21st Century Horror Film: Networked Monsters

(1)

21st Century Horror Film:

Networked Monsters

Dwarka Berloth

0634275086

Student Number: 10147101 Date of completion: June 26, 2017 Supervisor: Floris Paalman Second Reader: Eef Masson University of Amsterdam

Master Thesis - Media Studies: Film Studies Word count: 22.151

(2)

Abstract

The monsters in contemporary horror films have changed from their previous iterations. They portray new fears in a changing society This new monster reflects the changing relationship between technology, power and fear. This thesis examines the new anxieties portrayed in order to add to the understanding of third capitalism. The first chapter discusses the transformation of the monster in the second half of the twentieth century, with a specific focus on technological developments as both a catalyst for societal innovation and a source of fear. The following chapter builds on the first chapter by examining the contemporary monster as a reflection of our networked society. It demonstrates that the contemporary fears stem from the increasingly internalized technological values and logics, which are visualized as omnipresent. The representation of the omnipresent monster indicates a shifting power notion, which will be discussed in the third chapter. An analysis of It Follows (2014) portrays networked, peer power as a source of anxiety. This speaks to the horizontal power structure of cognitive capitalism, which rather than a redistribution of power, indicated an expansion of control. The final chapter analyses Black Mirror’s episode Nosedive, as it demonstrates how gamification serves cognitive capitalism by systematically internalizing its logics and values and applying this to behaviour. In conclusion, this thesis argues that contemporary horror film warns us for the internalization of cognitive capitalism through the representation of the omnipresent monster.

(3)

1. Introduction

Over the past decade, the horror genre has re-invented itself, both within and outside of Hollywood. Universal studios, once famous for iconic Hollywood monsters such as Dracula (1931), The Mummy (1932), Wolf-man (1941) and of course Frankenstein (1931), is now reimagining their monsters. Donna Langley, chairman of Universal Pictures states: “So, we took a good, hard look at it, and we settled upon an idea, which is to take it out of the horror genre, put it more in the action-adventure genre and make it present day, bringing these incredibly rich and complex characters into present day and reimagine them and introduce them to a contemporary audience” (qtd. in Masters).

Iconic horror films such as Carrie (1976), The Blair Witch Project (1999), The Ring (2002), Scream (1996), The Hills have Eyes (1977), The Wicker Man (2006), Poltergeist (1982), Halloween (1978) and The Thing (1982), have all had a remake over the last decade. These filmmakers have reinterpreted the originals and placed them within today’s context. Wes Craven, director of Scre4m (2002) explains the need for change in horror film:

At the end of the decade, there was a feeling that this was the perfect time to look at the first decade of the 21st Century, and it was quite distinctive from others, with 9/11 hovering over things and the presence of electronic media being brought down to people, to the level where everybody is online, everybody is on Facebook and people are tweeting, all over the world, all the time. It’s totally different. So, it was time to take that into account. (qtd. in Radish)

The new technological possibilities could visualize fantasies of the past and could therefore motivate a remake. More importantly however, themes, narratives and cinematography have been reimagined to adapt them to contemporary society. Independent horror filmmakers are reinventing horror as well. Contemporary horror film is adapted to the new generation and our contemporary context. The director of the horror film The Neon Demon (2016) Refn, claims that: "The digital revolution is a new canvas where we accept reality. We're in a new ecosystem. A new system where there is no regulation or control. Opinions are oblivious” (qtd. in Morrow).

The representation of the monster has seen a transition that depicts anxieties of its time. Particularly the post-war era until now has seen a transformation in this representation that illustrate a changing relationship between technology, power, and fear. This changing relationship is demonstrated by the dual nature of technology, in that it is both promising to innovation and possibilities, yet, at the same time

(6)

feared because it could pose a threat to humanity and it’s values. The relationship between these three aspects has shifted from being represented as external, like for example in the fifties in which alien invasions and mutants reflected the large external threat of the cold war, towards a relationship that is increasingly represented as abstract and internalized.

The abstract and internalized relationship between the web 2.0 and society is increasingly represented by an omnipresent monster. Prominent contemporary films such as Rings (2017), It Follows (2014), Friend Request (2016), The Babadook (2014) and The Bye-Bye Man (2017) for example, all use narrative and stylistic techniques, such as atmospheric mise-en-scène and eye-level camera angles, to reinforce that the contemporary monster is omnipresent, both abstract and human, not external but internal and warn us that we should fear our peers. No longer is the evil portrayed as a stranger, a serial killer, monster, virus or paranormal entity. The focus has shifted towards a more immaterial form of monster. Today’s monster could be anyone or anything, a neighbour, a virus, media itself, a hovering presence or all of the above at the same time. This evil is portrayed as being both invisible and ubiquitous. The role of technology is fundamental to understand the monster as a reflection of the changing relationship between technology and society in contemporary horror. Horror films portray technology as a mediator and a form of surveillance between power and fear, aiming to control rather than discipline society on an individualized level. The omnipresence of technology resonates with the fear of an expansion of control, that has extended to the level of peers and seeks to internalize new ideological systems. The scope of these systems is questioned through the concept of gamification. Gamification is increasingly visualized as a tool to control behaviour by creating a magic circle, a mediated space wherein new rules and structures shape behaviour that is productive.

Marina Levina and Diem-My T.Bui, editors of Monster Culture in the 21st Century, discuss the representational function of contemporary horror films: “Monster narratives of the past decade have become omnipresent specifically because they represent collective social anxieties over resisting and embracing change in the twenty-first century” (1-2). She argues that these changing monsters are a reflection of our past decade of uncertainty: “These fears and tensions reflect an ever more interconnected global environment where increased mobility of people, technologies, and disease have produced great social, political, and economic uncertainty” (1). Throughout its history, horror film has functioned as an expression of contemporary society and its near future. Horror film thrives in times of economic, political, cultural and social transition. The social function of horror films has not changed, however its representations and ideologies are reflecting fears of a changing society.

Horror film has historically been theorized as a display of repression. Robin Wood argued that the horror films radical potential lies in the fact that “the true subject of the horror genre is the struggle for recognition of all that our civilization represses or oppresses” (28). Jancovich, in his study of horror as a

(7)

representation of America in the 1950’s, adds to this argument claiming that “the monster is therefore seen as a profoundly ambiguous figure which challenges social norms and so reveals society’s repressive monstrosity” (1).

