Watch them, and you’ll likely notice that as the decades pass, the directors, writers and studio executives of these films seem to produce more and more on-screen blood, violence and gore. But why?
As a professor of horror studies, I explore the depths of the genre with my students – and for us to understand the evolution of blood in horror cinema, we first consider how films reflect their times.
Alfred Hitchcock and Michael Powell created proto-slashers with “Psycho” and “Peeping Tom,” respectively. Both films were released in 1960 about four months apart, both feature serial killers, and both operate on a “tell, don’t show” visual aesthetic. Rather than show the blood to the audience, the films provide narrative cues to only suggest the blood.Janet Leigh’s shower scene in ‘Psycho’ is one of the most memorable moments in movie history. Bettmann via Getty Images
Guts, gore and so much more
In “Psycho,” Marion Crane, played by Janet Leigh, is stabbed to death in the famous shower scene. But the quick-cut editing gives only the illusion of her nude body being slashed as a small amount of blood washes down the drain in black-and-white tones. By not shooting “Psycho” in color, and avoiding the image of bright red blood in the bathtub – Hitchcock’s choice – the film doesn’t seem as violent.
In “Night of the Living Dead,” George A. Romero’s 1968 seminal zombie flick, the walking dead consume the flesh of the living. Even though the movie is in black and white, the monochromatic presentation does not dull the display of the undead gobbling guts and licking up blood.
The film’s release came six months after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., and a clear connection between Romero’s film and the Civil Rights Movement then taking place is apparent. The movie’s heightened gore correlates to the movement’s all-too-bloody violent struggle, as Ben, played by Duane Jones, the sole person of color among the living, hides from the ghouls in an abandoned farmhouse with a group of six white people.
Ben works to keep the group safe but faces ongoing pushback from the white male characters. At the end of the film, a group of vigilantes, believing Ben is a zombie, guns him down before tossing his body into a fire.
The symbolism as a reflection of the times is hard to miss. Romero and John Russo, who co-wrote the screenplay, didn’t initially intend to make a statement on civil rights; but later, during postproduction, Romero realized the assassination of King turned his movie into a “Black film.”
Once again, blood is a common denominator. Sally’s body is covered in it after escaping Leatherface; Regan’s body, along with the blood, spews green vomit; and Ripley sees an alien burst out of a crew member’s chest. But the films weren’t just gory – they were metaphors for the uphill battle for women’s rights in the 1970s.
The original “Halloween” (1978) also fits here, but with a twist. The character of Laurie Strode, perhaps an early prototype of women protagonists in horror films, connects back to a “tell, don’t show” sensibility while simultaneously embracing changing times. While the first kill shows Michael Myers stabbing his older sister, the audience views the death from the partially veiled perspective of Myers behind his Halloween mask. You see little until her body hits the floor to reveal the blood.‘Halloween’ was a huge hit and has thus far spawned six direct sequels, one offshoot, a two-part remake and one reboot trilogy over 46 years. Universal History Archive via Getty Images
Nightmares and reality
In the 1980s, the slasher subgenre dominated horror – and the bloodier, the better: These movies focus on the number of kills and the creative ways the victims are dispatched.
Each sequel in these horror franchises needed to up the kills, if for no other reason than to outdo its predecessors and competitors. Audiences began rooting for villains like Myers, Jason Voorhees and Freddy Krueger, all of whom had their own theme music, and in Freddy’s case, trademark one-liners. Many of the villains had more character development than their victims, who seemed interchangeable and little more than fodder for the slasher machine.
The 1990s had bigger-budgeted, more innovative films, such as Wes Craven’s “New Nightmare” (1994) and “Scream” (1996). Here the attacks are more personal; the stabbings are close-up. CGI, or computer-generated imagery, used in abundance in the “Nightmare” series, allowed for more creative and bloody kills.
Scarier times mean bloodier movies
Since 9/11, horror films have existed in a place where there’s no apparent motive other than violence and bloodshed. In “The Strangers” (2008), the villains tie up, torment and savagely maim their victims. In the 2009 remake of “The Last House on the Left,” it’s the villains who meet a bloody end. Contemporary horror understands how senseless killings on screen are effective, because the removal of emotion from the violence parallels real-world incidents.‘Ghostface’ is the villain in the popular ‘Scream’ series. James Gourley/Getty Images Entertainment via Getty Images
By the late 2010s, horror films link to the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements, most notably in the “Halloween” reboot trilogy, as Laurie Strode once again confronts Michael Myers and the trauma he inflicted 40 years prior.
