Grief and Other Monsters: Understanding the Power of Emotion in The Babadook
Written by Mark Trinkle
(SPOILER ALERT: This is an analysis of the whole film and not just a review.)
Imagine a monster whose sole purpose is to consume your very life. At night it pins you down, slowly torturing you. You can’t sleep, but you can’t get up. You’re trapped. Don’t worry it will let you live, but only because it prefers to watch you suffer. It plays with your mind allowing you to believe you are safe but returns when you least expect it. It may hide, but it’s never truly gone- looming over your life, hiding in the corners of your home and slowly claiming everything you hold dear. Sometimes it can even claim you. If you let it, this thing can take you over causing you to hurt those you love against your wishes, even when you try to help them.
Last year’s Australian film The Babadook (Jennifer Kent, 2014) gives us an in-depth look at this very monster. In the film this monster is a dark entity known as "The Babadook". But what makes this movie so compelling is the real-world monster that hides beneath The Babadook’s ominous top hat: grief – specifically the kind that haunts those who have lost a loved one.
The film follows the struggles of a single mother Amelia (Essie Davis) and her outspoken son Samuel (Noah Wiseman). Samuel’s father was killed in an accident while driving Amelia to the hospital to have Samuel. Since then Amelia has struggled to make ends meet while at the same time refusing to talk about her loss with anyone including Samuel. Things get even harder for them when Samuel’s violent outbursts and overactive imagination get him kicked out of school and social services comes to evaluate her as a parent. In one scene his claustrophobic hold on Amelia’s life is illustrated perfectly as he sleeps next to her in bed, with his arms unconsciously wrapped around her neck.
Imagine a monster whose sole purpose is to consume your very life. At night it pins you down, slowly torturing you. You can’t sleep, but you can’t get up. You’re trapped. Don’t worry it will let you live, but only because it prefers to watch you suffer. It plays with your mind allowing you to believe you are safe but returns when you least expect it. It may hide, but it’s never truly gone- looming over your life, hiding in the corners of your home and slowly claiming everything you hold dear. Sometimes it can even claim you. If you let it, this thing can take you over causing you to hurt those you love against your wishes, even when you try to help them.
Last year’s Australian film The Babadook (Jennifer Kent, 2014) gives us an in-depth look at this very monster. In the film this monster is a dark entity known as "The Babadook". But what makes this movie so compelling is the real-world monster that hides beneath The Babadook’s ominous top hat: grief – specifically the kind that haunts those who have lost a loved one.
The film follows the struggles of a single mother Amelia (Essie Davis) and her outspoken son Samuel (Noah Wiseman). Samuel’s father was killed in an accident while driving Amelia to the hospital to have Samuel. Since then Amelia has struggled to make ends meet while at the same time refusing to talk about her loss with anyone including Samuel. Things get even harder for them when Samuel’s violent outbursts and overactive imagination get him kicked out of school and social services comes to evaluate her as a parent. In one scene his claustrophobic hold on Amelia’s life is illustrated perfectly as he sleeps next to her in bed, with his arms unconsciously wrapped around her neck.
We eventually learn that Amelia is torn between her desire to hide her grief and keep it to herself and her desire to care for her son. She loves him despite the trouble he gets into, but cannot help but harbor a secret grudge against the boy whose birth led to her husband’s death.
At the start of the film Amelia doesn’t realize all of these emotions she has bubbling under the surface but Jennifer Kent (writer as well as director) gradually gives us keys to Amelia’s psychology right before the titular monster kicks down the doors to wreak havoc on her mind and her home.
After Samuel first stumbles upon the Mister Babadook pop-up book and she sees how creepy it is, she destroys it hoping to make Samuel forget about its main character; a creature that will supposedly ‘haunt them if they let it in and make them wish that they were dead.’ Although it is a perfectly natural reaction to hide scary things from your child, it is important to note that Amelia uses this same approach when it comes to her late husband- going so far as to lock his things in the basement away from Samuel. Amelia’s attempts to protect her son also hurt him because as he says when she forbids him to go down to the basement ‘He’s my dad too, you don’t own him’.
