Comments on: Masked Murderers

By: lilyseye

lilyseye — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:02:24 +0000

I agree with you all (even Smichard’s zzzzzzzzs in a sense. They were home? Well, Tamara clearly wasn’t, so go away). The film succeeds, but in a general, simplistic way. It’s an easy formula that works: masks plus killers plus deep dark wood equals creepy and, if done really well, terrifying (it was not done as well as it could have been in The Strangers). But it seems too easy to me, and that’s why it’s not a film that I ever need to see again, as it does not provide *any* other reason to come back to it. Jaws, of course, clearly does this — it’s full of *characters* and an enormous amount of tension/suspense that The Strangers generally lacks.

And yes, the sense of meaningful play was more apparent and noteworthy in Funny Games. Because of this, The Strangers comes off as a somewhat cheesy horror knockoff of that political film.

I had a good time. It’s just not up there with my favorite scary flicks, those of which are fuller (in every sense of the term) – The Exorcist, What Lies Beneath, etc. I want a bit more behind those masks.

But that’s what *I* want.

By: Smichards

Smichards — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 13:43:47 +0000

“Why are you doing this to us?” “Because you were home….” Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz………………

By: Evrim

Evrim — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 07:59:00 +0000

The masks are absolutely not necessary; they are merely an addition to make the whole experience more terrifiying.
Compare ‘The Strangers’ with say, the recent US remake of ‘Funny Games’ : the psychopaths there wore no masks other than the ‘unseen’ masks that they used in their sick and degrading games. The fact that they looked like you, me, that cute guy next door made the experience more palpatable, more terrifiying. I defy anyone to not be haunted, not be startled by their brutal ordinariness.
This applies to more than just them though; the screen is full of violent perpetrators whose facade of normality never changes: not even when we finally see them cross over to the darker recess of the psychse and commit atrocious acts: ‘Henry : Portrait Of A Serial Killer’, ‘Man Bite Dog’ , ‘The Last Horror Movie’ and even ‘The Lost’.
But I think the point in ‘The Strangers’ is the childishness of the whole ordeal: as you remark, the film does not look upon itself to provide a deep , meaningful reason for the slaughter and terrorising of this couple: instead you have a sense of play: as if these culprits are playing with them: are playing a game of some sort. And the masks enchance this: they are grotesque but at the same time, childlike : simplifying the reasons as well as the images.

By: Trent

Trent — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 06:58:44 +0000

Although I haven’t seen the movie, you mentioned a notable absence in back story for our monsters. Isn’t that in and of itself a “mask”? We don’t see their faces and we don’t see their lives. I like the idea of the horror of the complete unknown… the audience is left to project their version of a personal monster. It could be your dentist under that mask! The taxi driver! Your mother in law! Now that’s scary…

Jaws is a “one trick pony” in a sense. It is how that iconic image is used, and what it does that horrifies us. So, to answer your question, it doesn’t seem matter if that’s all The Strangers is, if done right.

By: lilyseye

lilyseye — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 03:58:10 +0000

My mistake. What I meant was: does it matter that the masks themselves are exactly (and really *only*) what makes the movie so frightening? I mean, as long as the end result is creepy, does it matter if the film is a kind of one-trick pony?

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 03:51:23 +0000

Yes, it matters. We need those masks, otherwise it isn’t nearly as scary. Imagine, even the ugliest of persons in the exact same positions as those masked figures in The Strangers and you’ll see precisely what I mean. The mask is scarier. It’s otherworldly.