Ah the jump scare. For decades, jump scares have been used in horror cinema to shock the audience and provide them with a momentary sense of terror that will leave them screaming in their seats. They are one of the easiest ways to scare your audience and are by far the most frequently used method of scare tactics in horror cinema. However, jump scares are not always as effective as they should be. Nowadays, jump scares aren't as effective as they used to be, and people tend to simply dismiss them as cheap and lazy ways of frightening the audience. Now I'll admit, I'd much rather a suspense-laden horror film than one riddled with jump scares, to me suspense is just more effective in the long run. However, just because jump scares have become excessively used and are often predictable doesn't mean that they're all bad. If done correctly, jump scares can be highly effective even upon multiple viewings, but in order to achieve such an impact, one needs to follow a few ground rules first..
Suspense, suspense, suspense..
A jump scare without suspense is like telling somebody the punch line before telling the joke, it simply does not work. Many film makers think they can get away with throwing any old jump scare onto the screen without any build up, and 9 times out of 10 it just doesn't work out at all. However, a steady build of tension can do wonders for a jump scare and can really heighten the impact by the time it comes around. I'm going to take an example from Alfred Hitchcock's 1960 masterpiece, Psycho.
In one scene, an investigator names Arbogast (Martin Balsam) enters the residence of Norman Bates and his mother to question them about the disappearance of a young woman named Marion Crane (Janet Leigh). When Arbogast enters the Bates residence it is empty, and the foyer is shrowded in shadow. As Bernard Herrmann's sinister score slowly begins to build, Arbogast climbs the stairwell, while a door on the first floor can be seen slowly edging open. Then, as soon as Arbogast reaches the landing, we cut to an aerial shot where a mysterious figure comes out from behind the door and stabs Arbogast to death, all while that iconic piece of music plays. That scene scared me shitless the first time I watched it and even now it still manages to send chills down my spine, no matter how many times I've watched it. Hitchcock's excellent sense of direction, paired with Herrmann's chilling score and just the right amount of pacing make this one of the most terrifying scenes in horror history. Even now that the film is almost 60 years old, it is still more effective than a lot of modern jump scares because of the sheer attention Hitchcock pays to building suspense. It shows that with the right amount of tension and perfect timing, jump scares can be highly effective.
Never Force It
The problem with a lot of modern horror films is that they disregard the suspense and try to force in as many jump scares as possible. It's one of the reasons why I'm so opposed to found footage films as it's so easy for them to throw anything in front of the camera for a cheap scare. Throwing something in front of the camera like that just isn't scary any more, sure, you might jump of you're watching it in the cinema, but once the credits have rolled you will forget all about it. I'm going to use an example, that's not actually found footage, the Sinister films.
I really dislike the Sinister films, while they do have some good ideas, I feel as though they are too reliant on predictable and mundane jump scares. The finest example comes at a scene in the first film where Ellison (Ethan Hawke), climbs up to the attic to find a group of children watching projections of the grizzly home movies previously found by him. The camera lingers on this shot of the children watching the videos for several seconds, making it obvious that something is about to happen. Low and behold, the films antagonist Bughul sticks his head into the frame from somewhere giving the audience a cheap scare. It's a perfect example of a lazy jump scare with no thought or desire to be creative. It's literally the equivalent of someone jumping in front of you saying 'boo', it might make you jump a little until you realise how stupid it was. To make things worse, the EXACT same jump scare is used in the closing scene of the unwanted sequel Sinister 2. Again, the camera lingers on a shot of something before Bughul pops his face into the frame again. It's bad enough that this lazy method was used once before, but the fact that the filmmakers thought it would be okay to use it again in the sequel, and get away with it, is truly baffling. It's a prime example of how NOT to do a jump scare and one of the reasons why jump scares get such a bad reputation.
Get Creative
The fact that jump scares have been around for so long means that by now, it's hard to do something that we haven't already seen. Many filmmakers opt to simply replicate other methods of jump scares from previous films, often garnering mixed results. However, some filmmakers dare to do something different with their jump scares, and a prime example is James Wan. Wan is one of the most prolific horror filmmakers of the 21st century, spawning franchises such as Saw and The Conjuring, two defining horror franchises of the last 20 years. Wans films are often familiar in their story and subject matter, however, when it comes to crafting a good jump scare, the Australian director continues to prove that he has a few tricks up his sleeve.