The kills in the new “Halloween” trilogy are extremely bloody and violent. They also mirror the sexual and societal exploitation of women and their bodies. Ultimately, the series allows the protagonist, and the traumatized town of Haddonfield, to acknowledge the evil, confront it and try to finally put an end to it, once and for all.
The evolution in the horror genre’s presentation of blood and gore doesn’t necessarily make for scarier movies, but they often point to the scarier times in which we live. Earlier horror films, comparatively tamer and with less blood, were often box-office successes. But today’s audiences probably appreciate them more for their artistic merits than the fear they induce.
The preferences of horror audiences change over time, much like the ebb and flow of the blood depicted in these movies. The original “Halloween” has hardly a drop; the recent reboots are over the top – but still nowhere close to the mayhem depicted in the just-released “Terrifier 3.”
What the future holds is anyone’s guess. But check out the world around you, and you’ll certainly get a bloody good hint of what’s to come.
Looking for an entertainment experience that transcends the ordinary? Look no further than STM Daily News Blog’s vibrant Entertainment section. Immerse yourself in the captivating world of indie films, streaming and podcasts, movie reviews, music, expos, venues, and theme and amusement parks. Discover hidden cinematic gems, binge-worthy series and addictive podcasts, gain insights into the latest releases with our movie reviews, explore the latest trends in music, dive into the vibrant atmosphere of expos, and embark on thrilling adventures in breathtaking venues and theme parks. Join us at STM Entertainment and let your entertainment journey begin! https://stmdailynews.com/category/entertainment/
The dystopian Pottersville in ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ is starting to feel less like fiction
A fresh look at It’s a Wonderful Life through the film’s darkest detour—Pottersville—and why its greed, corruption, and desensitization to cruelty feels uncomfortably familiar in America today.
To many Americans, George Bailey’s dystopian nightmare is disquietingly familiar. Paramount
The dystopian Pottersville in ‘It’s a Wonderful Life’ is starting to feel less like fiction
Nora Gilbert, University of North Texas Along with millions of others, I’ll soon be taking 2 hours and 10 minutes out of my busy holiday schedule to sit down and watch a movie I’ve seen countless times before: Frank Capra’s “It’s a Wonderful Life,” which tells the story of a man’s existential crisis one Christmas Eve in the fictional town of Bedford Falls. There are lots of reasons why this eight-decade-old film still resonates, from its nostalgic pleasures to its cultural critiques. But when I watch it this year, the sequence where Bedford Falls transforms into the dark and dystopian “Pottersville” will resonate the most. In the film, protagonist George Bailey, who’s played by Jimmy Stewart, is on the brink of suicide. He seems to have achieved the hallmarks of the American dream: He’s taken over his father’s loan business, married the love of his life and fathered four excessively adorable children. But George feels stifled and beaten down. His Uncle Billy has misplaced US$8,000 of the company’s money, and the town’s resident tyrant, Mr. Potter, is using the mishap to try to ruin George, who’s his last remaining business competitor. An angel named Clarence is tasked with pulling George back from the brink. To stop him from attempting suicide, Clarence decides to show George what life would have been like if he’d never been born. In this alternate reality, Bedford Falls is called Pottersville, a place Mr. Potter runs as a ruthless banker and slumlord.Pottersville, the dark, dystopian version of Bedford Falls, is a place characterized by vice and moral decay.Paramount Having previously written about “It’s a Wonderful Life” in my book on literary and film censorship, I can’t help but see parallels between Pottersville and the U.S. today. Think about it: In Pottersville, one man hoards all the financial profits and political power. In Pottersville, greed, corruption and cynicism reign supreme. In Pottersville, hard-working immigrants like Giuseppe Martini who were able to build a life and run a business in Bedford Falls have vanished. In Pottersville, homeless addicts like Mr. Gower and nonconformist “pixies” like Clarence are scorned and ostracized, then booted out of the local watering hole. In Pottersville, cops arrest people like Violet Bick while they’re at work and haul them away, kicking and screaming.Violet Bick gets dragged away by the Pottersville police as George looks on.Paramount But what horrifies George the most about Pottersville is how desensitized the people living in it seem to be to its harshness and cruelty – how they treat him like he’s the crazy, deranged one for wanting and expecting things to be different and better. This is what the current political moment feels like to me. There are days when the latest headlines feel so jarringly unprecedented that I find myself thinking, “Can this be happening? Can this be real?” If you think these comparisons are a bit of a stretch, consider when “It’s a Wonderful Life” was made, and the frame of mind Capra was in when he made it.
