The Horror Movie I Never Knew I Needed A.K.A. Team Johnny – IN A VIOLENT NATURE (2024)

Do you know what I hate the most about writing today’s blog post? That I have the unfamiliar urge to policing my words, of being mindful of how I come across; not too uptight or guarded, or worse, not too annoying or simple-minded. Suddenly, after eight years of having created marathMARATH, I find myself fearful of my own voice. But fearful of what, exactly?

I have been staring at this untitled and blank Word document for an uncomfortable long period of time. I should be doing something else, something vaguely more productive. My perfectionist side is screaming at me, telling me to get on with it, while its counter is simply silent.

IT IS NOT TOO DEEP!! IT IS JUST A BLOG POST ABOUT A HORROR MOVIE!! GET ON WITH IT!!
(…)

Although, it is not just any horror movie, is it? It is more than that. I had never seen anything like it and, quite frankly, I lost my freaking mind. Yes, I passionately loved it, yes, but some people hated it, called it pretentious and a waste of time. Could I be wrong? So alarmingly mistaken? Or, could it be that In a Violent Nature (2024) represents a before and after in the genre? Can horror go back to being one-sided? Or, has a door been opened for a new type of storytelling, one that focuses solely, entirely, absolutely, exclusively, yes, completely on the bad guy? The bad guy as the main character, the one who is followed by the camera the whole time, the one you care for? Yes, care for.

And, ladies and gentlemen, that is the crux of my discomfort and apparent fear today: of being judged as problematic for caring about the bad guy… (*ew! passive hybristophilia? as if! what the actual hell*)… hold on, wait a second, what am I even talking about? That is nonsense. I am not problematic. I simply went along with the filmmaker’s vision and intention for his experimental slasher movie – he flipped the script and it worked on me, period.

Phew! That was a close call. I feel so much lighter and clearheaded now… (*guess what the girlies say about writing down your inner thoughts and feelings is true hahaha*)… um, well, it seems that today I am bringing you that ultra fresh, 110%, A++ content so let’s continue with it, shall we?

#spoilers

First things first, you do know what In a Violent Nature is about, right? Well, in the off-chance you do not, let me give it to you straight: it is about an undead slasher villain, Johnny, who is awaken from a supernatural curse when his dead mom’s golden locket is stolen from his own unmarked grave, and so his goal—getting the locket back—begins, and nothing, or no one, will stop him from achieving it. 

I was fascinated by the beginning of the movie as it really set the mood in a way that said, Hey, we really do not care about the soon-to-be victims, so we do not even need to look at them while they are talking among themselves, we need to look, however, at the resting place of Johnny which means just dirt and greenery from the woods. So, when one of the soon-to-be victims steals the golden locket from his unmarked grave, fact that gets asserted by a young hand infiltrating the frame, and cowardly leaving soon after, then, and only then, is when the camera moves atop Johnny’s resting place and slowly, in real time, shows him crawling out of the ground. And so, effective immediately, we closely follow him from behind on this unexpected and inconvenient chore of his.

Right away I realized that if someone had returned the locket without any issues or drama, Johnny would not have hurt, okay, killed anyone. He literally did not give a damn about you, he simply wanted his property back, so if you came across his way, he would eliminate you, nothing personal, just business; it could have been you, your friend, their friend, their mom, their accountant, their mechanic, well, you understand what I am getting at… you meant nothing to Johnny.

I found Johnny, the already established main character, quite interesting as he, in the most humanly way possible, resembled a wild animal in its natural habitat, with nothing on its mind except for the instinctual hunt. Sure, legend had it that he was a naive, special-needs kid when he tragically died due to a prank gone wrong at the hands of hateful adults who had a grudge against his greedy father, and wanted to teach him a lesson at the expense of innocent, little Johnny and, heck, long story short, the adults also killed the father after he confronted them about Johnny’s death. Current Johnny, animalistic-like Johhny, might not be the small, ‘slow’ kid he once was, but the supernatural, slow-walking adult version of his eternal vengeful spirit, and I was soooo here for it! (Go Johnny!)

Let me be clear, okay? I need you to understand one thing: my fascination with Johnny was rightfully earned thanks to the astute way the story was presented by the writer and director where facts and objectivity were king, although, to be fair, I am well aware that my being an open-minded person and always having a great appreciation for the art of moviemaking, elevated my watching experience. Wait, hold on, see? I am sounding pretentious now… mmh, let me recalibrate… what I should have said two sentences ago was that I am not your average dude who… alright, never mind, I need to stop digging my own grave.

