this is undoubtedly a drawcard for the less reflective amongst our fellows). Yes, there is the straightforward thrill aspect. However, with Saw, for example, there is also the nagging internal interrogation - what would I do if I were in the victim’s place in any of the ‘games’? This is certainly not a comfortable speculation, and I think some people like to test themselves by proxy, without any of the immediate physical risks faced by the characters in the movie.

I don’t think the idea of the battle between good and evil is entirely lost in such films, either - although it can certainly be obscured by the bloodthirsty nature of them. Something I found in Wolf Creek, for example - and also Sean of the Dead, which, if you haven’t seen, I recommend - was a portrayal of the sheer mundanity of evil, and how it isn’t necessarily the seductive, dark-cloaked predator hidden in the shadows, with an elaborate plan to bring about your destruction in various exotic ways; no, it could just as easily lurk in your next-door neighbour, or the unassuming stranger who welcomes you to his house on on a cold, rainy night.

Maybe there is survival value - and thus a deep evolutionary connection - in the notion that we can’t take anything for granted, that we should be wary of completely letting down our guard.

 

[Arizona_Mike]

I agree to an extent. I will say up-front that I utterly loathe torture-porn movies (a few of which I’ve been obliged to watch thanks to my job as a subtitler) for the simple reason that I find gratuitous and deliberate cruelty utterly reprehensible, and the one action I cannot forgive. I admit I cannot understand why anyone would enjoy it, except to consider, intellectually, that they are experiencing an extreme sense of schadenfreude - which may in itself have some evolutionary grounding, in the sense that to see another’s misfortune is to know that you are better off than they are, and more likely to survive.

Having said that, I have seen a couple of similarly-themed movies in the cinema (the first Saw and Wolf Creek) and I think there is just a bit more to them than gratuitous violence and gore (although this is undoubtedly a drawcard for the less reflective amongst our fellows). Yes, there is the straightforward thrill aspect. However, with Saw, for example, there is also the nagging internal interrogation - what would I do if I were in the victim’s place in any of the ‘games’? This is certainly not a comfortable speculation, and I think some people like to test themselves by proxy, without any of the immediate physical risks faced by the characters in the movie.

I don’t think the idea of the battle between good and evil is entirely lost in such films, either - although it can certainly be obscured by the bloodthirsty nature of them. Something I found in Wolf Creek, for example - and also Sean of the Dead, which, if you haven’t seen, I recommend - was a portrayal of the sheer mundanity of evil, and how it isn’t necessarily the seductive, dark-cloaked predator hidden in the shadows, with an elaborate plan to bring about your destruction in various exotic ways; no, it could just as easily lurk in your next-door neighbour, or the unassuming stranger who welcomes you to his house on on a cold, rainy night.

Maybe there is survival value - and thus a deep evolutionary connection - in the notion that we can’t take anything for granted, that we should be wary of completely letting down our guard.

I think that’s a good point. I think it was Bruno Bettleheim (sp?) in The Uses of Enchantment who argued that classic fairy tales were really designed as teaching stories - so Little Red Robin Hood, in addition to being just a good story, was probably used by parents in the middle ages to warn their children of the risk of stranger sexual assault.

I’ve often thought the fact that the two monomyths of horror story legend - the vampire and the shapeshifter - appear in every culture’s legends tells us something in the same way.

Most every culture has a belief in living-dead creatures that drain the life-essence from victims until their soul is lost and they become one of the undead - you find it in Russia, Hungary, China, Africa, you name it - and the shapeshifter, a man or woman who appears human but can change into a devouring creature - werewolves in europe, weretigers in India, Leopardmen in Africa, Skinwalkers (werecoyotes) among the Navajo.

Assuming such creatures don’t really exist, why do so many unconnected cultures have the same beliefs in such creatures?

I’d argue that they are ways cultures warn the young of very real human evils. Vampires are really the reflection of child molesters, who use the young to satisfy their own evil needs, and who wish to recruit them to their own twisted ways. Shapeshifters are the mythical representation of serial killers who want only to rend and tear the innocent to satisfy their own bloodthirsty urges. They can seem like your next-door neighbor one moment, and become a ravenous human beast the next.

