Erotic Thrillers are based on (often male) anxieties about sex, power and the intersection of the two. The subgenre evolved from the sexual politics of 1940s and 50s film noir as the Hays Code dissolved and the censorship of morals and ethics loosened. At its core, Erotic Thrillers are obsessed with the power dynamics between traditional (ie: white, middle to upper class, cis heterosexual) couples. And yet there is an undercurrent of queerness lurking beneath the surface, and often within the reveal of the killer/villain. Starting with Noirs and moving through Psycho to films of the 70s, 80s and 90s, including Basic Instinct, Dressed To Kill, Stripped to Kill, 10 to Midnight, and The Color of Night, Erotic Thrillers have a tendency to traffic in the (presumed male) audience’s sexual fears of queerness, particularly bisexual and trans women. This talk will explore the ways that sexual norms did – and didn’t – evolve throughout the Erotic Thriller heyday of the 80s to mid-90s. After exploring the social and political factors contributing to a fear of queer in this time period, we’ll conclude with a discussion of two recent contemporary examples (Yann Gonzalez’s Knife + Heart and Alain Guiraudie’s Stranger by the Lake) that suggest a new direction for queer representation in the subgenre. References: Karagiannidou, Aneta. Getting Away with it: The Erotic Thriller and Its Fantasies. Thesis. Keesey, Douglas. “They kill for Love: Defining the Erotic Thriller as a Film Genre.” Cineaction Williams, Linds Ruth. The Erotic Thriller in Contemporary Cinema. Indian University Press Film Clips: Psycho (1960, Hitchcock) Dressed to Kill (1980, De Palma) Basic Instinct (1992, Verhoeven) Stranger by the Lake (2013, Guiraudie)

From emblems of the occult to internet sensations, our feline familiars occupy a rarefied space in contemporary culture. By examining how cats came to be associated with the dark arts and their subsequent persecution to their current role as influencers and meme generators, this lecture will look at the dual role cats have played in guiding us towards and steering us away from darkness. Since the genre’s inception, cats and horror films have always flirted with each other with the little lions existing interchangeably as protectors, instigators, and doorways to the darkest regions of our imaginations. Once worshipped as Gods in Ancient Egypt they were executed alongside witches in Europe in the Middle Ages by the Church who demonized them which has led to a centuries long suspicion of their true nature. This lecture will examine the liminal space between life and death that cats occupy and how that ability is intentionally or unintentionally used in films such as Bell, Book and Candle (1958), House (1977) and Pet Sematary (1989) among others. By looking at their different uses in a variety of films, we will aim to uncover why these beguiling creatures provoke senses of dread, protection, and adoration within us. Class citations can be viewed here.

