One thing I remembered while listening about semiotics...

When Ian drew us a picture of a face (whitch later turned into Hitler), and started talking about how people recognise faces naturally, genetically, I instantly remebered this site http://facesinplaces.blogspot.com/ It's a whole blog full of photos of faces people saw where they shouldn't have. It's really interesting how things like that are both amusing and strangely thought provoking...
It's also interesting how people take advantage of this while creating some inhuman characters in cartoons and such. Disney too plays around with how people recognise faces in inanimate objects in some of its' cartoons, like the talking flowers in Alice in Wonderland:

While their humanisation is a lot more straightforward, it's still heavily based on how people tend to see faces in flowers, especially in pansies. Also, flowers here get turned into other objects and animals they remind us of as well, such as cats, bells and trumpets. Also, Lewis Carrol shouldn't be left out too, it was his idea to exploit this tendency in the first place.

Overall, Alice in Wonderland is a great example of semiotics and various analogies, since it's basically a dream a young girl has where her imagination and her personal analogies are materialised, under whitch there seems to be a deeper meaning lying, well, as far as I remember.

I watched Batman when I was little....

 I can't remember how exactly old I was, but I was introduced to Batman movies at a very early age- I was still in kindergarten. I think this is the actual reason why I like dark stuff. The goddamn Batman movies. Naturally, the first one I saw was the 1989 version by Tim Burton, and recently I rewatched it again, because I'm going to write the essay specifically about one of the most well known hero/villain pairs.
So, it probably goes without saying that it was an interesting experience to rewatch a movie that was part of my childhood. The most interesting part being actually remembering various details of the move- as in, 'hey, I remember seeing that!'- most of them being not that significant. It's interesting how a child's mind works- I didn't remember such parts as the Joker's parade with the gas-filled baloons or the part where Bruce Wayne confronts Joker himself in Vicky Vale's apartment, or some other rather important scenes, BUT I remember the gift with a colourful gasmask in it, Alicia's broken mask and Joker stating that she commited suicide, parts of the 'Smilex' commercial, Joker's tv announcement with him wearing that skin-toned makeup (but just the sight of it, I did not rememeber a single word he said), the part with the surgeon (though this part is rather important and I bet most people remember that too), that fried guy, and that bad "you wouldn't hit a guy with glasses" joke (but not what follows after).

 So, what made me remember these specific parts? Was it the colours, the mood, was it the schocking and unexpected nature of those scenes? Maybe. Though I see one thing that binds them all- they're short. I've read somewhere once that a child, until a certain age, cannot bind the images they see on tv into one continuous story. I kinda remember the movie as a single story, well, atleast I knew that the scenes were part of one, yet the things I remembered and understood were short bits and scenes. I didn't remember the talks Bruce and Vicky had, I don't remember the long but awesome statements by the Joker, I don't remember the whole fight/dangling over the edge of the church part, yet I remember the darn glasses. And I did not remember ANY part of Harvey Dent, but that's because he was boring :D
I think that it ultimately comes down to this in terms of leaving an impression to a child and making them remember things- short span and visuality. No way I have remembered that surgeon part or the commercial if they weren't strongly visually unsettling, especially for a child.

For the record, I still like Dark Knight more. Sorry Jack.

Horror and realism (or just plain Silent Hill)

Welp, the first real lecture this week was about realism and it's role in/relationship with media.

While I cannot say that I absolutely, fully took in the lesson (was sick/half asleep), it did get me thinking later. And, of course, since it's me, these thoughts went towards the creepy stuff.
While I wouldn't call myself a true true horror fan- I don't have a big horror movie collection or anything, and I don't belong to some zombie lovers group, I really DO love the creepy, mysterious and dark stuff, and anything that has to do with it instantly draws my attention- be it game, music, book or movie (though for some reason I have a huge problem of ending up never watching the movies I want). And I don't know if the fact that I was a very timid child, whose overly active imagination would create monsters everywhere makes my fascination with this creepy stuff understandable or paradoxical. All in all, I truly do love this stuff, both the the horror that actually scares me and the the horror at which I just look with fascination.

Ok, now I'm supposed to start talking about how realism relates to horror... It probably goes without saying that the success of a horror story actually scaring people relies directly on how it relates to reality, or should I say in this case, normality. One of the primary things that scare us is when we know that something is just not right, when we are unsure about something- be it our safety, financial stability or the state of the sandwich we're about to eat- when things are not normal, when we don't know what is going to happen to us, we get nervous, we get scared and disturbed.

"...And now they are going to eat ME! Oh my goooooooood!"

 There are multiple ways horror in various mediums gets people feel scared- from the more classical use of gore to the more complex use of psychological tension.Yet there are so many horror movies that make people laugh and cringe at the gross stuff, but not scared. I believe these movies usually don't have a good relation to reality- they are too absurd and too unrealistic to be scary and believable. I believe that if done right, even the most unrealistic monsters and such can seem real and more disturbing, and if done wrong, a ghost, probably the most believable of the classical horror creatures, can seem lame and funny.

One of my favourite game franchises ever is Silent Hill. Well, the first four games at least... Especially SH2. Anyway, the overall premise of these games roughly is that there's a lakeside resort town called Silent Hill (unsurprisingly), where, after some horrible events concerning cults, violence, suffering, paranormal and all that fun stuff, really weird things start to happen. The whole town sometimes gets covered by fog and some weird creatures start appearing and the further you go, the deeper you sink into somebody's, maybe even your materialised nightmares. It's full of mindf*** and makes you doubt reality probably even more than the Matrix. Of course, there's more to the stories than this, but this post is way too long already.
The original games are widely recognised as the scariest games ever, and are iconic and great examples of quality horror, which doesn't rely on things jumping out in the dark or murderers with saws. Instead, it uses sounds, creepy suggestions and symbolism and twists reality itself in a horrific and believable way that makes us think "this is how Hell really looks like". Also, they are the type of games that bring computer games closer to art.