Frank Capra, anti-fascist
In 1946, Capra was just returning to Hollywood filmmaking after serving for four years in the U.S. Army, where the Office of War Information had tasked him with producing a series of documentary films about World War II and the lead-up to it. Even though Capra hadn’t been on the front lines, he’d been immersed in the sounds and images of war for years on end, and he had become acutely familiar with Germany, Italy and Japan’s respective rises to fascism.Frank Capra served in the U.S. Army during World War II.Keystone/Hulton Archive via Getty Images When deciding on his first postwar film, Capra recalled in his autobiography that he specifically “knew one thing – it would not be about war.” Instead, he chose to adapt a short story by Philip Van Doren Stern, “The Greatest Gift,” that Stern had originally sent to friends and family as a Christmas card in 1943. Stern’s story is certainly not about war. But it’s not exactly about Christmas, either. As Stern writes in his opening lines:
“The little town straggling up the hill was bright with colored Christmas lights. But George Pratt did not see them. He was leaning over the railing of the iron bridge, staring down moodily at the black water.”
The protagonist contemplates suicide because he’s “sick of everything” in the small-town “mudhole” he’s stuck in – until, that is, a “strange little man” gives him the chance to see what life would be like if he’d never been born. It was Capra and his team of screenwriters who added the sinister Henry F. Potter to Stern’s short, simple tale. The Potter subplot encapsulates the film’s most trenchant, still-resonant themes: the unfairness of socioeconomic injustices; the pervasiveness of corporate and political corruption; the threat of monopolized power; the need for affordable housing. These themes had, of course, run through many of Capra’s prewar films as well: “Mr. Deeds Goes to Town,” “You Can’t Take It with You,” “Meet John Doe” and “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” the last of which also starred Jimmy Stewart. But they take on a different kind of weight in “It’s a Wonderful Life” – a weight that’s especially visible on the weathered face of Stewart, who himself had just returned from a harrowing four-year tour of duty as a bomber pilot in Europe. The idealistic vigor with which Stewart had fought crooked politicians and oligarchs as Mr. Smith is replaced by the bitterness, exhaustion, frustration and desperation with which he battles against Mr. Potter as George Bailey.George Bailey feels helpless in the face of corruption and cruelty.Paramount
Life after Pottersville
By the time George has begged and pleaded his way out of Pottersville, the lost $8,000 is no longer top of mind. He’s mainly just relieved to find Bedford Falls as he had left it, warts and all. And yet, the Bedford Falls that George returns to isn’t quite the same as the one he left behind. In this Bedford Falls, the community rallies together to figure out a way to recoup George’s missing money. Their pre-digital version of a GoFundMe page saves George from what he’d feared most: bankruptcy, scandal and prison. And even though his wife, Mary, tries to attribute this sudden wave of collectivist, activist energy to some sort of divine intervention – “George, it’s a miracle; it’s a miracle!” – Uncle Billy points out that it really came about through more earthly organizing means: “Mary did it, George; Mary did it! She told some people you were in trouble, and they scattered all over town collecting money!”The residents of Bedford Falls come together to save George from financial ruin.Paramount But the question of whether George actually wins his battle against Potter is a murky one. While the typical Capra protagonist triumphs by defeating vice and exposing subterfuge, George never even realizes that Potter is the one who got hold of his money and tried to ruin his life. Potter is never held accountable for his crimes. On the other hand, George is able to learn, from his time in Pottersville, what a crucial role he plays in his community. George’s victory over Potter, then, lies not in some grand final act of retribution, but in the incremental ways he has stood up to Potter throughout his life: not capitulating to Potter’s bullying or intimidation tactics; speaking truth to power; and running a community-centered business rather than one guided by greed and exploitation. In recent months, there have been similar acts of protest, large and small, in the form of rallies, boycotts, immigrant aid efforts, subscription cancellations, food bank donations and more. That doesn’t mean the U.S. has made it out of Pottersville, however. Each day, more head-spinning headlines appear, whether they’re about masked agents terrorizing immigrant communities, the dismantling of anti-corruption oversights, the consolidation of executive power or the naked display of political grift. Zuzu’s petals are still missing. Clarence still hasn’t gotten his wings. But this holiday season, I’m hoping it will feel helpfully cathartic to go with George Bailey, for the umpteenth time, through the dark abyss of his dystopian nightmare – and come out with him, stronger and wiser, on the other side. Nora Gilbert, Professor of Literary and Film Studies, University of North Texas This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Hollywood vs. Reality: How LA’s Wilshire Subway Was Really Built
Wilshire Subway: Did LA blast subway tunnels under Wilshire Boulevard? Hollywood says yes — engineers say no. Here’s how Metro safely tunneled beneath Miracle Mile.