At the start of the film Amelia doesn’t realize all of these emotions she has bubbling under the surface but Jennifer Kent (writer as well as director) gradually gives us keys to Amelia’s psychology right before the titular monster kicks down the doors to wreak havoc on her mind and her home.
After Samuel first stumbles upon the Mister Babadook pop-up book and she sees how creepy it is, she destroys it hoping to make Samuel forget about its main character; a creature that will supposedly ‘haunt them if they let it in and make them wish that they were dead.’ Although it is a perfectly natural reaction to hide scary things from your child, it is important to note that Amelia uses this same approach when it comes to her late husband- going so far as to lock his things in the basement away from Samuel. Amelia’s attempts to protect her son also hurt him because as he says when she forbids him to go down to the basement ‘He’s my dad too, you don’t own him’.
Some time later the book shows up on her doorstep again, good as new but this time with images of Amelia killing their dog, Samuel and eventually herself. As the film progresses the shadow of the mysterious creature haunts their days and their nights causing them both to lose sleep and Amelia to lose patience with her son. Weakened by this torment as well as her ongoing grief, she is unable to stop The Babadook from getting inside her.
As it starts to take over her she is verbally abusive to Samuel, telling him that she wished he had died instead of his father. While she is clearly not in her right mind (walking around with a knife in hand) the reason this scene feels so real (and so awful) is because we know that deep down the thought had definitely crossed her mind. She misses her husband and doesn’t know how to be a parent, or even herself without him. Samuel reminds her of the man she lost and she hates him for it. The Babadook is feeding on her resentment and grief and is using it to tear them apart.
There is a point near the climax of the film when she at her most unstable point, on the verge of choking Samuel, but is stopped when he reaches out to her to let her know that he still loves her and always will. His act of connection despite all her efforts to push him away gives her the strength to overcome the possession and regain control of herself. It’s a beautiful moment and speaks to anyone who has ever lost themselves to depression or grief. Having expelled it from her body she thinks that they are safe until Samuel remembers that the book told them that they couldn’t get rid of the Babadook.
This fact not only makes for an entertaining false ending but sets up one of the most interesting endings to a horror movie I have ever seen. The creature tries one last time to take Samuel, but having seen how much they need each other, Amelia fiercely stands up against the monster refusing to let anything get between her and her son again. In an epilogue scene that takes place on Samuel’s birthday, we see them celebrating as they never have done on the actual day of his birth (because of the pain that Amelia associated with that day). At one point Amelia goes down to the basement (where most of the memories of her husband now live) and feeds a weaker form of the monster that they keep down there.
It is implied that since they cannot get rid of the creature that they have decided to regularly appease it so it won’t get out of hand again. The monster, just like the pain, and the grief will never leave completely. But if they acknowledge it and are open about it, it cannot get in between them so completely again and won’t be able to ruin their lives. No longer afraid to talk about what happened to others and each other Amelia and Samuel are able to actually move forward without forgetting the past.
In theory the premise of a monster from a pop-up book driving a single mother insane might not seem like a movie meant to be taken seriously, but this film is crafted in such a way that a surreal monster is used to represent something very real and very scary. It is important to note that the while the film is not very gory there are many disturbing images, and an overall tone of dread that might not be for all viewers. The image of The Babadook itself can be scary, but the thing that is really memorable is how painfully real the grief is, and how invested the audience gets in Amelia’s point of view even after she is taken over. The Babadook is one of the rare horror movies in recent years with something to say about deep human emotions, and it does so with masterful strokes that make this movie a must-watch for anyone who is a fan of psychological horror.
As it starts to take over her she is verbally abusive to Samuel, telling him that she wished he had died instead of his father. While she is clearly not in her right mind (walking around with a knife in hand) the reason this scene feels so real (and so awful) is because we know that deep down the thought had definitely crossed her mind. She misses her husband and doesn’t know how to be a parent, or even herself without him. Samuel reminds her of the man she lost and she hates him for it. The Babadook is feeding on her resentment and grief and is using it to tear them apart.
