WHAT IS THE FIRST HORROR/GENRE FILM? in Silent Horror Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

WHAT IS THE FIRST HORROR/GENRE FILM?

Author	Comment
MYST0	WHAT IS THE FIRST HORROR/GENRE FILM?	Lead	[-]
Feb 1 12 11:32 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This topic was started in a Calagari thread where someone claimed that it was the frist horror film. So much good information came in I thought we should start a new thread on the subject and maybe qualify it a bit. Here are the 3 catagories: 1. What is the first horror film? This would be a short one or two reeler. It would seem Melies’ LE MANOIR DU DIABLE (1896) would take the honors, but Rick and I both agree that this is very difficult to validate since we need to clarify what would constitute a horror film. There is a film on YouTube that someone posted somewhere calling it the first horror film. It had ghosts popping in and out which would make it a true horror film, but I can't remember what the title was. It had a date of 1900 or so. I have it downloaded and will look it up. 2. What is the first horror feature (at least 4 or 5 reels). Here is where all the great discussion came in. If it would be possible to duplicate the relevant entries from the Calagari thread it would make matters easier. So far good arguments were made for CABINET OF CALIGARI, NOSFERATU (No one can disagree it is a true horror film) and especially LIFE WITHOUT SOUL, the early Frankenstein based film. PhantomXCI mentions L’INFERNO (1912) and I also thought of that one. I haven't seen it, but it is out on DVD. However, is it really a horror film or a film that just contains some horror content? I really need to see that one. 3. What is the earliest EXTANT horror film short and feature? Since no one alive has seen LIFE WITHOUT SOUL, can we be sure it is, in fact, a horror film?
	Remove this ad
Romymarion		#1	[-]
Feb 2 12 6:10 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Is it really L’INFERNO (1912) ?
PhantomXCI		#2	[-]
Feb 2 12 8:50 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	If you consider DANTE'S INFERNO (either the '24 or '35 versions) to be a horror film, then you have to consider L'INFERNO to be one, also. As for earliest extant features (aside from L'INFERNO), all of these 1913 films still exist: DER ANDERE, ATLANTIS (which is not horror/sci-fi, but contains a brief dreamlike sequence), FANTOMAS (serial), DIE INSEL DER SELIGEN (fantasy), and DER STUDENT VON PRAG.
pulp novelties		#3	[-]
Feb 2 12 2:35 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	This will be redundant from the CALIGARI thread, but using the criteria of could someone with a rudimentary, general exposure to film sit down and think they'd seen a genuine horror film, I'd have to say NOSFERATU. Its one of the few (possibly only?) horror-for-horror's-sake films of the silent era that I can think of. Though coming from an unacknowledged literary source, Murnau chose to cherry-pick the the horror and toss the more romantic and exotic adventure elements to the side. It also doesn't use horror to get any ulterior moral or social message across, the horror elements aren't isolated sequences propping-up up what's basically a romantic mystery, or cautionary drama. NOSFERATU tells a genuine tale of the supernatural, with most of the narrative supporting that aim. In tone Murnau sought to create a sustained atmosphere that moves between the morbid and the dreadful. Count Orlock is also a genuine monster; an ugly and amoral parasite, he spreads disease and death without mercy. His mere presence = death and corruption. I think there are a lot of prior silents that use what have come to be thought of as horror stories without making horror films, and there are still more that use grotesque fantasy elements in sequences, but I still don't see them as intrinsically horror. I also don't consider Melies/Edison/Pathe trick-films or the Italian epics like L'INFERNO to be horror films, but films with horrific or grotesque trappings. . Last Edited By: pulp novelties Feb 2 12 2:38 PM. Edited 1 times.
