Hell, I am delighted to agree that does not apply to Japanese horror. Reiko may have been investigating, but the dead teenagers weren't; they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, and Sadako killed them for it. Furthermore, I disagree that Reiko was guilty in the eyes of the movie. It's not the curiousity which is a sin. It's not even acting on the curiousity which is a sin. It's the metaphysical consequences of that curiousity. Reiko found out why the monster was going to kill her. She *understood* the bad thing, but she did not *promote* it, she did not bring it closer. (Up until the ending. Yes. Well.)
(As to Kirsty as support for the curiousity argument; remember, I said *I'm not sure* whether or not she's innocent in the eyes of the horror movie; and that's *after* the deal with the devil is complete. Yes, she opened a gate to a functional version of Hell. However, she ended up restoring the Appolonian order of things, and Pinhead himself is a force of order.)
So yeah, the victims in "The Ring" are innocent. Ditto everyone in "The Grudge". Ditto the mother in "Dark Water".
As to SF/H;
Am not seeing it in "The Matrix"; seeking knowledge (assuming you are one of the rare humans that can) lifts you from the sordid world and gives you superpowers and lets you battle demons that others can't see. It's *dangerous*, yes, but it's not something for which you need to be punished within the moral framework of the universe. It may kick you in the teeth, but you'll be a noble crusader rather than a bastard who got what they deserved. And rejecting this knowledge, trying to return to your ignorance, is the provenance of a coward and a traitor.
"The Terminator" is a horror movie.
In "2001: A Space Odyssey", it's not seeking knowledge which causes the problem, but the fact that poor HAL is *told to lie and can't handle it*. Duplicity and secrecy cause the tragedy; gaining knowledge elevates a human to an exalted state (and, incidentally, was what started off the human race). I see that as knowledge-seeking granting good things after a hard trip, not knowledge-seeking being a bad thing.
You are entirely correct about "Jurassic Park". Furthermore, you would be correct in saying that about any of Crichton's books, or any of the movies based off them. The man is a shrieking technophobe.
"Rosemary's Baby" doesn't punish the innocent; it exploits her. Punishment isn't bad things happening; punishment is bad things happening in a way that is presented as morally correct within the confines of the genre.
"Pet Sematery" is *so* much about the punishment of knowledge. You find out about the secret that breaks the laws of nature, you use the secret that breaks the laws of nature, and everything goes to hell.
Compare how often in horror movies someone uncovers That Which Should Not Be Known and has it start chewing off people's faces to how often they uncover That Which is Glorious and Good but Was Forgotten and has it ushering in peace and glory and light and victory. It's not usually something you find that defeats the monster; it's something you are, implicitly or explicitly. The virtuous girl kills the monster. The righteous man cannot be harmed by the demons. The monster can only be killed by a child who was born on a specific day/way/circumstance.
It's modern sword-and-sorcery, only instead of the villainous results of forbidden knowledge being defeated by a protagonist with naturally mighty thews, they're being defeated by a protagonist with naturally mighty moral integrity.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
timeasmymeasure
no subject
(As to Kirsty as support for the curiousity argument; remember, I said *I'm not sure* whether or not she's innocent in the eyes of the horror movie; and that's *after* the deal with the devil is complete. Yes, she opened a gate to a functional version of Hell. However, she ended up restoring the Appolonian order of things, and Pinhead himself is a force of order.)
So yeah, the victims in "The Ring" are innocent. Ditto everyone in "The Grudge". Ditto the mother in "Dark Water".
As to SF/H;
Am not seeing it in "The Matrix"; seeking knowledge (assuming you are one of the rare humans that can) lifts you from the sordid world and gives you superpowers and lets you battle demons that others can't see. It's *dangerous*, yes, but it's not something for which you need to be punished within the moral framework of the universe. It may kick you in the teeth, but you'll be a noble crusader rather than a bastard who got what they deserved. And rejecting this knowledge, trying to return to your ignorance, is the provenance of a coward and a traitor.
"The Terminator" is a horror movie.
In "2001: A Space Odyssey", it's not seeking knowledge which causes the problem, but the fact that poor HAL is *told to lie and can't handle it*. Duplicity and secrecy cause the tragedy; gaining knowledge elevates a human to an exalted state (and, incidentally, was what started off the human race). I see that as knowledge-seeking granting good things after a hard trip, not knowledge-seeking being a bad thing.
You are entirely correct about "Jurassic Park". Furthermore, you would be correct in saying that about any of Crichton's books, or any of the movies based off them. The man is a shrieking technophobe.
"Rosemary's Baby" doesn't punish the innocent; it exploits her. Punishment isn't bad things happening; punishment is bad things happening in a way that is presented as morally correct within the confines of the genre.
"Pet Sematery" is *so* much about the punishment of knowledge. You find out about the secret that breaks the laws of nature, you use the secret that breaks the laws of nature, and everything goes to hell.
Compare how often in horror movies someone uncovers That Which Should Not Be Known and has it start chewing off people's faces to how often they uncover That Which is Glorious and Good but Was Forgotten and has it ushering in peace and glory and light and victory. It's not usually something you find that defeats the monster; it's something you are, implicitly or explicitly. The virtuous girl kills the monster. The righteous man cannot be harmed by the demons. The monster can only be killed by a child who was born on a specific day/way/circumstance.
It's modern sword-and-sorcery, only instead of the villainous results of forbidden knowledge being defeated by a protagonist with naturally mighty thews, they're being defeated by a protagonist with naturally mighty moral integrity.