When is Science Fiction Horror

In cinema, genre is the most common system by which films are generally classified. Films in each type of genre, be they westerns, musicals or even gangster, contain certain conventions and components that usually distinguish them from other genres. These conventions are not only known by the filmmakers themselves but, most importantly, the cinema audience. Such conventions and components instigate a formula for each genre, so an audience who has paid to watch a western, for example, will expect to see a film that contained the American Western frontier, cowboys, indians and even a shootout. The audience expects a genre to stay true to its traditions. As Schatz puts it, “a genre film, like virtually any story, can be examined in terms of its fundamental narrative components: plot, setting and character. These components have a privileged status for the popular audience, due to their existence within a familiar formula that addresses and reaffirms the audience’s values and attitudes.”1 Such genre distinctions were, in certain instances, enhanced by the studio production system in Hollywood.2 For instance, John Ford will always be remembered for making westerns or Val Lewton for producing horror films. These two people were successful in certain specific genres and so Hollywood tended to hire them to remake the style of films that made them known and the studios rich.

Two such popular genres of this century have been science fiction and horror. Both modern examples of these genres have their roots in the previous century. According to Brian Aldiss[W1] 3, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, published in 1818, was the first important work in science fiction literature and Shelley became the first science fiction writer. It was popular from the very beginning. Frankenstein deals with a scientist playing God and creating a nameless creature. It explores science and modern thinking. It's when Frankenstein gives up his pre-scientific age (magic) books and begins his research in his laboratory that he is rewarded, however horribly. It is science and the future that gives Frankenstein the ability to play God. Sometime later, American writer Edgar Allan Poe started writing some intriguing and morbid stories, which made him the grandfather of modern horror. Short stories like The Fall of the House of Usher, The Masque of the Red Death, The Pit and the Pendulum and The Tell-Tale Heart remain popular even today and have been made into films themselves. “His are the domestic horrors, the glimpses of little lives riddled with fears of life and sex”.4 The two genres grew and developed in literature and when film emerged as a new medium, it grasped and accommodated the two genres.

There has been a countless amount of classic films emanating from the two genres in the last sixty odd years. But not all the films from these genres can be specifically categorised, sometimes a film actually overlaps them two. Often the two genres “are regularly confused with each other and often draw on the same materials”.5 This is especially true when horror films use components from science fiction to tell their story. The video store might consider them science fiction films, but if you strip films like Alien (1979), The Thing (1951) and even Event Horizon (1997) to their bare essence, they are a part of the horror genre.

The primary problem with categorisation is the location or setting for a particular film. The presumption is the location plays an important part in the conventions of a genre. At a surface level, this is true. However, using location solely in categorising a film is extremely limited and leads to miscategorisation. For certain films, futuristic settings, such as a dystopian world or a spaceship give a false indication of the true genre of a film. Even the inclusion of a UFO in a contemporary or past setting is still not indicative of genre. As Schatz argues “if film genres were identified by setting alone, then we would have to deal with an “urban” genre that includes such disparate forms as gangster films, backstage musicals, and detective films. Because the setting provides an arena for conflicts, which are themselves determined by the actions and attitudes of the participants, we must look to the generic character types and the conflicts they generate in identifying any genre”.6

This demarcation problem extends to science fiction and horror. Films like The Thing, Alien, Event Horizon or even Westworld (1973), have science fiction backgrounds. However, these specific genre settings provide a mere location for the conflict and action. These movies have a science fiction setting because it's ideal to deal with conflicts and characters from the horror genre. It's the characters and conflicts that give a truer indication of genre. For example, Event Horizon is a space ship that was lost in another dimension and which has reappeared again. A crew has been sent to discover what went wrong. The film is a blatant example of a “haunted house in space”. When the rescue crew arrive on the ship, they discover the crew have all died. Unlike Alien, where it is the alien which murders the crew, in Event Horizon, it’s discovered that the dimension that the ship has returned from is Hell itself. The science fiction elements are not integral by the end of the film as the film is too obviously a horror film borrowing certain science fiction elements.

