30 in 30: A MONTH OF HORROR. AUDITION
DAY 14
AUDITION (1999)
You shouldn’t see this film.
Frankly, I don’t know if it is a good idea to share or recommend this movie if you don’t know the person you’re suggesting it. It is very disconcerting. It probably has a shoe-in for the most difficult-to-see film of all time. So, why do I include it? Because it tells a good story, or at least it tries to.
There are other films which try to be disturbing just for the sake of being disturbing, and only manage to be sad exploitation films with little to no artistic value. I’m not going to dignify those films by mentioning them, but you know the ones I’m referring to, and if you don’t know them, then you’re better off that way. AUDITION is not like that, the director wants to tell a story that has meaning, it just happen to be a very (very) twisted tale.
AUDITION is the story of a middle age man; a widower who wants a woman by his side. The widower and his producer friend concoct a plan to find a new girl for him, they stage an audition. They are going to put out a casting call and interview girls. Once the widower finds the girl he likes, they will say the project fell through and he will ask her out on a date. The widower finds that girl, and she turns out to be a psychopathic torturer.
After watching CARRIE and some of the other horror films on the list, it has come to my attention that a lot a of the protagonists “had it coming.” I’m not saying they deserved what they got, but they weren’t the best people ever. Which made me remember something a teacher said about horror movie protagonists:
“They are paying for their sins.”
Blake Snyder’s “Save The Cat” I believe has some similar ideas around scary movies. “Sin” seems to be a central factor in the construction of most horror stories. Whatever is chasing the main protagonist is some sort of karmic reaction to whatever crimes he, or his people, committed in the past.
Why do we need stories about people paying for their sins? Two ideas come to mind. First, they serve as cautionary tales. Secondly, they help the audience believe the story that’s being told to them and accept it. Why do I mean by this? I think that if the story were about an upstanding man who did everything perfect all the time, and then got a murderous girlfriend, the people wouldn’t want to see that film. It feels wrong.
Making character suffer pains that the audience might think of as underserved or excessive, are going to make the audience hate the film, not the villain inflicting the torture. The humanity of the audience can’t be infringed.
AUDITION is right at the border, but I understand why some people might think is all too much.
What can we learn about the horror show that is AUDITION?
That character in horror movies not only need to be empathized with, they also must have some form of penalty to pay.
It seems strange and somewhat reactionary, but it’s a formula I see time and time again in the genre.
What makes this movie so scary?
Everything in it. The music is chilling, the cinematography is alienating, the characters believable, and the story is frightening. Probably more so to the males in the audience, some of which I know still flinch when they hear:
“Deeper, deeper, deeper.”
Tomorrow: TUCKER AND DALE VS EVIL (2010)
Yesterday: SESSION 9 (2001)