At an ideological level, contemporary horror films are increasingly using the medium to express themselves regarding changing forms of power. Two particular trends stand out; a shift in power from authorities to peers, in which omnipresence implies a source of surveillance. Rather than to portray a disciplinary society as a source of anxiety, a society of control has become its main focus. Secondly, horror films reflect a changed perception of reality, incorporating the concept of gamification, reflecting a shift from the spectacle society, such as in the Truman Show, to one where we are all part of the show, such as in Black Mirror’s (Brooker, 2011) Nosedive episode (Wright, 2016) in which a magic circle allows for motivational affordances.

1.1. Cognitive Capitalism

Today’s transition is often described as a transition into the next phase of capitalism. After mercantile and industrial capitalism, a new form of capitalism develops; cognitive capitalism (Moulier-Boutang 56). This third stage of capitalism is often referred to as late capitalism, globalized capitalism, technocapitalism (Feenberg 2012; Luis Villa-Suarez 2016), cognitive cultural capitalism (Scott 2008) or the attention economy (Bueno 2015). This new form of capitalism doesn’t necessarily oppose industrial capitalism, but marks a shift from physical labour towards immaterial labour. Another shift is the central position of knowledge and technology, signifying a shift in the economic, social, political and cultural paradigm.

Moulier-Boutang grasps the all-encompassing transition of this third capitalism in his thesis Cognitive Capitalism (2011). He takes a dominantly economical approach to his thesis, but weaves his sociological, philosophical and political knowledge into the notion as well. The reason I have chosen to use his term, cognitive capitalism, rather than all the other terms, is that Moulier-Boutang provides an ambitious theoretical framework. This framework aims to grasp the new phase of capitalism, positioning its new dimensions, defining it, defining its organizational structures and its possible effects on labour. Moulier-Boutang takes a Marxist perspective into cognitive capitalism, by referring to Marx’s general intellect and taking class and materiality into his framework. On the one hand, Moulier-Boutang recognizes the need for a new theoretical framework that takes the shifting order of class and materiality on a global scale into account, providing a central position to the socio-technical relation in today’s society. On the other hand, he acknowledges that the new phase, although cognitive rather than industrial, is ultimately still capitalistic in nature. Doing so, Moulier-Boutang provides a concrete theoretical framework of the abstract notion of a society in transition.

(8)

Moulier-Boutang proposes the term as “both a force and an ideology in which the capturing of gains from knowledge and innovation is the central issue for accumulation” (7). He then outlines fifteen distinctive characteristics of cognitive capitalism. The first six lay out the basic notions, defining a system in which socially produced surpluses are the central basis for wealth accumulation.

These fundamental characteristics are the virtualization of the economy, the growing role of the immaterial and “services related to the production of that immaterial” (50). This is a result of technological innovations resulting in digitized data (50). Because of this prominent position of technology, knowledge becomes the main input which is then translated into digitized data (50-51). This data is then captured, making it usable for the accumulation of wealth. Technological progress therefore increasingly forms itself as a socio-technical system (51). In terms of labour, cognitive knowledge does not replace the industrial labour model, but expands to the capturing of knowledge on top of the capturing of physical labour (51). This brings the Smithian division of labour into question, as labour comes to “obey cognitive criteria” (51-52).

The remaining characteristics Moulier-Boutang concern the organizational structures of cognitive capitalism. This organization has its premises in the network society, marking a radical novelty in which the interconnected internet architecture functions as a structure for society and production (53). This structure brings a shift to the current models, that are mostly based on geographical factors. Firstly, the distinction between consumption and production diminishes due to the nature of digital technologies that allow people to do both (52-53). In addition, digital technologies propose a new distinction of inputs: “hardware (physical), software (logical layer), and wetware (cerebral or living layer)” (53). This division brings the measurability at issue, as capital and labour, skilled and unskilled labour, are not distinguishable within this model.

The network society does not just reform labour, it redistributes power as well, taking the non-hierarchical architecture of the internet as a main framework for this new distribution (54). Moulier-Boutang has a positive outlook on this division, claiming a rise of social and productive cooperation and a new “global common good of collective intelligence” (53). In the same way, the information-goods or knowledge-goods create a horizontalization of power structures (54-55). Moreover, this equally distributed network, creates bio-production that is accessible and produced by all (56). This term is derived from Foucault’s notion of biopower:

By this I mean a number of phenomena that seem to me to be quite significant, namely, the set of mechanisms through which the basic biological features of the human species became the object of a political strategy, of a general strategy of power, or, in other words, how, starting from the 18th century, modern Western societies took on board the fundamental biological fact that human beings are a species. This is what I have called biopower (Security, territory, population, 1).

(9)

Referring to Foucault’s notion of biopower, Moulier-Boutang argues a shift of power from the institutionalized power, towards networked biopower. Just as Foucault, Moulier-Boutang defines biopower in its literal sense: “This production of life can be called bio-production, the production can be called biopower” (56). Thus, Moulier-Boutang refers to biopower as the possibility of producing life in the form of bio-production, as opposed to mechanical power. This form of production exemplifies the economy as a biosphere, as opposed to a mechanical sphere.

Moulier-Boutang mentions a growing tension over property rights and the re-structuring of the public’s enjoyment of immaterial goods. As I will later explain, this growing tension over property rights and enjoyment of immaterial goods implies a deterritorialization of knowledge within a networked structure, therefore this tension lies in the conflict of access to knowledge. The limiting of access speaks to the “capturing of positive externalities” (immaterial labour, knowledge-goods) is done outside working hours, and implicit knowledge, and capacities for contextualisation (58). This marks a contrast to our current society of debt, thus understood as negative externalities (55). The political economy therefore needs to resolve these negative externalities and focus on the capturing of positive externalities.

Moulier-Boutang argues for technology as a central concept for economic, political and social transformation, however fails to acknowledge the ideologies and meanings being carried out through them. Film studies on the other hand seek to understand these technologies and its relation to culture. This thesis examines contemporary horror film as it shows interest into these technological transformations by revealing how these technologies carry out hidden values and logics that are increasingly internalized into society. Contemporary horror film expresses fears about this transformation, and it does so by representing monsters as omnipresent, providing a critical perspective by exposing its conditions and power structures. Doing so, horror films can provide a better understanding of third capitalism, but it can also warn us for this transformation.

1.2 Methodology

Levina and Bui argue that: “In the twenty-first century, representational studies have begun to concern themselves with the ways in which monstrosity, as any processes of identification, is a fluid category concerned with representation and ambiguity of change” (5). The research question that is posed in this thesis is: how does the contemporary monster reflect on the change in the socio-technical society? The structure of this thesis is therefore twofold: The first two chapters study the transformation in the representation of the monster, which reflect on the societal relationship between technology, fear and power. The last two chapters inquires on how this omnipresence conceptualizes the changing notions of power within a context of cognitive capitalism.