I'm going to use an example from his film Insidious 2, while not the best horror sequel ever made, it certainly had its fair share of inventive jump scares. My personal favourite comes when Renai (Rose Byrne) comes under attack from the supernatural forces that plague her home while she is home alone. The tension slowly builds as strange things gradually start to happen, we catch glimpses of a mysterious woman in white before doors start slamming, furniture starts flying, and thing really start to get heated. Renai finally makes her way to the sitting room where the tension has been turned right up to 11, we know something is about to happen, but we don't know what or where it's going to come from. The camera pans around Renai who turns around, just as the camera moves enough to reveal that ghostly woman standing there who screams at Renai and strikes her across the room. Here, James Wan shows that he is trying to catch the audience off guard with his jump scares. Often we can predict where the ghost or the killer is going to jump at us from, but here Wan attempts to make that a bit more uncertain than usual. His penchant for crafting unique and effective jump scares can be seen in the first Insidious, as well as both Conjuring films too.
Everything in Moderation
Too much of anything can be bad, and that certainly applies for jump scares. Even if they are well-crafted and come with the right amount of tension, if there are too many of them they are bound to eventually get tedious. A film cannot rely solely on jump scares if it wants to truly be scary, instead it must incorporate a number of methods to keep the audience on the edge of their seats. Even films like Insidious and The Conjuring, that have some truly inventive jump scares, can become a bit monotonous towards the end, 50 jump scares later.
One of the scariest films of the past couple of years is The Witch, and that has very little jump scares at all. So what does it use instead, you may ask? First of all, suspense is the key. Usually suspense can be created by combining an eerie piece of music with the onscreen imagery and direction. This can often result in the audience becoming increasingly unsettled without anything even happening. What The Witch does, is that it builds this tension up considerably before quickly cutting to something else, usually a loud noise. It's an interesting method of jump scare in that nothing scary actually happens, yet because the tension was so high, it tricks you into thinking that you were in for something truly horrifying. Just like in Stanley Kubrick's The Shining, the editing is one of the films scariest qualities.
One more thing that can either enhance or replace a jump scare is imagery. One of the strong points of the recent Annabelle: Creation was its fantastic use of imagery. Sure, it had a lot of jump scares too, but the fact that it also relied a bit on the creepy imagery made it more than just a one trick pony. There is one particular shot that I mentioned in my review of the film, where we first catch a glimpse of the Annabelle doll. Her pale face and dark sunken eyes loom out of the shadowy room in which she sits, staring down our protagonist. We expect something to happen yet..nothing does, but overall the emphasis on imagery is much more effective.
Basically, jump scares aren't the only way you can scare your audience, you can use the, but use them moderately while experimenting with other methods in the meantime.
The Lewton Bus Dilemma
In 1942, a little film named Cat People was released, directed by Jacques Tourneur and produced by Val Lewton. The film has become well known for the fact that it never reveals its monster and instead relies on shadows and sound to create an imposing offscreen beast. In one infamous scene, Jane Randolph's character Alice is walking along at night when she soon realises that she just might be being followed. She begins to walk quicker down the shadowy street, gradually quickening her pace into almost a run, before finally stopping at a lamp post. Just when you think her assailant is about to strike, it doesn't, and instead a bus pulls in loudly beside her. This method of building suspense before breaking it with something harmless has become known as the Lewton Bus, after produced Val Lewton. It's a false jump scare method of sorts, that still manages to make the audience jump despite not being actually scary. It's a clever method that subverts the usual jump scare, and when used well can be really effective, however, over the years the Lewton Bus has transformed into something a lot less unsettling and rather ironic.. the cat scare.
Basically the cat scare is the same idea only using a cat instead of a bus, and while it is sometimes effective, the cat scare has gradually transformed into literally throwing a cat into the frame even before any tension is built. While films like Alien have done justice to the cat scare, other films seem to literally pelt a character with a cat during any scene that requires a cheap, yet harmless jump scare. The cat scare is more common in more family oriented films such as Hocus Pocus and The Mummy, which is fair enough as it is a harmless way of making the kids jump, but even six year olds can only take so many cat scares before even they become immune.
The Lewton Bus, and cat scares can be very effective when used properly, but simply throwing a cat into the frame just won't cut it.
As you can see, jump scares aren't always a bad thing when they're done right. Many films make the mistake of being plain lazy with their jump scares or using too many to the point that they lose their effect. The problem with a lot of modern horror films is that they feel that this is sufficient and that it audiences will respond well to it. However, even the more easily pleased audience members have begun to lose interest in cheap jump scares that lack any creativity. To craft a successful jump scare, you need to first build tension, then, when the time comes to hit your audience with the punch line, make it count. Don't do the obvious, make them think you're about to take a left before taking a sharp right. As well as that, it's important to remember to use jump scares in moderation, there are plenty of other ways to keep your audiences unnerved, make use of them as well. It's clear that jump scares are not always a bad thing, they just require a bit of creativity if they want to catch the audience off guard.
No comments:
Post a Comment