There is a point near the climax of the film when she at her most unstable point, on the verge of choking Samuel, but is stopped when he reaches out to her to let her know that he still loves her and always will. His act of connection despite all her efforts to push him away gives her the strength to overcome the possession and regain control of herself. It’s a beautiful moment and speaks to anyone who has ever lost themselves to depression or grief. Having expelled it from her body she thinks that they are safe until Samuel remembers that the book told them that they couldn’t get rid of the Babadook.
This fact not only makes for an entertaining false ending but sets up one of the most interesting endings to a horror movie I have ever seen. The creature tries one last time to take Samuel, but having seen how much they need each other, Amelia fiercely stands up against the monster refusing to let anything get between her and her son again. In an epilogue scene that takes place on Samuel’s birthday, we see them celebrating as they never have done on the actual day of his birth (because of the pain that Amelia associated with that day). At one point Amelia goes down to the basement (where most of the memories of her husband now live) and feeds a weaker form of the monster that they keep down there.
It is implied that since they cannot get rid of the creature that they have decided to regularly appease it so it won’t get out of hand again. The monster, just like the pain, and the grief will never leave completely. But if they acknowledge it and are open about it, it cannot get in between them so completely again and won’t be able to ruin their lives. No longer afraid to talk about what happened to others and each other Amelia and Samuel are able to actually move forward without forgetting the past.
In theory the premise of a monster from a pop-up book driving a single mother insane might not seem like a movie meant to be taken seriously, but this film is crafted in such a way that a surreal monster is used to represent something very real and very scary. It is important to note that the while the film is not very gory there are many disturbing images, and an overall tone of dread that might not be for all viewers. The image of The Babadook itself can be scary, but the thing that is really memorable is how painfully real the grief is, and how invested the audience gets in Amelia’s point of view even after she is taken over. The Babadook is one of the rare horror movies in recent years with something to say about deep human emotions, and it does so with masterful strokes that make this movie a must-watch for anyone who is a fan of psychological horror.
Applying the Supernatural to Horror: James Wan
Written by Anthony Watkins
One of the most enthralling genres that exists in film is the horror genre. It may come as a surprise that fans enjoyed scares far before classics such as Alfred Hitchcock’s Pyscho (1960) or William Friedkin’s The Exorcist (1973). In fact, the horror genre is one that has been around since close to the birth of cinema itself. Film pioneer Georges Méliès is often credited as creating the first horror picture with The Haunted Castle in 1896. Later, the genre was accentuated with the influential German Expressionist film The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (Wiene, 1920). The foundation for supernatural-themed horror pictures, however, lies with The Exorcist. Due to the film’s popularity and success, it should come as no surprise that in the decades since, the horror genre and supernatural theme has become increasingly popular with filmmakers and audiences.
One filmmaker that has positively contributed to the supernatural theme in horror films is director, writer, and producer James Wan. Born on February 27, 1977 in Malaysia and raised in Perth, Australia, Wan became interested in filmmaking when he was only 11 years old. He continued to become passionate about the filmmaking business as he ended up attending the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) in Australia. Through his studies at the university, Wan earned a Bachelor of Arts degree, while also meeting future collaborator Leigh Whannell.
A few years later in 2000, Wan would write and direct his first feature-length film, the horror flick Stygian, with co-writer and director Shannon Young. The film was a success in Australia, garnering a “Best Guerrilla Film” at the Melbourne Underground Film Festival.
In 2004, Wan unwittingly electrified his career with Saw. Collaborating with RMIT classmate Leigh Whannel, who wrote the screenplay for the film, Wan initially made Saw as a short film and presented it to the producers. Immediately impressed with the script, the producers agreed to finance the project before Wan and Whannel even made it to Los Angeles. The feature film, being shot on a low budget of $1.2 million, was originally envisioned to have a straight-to-DVD release (Filmibeat). However, the film was released theatrically and grossed an unprecedented $18.2 million in its opening weekend in the United States. It would go on to gross over $55 million in the US by the end of the year (IMDB). Due to the enormous box office success of the film, Saw would spawn six sequels to become a massive horror franchise. Wan, however, declined to direct the sequels and instead served as executive producer for the films. Nevertheless, with Saw, Wan managed to create an iconic villain in “Jigsaw”, along with his puppet “Billy.”