(10)

For the first chapter, I have done a historical literary study into the transformation of the monster in horror film in order to study how these changing representations reflect the changing relationship between technological development, power and fear in society. I have chosen to use the second half of the twentieth century because the post-war era marks the start of a prominent position of technology, both as an external threat and as a representation of the cold war, as well the entering of the television into households. Jeremy Biles demonstrates that horror portrays a dual nature in the depiction of technology, implying that technology entails power. On the one hand the notion of technological development signifies possibilities, progress and innovation. On the other hand, horror portrays this technological development as a threat to humanity and human values (148-149). This dual notion allows for a study which ties technology, power and fear together, portraying the changing relationship between these three main elements.

Finally, this leaves the question of the position of technology within a larger ideological framework. The relationship between technology and society is often discussed within a technological deterministic framework. The problem with this is that they are interested in single aspects of technology in relation to one-sided effects on society, thus unable to grasp the social and power representations of the monster in a broader, critical context. Moulier-Boutang on the other hand, presumes capitalism as a dominantly economic system, in which he positions technology as an architectural tool to carry out the capitalist ideology. He also, however, defines immaterial labour as “general intellect” (7). Doing so, he refers to Marx's’ concept of general intellect, in which discusses the primacy of the cooperation of cognitive abilities as a productive labour, rather than the time of the workers (Marx and Nicolaus, 1973). The Marxist starting point of general intellect that Moulier-Boutang uses, lays a basis for an understanding of the capitalist ideology being carried out through technology.

The second chapter builds upon the historical transformation of technology, power and fear by examining the representation of the monster in contemporary horror film. The historical transformation of the monster demonstrates that technology and technological values (carried out by the capitalist ideology) are increasingly internalized, leading to an abstract representation of the monster. Marina Levina’s claim that the monster narratives have become omnipresent because they represent collective social anxieties over resisting and embracing change in the twenty-first century is particularly relevant to this thesis (1-2). The omnipresent monster increasingly seen in contemporary horror film captures the internalized, abstract and social role of technology as a source of fear. Besides a literary analysis, I will do a film analysis of Friend Request (2016) in this chapter. This film represents a broader tendency of contemporary horror film that attempts to capture the network society into the representation of the omnipresent monster. To define the network society further, I am referring to Castells notion of the concept (2000), as an addition to Moulier-Boutang’s framework of the network society in cognitive capitalism, because Castells conceptualization is more elaborately discussed. To conclude this chapter, I will place the omnipresence

(11)

into a broader framework of the network society, demonstrating how this representation reflects the fears of the network society in a cognitive capitalist context.

The third chapter takes the omnipresent monster within a context of shifting power notions. Contemporary horror film demonstrate an expansion of power, from authorities to peers. Horror film portrays anxieties over this expansion of power by employing surveillance techniques that portray the omnipresent monster as a post-panopticon. It Follows (Mitchell, 2014) demonstrates this particularly well by demonstrating various cinematic surveillance techniques, such as voyeurism, eye-level camera shots and interactivity with both the viewer and the personages in the film. These cinematic surveillance techniques have been defined by Zimmer (302-303) , Levin (579) and Turner (107). Doing so, it represents the horizontal network society that defines the post-panopticon. I will then place this anxiety in the framework of cognitive capitalism, as It Follows provides a different perspective to the networked society, demonstrating that this shifting power notion does not just provide for a cooperation of brains, but also leads to an expansion of surveillance to the level of peers.

The final chapter discusses how this expanded power to peers is systematically internalized into society through the use of gamification. Where the post-panopticon portrays a deterritorialized form of power, gamification reveals its scope as limited, for the reason that the magic circle is a primary condition of gamification. A study of gamification in contemporary horror film can therefore reveal the construction of reality as an illusion that is carried out through technology. I will demonstrate this by a film analysis of Nosedive which is an episode of the British television series Black Mirror . Granted that Black Mirror is not traditionally seen as horror, due to a lack of monsters, blood or serial killers, I have chosen this series because it can be seen as horror and has an interesting angle on the development of technology and society. Peter Hutchings refers to Robin Wood’s definition of horror who argues that horror is film that ‘seeks recognition in societyof all that is repressed or oppressed’ (Wood qtd. in Hutchings 6). Nosedive does so by demonstrating gamification as an oppressive mechanism to control human behaviour within the magic circle. This anxiety addresses the virtualization of the economy as an oppressive, rather than a liberating power structure of cognitive capitalism, revealing the capturing of positive externalities as a systematic top-down exploitation beyond the workplace.

(12)

2. Chapter 1: 20th Century Monsters

2.1. Introduction

In the essay Monstrous technologies and the telepathology of everyday life, Jeremy Biles argues that technology in contemporary horror cinema consists of both technophobia and technophilia:

The anxious and exhilarated attitude towards technology is a response to the dual destiny announced by our technical horizon. On the one hand, technology promises perfection and victory over death; robotic bodies will ensure corporeal immortality, while the ability to upload human minds into networked computers heralds boundless consciousness, infinite connectedness. On the other hand, the overtaking of human biological bodies by robotic, technologized bodies point towards the demise of human species in its present form. (147)

This quote by Jeremy Biles discusses a notion of technology embodied in horror films that is dual in nature, reflecting the relationship between humans and technology in contemporary society. Technology is central to understanding the changing representations of the monster, as technology itself influences societal change. It incorporates the most idealistic and the most pessimistic visions into the representation of the monster. Biles’ description of “infinite connectedness” and the “demise of humanity” (147) portrays a vision that is specifically applicable to contemporary horror film reflecting our socio-technical society, whilst the dual nature in the fifties for example were that of mutant monsters, promising the possibilities of science, as well as being a threat to post-war society and its values. This dual nature does therefore not only allow for a better understanding of the representation of the monster today, but takes a central position in revealing societal values in horror history as well.

In this chapter I will discuss the transformation of the monster in the second half of the 20th century, with a specific focus on technological developments as both a catalyst for societal innovation and a concept of fear. I will do so, to demonstrate how the transformation of the monster reflects on the changing dynamics between technology, power and fear in society within its time.

2.2. Mutants and Invasion in the Post-War Era

Thompson and Bordwell characterize the post war era of both capitalist prosperity and the communist threat: “The United states took on the role of a world superpower, helping allies and former enemies. At the same time, the U.S.S.R struggled to assert its authority. President Truman adopted a policy of containment, trying to counter Soviet influence throughout the world” (298). Michele Hilmes adds: “The ink had hardly dried on the peace treaties before the first movements were seen of the struggle that would

(13)

occupy the next several decades. The Cold War began almost before the World War 2 had ended” (166). With these superpowers threatening to use their nuclear weapons, it was technology that counted.

