Thursday, September 25, 2025

Reexamining Classic Films as Domestic Horror in Scream With Me

 Scream With Me: Horror Films and the Rise of American Feminism (1968-1980) 

by Eleanor Johnson


Author and Professor Eleanor Johnson

Huge thanks to Atria Books and NetGalley for sending me an advanced copy of Eleanor Johnson’s excellent and timely new book Scream With Me: Horror Films and the Rise of American Feminism (1968-1980). I was so excited to receive a copy for review because I love horror movies and examining how they reflect and critique issues in society. Furthermore, to learn that Dr. Johnson was going to analyze how our post-Dobbs world reflects the horrors of women in classic horror films like Rosemary’s Baby, The Exorcist, The Stepford Wives, Alien, The Omen, and The Shining was intriguing to me. This book did not let me down either. In fact, Dr. Johnson’s analysis of these films and contextualizing them within the fight for women’s rights and equality helps to identify the ways in which we are gradually (or maybe not so gradually) regressing in the fight for women’s rights. If anything, Dr. Johnson provides a unique and timely examination of these films that feels fresh and necessary. It allowed me to reexamine these films that were a staple of my earliest experiences with horror and pointed to new directions in horror films with some analysis of more recent films.

Johnson provides some context for the book in her introduction where she explains that she was teaching Rosemary’s Baby in 2022, around the time of the Dobbs decision. Her lecture led to further questions about horror films in the 1970s, asking whether Rosemary’s Baby was “the only horror film so clearly tied to the battle for women’s reproductive rights in the 1960s or 1970s?” She then identified six films that shared “a gut-twisting awareness of women’s vulnerability to physical, reproductive, and psychological torture in their own homes,” which Johnson identifies as “Domestic Horror”, a kind of sub-genre that typically restricts its action to a confined place, has a male antagonist, inflicts horror on the female protagonist, with specific emphasis on her children, reproduction, or sex, and includes an element of physical violence. What I found particularly fascinating about Johnson’s analysis was her emphasis on connecting these films to elements of social and/or legal issues related to women’s rights in America at the time of their filming. Each film that she analyzes has a connection to issues like Roe vs. Wade, the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA- which was fascinating to learn more about), and the various laws that eventually restricted physical and sexual violence against spouses. In the past, husbands were allowed to beat their wives and children, and rape by a husband was not recognized as a crime. Johnson provides the historical background of these legal and social developments to further her argument that these films either explicitly or implicitly addressed these various issues related to women’s rights. While I appreciated her analysis of the films, often taking a descriptive and analytical look at the film’s key action, I felt like I learned more from her ability to connect the historical context of the films to these social and legal issues. The latter half of each of these chapters on the films examined the historical context. For example, the first chapter focusing on Rosemary’s Baby identifies how the support for reproductive rights was shifting at that time, especially in New York, where newspapers like the New York Times ran articles that promoted the idea that women should have more “control over whether to carry a pregnancy to term.” Although Johnson indicates that this film helped to provide more of a discussion about reproductive rights and women’s choices in their health, she also noted that there was a growing sentiment about advocating for more choices for women that resulted from grassroots campaigns, protests, and support from medical organizations. What I found particularly interesting about this analysis was how Johnson shifts the focus from the kind of campy horror of Satanism to the coercive control that Guy and the Castavets exert on Rosemary. It’s been a while since I’ve seen this film, but I remember thinking that the film wasn’t that scary. However, in thinking about the drugging scene and the gaslighting that Rosemary experiences, as well as the restrictions from seeing her friends and her doctor, it becomes clear that this is a different kind of horror film—one that Johnson rightly categorizes as a kind of domestic horror, where wives are subject to the control of their husbands and they lose autonomy and decision-making about their bodies and health. It’s not something that the 12 year-old me would have thought too much about when I initially encountered this film, but Johnson’s analysis and historical research provides a compelling and timely reading of this film.

I also appreciated her reading of The Exorcist, one of my favorite films of all time. Johnson reads this film as a domestic abuse film, and although some recent books have elaborated on the physical abuse that stars Linda Blair and Ellen Burstyn experienced, I hadn’t thought about the abuse that both female characters experienced. Some analyses of the film explain that this is a film about changing norms in society, and Johnson examines that element of The Exorcist, but also notes that Chris and Regan are punished because Chris is an independent woman who challenges the traditional roles of mother and wife as a single working professional. I’ve always loved the Catholic angle of the film, and because I attended Catholic school, I always thought that exorcisms and demons were the fun part of the religion that was left out of our theology class. Regardless, I can see how Johnson’s analysis works in that The Exorcist is both a feminist film and an anti-feminist film since we witness the extreme abuse that Chris and Regan experience. As Johnson notes, it’s men and the traditions of the Catholic church, the same church that excludes women from leadership roles, that can only save Regan from the demons that torture her when medicine and psychiatry fail to find any kind of physical or mental issues with her. The battle of good and evil always resonated with me, and I always appreciated Father Karras’s conflicts, doubts and sacrifices. However, Johnson’s analysis is incredibly interesting in framing the film more about Chris’s punishment for defying traditional roles for women. Johnson’s analysis of Chris’s meeting with Father Karras, describing her dress and actions as that of an abused woman, helped to highlight the kind of domestic horror that she faced in this film. In a later chapter, Johnson calls out the director William Friedkin for the danger and pain he inflicted on the female stars of the films (along with calling out other directors like Roman Polanski and Stanley Kubrick). As Johnson notes, Burstyn experienced a severe back injury and the screams we hear on the film are real. Blair, who was 11 or 12 at the time of filming, also experienced lasting spinal injuries because of the harnesses used in the film. One other aspect of Friedkin’s production was his initial lack of acknowledgement of Merecedes McCambridge, who provided the voice of the demon Pazuzu, and Eileen Dietz, who served as Linda Blair’s stunt double for many of the scenes in the film. While I had read about the omission of McCambridge, Nat Segaloff’s great book The Exorcist Legacy provides some additional background about the lawsuit that McCambridge initiated that eventually led to her compensation and credit for the film. What was more surprising (and abusive) was that McCambridge was encouraged to chain smoke and consume raw eggs to achieve the demonic sounding voice that is so terrifying in the film. What I found even more troubling was that it seemed like Friedkin encouraged McCambridge, an alcoholic, to continue drinking to achieve the gravelly sounding voice despite achieving sobriety prior to the film. Similarly, Eileen Dietz was not initially credited with some of the stunts in the film. Mark Kermode in his BFI Film Classics book about The Exorcist notes that Friedkin wanted to make it seem like Blair was acting in every scene and also led to Dietz not being recognized as a credited performer in the film, although Friedkin and Warner Brothers seemingly minimized her contributions by measuring them to be under 30 seconds of film time. Regardless, I think these were other instances of Friedkin’s limitations of women’s contributions to his films.