One filmmaker that has positively contributed to the supernatural theme in horror films is director, writer, and producer James Wan. Born on February 27, 1977 in Malaysia and raised in Perth, Australia, Wan became interested in filmmaking when he was only 11 years old. He continued to become passionate about the filmmaking business as he ended up attending the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) in Australia. Through his studies at the university, Wan earned a Bachelor of Arts degree, while also meeting future collaborator Leigh Whannell.
A few years later in 2000, Wan would write and direct his first feature-length film, the horror flick Stygian, with co-writer and director Shannon Young. The film was a success in Australia, garnering a “Best Guerrilla Film” at the Melbourne Underground Film Festival.
In 2004, Wan unwittingly electrified his career with Saw. Collaborating with RMIT classmate Leigh Whannel, who wrote the screenplay for the film, Wan initially made Saw as a short film and presented it to the producers. Immediately impressed with the script, the producers agreed to finance the project before Wan and Whannel even made it to Los Angeles. The feature film, being shot on a low budget of $1.2 million, was originally envisioned to have a straight-to-DVD release (Filmibeat). However, the film was released theatrically and grossed an unprecedented $18.2 million in its opening weekend in the United States. It would go on to gross over $55 million in the US by the end of the year (IMDB). Due to the enormous box office success of the film, Saw would spawn six sequels to become a massive horror franchise. Wan, however, declined to direct the sequels and instead served as executive producer for the films. Nevertheless, with Saw, Wan managed to create an iconic villain in “Jigsaw”, along with his puppet “Billy.”
Wan created an iconic villain and mask with "Jigsaw" in his 2004 horror film, Saw. The film launched a large, commercially successful franchise spanning 7 films.
In 2007, Wan officially moved on from the Saw franchise with Dead Silence, another horror film, and Death Sentence, a crime/drama film starring Kevin Bacon. Wan’s next feature-length effort after Death Sentence was another horror film, Insidious. On another low-budget of $1.5 million, the film was initially rejected by the Toronto International Film Festival, but went on to become another box office smash for Wan (TVGuide). In its opening weekend in the US, the film garnered over $13 million, and ended up grossing over $54 million (IMDB).
Wan continued on a roll with The Conjuring (2013), a film based on the true case files of renowned paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren. Critically praised for its use of “old school scares” and sharp cinematography, (which will be investigated next week in my article on the film) The Conjuring became yet another box office hit for Wan, grossing over $41 million in its opening weekend in the US and a staggering $137 million for the year in the US alone (IMDB).
Wan continued on a roll with The Conjuring (2013), a film based on the true case files of renowned paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren. Critically praised for its use of “old school scares” and sharp cinematography, (which will be investigated next week in my article on the film) The Conjuring became yet another box office hit for Wan, grossing over $41 million in its opening weekend in the US and a staggering $137 million for the year in the US alone (IMDB).
Wan created an unrelenting suspenseful atmosphere in The Conjuring (2013).
After directing a sequel to Insidious titled Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013), Wan took a break from the horror genre in directing the seventh film in the blockbuster “Fast and Furious” franchise, Furious 7. Due to the unexpected death of star Paul Walker, the film was pushed back from its original release date and is now scheduled for release on April 3, 2015. Currently, Wan is working on directing a sequel to The Conjuring, titled The Conjuring 2: The Enfield Poltergeist. The film is scheduled for release on June 10, 2016.
Trademarks
Wan works almost exclusively in the horror genre, and he has developed some motifs in several of these films. He likes to utilize puppets and ventriloquist dolls, as he uses them in Saw (2004), Dead Silence (2007) and The Conjuring (2013). Through his horror films, Wan is known for creating unrelenting suspense for audiences, as he did especially in Insidious (2007) and The Conjuring (2013). Wan is also known for conjuring up old-school scares and a classic horror aesthetic for audiences, as he did most effectively in The Conjuring (2013) but also in Dead Silence (2007). Finally, Wan likes to collaborate with RMIT classmate Leigh Wannell, who has written several of his films, including Saw (2004), Insidious (2007), and Insidious: Chapter 2 (2013).
WORKS CITED
IMDB. 2014. 6 Dec. 2014. <http://www.imdb.com>.