The television was a major technological change that had an impact on the everyday lives of the American society. Michele Hilmes explains the introduction of the television within the social context of its time: “Cold war tensions only heightened the close relation between government and industry, designated as corporate liberalism, and despite considerable social unrest brewing among America’s minorities and redomesticated former wartime workers, television promised a normalizing nation the good life” (205). The television however, also brought fear into the homes, as broadcasters often put commercial ends above the public interest. The classic network had highly centralized power over both the network and its content, leading to anxieties of invasion and brainwashing (Hilmes 205).

This dual transformation of society, characterized by outside threats and transformation of society within is also reflected in the dual nature of technological developments at the time. On the one hand technology stood for innovation and modernity, able to protect the capitalist ideology from the antagonist, both physically and ideologically. On the other hand, technological developments were a source of anxiety, with the threat of the atomic bomb and technological means increasingly getting integrated into everyday households. Technology was both the solution to these threats as well as a powerful force of destruction. Consequently, it became a prominent aspect of horror film. Not only in the making of film, but in its discourse as well. “The horror films of the 1950’s are about science and technology run riot, an accurate enough reflection of reality for a confused populace, wary of the pace of technological change” (Wilson).

Horror movies presented alien invasions and mutant monsters, which reflected both the cold war and the transformations within society. Alien invasion is often presented as the technologically advanced monster from outer space who invades the earth in order to extinguish humanity. The aliens were presented as mysterious and extremely powerful, whilst at the same time invisible in the western society. Movies such as The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951), The Thing From Another world (1951), The War of the Worlds (1953) and It Came from Outer Space (1953) all presented alien monsters as a mysterious other human capable of destroying America with their powerful technological tools that are out of control (Habrat). The Day the Earth Stood Still, for example, presents an explicit message in which alien monsters threaten the United States both in its totality, as well as its ideology, representing the communist threat as human and unnoticed within society as well as their powerful atomic bomb as technologically more advanced.

Mutant monsters also fit within this theme. These mutant monsters, such as Godzilla (1954), the 50 foot Woman (1958) and the Incredible Shrinking man (1954) were often extremely large or small as a result of radiation or scientific experimentation. These monsters were man-made experiments able to destroy humanity with either their small or big size. This directly reflects the dual nature of technology

(14)

and science as both the anxiety as well as the solution to these threats. Peter Biskind claims that “where science caused the problem, science often solved it too” (n. pag).

On the level of representation, these monsters are commonly associated with the fear and hysteria of cold war and ‘the alien other’: communism (Warren 1997). This is a common assumption within the Marxist critique according to Jancovich. He argues that this is not just a representation of the Russian threat, but a depiction of the scientific-technological rationality of Fordism within the western world as well. First of all, these movies articulate this evil as coming from within american Society, rather than simple fear from outer space (17-20). Jancovich uses the The Thing from another world (1951) as an example, in which scientists discover ‘the thing’ in the ice on the North Pole, which feeds on human blood and reproduces at an alarming rate. While the military want to kill the alien, the scientists seek to preserve it following the thought that knowledge is more important than life. This creates a class struggle between the two as the scientists are considered high-ranked and look up to the alien for its ‘superior’ rational, whilst the military are portrayed as the proletariat, seeking their own gain. The invasion' and monster movies of the 1950’s are, he concludes, far from being products of right-wing hysteria and anti-communist rhetoric, narratives preaching the necessary authoritarian resistance to the anarchy of communism: they are, he suggests, far more anarchic and libertarian in their conclusions than one might imagine in their presentation of the shadow side of scientific-technical rationality (31-37).

The cold war created a transition in which technology and science became both a threat whilst also the solution, which led to a repositioning of scientists. Whereas the military and politicians were the most powerful in terms of protecting the United States and its ideology, scientists and corporations were granted a more prominent position. Technological developments, such as the atomic bomb, space technology, the television and household electronics, were presented as powerful machines. Horror cinema reflected this shift of power in the form of alien invasion and mutant monsters, that represent both the large outsider threats, as well as the transitions in society. Horror portrayed technological developments as powerful, but as inherently dual in nature: as a tool for progression, innovation and saviour of the big nuclear threat, portrayed by the aliens and mutants in the sense that they forced us to rebuild and “live peacefully” such as Klaatu from The Day the Earth Stood Still. These aliens also portrayed a discourse that advanced technology was the future, as they are presented as more technologically advanced than humanity, such as the robot army, that is used as a threat to ensure humanity “lives peacefully” (The Day the Earth Stood Still). Within this discourse technological developments are presented as a threat and a source of paranoia and anxiety, that can destruct humanity at large, but also from the inside, in which knowledge is prioritized over life.

(15)

2.3. 1960’s and 1970’s: a new wave of American horror

The sixties was a time of social change, which is reflected in its portrayal of evil. More than shocking images, the sixties are known for a an obsession with the psychological individual (Hutchings 174). This diversity of sub genres reflected the wide variety of subcultures. During this time a younger generation started standing up against the values of their parents (Hutchings 175). “Low budget films brought a new realism and immediacy to horror, taking their reference from the tv and documentaries, rather than the gothic tradition” (A History of Horror). It saw a significant shift from monster movies and supernatural science fiction films to more realistic, suspenseful movies. This also implied a shift from portraying anxieties over societies at large, such as the nuclear threat, towards a more individualized depiction of fear, which reflected the increasingly individualized youth culture. The spectacular mutant monsters and alien invasions made way for mundane evil like Norman Bates (Hitchcock 1960).

This shift towards supernatural, atmospheric and psychological horror reflects a shift of focus towards the intrinsic psychological abnormalities. There was a trend of extreme psychological states and scenes of sexual violence (Hutchings 29). This “fascination with the psychologised individual might well be related to broader social change, and in particular to shifting definitions of identity within an increasingly affluent and consumerist world” (Hutchings 174). A well known example is Psycho (1960), both in its representation of fears and as a representation of anxieties in society (Jancovich 220-221). Jancovich paraphrases Robin Wood:

Psycho is groundbreaking because it simply does not displace that which is repressed to an alien form, but directly associates it with the family, the central institution of patriarchal, American society. In Psycho, it is argued, it is the repressions and tensions within the ‘normal’ American family which produce the monster, not some alien force. In this way, the film supposedly questioned definitions of normality and abnormality, and so transformed the genre. (222)

This quote speaks to all the prominent anxieties portrayed in society and horror. Horror became a cinema of repression, aiming to receive acknowledgement for repression in society (Wood qtd. in Hutchings, 6). This function is particularly relevant to the generation gap at the time, which seeked to liberate themselves from the oppressive values of the previous generation. This theme of repression is seen in many films, for example in Witchfinders General (1968) and Night of the Living Dead (1968).