I won’t get into too many of the other reviews, but I thought that the chapter on The Omen was fascinating in presenting the idea of benign patriarchy. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen The Omen, but I didn’t realize some of the elements of the story and how horrible Robert Thorn was to his wife. As Johnson notes, this film offers a “subtle but trenchant” examination of domestic horror. Likewise, her chapter on Alien and the reproductive violence in that film was interesting to take. I remember begging my parents to let me watch Alien when I was like 5 or 6, and it’s probably a good idea that I didn’t watch it then. I first watched Aliens, which is more of an action sci-fi movie with a strong female protagonist. Johnson notes how powerful Ripley is not only for her survival skills, but also her knowledge. She represents a change in female protagonists in the book. Nevertheless, Johnson identifies some of the ways in which embryos have more rights than hosts, and by impregnating men in the film, helps to show some of the horrors of forced births and reproductive control. I also appreciated her analysis of the ERA and how it connected to this film. It’s still somewhat surprising to learn that something like the ERA, which would codify women’s equal rights, is controversial and never was ratified despite initial indication that it was well supported. As Johnson explores, some of the concerns regarding women in combat may have contributed to limiting support for the amendment. Johnson contrasts these questions with the character of Ripley, noting how some battles are not always won with strength and might. I really appreciated this chapter, especially as I’m watching the new series Alien: Earth that deals with questions regarding technology, humanity, and corporate control. While not explicitly feminist, the show critique the kind of patriarchal control in tech, where a tech mogul’s designs on creating cyborg children may suggest that reproduction will become manufactured with little need for humans. If anything, the show has raised issues around body autonomy that Johnson identifies as a staple of these domestic horror films. I also really appreciated Johnson’s chapter on The Shining, another film I encountered probably too early in my horror watching, but have always loved for its eerie design and iconic shots. Rather than presenting the film as a supernatural story or psychic horror, Johnson examines The Shining from a domestic horror standpoint, examining the film primarily through Wendy’s experiences and terror. It’s through this analysis that we see how Jack displays typical abuser attributes and how his behaviors once in the Outlook Hotel further present him as an abusive husband who wants to torture and humiliate his wife and child. Furthermore, Jack’s encounter with Grady, the previous caretaker who also murdered his own family, presents the idea that this kind of family violence is systemic and something that is passed down. We also somewhat see this in King’s sequel to The Shining, Doctor Sleep, where a grown Dan Torrance comes to grips with his own addictions after confronting a neglected child. Although Johnson notes that Doctor Sleep, the book and the movie, don’t have the same level of domestic horror that The Shining exhibits, I think that Dan Torrance in Doctor Sleep has tried to escape his dad’s influence and break the cycle of abuse. Regardless, Johnson’s analysis of The Shining, noting the kind of abuse that Shelly Duval experienced at the hands of both Kubrick and critics, presents an important examination of the film and provides a new context for understanding how normalized violence towards spouses was at the time.

The last two chapters examine two different elements of domestic horror. One chapter, as I mentioned, is dedicated to recognizing that sometimes horrible people create great art. The other chapter notes some more recent horror films that take a feminist approach to domestic horror. I was so excited to read this chapter since it examines two more recent films that really intrigued me: The First Omen and Creep. I haven’t read too much about The First Omen, but I was blown away by this film. Johnson’s analysis helped me better understand the film, especially since I didn’t rewatch The Omen before watching this film. Johnson also analyzes Immaculate, another religious horror film about forced births in a post-Dobbs era. I was really surprised to find Creep in Chapter 7. I haven’t seen Creep 2, but after reading this book, it is on my “to watch” list. Johnson presents Creep as a kind of domestic horror by examining Aaron’s victimization by Josef. Johnson notes similarities between Creep and other films, but also acknowledges that had Aaron been a woman, we would react differently to the decisions to meet a stranger for money with a promise to film with discretion. Furthermore, the decision to show Aaron’s perspective on filming leads to a unique take on the experience as Josef gradually violates typical boundaries with his brazen and bizarre behavior. Creep definitely unsettled me, largely because of Duplass’s weird performance, but also because of Aaron’s continual acceptance of Josef’s grooming. Seeing this as the kind of domestic horror that Johnson examines was interesting and provided a new perspective on the film.

Scream With Me is an amazing book for any horror fan. I can see this book being used for a course on films or as a way to apply feminist theory to examine art, whether it’s film or more traditional texts like books. Johnson provides a way to examine horror films as a kind of mirror to society, to critique the lack of progress in women’s rights. This is not only a great read, but it is an important and timely book that I highly recommend. 






No comments:

Post a Comment