“James Wan.” 2014. 6 Dec. 2014. Filmibeat. <http://www.filmibeat.com/celebs/james-wan/biography.html>.
“James Wan.” 2014. 6 Dec. 2014. TV Guide. <http://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/james-wan/bio/180285>.
WORKS CITED
IMDB. 2014. 6 Dec. 2014. <http://www.imdb.com>.
“James Wan.” 2014. 6 Dec. 2014. Filmibeat. <http://www.filmibeat.com/celebs/james-wan/biography.html>.
“James Wan.” 2014. 6 Dec. 2014. TV Guide. <http://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/james-wan/bio/180285>.
Conjuring Up Old School Scares: James Wan's "The Conjuring"
Written by Anthony Watkins
What’s scarier for you as a viewer? Seeing something created on screen, or not seeing something on screen, and instead being forced to “fill in the gaps” with your own imagination? For me personally, it is the latter. I have watched many films spanning several decades---films that are intended to thrill, surprise, and shock the viewer. One of my favorite films is Steven Spielberg’s pioneering blockbuster Jaws (1975). As I wrote in a previous article, Jaws was largely successful due to its failure—that is the failure of the mechanical shark “Bruce”. Because the shark did not work properly for several scenes in the film, Spielberg was forced to form the shark’s point-of-view using underwater shots. Also, just as importantly, Spielberg decided not to reveal the creature until about halfway through the film. A similar aesthetic was used in another favorite Spielberg film of mine in Jurassic Park (1993). If you have seen the film, you will remember that we only catch a glimpses of the terrifying velociraptors and we do not see the Tyrannosaurus Rex at all until the famous “T-Rex Paddock Attack” scene. The characters in the film were even disappointed not seeing any dinosaurs on their first tour (cue Jeff Goldblum: “Now eventually you might have dinosaurs on your dinosaur tour, right?”). What I am getting at is that suspense for viewers is created by not seeing the object right away. Instead, force audiences to get on the edge of their seat and make them anxious and antsy about wanting to see what they currently can’t see on screen.
In Jaws and Jurassic Park, Spielberg chooses not to reveal the attraction early on, effectively generating excitement and angst for the characters (and viewers).
This is an aesthetic that was used in old-school horror films, particularly with The Exorcist (Friedkin, 1973) and The Amityville Horror (Rosenberg, 1979). But in recent years, filmmakers have opted for a new approach to scare and create terror for audiences: showing gore and excessive graphic violence (“splatter” films) or a combination of gore and sexual imagery (“torture porn”). These films can be effective in their own right, but in my opinion they do not live up to the old-school aesthetic.
Director James Wan, who ironically helmed the original Saw (2004) and is responsible for popularizing torture porn, harkened back to old school horror films with Insidious (2010) and most recently with The Conjuring (2013). What specific old school scares did Wan recall to electrify audiences?
First and foremost, Wan used what I call the “Jaws” aesthetic described in the opening paragraph. He doesn’t fully reveal the supernatural entity that is possessing the Perron family’s house until the last quarter of the film. The other three quarters of the film, Wan tantalizes viewers with partial prints of the being (ex: hands) instead of giving away the full body. In other words, he forces audiences to fill in the rest for themselves with the most terrifying special effect one can ever create---imagination. In an interview with Rolling Stone, Wan noted, “I always felt that what is scary is actually hearing someone tell you what they think they see. That sense of invisibility makes things a lot scarier, since your imagination tends to fill in the gaps. So a character can be staring into the darkness behind a door and you just see the fright on their face. I think that's scarier than showing you what's behind the door” (Rolling Stone).
Director James Wan, who ironically helmed the original Saw (2004) and is responsible for popularizing torture porn, harkened back to old school horror films with Insidious (2010) and most recently with The Conjuring (2013). What specific old school scares did Wan recall to electrify audiences?