Melkes		#4	[-]
Feb 2 12 6:01 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'd argue that there were several films of the silent era that would fit in the horror category, also by modern standards. Since a lot of the films of the era are lost this means that many films can be judged only through film programs, reviews and stills, meaning it is of course uncertain to say whether they were really horror films - yet we know from extant silent films that movies of this kind were made so there must have been a good deal of actual horror films among the lost ones as well. Even if we limit the discussion to feature-length extant silents, films like Der Student von Prag (both the 1913 and 1926 versions), Unheimliche Geschichten (1919), Nosferatu (1921), Orlac's Hände (1924) and La Chute de la maison Usher (1928) fit squarely in the horror category I'd say.
pulp novelties		#5	[-]
Feb 2 12 6:32 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'd argue STUDENT OF PRAGUE is more a "morality tale" than full-bodied horror. Sure it's got deals with the devil and whatnot, but then even something like THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER is horror, rather than moral-fantasy. L'INFERNO, CALIGARI, HAXAN, FAUST, THE GOLEM all have their moments, but it's not their main thrust.
Rick		#6	[-]
Feb 2 12 7:07 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think this conversation just illustrates what I said in that other thread -- a big part of the reason that we'll never answer this is because we'll never agree on what constitutes a horror film. You may be right that NOSFERATU was the first intentional, full-blooded, no-doubt-about-it actual horror film. But what if I say THE AVENGING CONSCIENCE is also a horror film, just...not as much? Or L'INFERNO has horror elements enough to make it a horror film, but it's even lower on the "real horror" scale. So this is an interesting conversation, a worthwhile conversation, and maybe we can introduce folks (myself included) to some unknown or unfamiliar ancient titles, but we ain't never gonna answer the question. Not to the satisfaction of a majority, at any rate. Personally, I tend toward the more inclusive, less-horror-required end of the scale, but, to each his own. Still -- carry on.
pulp novelties		#7	[-]
Feb 2 12 9:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Horror is like pornography, I know it when I see it (kidding). I think the horror film developed over time. I wonder if this question were put to the filmmakers of these silent films after the genre had been coined, if they would say it was their intent to make a horror film? I suspect the creators of CALIGARI would have said they had loftier goals, but if Murnau claimed otherwise, he'd have to do some fancy talking to convince me. I've not seen AVENGING CONSCIENCE, though it is at my disposal, I'll have to give it a look. I have seen L'INFERNO and don't think of it as horror at all, it's a pretty literal illustration of the book, and thought full of the grotesque, it's more like a the biblical spectacles of it's day.
Wich2		#8	[-]
Feb 2 12 10:13 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>I'd argue STUDENT OF PRAGUE is more a "morality tale" than full-bodied horror. Sure it's got deals with the devil and whatnot, but then even something like THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER is horror, rather than moral-fantasy.< Tim, I'm not sure I'm reading you right... But speaking as a big fan of both the film and its base story, if you're saying that DEVIL/DANIEL is what you consider a Horror piece, not a Morality Tale, I'd have to respectfully (but pretty strongly) disagree. -Craig
MYST0		#9	[-]
Feb 3 12 1:03 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I am tending to lean towards STUDENT OF PRAGUE (1913) as the first horror feature. The plot is driven on that deal with the devil. I have a copy of L'INFERNO coming to me in a few weeks so I need to look at that. Wouldn't that be more of a spectacle with some horror scenes? If the horror scenes dominate the film it could be the first. I don't think I have seen AVENGING CONSCIENCE, or at least not in a very long time, I think it is in my collection somewhere, but it is 1914. Since it has a Tell Tale Heart story line it could be a true horror film. THE CABINET OF CALIGARI is certainly a horror film in my book no matter what the Director's lofty intent. It's got a mad doctor, a serial killer and all manner of horror trappings. I think even Hitchcock didn't consider PSYCHO a horror film, so you really can't go by what the director has to say. Of course, Karloff claimed to have never made a horror film and would rather they be called "terror" films. Rick is correct, however, that the true definition of what makes a film a horror film will probably never be agreed upon. I also would tend to be as inclusive as possible as well. There are, for example, westerns that have enough horror content to be considered a horror film. TOMBSTONE CANYON, for example. I also, in my mind, know a horror film when I see it as pulp novelties has pointed out. He makes a very good argument for NOSFERATU as being the first all out and full blown horor film, but, as I have said I see CABINET OF CALIGARI and STUDENT OF PRAGUE as also being a complete horror films. We still have not nailed the first horror short. I would tend to agree that the early trick films would not qualify since they were meant to be like magic shows and the intent was not to scare an audience. It would possibly be something that has a plot as brief as it might be. That is why I suggested that ghost film. I wish I could remember what it was. It may have been a haunted hotel room or something like that. I think the INTENT was to scare the early turn of the century audiences. These were the same audiences who were shocked to see a train pull into the station and it seemed to come right at them.