This theme of repression resonates with the psychological focus on horror film. According to Freud, certain experiences can make repressed memories resurface (Freud). Horror films are particularly capable of servicing this need, by reflecting an overall atmospheric style, such as in the Carnival of Souls (1962) for example. Repression was themed in opposition to sexual liberation shown in films at the time such as in Repulsion (1965). Both Robin Wood and Janovich represent two trends that stood out in the 1960’s: Wood’s focus on psychological repression reflected the underground horror film culture as a

(16)

representative of youth. His theories of repression also lays a focus on the psychological fears in mundane people like Norman Bates. Jancovich, on the other hand, lays his focus on power structures in society by arguing that Wood lays a basis for understanding Psycho as progressive and critical in that they identified the monster with the fundamental institutions of american society (“American Horror From 1951 to the Present” 16).

What struck me during my research on the technological depictions in this era, is that technological representations are absent. This is a stark contrast to the post war-era, which was filled with technological terror. Brian Duchaney, author of The Spark of Fear: Technology, Society and the Horror Film points out that technological fear seemed absent, but that technological fears can be found in the substructure of the american dream, in the seemingly ordinary (64). He argues that the world in the sixties was forever changed because of technology. Science was out of reach for the ordinary people, many didn't understand how technology in the home such as microwaves and telephones worked. The desire to have these technologies nonetheless changed the social spheres, as a component of the american dream. He proposes four main qualities that testify to the psychological and emotional loss of innocence America was experiencing at the time: isolation, change, loss of innocence and a lack of progress. Technology is at the center of these fears, as it allows for leisure and wealth (67). For example, Norman Bates’ freedom in Psycho is expressed through isolation and Peeping Tom (1960) explored society through technological advancements, in which Tom’s killings becomes a response to societal repression, therefore suggesting a lack of progress in society.

The trends of the 1960’s flowed into the 1970’s, portraying threats to the safety of the home. Contrary to the sixties however, america was settling into a new realization of the future (Duchaney 100). The evil lurking in the home in the seventies was often portrayed within the idea of demonic children, portraying anxieties over a society of progress. Rosemary didn't just spawn a demonic baby, she began a trend of demonic children. The scariest monster of all time was a 14 year old girl in The Exorcist (1973). This film portrays the omnipresence of evil. A homeless man in the subway asks father Damien: “Father! Could you help an old altar boy?”. An hour later in the film, this sentence is suddenly repeated by the devil, suggesting an omnipresence of evil through the portrayal of a monster. This is a contrast with omnipresence portrayed in contemporary cinema, in which it is the absence of evil that creates this omnipresence.

Teens were a large audience group in the seventies, represented by the slasher films, such as the Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) and Halloween (1978), and the teen romance horror films such as Carrie (1976). These films presented technology as a window to the world and, in case of the slasher films, rather the lack of technology as isolation and lack of safety. Along with the teen horror and slasher hypes, the home rental audiences grew bigger. The home rentals changed the film landscape as cinema

(17)

became a common good in popular culture. This led to horror films becoming more “reflexive” (Duchaney 108).

Where in the sixties technology was a manner to achieve the american dream, in the seventies society aimed to maintain this dream. Technology was increasingly linked to individualism and consumerism. Duchaney argues: “[...] There was a growing feeling that Americans depended on technological advancement and automation as a way of upholding the newfound promise of social status” (100). This individualism was reflected in the portrayal of evil in the slasher genre, which portrayed single male psychopaths who slashed their female victims. These monsters portrayed the isolation from society, as these monsters were people but dehumanized, and their victims fear stemmed from being cut off from the world. This reflected the paradigm in which technology became symbolic for safety and being connected, which is exemplified by the use of the telephone in horror films at the time. Duchaney argues that “the telephone in horror film blurs the line between life-saving device and life-altering mechanisms of destruction” (104). The dual nature of the telephone is therefore made apparent, portraying the telephone as life-saving device as well as a tool of destruction. The latter is demonstrated by the agency technology had started to gain and was often used as a tool for spirits and other paranormal entities to communicate. The telephone in this example represents a whole scale of technological tools, such as betamax and vhs and later the compact disc, as well as many household tools such as freezers and microwaves that were a prominent aspect of modern life. Contrary to the 1950’s in which technology was thought of as machinery, these technologies were increasingly thought of in social terms, as an expression of one's individuality. This trend would continue in the following era, that became increasingly materialistic.

2.4. 1980’s

John Carpenters Halloween introduced the era of indestructible slasher villains who could not be destroyed. They were killed over and over, but they kept returning, marking an era of gory gratuitous indulgence in the eighties. Technically advancement in the field of animatronics and latex allowed for gory and realistic close-ups, which coincided with the material ethos of the eighties. After lurking in the shadows for the past two decades, the monsters were out in the daylight, for example the American Werewolf in London (1981) and The Thing (1982). Along with materialism and individualism, technology advanced quickly, and the eighties saw an enormous technological boom in all fields such as genetic modification, walkmans, pac-man, vcr, cell phones and the personal computer. On a larger scale, space shuttle Columbia was sent into space, portraying the dual nature of technology as both a promise of a new world, as well as a nightmare when it exploded and killed all the seven astronauts, signifying the destruction of humanity (Howell).

(18)

The genre of body horror combined all these elements: the technological advances in latex and foam and improved special effects allowed for the depictions of the post-human. Douglas Kellner argues that filmmaker David Cronenberg particularly represented the postmodern panic of the eighties (89). He argues that the postmodern body reflects fear of the ramification of media, and moreover, the internalization of media, predicting an implosion of meaning, masses, and society which obliterates boundaries of the real and referential security (90).