Johnnyyyyyy. Johnny was supernatural, thus possessed supernatural strength and was masterful when using it against others. Side note, can we all agree that the pretzel-yoga-girl death scene will go down in history as being one of the most gruesome, memorable, and creative deathly attacks ever put together and shot on film? Brilliant, just brilliant craftsmanship.

Another death scene that made me audibly awe in admiration was the Park Ranger’s. When Johnny severed the spinal cord—immediately rendering the Ranger unable to move or talk—and tortured him slowing by slicing him with the industrial wood cutting machine, was the moment when I knew the filmmaker was all in in this experimental slasher movie of his. He broke many unspoken rules and my brain was buzzing with elation and excitement.

What else can I say about In a Violent Nature? That I appreciated the really, really long takes, the walking in the woods in real time during night and day, all the sounds, all the visuals, the original camera angles, the meticulously detailed work put together when marrying the peaceful and relaxing scenes with the horrible realities of life cycles in nature. Because remember, Johnny was an animal-like behemoth with no intrinsic bad intentions, that was why when he finally got back his golden locket, he eagerly returned to his tranquil, solitary slumber six feet under.

(…)
THERE!! WASN’T THAT EASY!? 

In Love and Fear,

—Marath

P.S. Because I have way too much free time on my hands:

© 2016-2024

When One Thing Leads to Another: WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE? (1962)

Hello friend! How are you doing? I am great and currently on vacation, reporting from the Crowne Plaza Milwaukee South hotel while the family is out and about. (Decided to have a quiet and restful afternoon by myself, in case you were wondering.) Is it worth mentioning that today’s writing companions are stale coffee, cold leftovers, and a view so pretty that makes said lackluster beverage and food combo a-okay? No? Well then, let’s get down to business.

Last week we watched Maxxxine (2024) at the theater and thought it was just okay, granted, that very film, the third and final installment in the X trilogy, was our first introduction to the franchise and, you could argue, our lack of attachment to it was the reason why the story did not resonate with us. Sure, we deliberately [and selfishly] went to see the movie because it took place in Hollywood during the 80’s and wanted to indulge in the nostalgia of the good old days, and that we did. So, to follow the same sentiment of not doing things chronologically, let’s begin by the end with What Ever Happened to Baby Jane (1962).

After watching the movie, reading the book, and listening to the audiobook—all for the first time in the last few days—I can safely say I am now a What Ever Happened to Baby Jane afficionado, as well as a fan of Henry Farrell’s original 1960 novel. I know I am biased, but the story was arguably so great that just two years after the book was published it was adapted into a Hollywood movie – if that is not proof of creative and artistic prowess, I do not know what is.

Right, here is my quick summary of the movie with SPOILERS: A family of four—mom, dad, and two little girls—rely financially on the income made by the younger one as a Child Star who, if not for her all-American, daddy’s-little-girl cute looks, would be regarded as a sham by the public due to her lack of natural talent as a performer. The child, Jane, perhaps in frustration and sensing she does not deserve all the attention and fame she is getting, behaves like an insufferable brat and is unnecessarily mean and hurtful to her family, including to her sister, Blanche. Blanche is more demure and mindful, undeniably the good sister, the one whose potential is so real and palpable that you can predict for her a solid and successful career in showbiz in a decade or so. And it does happen. Blanche, now a young woman, is an established Movie Star with studio contracts so generous that she makes sure to help her now-forgotten, has-been sister by requiring she too has a role in all her films, even if it calls for Jane to play background roles as Cigarette Girl Number 3. Humiliated, Jane acts out again but now by drinking heavily and by embarrassing Blanche at public events, thus, when the [un]lucky opportunity presents itself while no one is looking, she tries to run her over with a moving vehicle… one sister ends up traumatized and the other paralyzed. And here, my dear horror friend, is where the movie really begins.

A few decades later, Jane was a scary old hag, mainly because of her untreated mental illness, but also because of her stubbornness about wearing age-inappropriate clothes and unflattering makeup. On the inside she was ugly too, alas, she had a job to do ever since Blanche ended up in a wheelchair. Jane was a bitter, resentful, and mean caretaker, expressing her volatile emotions in unhealthy ways, only making things worse for everyone.

Blanche was an elegant mature lady, even during paraplegia. There was something so undeniable about her, about her good character, good values, she was all in all a good person. Attractive too, sure, she radiated not only beauty and health, but strength and resilience. She was simply Blanche.

