genre film. When I Google the term, the first hit brings me to a review of Monsters from the Arab Times, which compares
T
the film to District 9, noting that they “both belong to the category of ‘elevated genre,’ where horror, sci-fi and monster movie tropes are smartly used to tell a not-so-usual story.” A few entries down the Google results list, I find an interview with director Matt Reeves on the Cineplex movie
blog about Let Me In, his remake of the Swedish vampire movie Let the Right One In. When asked why he was at- tracted to the story, he explained, “It’s an elevated genre, which means there’s more of a dramatic and emotional core than just the horror. The best thing about elevated genre stories is that they’re always about something else. In this case it’s a vampire story about the pain of adolescence.” Regular horror movies aren’t about something else? Does that mean other thinly veiled films about adolescence,
such as I Was a Teenage Werewolf, The Beast Within or Ginger Snaps are elevated genre films? Are elevated genre films art house horror movies? Would Argento’s work count as elevated genre because of his lurid colour schemes, bizarre plotting and unconventional narratives (sometimes involving, uh, monkeys)? Would you call Romero’s Dead films elevated genre because they’ve got a strong political agenda beneath the gut-munching? Night of the Living Dead certainly wasn’t a respected work when it came out at the end of the ’60s and shocked audiences. Can something start off as offensive and gory and later become elevated? Kinda tough to wrap your grey matter around, isn’t it? Creating new descriptions and categories for art is both more important and
less relevant than ever. There are more films and filmmakers out there cross- pollinating and deconstructing styles than ever before, so in order for us to communicate clearly and quickly (Facebook, Twitter and texting are both a cause and symptom of this), it’s useful to work up shorthand such as “elevated genre” (or “splatter-punk” or “zom-com,” etc.). At the same time, as more genres, subgenres and sub-subgenres are created, those labels become less meaningful. So, isn’t an elevated genre film just a thoughtful, ambitious and/or accom-
plished genre movie? By dictionary definition, “elevated” means “exalted or noble; lofty: elevated thoughts.” Elevated genre doesn’t sit well with me because the term implies
a judgement upon, or maybe an apology for, the genre. It’s like, “Of course horror films are distasteful, but you can feel okay about this one because it’s better than a crass monster flick – it’s... elevated.” The attitude that the horror genre is a ghetto is nothing new. One of the most famous examples is Exorcist writer
William Peter Blatty calling that film a “supernatural detective story” rather than a “horror” film. Right... and Hal- loween is a dark family drama, Dracula is a gothic romance and The Blair Witch Project is an outdoor adventure tale. We cast a wide net in Rue Morgue; we’ve reviewed The Passion of the Christ, The Dark Knight and, in this issue,
Ingmar Bergman’s The Magician – because the edges tell us a lot about the centre when it comes to the genre. I wouldn’t call any of those films “horror,” but each of them speak to the average horror fan in certain important ways – through gore, monsters and the supernatural, respectively. Inversely, there’s no need to treat artistry, intel- ligence or respectability as something that is in opposition to genre content. Copious amounts of blood, space crea- tures or scares does not equate to something base. Some might look at Monsters, District 9, Let The Right One In or the more personal films of Guillermo del Toro
and call ’em elevated genre films (possibly before putting on a tweed jacket with elbow pads and lighting up a pipe). But I look at those films and just see damn good genre movies. Elevated? That only comes into it when I think about my desire to plant a boot in the ass of anyone who thinks “genre,” on its own, is a bad thing.
here are certain combinations of words that make me wince. For example, “nu metal,” “light beer,” “Hol- lywood remake,” “CGI monster” and “sparkling vampires.” A new term has entered the lexicon lately that’s proving to be just as cringe-worthy: “elevated genre.” I’ve heard it mentioned at film festivals and in conversation over the past year, and it seems to be catching on as a way to describe a certain type of
STAFF
publisher Rodrigo Gudiño
ManaGinG eDitor Monica S. Kuebler
art Director Gary Pullin
office ManaGer Jessa Sobczuk
MarketinG/aDvertisinG ManaGer
Jody Infurnari PH: 905-985-0430 FX: 905-985-4195 E:
jody@rue-morgue.com
CONTRIBUTORS
ANDREW AHMED STUART F. ANDREWS MATT BARONE BRENTON BENTZ A.S. BERMAN JOHN W. BOWEN PHIL BROWN JAMES BURRELL PEDRO CABEZUELO PAUL CORUPE JAMES FISHER THE GORE-MET PETER GUTIÉRREZ MARK R. HASAN JEREMY HOBBS CLAIRE HORSNELL
JUSTIN HUMPHREYS LAST CHANCE LANCE ANDREW LEE AARON VON LUPTON TOM MES ALISON NASTASI JOSEPH O’BRIEN DEJAN OGNJANOVIC NINA C. OWENS GEORGE PACHECO JESS PEACOCK SEAN PLUMMER NADJA SAYEJ BRIAN J. SHOWERS APRIL SNELLINGS
RUE MORGUE #108 would not have been possi- ble without the valuable assistance of Marie-Ève Larin, Mary-Beth Hollyer, Al McMullan, Thor and the Honey Island Swamp Monster.
RUE MORGUE #108 is dedicated to Ingrid Pitt. R.I.P.
Cover: blaCk death Design by Gary Pullin.
Rue Morgue Magazine is published monthly (with the exception of February) and accepts no responsibility for unsolicited manuscripts, photos, art or other materials. Freelance submissions accompanied by S.A.S.E. will be seriously considered and, if necessary, returned.
We acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Canada Periodical Fund (CPF) for our publishing activities. RUE MORGUE Magazine #108 ISSN 1481 – 1103 Agreement No. 40033764 Entire contents copyright MARRS MEDIA INC. 2011. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PRINTED IN CANADA.
dave@rue-morgue.com RM6
eDitor-in-chief dave alexander
associate eDitor trevor tuminski
Graphic DesiGner Justin Erickson
copy eDitor Liisa ladouceur
financial controller Marco Pecota
intern andrew sutherland
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72