When the 1997 disaster film Volcano depicted lava erupting along Wilshire Boulevard and referenced blasting during Red Line subway construction, it delivered gripping cinema — but not accurate engineering.
In reality, Los Angeles Metro did not rely on large-scale blasting to construct subway tunnels beneath Wilshire Boulevard and the Miracle Mile. Instead, engineers used tunnel boring machines (TBMs) specifically to avoid the very risks Hollywood dramatized.
Why Blasting Was Avoided
The Wilshire Corridor sits atop historic oil fields, making methane gas pockets a known and serious concern. A deadly methane explosion near Fairfax Avenue in 1985 led to heightened scrutiny of underground construction in the area. Blasting in such conditions could have caused unpredictable gas releases, ground instability, or damage to surface structures.
As a result, Metro engineers chose pressurized, closed-face tunnel boring machines, which allow for:
Controlled excavation in dense urban environments
Continuous ground support to prevent settlement
Integrated gas detection and ventilation systems
These machines grind slowly through soil and rock while installing precast concrete tunnel linings, creating a sealed, gas-resistant structure as they advance.
The Real Engineering Feat
Although Volcano took creative liberties for dramatic effect, the true story of tunneling under Wilshire is no less impressive. Advances in TBM technology and methane mitigation ultimately allowed the Metro D Line (formerly the Red Line/Purple Line) to safely pass through one of Los Angeles’ most geologically complex corridors — without explosions, collapsing streets, or cinematic chaos.
Bottom Line
Volcano remains a memorable piece of 1990s disaster cinema, but its portrayal of subway construction is fiction. The real achievement lies in decades of careful planning, modern tunneling technology, and engineering solutions that quietly reshaped Los Angeles beneath its busiest boulevard.
A Palestinian-Israeli film just won an Oscar − so why is it so hard to see?
The Palestinian-Israeli film “No Other Land” won the 2025 Academy Award for best documentary but struggles to find a U.S. distributor due to its controversial subject matter around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Despite critical acclaim, it faces unique barriers compared to other independent films.
Last Updated on November 3, 2025 by Daily News StaffLeft to right: Basel Adra, Rachel Szor, Hamdan Ballal and Yuval Abraham pose with their Oscars for ‘No Other Land’ at the 2025 Academy Awards. Maya Dehlin Spach/Getty Images
For many low-budget, independent films, an Oscar win is a golden ticket.
The publicity can translate into theatrical releases or rereleases, along with more on-demand rentals and sales.
However, for “No Other Land,” a Palestinian-Israeli film that just won best documentary feature at the 2025 Academy Awards, this exposure may not translate into commercial success in the U.S. That’s because the film has been unable to find a company to distribute it in America.
“No Other Land” chronicles the efforts of Palestinian townspeople to combat an Israeli plan to demolish their villages in the West Bank and use the area as a military training ground. It was directed by four Palestinian and Israeli activists and journalists: Basel Adra, who is a resident of the area facing demolition, Yuval Abraham, Hamdan Ballal and Rachel Szor. While the filmmakers have organized screenings in a number of U.S. cities, the lack of a national distributor makes a broader release unlikely.
Film distributors are a crucial but often unseen link in the chain that allows a film to reach cinemas and people’s living rooms. In recent years it has become more common for controversial award-winning films to run into issues finding a distributor. Palestinian films have encountered additional barriers.
As a scholar of Arabic who has written about Palestinian cinema, I’m disheartened by the difficulties “No Other Land” has faced. But I’m not surprised.