Was Jane triggered more than usual by recent tv reruns of Blanche’s work? Yes. Was Jane jealous of Blanche’s joyful reaction to watching herself on tv? Yes. Was Jane determined to having a much-deserved comeback as Baby Jane—her childhood stage name—so people would idolize her again, love her again? Yes. Would she be able to balance both her hatred toward Blanche and her own self-obsession and self-pity? No, not at all.

If you were Jane, you would perceive what happens next as a series of pranks and misunderstandings, all meanspirited, yes, but certainly not meant to hurt Blanche; she would never hurt Blanche, she took care of Blanche. If you were Blanche, you would perceive reality as it is, because this is reality and you are being kept captive in your own home, slowly being killed by your sister who desperately needs psychiatric medical intervention. One sister was the tormentor and one was the victim, but only one knew it.

I have to pause here to say there was one thing I did not like about Blanche: her constant enabling of Jane’s horrid behavior. Over and over, and without consequences, she let herself be mistreated. It was infuriating to watch. I could not understand how this very sensible and smart woman was so stupid when it came to her sister, I mean, was there something we did not know? Was there more to the story? Was Blanche keeping a secret? If so, how bad could it be? Would it be worth her own life? Anyway.

So long story short, Jane’s drinking and unbalanced mind made her murder the housekeeper, injure the pianist (in the book he barely made it alive), and torture and starve her sister. And in the final scene, when a psychotic Jane takes a moribund Blanche to the beach to reminisce about their childhood, Blanche confesses to Jane that she had done it all to herself, that Blanche had cause her own paraplegia when she had tried to run her, Jane, over with her car. Jane would not remember this as she was drunk, scared, and traumatized, repressing it all. Blanche also confesses that she hated her, Jane, and that she had wanted payback for all the times Jane had made her life impossible as a child, so much so that when Blanche gained status and power through her movie career, she made sure to always have a contract clause that would ‘imprison’ Jane in small parts so she would never leave, never start a new life, never get married and have a family of her own. This was Blanche’s revenge.

“Then, you mean, all this time we could’ve been friends.” –Jane [timidly offers that assertion as she is being told her life was hijacked and wasted due to unresolved childhood resentment. Her reaction was not to ask in a loud and angry voice, How dare you, How could you, I could have done and been so much more, but instead, We could have always been friends? Heartbreaking.]

Perfect time to show why Baby Jane reminded me of Pearl, or vice versa:

A young Pearl was obsessed with Hollywood movie starlets and believed she had the same abilities as them. Even though she lived in rural America during the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, and was waiting for her husband to return from WWI, she knew she was destined for stardom and was resolute to do everything in her power to escape the boredom of her life. She, like Jane, was delusional about her artistic talent as she had exactly none of it. Also, just like Jane, Pearl threw an extremely embarrassing tantrum—a really uncomfortable spectacle to watch—when confronted by ‘adults’ or, better put, by figures of authority in the industry, with the fact that she was not good.

Likewise, Pearl and Jane seemed to have had roadblocks on their mental and emotional development as adults, and also appeared to suffer from delusions of grandeur because they saw each other as the ultimate and perfect performer, when in reality they were dummies without talent. Murderous, sociopathic dummies for sure, yes, but dummies nonetheless.

Okay, I need your full attention here, we’re almost done: The X trilogy consists of Pearl (2022) who follows a young and deranged Pearl in 1918; continued by X (2022) who follows pornographic actress Maxxxine in 1979 as she crosses paths with an older and still deranged Pearl; ending with Maxxxine (2024) set in 1985 where we focus again on the x-rated actress as she makes it into the mainstream media. Young Pearl, old Pearl, and Maxxxine were played by the same actress and, to me, that was the entire gimmick of the franchise; Pearl was the one movie worth my time and attention out of the three, if I am being honest with you.

So, what was learned today? That when you are curious enough, one thing might lead to another. That if I go to the cinema to watch a random 80’s-inspired movie, I might end up liking better a different movie related to said random movie; that if I enjoy the related movie so much, it might make me want to watch [for the first time] the black & white classic movie where the main character is as histrionic as this one; and that if I watch said classic movie, I might fall in love with it so hard, and with such a passion, that I might end up telling you all about it.

