Fright Night and the Erotic Allure of 1980s Horror

Fright Night is one of my favorite horror movies. However, I hesitate to call it a horror movie, as it's not scary at all. Perhaps there are one or two scenes that are unsettling, but even then, these scenes are contextualized by a film that frames horror as fun, campy, and puerile (and not in a bad way). If the film has a message, it is that horror in the 1980s was a cultural form permeated by voyeuristic pleasure and unconscious eroticism (and no small amount of veiled homoeroticism). But does this view hold up when considering all the horror movies produced in the 1980s? I believe eroticism is a significant element of 1980s horror films, but there are exceptions. Some 1980s horror films are more concerned with escaping the ordinary (e.g., Nightmare on Elm Street, Dolls, Child's Play), rather than focusing on eroticism.

Fright Night is not one of those films. It is clearly focused on providing voyeuristic pleasure for its viewers, and director Tom Holland doesn't try to hide this at all. One of the first scenes in the film features a television screen showing a horror film, while the camera pans to two teenagers, Charley Brewster and Amy Peterson, making out on the floor. From the beginning, 1980s horror films are portrayed as quasi-pornographic, designed to arouse but through suggestion and association rather than explicit imagery.

Copyright Columbia Pictures 1985

Later, the film introduces the character of Jerry Dandrige, one of my favorite film vampires. Dandrige, played by Chris Sarandon, is a big part of what makes this film iconic. His portrayal of Dandrige is unique, as he is haughty and dangerous but also bizarrely sympathetic; Sarandon doesn't play a manic, psychopath vampire but instead renders a more human, calm exterior. Even though Dandrige is a murderous bloodsucking monster, when he appeals to Charley Brewster to leave him alone, the viewer may feel a slight bit of sympathy for his appeal. Why didn't Brewster take Dandrige up on his offer? If Dandrige is cursed with vampirism, he is forced to feed to survive, right? However, the film doesn't allow us to sympathize with Dandrige for very long. Through the amazing costume effects of Steven Johnson, we see Dandrige transformed into a monster after being wounded with a pencil by Charley Brewster.

Many scenes in this film involve people looking voyeuristically. Consider the scene where Charley Brewster first learns that Dandrige is a vampire. Using binoculars, Charley looks through his window into the window of Dandrige's house and spots him naked with another woman in a sexualized embrace. Dandrige reveals his vampire fangs just before biting his guest. The theme of looking upon horror and receiving some sort of erotic pleasure from it is woven throughout the film. Consider the scene after the vampire killer, Peter Vincent, slays the werewolf/vampire hybrid, Evil Ed Thompson. This is one of the coolest effect scenes in the film, showcasing the transformation from a wolf back into a human. Steven Johnson's practical effects genius is on full display. As the reverse transformation is happening, Peter Vincent's face is constantly shown; we see several emotions playing upon his features, and the strange pacing unsettles us. Why are we watching this man's face contort and emote so intensely? In other words, the pacing of the film slows down to get us to reflect on the nature of watching horror--a horror like a transforming beast--and the pleasures and pains associated with it.

I'm not trying to suggest that Tom Holland set out to encode some high-art message into this fun horror film about teenagers, vampires, and vampire killers. However, I am suggesting that, despite its quirkiness and silliness, the film artfully encourages us to consider the nature of horror films in the 1980s. There is a great scene in the middle of the film that captures the essence of this theme perfectly: Charley Brewster and Evil Ed Thompson are watching the news in a diner. Evil Ed then tells Charley that there were two recent murders in town, and, laughing hysterically, adds that the bodies had their heads cut off. Charley Brewster responds, "You're sick."

Are we all sick? Why do we take pleasure in the erotically charged spectacles often provided by 1980s horror films? This is one of the interesting questions posed by Fright Night. It's up to us to answer it.

Navigating Information Overload and the Importance of Slow Journalism

I've been grappling with the challenge of consuming too much news. How do you avoid the never-ending scroll of doom when we're witnessing significant world historical events unfold? How can you manage to read low-stakes books (e.g. fiction), engage in casual conversations, or fully immerse yourself in your work, all the while major events are taking place? It's challenging. Staying informed about current events has never been easier. And there's minimal friction in raising your figurative periscope to get a glimpse of the world.

That being said, I recognize the crucial reasons behind the need to limit your news intake. One significant concern is the negative news bias. Most news agencies tend to emphasize negative news, and given the vastness of our planet and the complexity of our society, there's a perpetual supply of such content. So, if you consume a lot of news, you're likely to be inundated with a barrage of negativity, which can significantly impact your mental well-being.

Another issue to consider is the increased risk of encountering biased or slanted news when you actively seek out information. In the age of an endless information flow, much like a buffet, you might find yourself naturally gravitating towards news that confirms your existing biases. By analogy, selecting a healthy dish from a limited restaurant menu is easier than resisting fried food and sweets at a sprawling buffet. The same principle applies to news consumption: when you broaden your news sources, you're more likely to construct an echo chamber for yourself. Of course, it's crucial to begin with reliable news sources, but that's becoming increasingly challenging in today's landscape.

Personally, I've turned to magazine news and long-form journalism as my solution. I won't specify particular titles I read because no matter what I mention, there will always be critics. However, I want to defend the merits of weekly or bi-weekly news magazines. Their slower pace forces you to take a step back, encouraging more deliberate thinking. Their longer-form articles demand sustained attention and potentially foster thoughtfulness.