First and foremost, Wan used what I call the “Jaws” aesthetic described in the opening paragraph. He doesn’t fully reveal the supernatural entity that is possessing the Perron family’s house until the last quarter of the film. The other three quarters of the film, Wan tantalizes viewers with partial prints of the being (ex: hands) instead of giving away the full body. In other words, he forces audiences to fill in the rest for themselves with the most terrifying special effect one can ever create---imagination. In an interview with Rolling Stone, Wan noted, “I always felt that what is scary is actually hearing someone tell you what they think they see. That sense of invisibility makes things a lot scarier, since your imagination tends to fill in the gaps. So a character can be staring into the darkness behind a door and you just see the fright on their face. I think that's scarier than showing you what's behind the door” (Rolling Stone).
In this scene, Wan opts not to show audiences what the character sees behind the door, instead forcing them to visualize for themselves the appearance of the supernatural entity. The end result is something more terrifying than anything that could be shown on screen.
The film itself is virtually devoid of any blood, gore, or special effects. Since there is only a couple profanities in the entire film and no sexual content, it can be affirmed that The Conjuring earns its R rating on scares alone. Besides using the “Jaws” aesthetic mentioned above, Wan creates these scares in various other ways. From the outset, he creates a very brooding and sinister atmosphere in the old farm house. We hear doors and floorboards creaking, wind blowing—causing objects to bump against each other, and strange noises. He is also able to emanate an ominous quietness, especially during the night scenes. This atmosphere is aided by an extensive use of slow dolly shots down empty hallways—making viewers believe someone or something is present behind the camera.
Slow, stealthily-moving dolly shots of empty hallways add to the tension of Wan's film.
The “jump” scenes presented in the film also need to be called to attention. Wan has certainly done his homework and watched previous horror films to know when viewers expect something or someone to jump out and scare them. For that reason, he skillfully presents a shot that looks for certain that it will be a jump moment. However, at that point, he reveals that there was nothing after all, giving viewers a brief, but false sigh of relief. Then, viewers are then skillfully caught off guard when Wan makes his reveal. This happened several times as I was watching the film, and though audiences will know what to look for the second time around, the terror remains.
I always feel the musical score in a film is not recognized or given enough credit by critics or audiences (What would Jaws be without its music?) In this film’s case, although not related to old school scares, the score certainly needs to be recognized. Composer Joseph Bishara, who previously worked with Wan on Insidious, effectively adds to the haunting atmosphere by creating a chilling an unnerving soundscape using a mix of brass instruments, among others.
In conclusion, with The Conjuring, director James Wan was able to recreate some of the classic scares that made films such as The Exorcist and The Amityville Horror so memorable. By not relying on graphic violence and instead on audiences’ imaginations, he was able to bring horror back to its prime from the 1970s. Audiences were able to rediscover this potent aesthetic that goes far beyond what the human eye can ever see. My hope is that both present and future filmmakers will start to push this “old school” but highly effective method.
WORKS CITED
Greene, Andy. “'Conjuring' Director James Wan on the Legacy of 'Saw,' Plans for 'Fast and Furious 7'.” Rolling Stone. 19 July 2013. 19 Feb. 2015. <http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/conjuring-director-james-wan-on-the-legacy-of-saw-plans-for-fast-and-furious-7-20130719>.
I always feel the musical score in a film is not recognized or given enough credit by critics or audiences (What would Jaws be without its music?) In this film’s case, although not related to old school scares, the score certainly needs to be recognized. Composer Joseph Bishara, who previously worked with Wan on Insidious, effectively adds to the haunting atmosphere by creating a chilling an unnerving soundscape using a mix of brass instruments, among others.
In conclusion, with The Conjuring, director James Wan was able to recreate some of the classic scares that made films such as The Exorcist and The Amityville Horror so memorable. By not relying on graphic violence and instead on audiences’ imaginations, he was able to bring horror back to its prime from the 1970s. Audiences were able to rediscover this potent aesthetic that goes far beyond what the human eye can ever see. My hope is that both present and future filmmakers will start to push this “old school” but highly effective method.
WORKS CITED
Greene, Andy. “'Conjuring' Director James Wan on the Legacy of 'Saw,' Plans for 'Fast and Furious 7'.” Rolling Stone. 19 July 2013. 19 Feb. 2015. <http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/news/conjuring-director-james-wan-on-the-legacy-of-saw-plans-for-fast-and-furious-7-20130719>.
Here is a scene from the movie described earlier in the article, where Wan shows emotional terror without revealing it visually.