Characters give a stronger indication of genre. Most importantly, the motivations a character has for his/her actions. For instance, the scientist is a traditional character that is usually found in a science fiction film. However, what the scientist does is an important ingredient in distinguishing genre. A typical scientist in a science fiction film, may be an outsider, but who benefits the community in the film. However, the twist to this character type is the “mad” scientist. The “mad” scientist is a closer indication that a film may be a horror film. Such a scientist has a twisted or egocentric view of what benefits his discovery will deliver to the community. For instance, in James Whale’s Frankenstein (1931), Frankenstein, the “mad” scientist is totally obsessed in using science to play God, to create a living human being from scraps off corpses: “In the name of God, now I know what it feels like to be God”. He goes against the community and creates the Monster. Though not seen as a science fiction film, Frankenstein does have science, rather than magic, as the vessel that sets off the conflict. Other such obsessive scientists are the duo in The Fly (1958) and its remake by Cronenberg (1985). The remake is closer to the gore of horror as the scientist slowly and horribly transforms into a fly monster. Another example, is I, Monster (1971), produced by Hammer’s rival, Amicus. In their version of the Jekyll and Hyde story, the scientist discovers a drug the removes inhibitions. After trying it on his patients he uses it on himself, turning into the violent opposite of his natural character. He continues to use the drug more and more, against his friends’ wishes, turning himself into an extremely violent and sadistic beast of a human. In all these examples, the scientist goes against the human community or the community represented in the film. Science is manipulated and used for negative results. These films show science can be a dangerous tool with horrific results if the research and ambition of the scientist is not tempered and controlled.

Another important character in traditional science fiction films is the alien. As Kawin argues7, a film like Robert Wise’s The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) is a good example of a science fiction genre alien. The alien Klaatu which lands in Washington D.C. has arrived to warn the human race about the dangers of nuclear violence. He is a nonviolent, progressive and friendly alien, who is there to promote the positive aspects of science and communication between the worlds. On the other hand, there is the horror genre alien, that comes across as a threatening, negative character that endangers the community that the audience relates to. A good example is The Thing, because the alien is a cross between a faceless monster and a vampire. It’s a vegetable being that requires blood for nourishment. It is motivated by base instinct alone. However, this contradicts the notion that this alien creature is part of a race of intelligent beings that have conquered space travel between galaxies. Though none of this intelligence is shown by the Thing. It’s a mere animal. Another example of the alien as monster is in Alien. The monster is only interested in killing all its enemies. But it does show an intelligence in hunting down the humans and is also aware when Ripley is planning to destroy the ship.

There are twists to the monster in science fiction films. For instance, in Westworld the androids that have been programmed to entertain the paying human customers in the various worlds (western, medieval, roman, etc.) run amok when the human programmers lose control of them. The Yul Brunner cowboy android is determined to kill the heroes of the film. Like the living dead, the android survives destruction a number of times. It’s relentless as it continues to hunt the humans to the very end. In essence, the androids are zombies, undead humans. The film uses the horror zombie motif to play on the theme of the fear of technology. The androids are as resilient as the zombies from George Romero’s Night of the Living Dead (1968). Another twist to the horror staple of the zombie was in Don Siegel’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). In this film alien pods transform humans into counterfeits. “The zombies are now among us, and we cannot tell them and the girl next door apart any longer.”8 These fake humans are now the people in the community, family and friends. As a play on the Communist fear, Siegel uses the horror conventions, over a science fiction setting, to tell his story.

The conflict in the story also plays an integral part in the demarcation between science fiction and horror films. The main conflict in the horror science fiction films is the misuse of science and technology which harms the community. A most recent example is the dinosaur films of Steven Spielberg. Like modern Frankensteins, the scientists in these films have used science to bring back dinosaurs. However, they can't control their creations and the dinosaurs run amok attacking their creators, the humans. The abuse of science may be seen as the main conflict in these horror films. Science is used with detrimental results. Science is pushed further than the community finds acceptable and able to control, so the community suffers the consequences. As Kawin argues, “horror and science fiction are different because of their attitudes toward curiosity and the openness of systems, and comparable in that both tend to organize themselves around some confrontation between an unknown and a would-be knower”.9

Horror films that use science fictional elements may be distinguished from its science fiction counterparts if all the elements of location, characters and plot are taken into consideration. Using location to define the genre of a film is misleading because many horror films use a science fiction setting to tell their story. Characters and their motivations and the conflict their motivations, desires and ambitions cause are stronger components to study and analyse a film by. Films like The Thing, Aliens, Jurassic Park, Event Horizon and Westworld, while using science fiction locations, actually utilise science, technology and scientists as components that bring on negative effects to the community the films are based in. They are films which warn against the excesses of science and the horrifying repercussion that can be suffered.




1 Schatz, Thomas, “From Hollywood Genres: Film Genre and the Genre Film, in Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen’s (eds.), Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings, Oxford University Press: New York, 1999, p. 646.
2 Ibid., p. 646.
3 Aldiss, Brian with Wingrove, David, Trillion Year Spree, Paladin: London, p. 46.
4 Ibid., p. 72.
5 Kawin, Bruce, “The Mummy’s Pool, in Leo Braudy, op. cit., p. 680.
6 Schatz, Thomas, op. cit., p. 646.
7 Kawin, Bruce, op. cit., p. 681.
8 Clarens, Carlos, Horror Movies: An Illustrated Survey, Secker and Warburg: London, 1967, p.165.
9 Kawin, Bruce, op. cit., p. 681.

[W1]