What stands out to me in Kellner’s work on Cronenberg, is that he presents a vision of technology that is often seen today, that of the mind as controllable and programmable, as well as the multiplication of the body:

Although Cronenberg presents himself as a Cartesian in interviews, his films deconstruct the Cartesian opposition between mind and body, presenting the mind as res extensa subject to control by both psychic and material forces, while presenting the body as a site of psychic and ideological invasion where res cogitans, often multiply reproduced, literally reifies the body to subjectified excess. Scanners, for instance, presents new drugs creating destructive psychic powers while Videodrome shows telematic invasion conquering mind and body at once in the creation of a new species which synthesizes the technological with the human. (89-90)

Therefore, Cronenberg’s work marks an important turn in the way technology was thought of, as it was now increasingly considered as a mode of thought and a principle of social organization. Technology as a mode of thought is demonstrated by Professor Brian O'Blivion, the evil brain behind the Videodrome program in Videodrome (1983):

The battle for the mind will be fought in the video arena, the videodrome. The television screen is the retina of the mind's eye. Therefore, the television screen is part of the physical structure of the brain. Therefore, whatever appears on the television screen emerges as new experience for those that watch it. Therefore, television is reality, and reality is less than television. (Videodrome)

Cronenberg has never denied being greatly influenced by his former professor Marshall McLuhan and has woven his philosophy about humanity, technology and the media into his iconic film Videodrome. In this movie television president Max is looking for a new show and is introduced to Videodrome, a plotless television show that resembles a snuff film. Max sets out to buy the rights of the show, thinking it will be the future of television. Later, Max views a videotape in which O'Blivion informs him that the Videodrome is a socio-political battleground in which a war is being fought for control of the minds of the people of North America. Shortly after, Max transforms. His stomach now functions as a vcr input and Max’ mind starts to change. Max is being used as a tool for videodrome, in order to spread it out to the rest of the world. Bianca, O’Blivion’s daughter, re-programmes Max to turn him against Videodrome and Max kills the people behind the show using his body as a transformative tool, like his hand being able to turn into an organic gun. In terms of Marshall McLuhan, Videodrome presents a vision of humans and

(19)

technology as an extension of one another, even becoming one another. Moreover, “the medium is the message” is carried out literally as the technology is portrayed as a tool for mind control that functions through the physical body. The anxiety portrayed about technology lies in its dual nature, which both promises great possibilities of mass media and the ‘telematic body’ (Kellner, 94), however simultaneously depicts the transformation and even eradication of humanity within these possibilities. This is a very typical theme for body horror especially, because it formulates the anxieties over the changing human nature in regards to societal transformation in relation to the body.

Videodrome portrays that anxieties about technology are increasingly internalized into the body, reflecting the internalization of mass media. Technology was therefore increasingly thought of as a mode of social organization. The portrayal of technology however is still one of mass media, discussing a fear stemming from a one-to-many, top-down power. The one-to-many model is reflected in the portrayal of Videodrome, a program that is created by some type of corporation, includes violence and has its own agenda. Technology itself was therefore not given any agency yet, but exerted the ideology of the institutions and corporations and Videodrome portrays uncertainty about these ways of life and values that were exerted through technology, just like society at the time.

2.5. After the eighties, before the web 2.0

By the end of the eighties, the world was increasingly becoming globalized and commercialized. The evolution of new technologies, which contributed to the merging of the American culture industries had resulted in the emergence of a global teen market (Wee 59). The internet and other digital technologies allowed for the circulation of global culture, self-reflexivity and metanarratives. Horror cinema had become a branded commodity, reviving slasher monsters such as Freddy Krueger (Nightmare on Elm street 1984) and Jason (Friday the 13th 1980) repeatedly, as well as other prominent monster figures such as the Exorcist (1973) and even Frankenstein (1931). These monsters were so conformed to the genre conventions that they became parodies of themselves, as shown by movies as Braindead (1992) and Scream (1996), who created metafictional horror to ridicule the established rules of horror. This in itself portrays a society that was hyper commodified and lacked meaning. Audiences had a need for intelligent and realistic horror, which they got in the form of the serial killer monsters. Movies as Silence of the Lambs (1991) and Se7en (1995) gave us the intelligent serial killers. Silence of the Lamb’s Hannibal Lector, a cannibal, literally addressing consumption, but also depicted as outsmarting institutions and corporations, therefore suggesting a critical note to capitalist society as an exclusive system. Tithecott argues that “we often associate intelligence with rationality, the inscription of serial killers with intelligence can shield us from meaninglessness, from a disruption of our models of cause and effect,

(20)

from the behavioral non sequitur” (146). These intelligent serial killers in the nineties therefore criticized a hyper commodified society.

2.6. Conclusion

Although history is never linear, the history of horror portrays a transformation of the monster as a reflection on society. Looking back at the transformation of the monster as a reflection of technology, fear and power there are four main paradigms seen from the fifties till the end of the 20th century. The first paradigm in the pre-war era consists of concrete and large threats, targeting society as a whole. The monsters were represented by mutants and aliens, reflecting the nuclear threat of the cold war. These were battles that were fought by the United States and the U.S.S.R.. Scientists were an important aspect of this threat, being able to lead these technological innovations necessary to combat this threat and contribute to the space race. At the same time, science was threatening, as the scientific-technical rationality prioritized knowledge over life. Technology and science were therefore both promising as a threat to the values of the proletariat. The television was also introduced into the households, normalizing social norms and values which were symbolic for rebuilding society after the war. The fear however, stemmed from the centralized power of the networks, inspiring many horror films to represent anxieties of brainwashing and invasions. Within these dual natures, technology was granted enormous centralized power, however it was ultimately still thought of as being external machines.

The second paradigm began in the sixties and lasted till the end of the seventies. This might seem like a long period in which too much had changed, however there was a long, subtle transformation in terms of technology and societal values. During this time, society did the opposite of their previous generation by completely looking inward and became obsessed by the psyche of the individual. This led to fears coming from everyday people, even family members, such as in the Exorcist, representing the fears of a change in society. Striving to realize the American dream, losing this dream life became a main fear depicted in horror films at the time in terms of isolation, change, loss of innocence and a lack of progress as a society. Technology was not so much thought of as an external machine anymore, but became a symbolic tool for modern society. It allowed people to perform less physical labour and promised more leisure time. There was however a shift in power within the transgression of technology within the household, mainly that it had come with the attached commercialism. When technology moved into the homes, so did the monsters. Evil was shown as omnipresent and atmospheric, but still had a concrete body. A similar understanding was given to technology, it was helpful, but at the same time people didn’t quite understand how technology worked. Slowly but steadily however, this understanding developed and technology became increasingly integrated, becoming a tool of safety, as well as a tool of destruction to the values of the modern society.