It is tempting to view Walt Disney Studios’ output as the antithesis of the horror genre, with many scholars and commentators focussing on its tendency to adopt bright aesthetics, conclude with unambiguous ‘happy endings’ and find their narrative momentum in young protagonists’ search for love. This idea, that Disney’s success is in sanitising the world and that its early animation represents a kind of bastardisation of ‘gorey’ folk tales, has even led to the widespread use of the word Disneyfication; the act of removing horror from the world and its stories. However, this class aims to problematise this assumption by arguing that the aesthetics and narratives of the horror genre are not only integral elements in some of Disney’s most popular franchises but were central to the construction of the Disney brand. By first looking at some of Walt Disney’s work before Mickey was even a doodle, particularly 1924’s Alice’s Spooky Adventure, this class will build a textual history that suggests the macabre, kinetic skeletons of The Skeleton Dance (1929) were an obvious, rather than atypical, introduction to The Silly Symphonies. An examination of later spooky shorts like The Haunted House (1929), The Gorilla Mystery (1930) and The Mad Doctor (1933) will demonstrate that far from being immune to horror’s charms, early Disney animation embraced it again-and-again. This lecture will use these early examples as a foundation to unravel unexpected connections between a number of cinematic horror subgenres and popular Disney animations from different Disney ‘eras’. Films like Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs (1937), Fantasia (1940), Sleeping Beauty (1959) and The Princess And The Frog (2009) will be considered through the lens of horror theory and scholarship as well as placed within the lineage of American horror cinema. In doing so, this lecture will untangle debates surrounding child horror fandom, horror’s ‘appropriateness’ for children and the academy’s reticence to position the Disney Studio within horror histories. Ultimately this class will demonstrate how Disney visual media often serves as an introduction to the aesthetics and themes of the horror genre, becoming formative in young viewer’s understanding of cinematic horror as well as positioning horror as a key strategy to appeal to its fans of all ages. Learning Outcomes: Have a greater understanding of The Walt Disney Studios’ history, particularly through the lineage of horror history. Be able to have nuanced discussions about the debates that surround children’s horror and how Disney negotiates them. Understand the important role of horror narratives and imagery in the ‘Disney formulae’. Develop a better understanding of Disney scholarship and how horror studies can interact with it. Films / Shorts Discussed: La Maison Ensorcelée (Chomón, 1906) The Haunted House (Keaton and Cline, 1921) Alice’s Spooky Adventure (Disney, 1924) The Mechanical Cow (Disney, 1927) The Skeleton Dance (Disney, 1929) The Haunted House (Disney, 1929) The Gorilla Mystery (Gillett, 1930) The Mad Doctor (Hand, 1933) Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs (Hand & Pearce, 1937) Fantasia (Algar & Jackson, 1940) Sleeping Beauty (Reitherman & Geronimi, 1959) The Princess And The Frog (Musler & Clements, 2009) Abbreviated Bibliography: Animation And America (Wells, 2002) Walt Disney’s Silly symphonies. A Companion To The Classic Cartoon Series (Merritt & Russell, 2008) Trick or Treat: A History of Halloween (Morton, 2008) Children Beware!: Childhood, Horror and the PG-13 Rating (Antunes, 2018) Horror Films For Children: Fear And Pleasure In American Cinema (Lester, 2021)

The 1978 animated film Watership Down, adapted from Richard Adams’ 1972 novel, is now widely known as one of the most frightening children’s films ever made, its subject matter of animated rabbits and U classification (upgraded to PG as of August 2022) supposedly not adequately preparing young viewers and their guardians for its mature tone and disturbing imagery. But is it really the case that audiences were not forewarned of the film’s material, and where did the perception that it is a typical, all-ages family film come from? This talk begins by examining the production, marketing, classification, critical reception, paratexts and television broadcasting strategies of the film to trace the history of how Watership Down‘s ‘traumatic’ legacy came to be. It will then consider how the film’s reputation informed the production, marketing and reception of the 1999 and 2018 television adaptations, especially with regard to how these versions attempted to tone down their horrific aspects and reassure viewers of their suitability for children, the extent to which they were successful in this aim, and what this has to do with their lack of lasting cultural legacy compared with the film. In doing so, this talk aims to take the conversation about Watership Down beyond debates about ‘suitability’ and trauma by situating the film and television adaptations in hitherto underexplored historical, industrial and critical contexts that shed new light on this remarkable classic of British popular culture.

Zombies never sleep, never stop. At the heart of what makes the zombie such a lasting terror in our cultural imagination is its relentlessness. Fast or slow, it propels itself toward us with a mindless determination, it is motivated by a ceaseless drive to move, to consume, and to spread. The zombie is a reflection of life at its worst, reduced to simple needs and impulses. But how did the zombie become a symbol of bare life? To answer the question of why the zombie can’t stop, we will look to the zombie’s origins in colonial Haiti, where the zombie first emerged as a monster within the slave cultures of the Caribbean, but from there it quickly spread – first to Hollywood and then to the world, becoming one of the most prominent and enduring movie monsters. Early touchstones will include the travelogue of William Seabrook – the original reference to the zombie in American consciousness – and the ethnographic works of Zora Neale Hurston and Wade Davis as well as early zombie movies like White Zombie, all of which show the zombie as a kind of monstrous slave and show the monster’s roots in the monstrosity of labor in modern culture. From there, we trace the zombie’s evolution from monstrous slave to a monstrous consumer in Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead and postmodern icon in Return of the Living Dead and Zombi 2. Finally, we’ll look at recent iterations of the zombie as plague, pandemic, and finally apocalypse. Across all stages of its evolution, the zombie reflects the contradictions around race, labor, and value that extend from its origin into the present day, revealing important insights into the always on, flexible work environments of the neoliberal present. Exploring the question of why the zombie can’t stop leads us to question, why can’t we?