In Love and Fear,

—Marath

© 2016-2024

The Final Girl Support Group

Hello, hello, hi! Happy Tuesday, hope your three-day weekend was as chill and relaxing as mine, but if it wasn’t, that’s cool too, there is no right or wrong way of doing things in this horror life of ours, only legal and illegal tho lol. Anywhoozle, have you read the 2021 novel by Grady Hendrix called The Final Girl Support Group? Please, please, please, if you haven’t already, get your copy and read it asap. Don’t be like me: I had mine for a couple of years, literally collecting dust on my bookshelf, and just recently, for no specific reason at all, decided to give it a go and, goodness me, I could not put it down, it was really that good! Sure, I bought my copy by happenstance when visiting our local B&N thanks to its pretty cover and badass title, but had zero idea the story was a true love letter (ew, sorry, there’s no better way of putting it) to the Horror movie genre, our Horror movie genre; needless to say, had I known that vital piece of information sooner, I would not have let the years go by without me enjoying it. 

So, this is me, Marath, asking you to read the book (sooner than later) and take pleasure in the incredibly rich world of horror it holds for us.

Okay, now that you and I are on the same page and are good to go, let’s talk about my top-5 things (all spoiler-free) that made The Final Girl Support Group such a fun reading experience:

05. The present-day story (there were 80’s and 90’s flashbacks) taking place in 2010 here in California (and in other States as well), but in particular in the city of Burbank, aka my neighborhood; I know it is silly, but details like these add something extra to the mood, especially when a fictional character navigates the places of your very own non-fictional life.

04. Getting to know the main character, Lynette, and realizing little by little she was mentally and emotionally unwell, and then immediately proceeding to feel bad for her and wonder how a 38-year-old massacre survivor can still live in such debilitating fear and paranoia after all those years, even after her first attacker had been dead since 1988, and the second had been incarcerated since the 1990’s. Wait, if I did not mention it before, the book talks about seven middle-age women, all of whom survived traumatic events in their teenage years. Final Girls are what society, the press, and movie producers have called them for the past few decades, and it is also what they call themselves now. Every month, they meet at their secret Support Group which is guided by their therapist, Dr. Carol Elliot. The women are very different and at distinct stages of their lives, some are ready to close that chapter and move on and others, or shall we say other, not so much. Life was already though, but suddenly, and without any provocation at all, a myriad of unfortunate coincidences started happening, bringing their horrific past to the forefront. At first, it was thought to be really bad luck, but if there is something you and I, horror fans, know about Final Girls, is that they cannot afford the luxury of simple bad luck, they deal with revivals, sequels, and spin-offs :(

03. Meta-everything.

02. Chrissy’s misunderstood character; she was the anti-Final Girl on ethical and moral grounds, the one exiled from the secret and über exclusive Support Group, the traitor, the one in a relationship with a Monster, the one profiting from black market murderabilia, the one morbidly preserving the past via her art installation rooms, the chaotic and dirty one, the one with the dangerous philosophies about Final Girls & Monsters, the isolated one, the one survivor willing to die already, the one far too gone for help, but the one needing it the most. Duuuude, her character was so freaking interesting, I cannot convey in words how unique her whole vibe was. Honestly, I could read an entire trilogy based on her story.

01. All, and I mean all the references, from the big and obvious to the minute and obscure, of the cult-classic slasher Horror films and their relation to the seven Final Girls and their backstories/franchises:

I - Marilyn Torres, Panhandle Meat Hook; based on Sally from THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1974); Sally was played by actress Marilyn Burns

II - Dani Shipman, The Babysitter Murders; based on Laurie from HALLOWEEN (1978); actress Danielle Harris played Jamie, Laurie Strode's daughter, in Halloween 4-5

III - Adrienne Butler, Summer Slaughter; based on Alice from FRIDAY THE 13th (1980); Alice was played by actress Adrienne King

IV - Heather DeLuca, Deadly Dreams; based on Nancy from A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET (1984); Nancy was played by actress Heather Langenkamp

V - Lynette Tarkington, Slay Bells; based on Denise from SILENT NIGHT, DEADLY NIGHT (1984); Denise was played by actress Linnea Quigley

VI - Julia Campbell, Stab; based on Sidney from SCREAM (1996); Sidney was played by actress Neve Campbell

VII - Christine “Chrissy” Mercer, Gnomecoming; not based on any known Final Girl, but it is loosely speculated her backstory was inspired by Canadian film PROM NIGHT (1980)

So yeah, The Final Girl Support Group was an exceedingly entertaining novel, and it not only left me feeling happy and proud for being part of the horror community, but it also gave me hope thanks to its basic message: that traumatized girls, even horror-level traumatized girls, can grow up to be normal women, especially when they have each other for unconditional support. The End.

In Love and Fear,

—Marath

© 2016-2024