(21)

In the eighties, technology had moved from the homes into our bodies, or rather became an extension of our bodies. Within this third paradigm technology had become personalized, but at the same time the power over these transformations were still centralized by governments and corporations. Technology was increasingly thought of as a mode of social organization, but was organized by corporations. The fears portrayed during this time aimed at the ideologies behind the technologies, as they were in power to decide and shape the new humans. These technologies were also increasingly becoming ideologically interconnected with each other, as cultural narratives were spreading over different types of media, adding to the integration of technology into society. Just like technology, the anxieties portrayed were progressively integrated with our bodies. These fears were prominently represented by the body horror subgenre, for example in Videodrome. The dual nature of technology was portrayed as both powerful and promising of stronger, enhanced humans. The post-human body also ensured a loss of humanity because they were controlled by people in power who seeked to enhance this body for commercial gain, portraying violence and mutilation to the integrity of individuals.

In the final paradigm of twentieth century horror, technology moved from our bodies into our minds. Monsters that represented the previous decades, had been revived in this cycle, but became to represent a commercially saturated society. The innovation in the horror genre came from the intelligent serial killers, who no longer needed masks, as the evil was hidden in their heads. Instead of technology as an expression of oneself, it became an integral part of our identity.

In conclusion, horror film in the 20th century has seen a transformation in representation as a reflection of the changes in society. Technology is a central aspect of this change, demonstrating how monsters moved from being large, concrete and external, slowly becoming small and internalized. This is a continuing trend. So much so, that the contemporary monsters reflect omnipresent monsters, reflecting that we don’t really know who or what to fear anymore.

(22)

3. Chapter 2: 21st Century Monsters

3.1. Introduction

Contemporary horror film has been broadly discussed by Marina Levina and Diem-My T.Bui in Monster Culture in the 21st Century. This book consists of nineteen essays from different authors from numerous fields, aiming to define and position the contemporary horror film within a larger cultural, social, political and economic transition. In the introduction of this book, Levina and Bui describe both the premises in which the contemporary monsters can be studied, as well as multiple features of the contemporary monsters. Levina and Bui argue that contemporary society is currently in a state of uncertainty and the changing monsters allow us to “deal with the profound acceleration in changing symbolic, economic and technological systems” (1).

The first main aspect of the new monster is omnipresence, reflecting on the widespread availability of modern technology: “monstrous narratives of the past decade have become omnipresent specifically because they represent collective social anxieties over resisting and embracing change in the twenty-first century” (1-2). This quote demonstrates the function of contemporary horror film as a screen for anxieties in the global social field. Also, by noting “resisting and embracing change” (1), Levina and Bui imply an internal process. Moreover, this statement implies a changing notion of power, that is to be resisted or embraced socially. They then add to this notion that the “monstrosity has transcended its status as a metaphor and has indeed become a necessary condition of our existence in the twenty-first century” (2). Here again, it is stated that monsters are internalized systems that form a collective state of being, rather than metaphorically embodying societal fears. The word transcended indicates a shift to the virtual realm. Omnipresence is thus described as part of our socio-technical realm. Wetmore, author of Post 9/11 Horror in American Cinema, reaffirms omnipresence as a key element of contemporary horror: “[...] The rise of social media and the omnipresence of technology are all sources for horror in the new millennium” (19).

Levina and Wetmore imply that omnipresence is closely related to technology. In the second part of Monster Culture in the 21st Century, three essays discuss monstrous technologies in relation to different aspects of the socio-technical realm that contribute to the omnipresent condition. In the

(23)

introduction Levina and Bui define the key concepts of technological logics and values reflected in contemporary horror film. She claims that “technologies, much like the monsters we create, seem to have achieved agency of their own” (9). Technologies have become part of our identities: “We embrace and resist the multitude of ways in which technology permeates, constructs, but also challenges subjectivities, bodies, and identities” (9). In other words, omnipresence as a technology is thought of as living within our internal selves, constructing a part of our identities, implying a mode of thought and a systematic form of social organization.

Herein, questioning Biles’ dual notion of technology would be relevant, in order to reveal the technologically implied values and logics of the system woven into our internal socio-technical realm. As mentioned in the previous chapter, Biles notes the dual nature of technology as a response to the dual destiny announced by our technical horizon, with on the one hand the promise of victory over death by uploading our minds into networked computers, whilst on the other hand, the demise of the human species in its present form by the technologized bodies (147). Technology is therefore directly related to the question of its development in the future, as well as its reach in terms of interference of human values. The form of social organization and the internalized systems are indicated as global and collective, suggesting a boundless territory. This leaves the question of spatial boundaries of the understanding of omnipresence. Levina and Bui conclude that:

Much in the way that monstrous texts of the 1970’s and 1980’s often took place in enclosed, family-occupied spaces to reflect the unintended consequences of the dissolution of a traditional patriarchal family structure, so do monstrous texts in the twenty-first century address the fears of open, unbounded spaces occupied by zombies, ghosts, and other unseen and unyielding enemies (10).

To define omnipresence as a key aspect of the condition of the monster in contemporary film, we must consider its socio-technological context, its technological features as an internalized mode of thought and a global system of social organization. Omnipresence exists in an abstract form, both physically and ideologically, within the dual nature. This notion in itself marks a radical change from the depiction of the monster in the 20th century, which became increasingly internalized, but ultimately still had a concrete form attached to them, such as the serial killers in the nineties. In the previous depictions, abstract fears in society were metaphorically embodied, whilst contemporary horror film depicts concrete technologies and processes as abstract, seeking to define fears in society, rather than to embody them. In a way, this novelty in itself reflects society as being uncertain what or who we should be fearful of.

3.2. Defining omnipresence in the network Society

Furthering the exploration of this socio-technical premise in which omnipresence takes place, Manuel Castells makes a valuable contribution to the conceptualization of the network society. He also notes that

(24)

“we live in confusing times, as is often the case in periods of historical transition between different forms in society” ("Materials for an exploratory theory of the network society.", Preface). He defines the network society in a more detailed and media inclusive manner:

[...] The definition, if you wish, in concrete terms of a network society is a society where the key social structures and activities are organized around electronically processed information networks. So it's not just about networks or social networks, because social networks have been very old forms of social organization. It's about social networks which process and manage information and are using micro-electronic based technologies. (Castells qtd. In Kreisler)

The manner in which he describes the premise, logic, social organization and values, demonstrate equivalent characteristics to which omnipresent technologies are described by Levina and Bui. Castells highlights its systematic power to internalize these logics into society: “The diffusion of a networking logic substantially modifies the operation and outcomes in processes of production, experience, power, and culture” (“The Rise of the New Network Society” 500) Thus, again defining the reach of technological omnipresence as boundless and global. However, where Levina and Bui grant agency to technology, Castells does not:

