The horror studies professor says it’s important to consider how movies reflect their times.
Getty Images
2024 is full of bloody horror movies. That year saw the release of blood-soaked films such as “Immaculate”, “The First Omen”, and “The Strangers”. As Halloween approaches, bloody offerings are streaming in theaters and running in cable TV marathons.
If you watch these movies, you’ll notice that as the decades have gone by, their directors, screenwriters, and studio executives have created more and more blood, violence, and gore on screen. but why?
As a professor of horror studies, I explore the depths of this genre with my students. To understand the evolution of blood in horror films, first consider how the films reflect their era.
Alfred Hitchcock and Michael Powell created the proto-slasher with “Psycho” and “Peeping Tom,” respectively. Both films were released in 1960 about four months apart, both feature serial killers, and both are based on a “tell, don’t show” visual aesthetic. Rather than showing the audience blood, the film provides narrative clues that only hint at blood.
Janet Leigh’s shower scene in Psycho is one of the most memorable moments in movie history.
Getty Images
Guts, Gore etc.
In Psycho, Marion Crane, played by Janet Leigh, is stabbed to death in the famous shower scene. However, the quick-cut editing only gives the illusion that her nude body has been cut away, with a small amount of blood flowing down the drain in black and white tones. By not shooting Psycho in color and avoiding images of bright red blood in a bathtub (Hitchcock’s choice), the film looks less violent.
By the late 1960s, the restrictive Hays Code, which prohibited the use of explicit violence and fake blood on screen, was replaced by the less stringent Motion Picture Association of America film rating system. Filmmakers will have new freedom to express fear, anxiety, and fear in a more visceral way. One way to do this is to increase blood flow.
In George A. Romero’s seminal 1968 zombie film Night of the Living Dead, the walking dead devour the flesh of the living. Although the film is in black and white, the black and white presentation doesn’t dull the depiction of the undead devouring internal organs and licking up blood.
The film was released six months after Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, and the connection between Romero’s film and the civil rights movement that was occurring at the time is clear. The film’s gore is heightened by the movement’s bloody and violent struggle as Ben, played by Duane Jones, the only living person of color, hides from ghouls in an abandoned farmhouse with a group of six white men. Correlated.
Ben works to keep the group safe, but faces continued backlash from the white male characters. At the end of the movie, the vigilantes, believing Ben to be a zombie, shoot him dead and throw his body into the fire.
You can’t miss the symbolism that reflects the times. Romero and John Russo, who co-wrote the screenplay, initially had no intention of making a statement about civil rights. But then, during post-production, Romero realized that King’s assassination had turned his film into a “negro movie.”
In Night of the Living Dead, ghouls roam the countryside in search of hapless human prey.
Getty Images
bloody metaphor
Then came the 1970s, with blood splattered all over the screen. However, Tobe Hooper’s The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), William Friedkin’s The Exorcist (1974), and Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979) all have the unthinkable. They all have one thing in common: they feature a female protagonist who survives the situation.
Once again, blood is the common denominator. Sally’s body is covered in Leatherface after she escapes from him. Regan’s body spews green vomit along with blood. Ripley then sees an alien pop out of a crew member’s chest. But these films weren’t just gory, they were also metaphors for the uphill battle for women’s rights in the 1970s.
The original Halloween (1978) also fits here, but with a twist. Laurie Strode’s character is perhaps an early prototype of the female protagonist in horror films, returning to a sense of “tell, don’t show,” while simultaneously embracing changing times. The first kill shows Michael Myers stabbing his sister, but the audience sees the death through a partially veiled perspective of Myers, who is covered in a Halloween mask. Almost nothing is visible until her body hits the floor and blood appears.
The evolution of the depiction of blood and gore in the horror genre doesn’t necessarily produce scarier films, Francis says, but they are often indicative of the scarier times we live in.
Getty Images
nightmare and reality
In the 1980s, the slasher subgenre dominated horror. And the more blood, the better. These films focus on the number of killings and the creative methods of dispatching the victims.
Sequels to these horror series needed to increase their kill count for no reason other than to outperform their predecessors and competitors. Audiences began rooting for villains like Myers, Jason Voorhees, and Freddy Krueger, each of whom had their own theme music and, in Freddy’s case, his trademark one-liners. Many of the villains had more character development than the victims, making them seem interchangeable and nothing more than fodder for the slasher machine.
The 1990s saw bigger budget, innovative films such as Wes Craven’s The New Nightmare (1994) and Scream (1996). The attack here is more personal. A close-up of the stab wound. The Nightmare series made heavy use of CGI (computer-generated imagery), allowing for more creative and bloody kills.
Scarier times mean bloodier movies
Since 9/11, horror films have existed in places with no clear motive other than violence and bloodshed. In The Strangers (2008), villains tie up, torment, and brutally injure their victims. In the 2009 remake of “The Last House on the Left,” it’s the villains who meet a bloody end. Modern horror understands how effective senseless murders can be on screen, as removing emotion from the violence is similar to real-world events.
“Ghostface” is a villain from the popular “Scream” series.
Getty Images
By the late 2010s, horror films had become linked to the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements, especially in the reboot trilogy, as Laurie Strode once again confronted Michael Myers and the trauma he inflicted 40 years earlier. The work “Halloween” became prominent.
The murders in the new “Halloween” trilogy are very bloody and violent. These also reflect the sexual and social exploitation of women and their bodies. Ultimately, the series allows the protagonist and the traumatized town of Haddonfield to recognize evil, confront it, and ultimately seek to end it once and for all.
The evolution of the depiction of blood and gore in the horror genre doesn’t necessarily produce scarier films, but they are often indicative of the scarier times we live in. In the past, horror films were relatively tame, had little blood, and were often commercially successful. But today’s audiences probably appreciate their artistic merit more than the horror they evoke.
Just like the ebb and flow of blood depicted in these films, horror audience tastes change over time. The original “Halloween” has very few drops. The recent reboots are great, but they still don’t come close to the mayhem depicted in the just-released “Terrifier 3.”
No one knows what the future holds. But check out the world around you. That way you’ll get a great hint of what’s to come.