The role of film distributors
Distributors are often invisible to moviegoers. But without one, it can be difficult for a film to find an audience.
Distributors typically acquire rights to a film for a specific country or set of countries. They then market films to movie theaters, cinema chains and streaming platforms. As compensation, distributors receive a percentage of the revenue generated by theatrical and home releases.
The film “Soundtrack to a Coup D’Etat,” another finalist for best documentary, shows how this process typically works. It premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2024 and was acquired for distribution just a few months later by Kino Lorber, a major U.S.-based distributor of independent films.
Advertisement
The inability to find a distributor is not itself noteworthy. No film is entitled to distribution, and most films by newer or unknown directors face long odds.
So why can’t “No Other Land” find a distributor in the U.S.?
There are a couple of factors at play.
Shying away from controversy
In recent years, film critics have noticed a trend: Documentaries on controversial topics have faced distribution difficulties. These include a film about a campaign by Amazon workers to unionize and a documentary about Adam Kinzinger, one of the few Republican congresspeople to vote to impeach Donald Trump in 2021.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, of course, has long stirred controversy. But the release of “No Other Land” comes at a time when the issue is particularly salient. The Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023, and the ensuing Israeli bombardment and invasion of the Gaza Strip have become a polarizing issue in U.S. domestic politics, reflected in the campus protests and crackdowns in 2024. The filmmakers’ critical comments about the Israeli occupation of Palestine have also garnered backlash in Germany.Locals attend a screening of ‘No Other Land’ in the village of A-Tuwani in the West Bank on March 14, 2024. Yahel Gazit/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
Yet the fact that this conflict has been in the news since October 2023 should also heighten audience interest in a film such as “No Other Land” – and, therefore, lead to increased sales, the metric that distributors care about the most.
Indeed, an earlier film that also documents Palestinian protests against Israeli land expropriation, “5 Broken Cameras,” was a finalist for best documentary at the 2013 Academy Awards. It was able to find a U.S. distributor. However, it had the support of a major European Union documentary development program called Greenhouse. The support of an organization like Greenhouse, which had ties to numerous production and distribution companies in Europe and the U.S., can facilitate the process of finding a distributor.
By contrast, “No Other Land,” although it has a Norwegian co-producer and received some funding from organizations in Europe and the U.S., was made primarily by a grassroots filmmaking collective.
Stages for protest
While distribution challenges may be recent, controversies surrounding Palestinian films are nothing new.
Many of them stem from the fact that the system of film festivals, awards and distribution is primarily based on a movie’s nation of origin. Since there is no sovereign Palestinian state – and many countries and organizations have not recognized the state of Palestine – the question of how to categorize Palestinian films has been hard to resolve.
Advertisement
In 2002, The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences rejected the first ever Palestinian film submitted to the best foreign language film category – Elia Suleiman’s “Divine Intervention” – because Palestine was not recognized as a country by the United Nations. The rules were changed for the following year’s awards ceremony.
In 2021, the cast of the film “Let It Be Morning,” which had an Israeli director but primarily Palestinian actors, boycotted the Cannes Film Festival in protest of the film’s categorization as an Israeli film rather than a Palestinian one.
Film festivals and other cultural venues have also become places to make statements about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and engage in protest. For example, at the Cannes Film Festival in 2017, the right-wing Israeli culture minister wore a controversial – and meme-worthy – dress that featured the Jerusalem skyline in support of Israeli claims of sovereignty over the holy city, despite the unresolved status of Jerusalem under international law.Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev wears a dress featuring the old city of Jerusalem during the Cannes Film Festival in 2017. Antonin Thuillier/AFP via Getty Images
At the 2024 Academy Awards, a number of attendees, including Billie Eilish, Mark Ruffalo and Mahershala Ali, wore red pins in support of a ceasefire in Gaza, and pro-Palestine protesters delayed the start of the ceremonies.
As he accepted his award, “No Other Land” director Yuval Abraham called out “the foreign policy” of the U.S. for “helping to block” a path to peace.
Even though a film like “No Other Land” addresses a topic of clear interest to many Americans, I wonder if the quest to find a U.S. distributor just got even harder.
This article has been updated to clarify that the film was a collaborative effort between Palestinian and Israeli filmmakers. It has also been updated to reflect the film’s win at the 2025 Academy Awards.
