A Christian Response to Horror Cinema: Ten Films in Theological PerspectivePeterFraser. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2015.

Abstract

A Christian Response to Horror Cinema: Ten Films in Theological Perspective Peter Fraser. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2015.Peter Fraser, whose two previous books {Reviewing Movies [2000] and Images of Passion [1998]) also tackle subject of religion and film, develops a theology for horror film in A Christian Response to Horror Cinema. Despite an admitted ambivalence about as a whole that may separate it from other books on horror, Fraser explains his interest in subject, as this book was in gestation for two decades: Working against grain of a scientific age that tends toward denial of possibility of not only a personal God, but a personal devil, of horror insists that what lies beneath our dread of mysterious and dangerous unknown that horror explores is Satan himself, his minions, and a grisly unreality that if seen without ghostly veils would make Milton's Pandemonium seem a rather familiar place (7).Evidence suggests that films with demons have generally appealed to more religious audiences than more traditional bogeymen (e.g., vampires and zombies), but Fraser examines concept of demonic in horror film to a much greater extent than simply films like The Exorcist (1973) and Paranormal Activity series. Evoking Chris tus Victor (the atonement theory that proposes Christ's death was foremost about defeat of forces of evil) over demonic, five questions govern his examination of films: (1) What is monster?; (2) What inhabits monster?; (3) Why is this chaos unleashed on people?', (4) What is broken taboo?', and (5) How can exorcism be performed?Despite this broader approach to understanding demonic in horror film, strongest chapters still tend to be those on films that naturally lend themselves to Fraser's religious perspective. To put it bluntly, his preference is on those that exemplify how genre depends on paradigms of Christianity and especially those quirky salvific elements like bread and wine and prayers of priests and faith of children (114). This is certainly case with Carl Dreyer's Vampyr (1932), a work Fraser considers as spiritually rich as his later works. He challenges David Bordwell's long-accepted, neoformalist analysis that reads film as largely confused and inexplicable. Fraser, on other hand, sees film as a simple tale of possession and redemption (44), supporting his argument with some of new scholarship connecting vampire fiction and film to Christianity. Vampyr may be best example of how the vampire is rooted in a theology of blood redemption (46), far removed from vampire films of today, such as Blade (1998-2004) or Twilight series (2008-2012). Some of Fraser's more interesting thoughts can be found in his chapter on The Wicker Man (1973). Connecting film to Hebrew Bible's condemnation of Ammonite deity Mo lech, Fraser notes that despite film's increasing popularity as a cult film, most viewers have ignored its cautionary warnings against rising current of Neopaganism.Some of author's most memorable comments can be found in overtly theological The Exorcist, including some intriguing contributions to horror film scholarship. …