So, good point. Horror movies and stories, even the bad ones, are designed to teach people to be aware of threats. I know that if I ever bought an old house, my neighbor warned me about people who vanished there, I began to hear strange noises, then saw what looked like a ghost coming down the stairs, you wouldn’t have to worry about me. I wouldn’t try to bring in a medium or psychic investigator to find out what was going on because I would be packed, out the door, and driving in my car down the highway at 100 mph until I was two counties over. I know what to do from seeing too many horror movies.

 

[edwest2]

Why are people attracted to the gangster image, and why do we spend money at the cinemas to be frightened by seeing somebodies gruesome death?

I am looking at this from a psychological perspective. I want this discussion to be philosophical in nature, so i will not be impressed if somebody gives the answer “original sin”. I want to see something a bit more sophisticated than that. For example its understandable why somebody would enjoy a film about being a “vigilante” because they may live in a community where a lot of bullying and crime happens. They feel helpless and might often fantasize about taking the law into their own hands.

Hollywood plays on those insecurities and makes a lot of money from exploiting that fear. But might films also cause irrational fear or even violence? Could it be that film can often be used to shape peoples political or moral opinions and mindsets?

It is not merely entertainment. In the early years of Hollywood, the Church had some concerns:

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_29061936_vigilanti-cura_en.html

If you read about movie history by serious writers, you’ll find many references to the messages in the movies. I’ve read that many science fiction films of the 1950s where aliens come to threaten Americans were really talking about the Communist Menace - our fear that the Russians would come and destroy our way of life, and many of us in the process. You’ll read how many motion pictures advanced or spoke against certain beliefs held by the public during certain time periods.

No one is forced to see a movie. I might see one or two a year, like Iron Man or anything by PIXAR. I suggest getting a copy of The Creation of the Media by Paul Starr. Some movies made during World War II were definitely made to portray our enemies in a certain way, to show the courage of our soldiers and to speak for or against certain ideas.

Peace,
Ed

 

[domandcarols]

The culture of death, need we say more Mind?

The main emphasis on such films are death and violence, not to be used to add to the plot but to make them the focus of the plot. Their are good movies that have horror and violence, but only to use them to add to the plot in which could be a good, observe The Lord of The Rings. The plot was the battle of good and evil but death, violence, and a bit of horror were used to emphasis the necessity of good men to fight evil. When people start making films, or write stories with the end goal in mind is nothing but violence and horror, it becomes an evil story, observe the Saw movies.

This is the reason why I don’t go to the theater anymore, or only watch movies that produce a meaningful message. . . so I watch very very little nowadays.

Also might I add, these films have been more damaging then people realize. Not just the films but also main stream media and video games that also emphasis violence. Especially media, such as that horrible plane crash during that air show in Reno, they replay the tape over 5-10 times in a row until, all day long until it becomes casual to watch while forgetting the fact, people just died in those moments. The desensitization to violence of the public is mainly attributed to these forms of entertainment. Though be it gradual and almost undetectable, the psychology process of desensitization is gradual.

I completely agree with every word.

 

[Flyingg]

I used to like horror movies, I was never interested in violent movies,and if a horror movie have some extremely violent scenes, I don’t watch it. I was only attached to horror movies with spiritual basics, after I stopped believing in ghosts, demons, gods, I stopped being interested in those movies too. I can’t fear anymore what I think is unreal… Which made me now uninterested in all horror movies.

 

[Trishie]

Hollywood makes an untrue assumption, perhaps, if it represents a belief that we all like horror movies and violent films. I don’t imagine I’m alone in disliking and in avoiding horror or violent movies.
I agree that the frequent diet of horror and violent crime, along with violent computer games, can have desensitising effect to others tragedies and pain, and further undermines Christian love in our society. I protected my children as long as I could from gratuitous violence and unnecessary nastiness, but in this world that is a losing battle.

 

[nickybr38]

I appreciate your answer, but i think it goes a bit deeper than that. Saying that we enjoy the feeling of being scared doesn’t tell me “why”. When is the last time you enjoyed being chased down the street by a creep holding a giant knife?

It’s really not more complicated. Adrenaline is a very powerful drug and an easy thrill. People seek those things that cause adrenaline and fear and excitement cause adrenaline spikes.

Yes. It’s that simple. Sometimes, for some people, it goes deeper but I think for the majority we’re just looking for a ‘cheap thrill’, as it were.

 

[Windfish]

Why do violent films and horror movies thrill us? Why do we find it a thrill to be scared?

The Assumption of Mary and Horror Movies.

Horror is a wonderful genre.