MYST0		#10	[-]
Feb 3 12 1:13 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Ah! Here is the film I was thinking of: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0000340/ It may not qualify as it is more of a comedy.
	Remove this ad
pulp novelties		#11	[-]
Feb 3 12 2:29 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Wich2 wrote: >I'd argue STUDENT OF PRAGUE is more a "morality tale" than full-bodied horror. Sure it's got deals with the devil and whatnot, but then even something like THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER is horror, rather than moral-fantasy.< Tim, I'm not sure I'm reading you right... But speaking as a big fan of both the film and its base story, if you're saying that DEVIL/DANIEL is what you consider a Horror piece, not a Morality Tale, I'd have to respectfully (but pretty strongly) disagree. -Craig No, I wasn't clear in my wording. I meant to say that a deal with the devil does not necessarily mean "horror movie" and more often means morality play. THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER is an example of a clearly non-horror film that nonetheless features a bargain with Satan. I don't consider Murnau's FAUST horror either, in spite of Faust's meeting with the Devil at the crossroads being one of the creepiest manifestations of Satan on film.
TServo4		#12	[-]
Feb 3 12 2:54 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	OK, but how is an insane doctor carrying around a zombie-like somnambulist he's hypnotized into becoming a serial killer not a horror film? J. Theakston Capitol Theatre, Rome, NY
Melkes		#13	[-]
Feb 3 12 10:14 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	pulp novelties wrote: I'd argue STUDENT OF PRAGUE is more a "morality tale" than full-bodied horror. Sure it's got deals with the devil and whatnot, but then even something like THE DEVIL AND DANIEL WEBSTER is horror, rather than moral-fantasy. L'INFERNO, CALIGARI, HAXAN, FAUST, THE GOLEM all have their moments, but it's not their main thrust. I would not consider The Devil and Daniel Webster a horror film either, but Student is a completely different kind of film. The deal is not made with the devil, but with the sinister (and supernatural) figure Scapinelli, a character taken straight out of the stories of E.T.A Hoffmann (only in the much shortened English export version the characterization of Scapinelli is abandoned, and the deal between the main character Balduin and Scapinelli is announced as "a bargain with Satan" to simplify matters). After the deal is done, Balduin is literally haunted by his mirror image. As for Caligari, I would personally not have any trouble including it as a horror film. That it's an "art film" does not mean it can't be horror. One argument for not considering it straight horror could be that it has one foot in the crime thriller category. In The Avenging Conscience, the horrific part of the story only takes place, as far as I remember, towards the end of the movie. If it should be considered a horror film at all, it's certainly not the first one - Student predates it by a year and is more full-blooded horror than this. I would agree that L'Inferno (1911) is not a horror film and is more in the line of Faust-like fantasy. Last Edited By: Melkes Feb 3 12 10:20 AM. Edited 1 times.
pulp novelties		#14	[-]
Feb 3 12 11:45 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'll grant that CALIGARI is nightmarish, and were it not so artsy, it would be not so horror-filmy. I guess I find it's horror is more illustrative of dissolution of post-war Germany. The whole "clowns are running the circus" vein, and the general grotesque cynicism of the German Expressionist movement seems more a thing social commentary than out-and-out horror for it's own sake to me. Unlike a lot of "German Expressionist" films, CALIGARI is faithfully alined with the thrust of the movement in ways other than just the visual distortions. I suppose if it walks like a duck...then sure it's a horror-film.
PhantomXCI		#15	[-]
Feb 3 12 11:46 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	There are people who don't think that THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME and THE MAN WHO LAUGHS are horror films- they're historical melodramas. There are those who don't consider SILENCE OF THE LAMBS to be horror- it's a detective thriller. ON BORROWED TIME and DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY are really macabre fantasies. THE INVISIBLE MAN and CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON are more sci-fi, so they're not horror, either. Sir Christopher Lee doesn't consider his FU MANCHU films to be horror. Then there are the Universal "are they or aren't they" titles like THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD, SECRET OF THE CHATEAU and THE MAN WHO RECLAIMED HIS HEAD. There are so many different categories into which you can sub-divide horror/sci-fi/fantasy films, that it really confuses things and detracts from the purpose. I'm still going with L'INFERNO.