The game's connection with realism and "normality" is very strong, because the main "monster" here is the town itself that shifts reality, so for the horror to work, the "real" things have to look as normal as possible for the horrible reality twists to work:

Also, the characters themselves have to look very average and realistic for the players to identify with, and, once again, to contrast with the abnormal surroundings (also to contrast with what some of them might have done- not everyone is innocent):

So yeah, everything seems realistic and normal (only with a little hint of gloominess), just waiting for someone or something to break all that normality. And, well, it gets broken here. A lot. Continuously. It's very disturbing, scary, and fascinating at the same time. And it still feels kinda.... real.

Let's start with some of the biggest stars of the series (besides the main characters)- the monsters. They are some of the most iconic horror creatures ever, with their own unique designs. The whole approach and style was created by Masahiro Ito, who designed the creatures for the first three Silent Hill games:

Mommy.

One of my favourite things about them that all of them- ALL of them have some sort of meaning, symbolism (which is often quite disturbing) concerning the experiences and memories of the people whose minds are making them manifest.
But what makes them actually scary and what does realism have to do with it? Well, first of all, the base for most of them is the human body, which is more or less deformed, secondly, the way it IS deformed is probably the most disturbing thing about them. A lot of them look as if the hand of some twisted deity (and such thing does sort of exist in these games) has taken a corpse and twisted and turned it, relocated the skin, turned the head the other way, erased the face, put the body, the skin in a metal frame, chopped some bits off, and so on and so on. They really look like they were violated by some aggressive force. Their deformities dehumanise them, yet they stay realistic and recognisable as partially human which is even more scary. Their (twitchy, limping) movements, while maximised to the point of looking unnatural and scary, still remind you of real sick/injured people, and the flesh tones make everything worse. Oh, and the one thing they all share is their lack of a face, (or emotion if they happen to have a human face) and speech (with the exception of Leonard in SH3, but he's a special case), which is also a great contributor to their inhumanity. I especially felt the importance of that when I saw that the Needler in Silent Hill: Homecoming (never playing that again) had an inhuman, but functioning face (as far as I remember). For me it broke the impression of "something from beyond" instantly, making him look more like a pest, an animal to me.

BAD

 And the whole approach to the monsters in Homecoming seemed wrong to me. They seemed too fancy, and didn't fit with Masahiro's original creations at all. Or maybe I'm just being picky. Still, the most famous Silent Hill creature EVER is quite simple.

AWESOME

IT'S JUST A GUY WITH A BIG PAINFUL-LOOKING HELMET. Yet we find Pyramid Head very scary and threatening, and the way his helmet is designed makes him seem like the boss around there. Too bad that he is forced to appear in Homecoming too, only redesigned and stuff. Oh yeah, creativity, Double Helix has it.

All in all, the creatures of Silent Hill are scary because they both look like something not of this world, not real, yet also as part of it, realistic.

At least that's what I think.

Also, their "realness" as monsters is a subject of doubt in the games- it is sometimes hinted that they might be hallucinations or real people who the characters see as monsters (which is really bad, because the player has to shoot at them). Also, there have been people in Silent Hill who were actually "monsters", but they didn't see that at first, or at all. Not to mention the manifestations. Yeah, these games are confusing like that. I love it.

She still confuses me dammit

 Ok, shutting up about the monsters, what can I say about the surroundings? Well, when the reality gets totally bent by the ungodly power in the town, it's called the Otherworld. It sorta works like surrealism, and was inspired (just like the monsters) by such guys as Francis Bacon, Hieronymus Bosch and even Dali. And, to me, surrealism has always seemed as "realism rearranged", and,well, Otherworld is just that, just with more horror and blood and things that you don't want to know where they came from and what they are. Just like the monsters, the Otherworld is both recognisable and foreign at the same time, and it even has a greater effect, since most of the times you get to see how the places really look like before everything shifts and changes before your very eyes.

Yum.

This post is a total image overkill, and yet I'm still not entirely satisfied with the pictures I found for this :| 

Anyway, the Otherwold messes with the player not only by using twisted visuals, but by even twisting the scale and perspective of things to an amazing effect. The ways it manifests before the player are also interesting, from just stepping out of the room, to scary sequences. It also should be mentioned, that before the Otherworld, the characters usually experience the Fog world, a tamer, but just as creepy version of the former.
I also feel the need to praise the great camera angles and wonderful music composed by Akira Yamaoka that are used here to heighten the effect and atmosphere.

All in all, I believe that Silent Hill games are prime examples of interesting, intriguing and just plain good horror- realism and surrealism are constantly present here and work together to create a great experience. The stories are also really intriguing and emotional, my eyes got teary at the end of SH2...

Also, have I mentioned that this game was created by the Japanese? That alone guarantees that this is quality horror.

I think that is all. Wanted to add some videos, but nobody will watch them (or read this) anyway. Also, wasn't this post about realism....?

Also, watch me as I wake up the next day and start editing the hell out of this post, because I hate everything I do lately.

First post ever

Hello.... This seems to be the first post I'm ever making here... This blog is actually a university assightment- I have to write something atleast once a week concerning the Media Cultures lectures.
Uh, wish me luck?