Networks are appropriate instruments for a capitalist economy based on innovation, globalization and decentralized concentration; for work, workers, and firms based on flexibility and adaptability; for a culture of endless deconstruction and reconstruction; for a polity geared toward the instant processing of new values and public moods; and for a social organization aiming at the supersession of space and the annihilation of time. Yet the network morphology is also a source of dramatic reorganization of power relationships. Switches connecting the networks (for example financial flows taking control of media empires that influence political processes) are the privileged instruments of power. Thus, the switchers are the power-holders. Since networks are multiple, the inter-operating codes and switches between networks become the fundamental sources in shaping, guiding, and misguiding societies. The convergence of social evolution and information technologies has created a new material basis for the performance of activities throughout the social structure. This material basis, built in networks, earmarks dominant social processes, thus shaping social structure itself. (“The Rise of the New Network Society” 502)

Castells therefore puts technology in service of a (cognitive) capitalist system, as well as placing the network in a Marxist framework of the superstructure applying values, logics and organization to the (social) base through technology. This conceptualization of the network society is similar to that of Moulier-Boutang’s network society, Castells even points this out by arguing that “[...] the Information age replaces/subsumes the technological paradigm of the Industrial age, organizing primarily around the production and distribution of energy” (2001 5-6). These two conceptualizations differ however in their notions of power. In Moulier-Boutang’s framework power is evenly divided amongst peers, whereas Castell argues that it is a rather top-down structure being internalized, and thus circled back from the base to the superstructure:

Because technology is as decisive in the realm of power (military technology, for instance) as in the realm of production. Similarly, technology plays an essential role in framing the relationships of experience: for instance,

(25)

human reproductive technology frames family relationships and sexuality. Therefore, we must integrate technology, on its own ground, as a special layer of the social structure, following an old tradition in human ecology. (9)

The reason for including this notion of technological power, whilst defining omnipresence in contemporary horror film, is because it describes the process of internalization, the layer that is the condition of anxiety as demonstrated by Levina and Bui. This anxiety therefore stems from this internalization process, depicted as omnipresence in contemporary horror cinema.

He proposes two emergent forms of time and space that characterize the network society, that address the boundless omnipresence depicted by Levina and Bui: Timeless time and the space of flows. In contrast to the industrial age, timeless time is defined by the use of new information/communication technologies in a relentless effort to annihilate time (Castells “Exploratory Theory of the Network Society” 13). The space of flows refers to the technological organization, which organizes the “simultaneity of social practices without geographical contiguity” (14). It is therefore relevant to define omnipresence in contemporary horror film in terms of space and time. David Bordwell adds a cinematic note to the spatial dimensions of omnipresence in film by claiming that classical film has a tendency to translate narrational omniscience into spatial omnipresence (125).

Omnipresence is a broad definition central to contemporary horror film that reflects anxieties regarding a socio-technical condition in contemporary society. This omnipresent condition is one of ambiguity and uncertainty, that is caused by a changing relationship between technology, fear and power. Omnipresence is therefore a central notion to understanding contemporary horror film as an expression of the changing relationships between technology, power and fear. My aim in this chapter is to examine the contemporary monster through the broad concept of omnipresence in terms of its dynamics between technology and fear, as a reflection of our socio-technical society.

These elements are positioned internally within a collective socio-technical premise. The film Friend Request (2016), directed by Simon Verhoeven, resides within this premise, and aims to grasp contemporary anxieties by discussing social media, exemplifying omnipresence and reflecting contemporary society.

3.3. Synopsis of Friend Request

The plot is then rewinded to two weeks earlier. Laura is at home watching cat videos, which she shows to her roommates Olivia, Isabel and Gustavo. The next day, Laura receives a friend request from Marina, and accepts, despite her roommates thinking the animations and drawings are odd. Laura begins a friendship with Marina. This friendship soon turns sour when Laura does not invite Marina to an event, lying to her that she hasn’t planned anything, but does share the planned celebrations on facebook. Marina confronts Laura and during their argument she finds out that Marina has no hair. Laura later

(26)

unfriends Marina, who in return, upon seeing that she is down to zero friends again, kills herself in front of her webcam, which is automatically uploaded to social media.

The next day, the suicide video is uploaded to Laura’s facebook page and she is unable to remove it. People consequently start unfriending Laura. She tries to delete her account but somehow it is not possible to do so. She later finds out, with the help of her friend Kobe, that the source code is not binary code. That night, Marina adds Gustavo on facebook and shortly after Gustavo is killed by wasps in some sort of delusional state that resembles Marina’s drawings and creepy video’s. This video is again posted on Laura’s page and she loses almost all her facebook friends. She is stalked by Marina’s vengeful spirit in her dreams and through a mirror that appeared in her house.

Determined to free herself from Marina, Laura finds out that in order to really kill her, she must destroy the laptop Marina used to record her suicide. Laura and Kobe go to Marina’s house, far out of the city, a house that was burned down long ago. While there, a ghost tells them that they have to search for Marina in the basement. Laura and Kobe get separated and when she finds Kobe, he is staring into the same mirror that appeared in Laura’s house earlier. Kobe stabs Laura, saying she can’t be lonely when she is dead, hoping to save himself by killing Laura. Laura manages to get away and realizes that Marina didn’t kill herself at the house, but at a factory nearby. Once she is at the factory, Laura gets a video call from her mother, who appears to be losing her mind, tells her she can see Marina as well and walks away in the video with a knife in her hand. Laura’s boyfriend Tyler finds Laura at the factory, but is killed by Kobe. She runs away but reaches a dead end. Miraculously, Marina’s wasps kill Kobe before he could kill her.

Laura sees an apparition of Marina as a child, who leads her to her laptop. Laura sees herself walking towards the laptop on the screen, however the image is mirrored and she is in a forest. She is attacked in the forest by Marina. In the last scene, some time has passed and there is a fresh batch of students. Laura is sitting alone at a lunch table and is laughed at, just like Marina. She turns to her laptop, which shows her Facebook page with Marina’s content, ending the movie in a circular manner.

3.4. Case Study

The network society is indicated in the film through the use of Facebook. Right after the opening scene and the title slide (which uses the Facebook font), Laura is introduced in the movie through her facebook profile as the film scrolls through her page, whilst showing a short montage of the photo’s and video’s that she has shared. This places the movie in a socio-technical environment. It is through her facebook page that Laura’s identity is established, therefore indicating that a technical layer is a determining factor of her identity. The discourse being exemplified, is that Laura represents today’s generation of the network society. A shot of Laura jogging flows into shots of her photo’s on her profile, showing photo’s

21st Century Horror Film: Networked Monsters