Wich2		#16	[-]
Feb 3 12 12:17 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>No, I wasn't clear in my wording. I meant to say that a deal with the devil does not necessarily mean "horror movie" and more often means morality play.< Gotcha. >I don't consider Murnau's FAUST horror either, in spite of Faust's meeting with the Devil at the crossroads being one of the creepiest manifestations of Satan on film.< Agreed - that's one terrific moment.
pulp novelties		#17	[-]
Feb 3 12 2:36 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	PhantomXCI wrote: There are people who don't think that THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME and THE MAN WHO LAUGHS are horror films- they're historical melodramas. There are those who don't consider SILENCE OF THE LAMBS to be horror- it's a detective thriller. ON BORROWED TIME and DEATH TAKES A HOLIDAY are really macabre fantasies. THE INVISIBLE MAN and CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON are more sci-fi, so they're not horror, either. Sir Christopher Lee doesn't consider his FU MANCHU films to be horror. Then there are the Universal "are they or aren't they" titles like THE MYSTERY OF EDWIN DROOD, SECRET OF THE CHATEAU and THE MAN WHO RECLAIMED HIS HEAD. There are so many different categories into which you can sub-divide horror/sci-fi/fantasy films, that it really confuses things and detracts from the purpose. I'm still going with L'INFERNO. Actually, I think there is a strong argument why all of those aren't horror, I don't see HUNCHBACK as horror at all, I only begrudgingly would say PHANTOM is. Both are book-based romantic-fiction with sympathetic, grotesque "villains" who are more social outcasts than genuinely evil or corrupt. I have SILENCE OF THE LAMBS filed under mystery myself. CREATURE and INVISIBLE MAN have become horror in my mind more because by association they are part of the Universal Monsters franchise, INVISIBLE MAN seems less horror than CREATURE to me. I can also see why some regard PSYCHO as "suspense" rather than horror, but I myself used to argue that if a horror-film was to good it couldn't be called a horror-film any longer. There are exceptions films like THE HAUNTING, THE INNOCENTS, ROSEMARY'S BABY are all horror to me.
TServo4		#18	[-]
Feb 3 12 7:01 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The problem is that you can get really nitpicky about this, but a horror film by any definition is follows a film that elicits a shock or horror reaction based on peoples' fears. HUNCHBACK is a historical melodrama. PHANTOM absolutely is horror—Chaney is a human monster masquerading as a ghost, and he ruthlessly kills people. People were genuinely scared of him, versus the Hunchback, which ultimately they felt pity for. CREATURE and INVISIBLE MAN are both movies with killing monsters (one is animal, one is human). PSYCHO absolutely is a horror films—it's mindf***ing the audience. J. Theakston Capitol Theatre, Rome, NY
pulp novelties		#19	[-]
Feb 3 12 7:27 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	TServo4 wrote: The problem is that you can get really nitpicky about this, but a horror film by any definition is follows a film that elicits a shock or horror reaction based on peoples' fears. Sure, but then any mystery/suspense film with moments of mortal terror are horror too. I'm probably being more narrow here than need be, more for spirited debate than anything, but when it comes to silent films I don't think there was an acknowledged "horror" genre. The very notion even seemed regarded with distaste in the 30's, with genuinely horor-for-horror's-sake getting a raised brow and soft-peddled with the term "thriller." So when it comes to the dawn of cinema through the twenties, it's pretty subjective. Last Edited By: pulp novelties Feb 3 12 7:58 PM. Edited 1 times.
TServo4		#20	[-]
Feb 3 12 7:52 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Sure, but then any mystery/suspense films with moments of mortal terror are horror too. But the horror isn't the raison d'être of a mystery or suspense film, the intrigue surrounding the situation is. J. Theakston Capitol Theatre, Rome, NY
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

WHAT IS THE FIRST HORROR/GENRE FILM?

WHAT IS THE FIRST HORROR/GENRE FILM?