Please note this class has two options to participate: Live and virtual via simulcast. One now-famous night in 1975, an ordinary family fled their new Long Island home with only the clothes on their backs, never to return—but taking with them an outrageous story that they would retell far and wide. The supernatural scourge that supposedly drove them out was attributed to the house’s history: It was the site of the 1974 DeFeo family massacre, where the eldest son of a troubled family executed his parents and four siblings. The mystery of young Ronald DeFeo, Jr.’s motivation blended in the public imagination with the terrors reported by the Lutz family, making the success of “The Amityville Horror”—first a best-selling novel, then an iconic independent film, then a wildly prolific franchise including more than 30 movies—a foregone conclusion. But what is it that makes this folklore so enduring when Ron DeFeo, Jr.’s own defense attorney confessed in court that he and the Lutz family “created this horror story over many bottles of wine”? The endurance of the “Horror” seems to rely upon the built-in beliefs of the white, suburban, generically Christian public who continue to consume its new outgrowths. Its earliest iteration represents the first popular version of the “Indian burial ground” trope, predating even THE SHINING and POLTERGEIST II, in which the haunted house is said to have been built on the land of indigenous tribes whose actual presence there was highly debatable. Mixed in with this primal feeling of white guilt is a simplistic Christian ethos, represented in the first film as a gateway to hell in the basement, and a demonic voice that drives a priest from the fly-plagued home with the oft-repeated bellow, “GET OUT!” The claim that a movie is “based on a true story” can be irresistible to audiences, whether or not it is substantiated. This marketing device is all the more successful when it piggybacks on preexisting beliefs held by a target audience. This talk will examine the folkloric “Amityville Horror” as a prime example of the power of stories that, while unverifiable, intersect with the existing faith and beliefs of its receptive public. We will discuss elements of the DeFeo murder case that have been utilized to scaffold the largely fictional franchise, and the archetypal potency of core texts and films. The talk will draw on supporting theory put forth by figures such as William James and Carl Jung, to build greater understanding of the power of faith and belief as it relates to the continued consumption of the “Horror”—even as it reaches into the deep sea, and the far reaches of outer space. — If participating in the live/physical event, please check with your local health authority on the current requirements for masks and vaccination for attending live events. If participating via live simulcast event – the class cannot be watched later, so please be sure you are available at the date and time the class is being offered in before registering. Classes curated by Miskatonic Los Angeles are in Pacific Time.

The focus of this lecture is ostensibly on representations of the witch in contemporary Bollywood film. But it is also a discussion on how the supernatural as a genre is being used to challenge problematic gender codes and social conventions in South Asian popular cultures. Hindi popular cinema is in many respects unique in relation to other global cinemas, particularly in its historic reliance upon strictly proscribed guidelines for representations of women and a ‘good woman/bad woman’ binary. In Bollywood, this gender binary has been used to code socially acceptable behaviours that have privileged an imagined concept of India, one that is patriarchal, Hindu-centric and homogenous. Historically, the figure of the witch or churail as she is known in both Hindi and Urdu, has fit the context of this binary through her representation as a ‘bad woman’ who is inevitably punished for acting outside of filmic norms of gender behaviour. However, recent iterations of the witch in Hindi film productions, have seen a complete volte-face, as new witch films have represented the figure as a sympathetic protagonist and fighter for gender justice. Looking at the films Veerana (dirs. Shyam and Tulsi Ramsay, 1988), Chudail No.1 (dir. R. Kumar, 1997), and contemporary Netflix co-productions, Stree (dir. Amar Kaushik, 2018), and Roohi (dir. Hardik Mehta, 2021) we can observe how the witch and relatedly, gender conventions, are evolving in Bollywood. Situating these films within socio-political, cultural and production contexts, it becomes apparent that there has been a rupture with the traditional gender paradigms that have historically sought to police and control women’s gender expression. View instructor Saira Chhibber’s class citations here.

Please note this class has two options to participate: Live and virtual via simulcast. Wuchereria causes your scrotum to swell like a grapefruit, Leishmania can eat your nose, and people infected with Pulex speak willingly of self-amputation. It should be no surprise that we evolved both fear and disgust as a way to avoid being infected by parasites. Parasites are why we think poop stinks and why we find a symmetrical face beautiful. Parasites were with us before we evolved as a species, and have since left their mark on our history and many of our cultural practices, and traditions. They also make great villains. Fear of the rabies virus likely led to notable legends about the creatures and monsters that inspired Shelley and Stoker. Invasion of the Body Snatchers, Shivers, and Alien use parasites to create genuine horror. Such films have, at their core, four common elements. The first, is the horrifying premise that dangers hide unnoticed in our friends, loved ones, or pets. Thus, your boss is their Trojan horse. Your child is their sheep’s clothing. And sometimes your wife is just your wife. The second is the extent that being infected changes “you” to “us”. Namely, some parasites have the capacity to hijack their hosts and take them for unwise, and sometimes tragic trips. Many of us, in fact, host a parasite that wants us dead, and messes with our personality to increase those odds. The third theme is that parasites are outsiders. Usually they are presented as some kind of one-off alien creature we did not see coming. Finally, parasites often have shallow motives, and they come across as pointless, violent monsters. As such, films about parasites have barely scratched the surface of their ingenuity. In fact, their evolutionary acrobatics are often admirable and unmatched in complexity. Their motives are pure, and often gentle in comparison to carnivores and herbivores. And parasites are not alien, or even oddities. Rather, parasitism is the most popular lifestyle on the planet. We are a parasitic planet, so to speak. Rich functioning ecosystems support rich and diverse parasite communities. Organic food depends on parasites to control insect pests. And some parasites are among the most endangered species on earth, leading to calls for their protection. In this lecture, Kevin Lafferty will consider how parasites are far more fascinating than how they are represented by the entertainment industry. Then, we’ll go out for sushi. — If participating in the live/physical event, please check with your local health authority on the current requirements for masks and vaccination for attending live events. If participating via live simulcast event – the class cannot be watched later, so please be sure you are available at the date and time the class is being offered in before registering. Classes curated by Miskatonic Los Angeles are in Pacific Time.

From Lang’s M to Derrickson’s The Black Phone, the spectre of the child murdering stranger has long haunted cinema. Aside from adult concerns for child safety, scenes of ‘stranger danger’ in horror and related media reignite repressed magical thinking and our childhood fears of the dangerous adult Other. Unlike mature adults, these abductors (or Danger Strangers) – The Child Catcher, Pennywise the Clown, Rose the Hat, The Grabber – are more akin to grown-up children, possessing supernatural talents and/or childlike characteristics that act as magical lures to entrap their victims, making them all the more unsettling. In this lecture I will present a loose structural model that represents 13 recurring stages in child abduction scenes, with examples from a number of films. As a filmmaker my focus is on formal aspects so we will be digging down into visual subtext and cinematic storytelling devices to see how meaning and tension are created on screen. Form here I will broaden out the investigation to look at both Freud’s essay on the uncanny and the Jungian concept of the puer aeterna, touching on the Trickster archetype and Pan, and relate these ideas to the character of the Danger Stranger and what it means to us as spectators. Following this we will investigate the language of Stranger Danger in a wider context by examining preventative public information films from the UK and US, Victorian cautionary tales and fairy tales. We will also look at how the irrationality of satanic panics and the scapegoating of minorities play into stranger danger narratives. The lecture will conclude with a presentation of my most recent horror short, The Watcher, which was built on my research and the 13 stage model I developed. Due to unforeseen circumstances, we have to postpone this lecture (originally scheduled for October 26th), STRANGER DANGER: CHILD ABDUCTION IN THE HORROR FILM (LONDON), to Tuesday, November 22nd, 7:00 pm GMT.