The Fear of Losing Control

Posted by Greg Ferrara on October 12, 2011

Horror movies have, for decades, dealt with ghosts, vampires, monsters, mad killers and invading aliens and, usually, the fear of a violent death is all it takes to frighten a character into finding the strength to do what needs to be done (and striking a primal nerve in the viewer as well). Characters like Abraham Van Helsing find it in them to overcome whatever fears or apprehensions they might have to gather the resolve to rid the world of relentless, blood-sucking evil. And we, as the viewers, both cheer them on and find a measure of relief when their prey is exterminated, as if, somehow, we were in danger, too. The same primal instincts of self-preservation inform us when watching a mad killer slashing fresh young victims. We talk to the screen (“He’s right behind you!” “Run!” ), cover our eyes and hope that someone will defeat this menace or, at the very least, survive to fight another day. But what if the fear is deeper? What if the fear isn’t about violent death at the hands of a werewolf or vampire or serial killer? What if the fear is simply no longer having a choice? Losing your free will? Losing control over everything that is important to you? It is a fear that is, quite frankly, one of the most terrifying things a human being will ever encounter but one that horror has only examined erratically, more indirectly as a side-effect than head-on as a condition.

There is something innately terrifying about losing one’s own ability to decide, to choose, to think and speak and act how one wants. In both the 1956 and 1978 versions, Invasion of the Body Snatchers deals directly with the fear of losing one’s own sense of self but other movies have done so in a more roundabout way. Vampires ostensibly take away your sense of self by cursing you into a life of the undead. You are now relegated to the night and have to drink human blood for sustenance (although, since you can’t die I guess there’s no chance of starving to death if you choose not to). However, you could, if need be, simply walk out into the light or impale yourself upon a wooden stake to end the torment. So, being a vampire isn’t very scary along the lines of losing one’s sense of choice. It’s still there but your social limitations are greatly increased.

Worse, by far, is becoming a zombie. In that sense, you’ve lost your wits completely and wander about looking for non-zombie humans to kill and eat. You are, by any reasonable measure, no longer you. Although, it would appear, your cognizance is severely hampered so maybe it’s not that bad after all. And the fear, ostensibly, in a zombie movie is the fear of being attacked and killed, not of losing who you are. That’s a side-effect of the process but the terror comes in being eaten alive, possibly by a former friend or family member.

No, what seems to be the worst is knowing you have no choice. Often times, this comes in the form of drama or parable, dealing with oppressive authority; something like George Orwell’s 1984. Horror deals with it as well though much more rarely. The classic 1960 horror/sci-fi classic, Village of the Damned, deals with it directly. In it, women in the village of Midwich, England, become pregnant from an unknown outside force and give birth on the same day to blond children who grow at an accelerated rate. Later, it is learned that they communicate with each other telepathically and can read the minds of the villagers. If anyone thinks evil thoughts against them, they run the risk of being killed.

And so, the horror of Village of the Damned is not that these children are attacking, torturing and eating people. No, it’s that they’re monitoring your thoughts, the ultimate invasion of privacy. You no longer have the freedom to think what you will without fear of repercussion. One year later, The Twilight Zone aired the episode, It’s a Good Life, in which Bill Mumy plays a young boy who can not only read your thoughts but controls seemingly everything, up to and including the weather. Once again, fear of reprisal keeps everyone in check.

But this is all small potatoes compared to the genius of Invasion of the Body Snatchers because, and here we get to the meat, Body Snatchers is literally about having you, your personality, your being, replaced with another. Replaced with a physical version of you but one that’s dead emotionally, an automaton at best. A pod person grows while you sleep and you, the real you, never wakes but, instead, a pod person awakes. This pod person has your body, your face, your voice but they’re a blank slate. They retain enough of you to function under cover. They remember names and faces, family and friends but they just don’t act quite the same. Family and friends notice a difference but can’t figure out what’s going on. Until it happens to them, that is.

Now, having something else take control of you can go two different ways. It can go crazy, over-the-top, out of the ballpark different, like Regan in The Exorcist, or it can go under the radar, “What’s Bothering Bob” different, like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. But which is more frightening?

Having something filled with malice would, at first glance, appear to be more frightening. In The Exorcist, Regan McNeil is inhabited by a demon that causes a fair deal of damage to her and those around her. From psychiatrist crotch grabs to drunken directors tossed out the window, it’s a bit dangerous to find yourself alone with Regan but even more scarring to be Regan (though, admittedly, not as deadly). I mean, they have to tie her to the damn bed to keep her from cutting and harming herself even more. But here’s the thing: With that kind of loss of control, there’s a shot at redemption. Regan is freed from her inner body prison thanks to the sacrifice of another person. Once you become a pod person, on the other hand, you’re gone, forever.

And here’s why I think that’s more frightening: Because there’s a good possibility that it could happen to us, or so we tell ourselves in our more despairing moments. The idea of falling into dementia in old age, suffering a stroke that causes irreparable brain damage or, worst of all, suffering a brain injury in an accident at a young age and losing your ability to cognizantly express yourself for the rest of your life is terrifying because it represents a loss of yourself in a very real and physically threatening way. And it’s something most of us have already encountered with a grandparent, parent, sibling or friend. I have, and while I won’t get into the sad details here, suffice it to say it’s a palpable fear, one that strikes at the very nature of existence.

That’s why Invasion of the Body Snatchers can succeed (pretty much any version, I suppose, but my favorites are the original and the 1978 remake) whether the politics or satire they were trying to achieve at the time are understood or not. What is understood is the loss of self and it’s understood on a primal level. Think about it, once a person becomes a pod person, they don’t suddenly endure daily torture, cut themselves, throw people out of windows, eat brains, suck blood from the necks of virgins or wish people who offend them into the cornfield. For the most part, they just walk around, meet with each other, do their jobs and carry pods to new cities. There is nothing threatening about that and yet, it’s incredibly threatening! Because you, the new pod person, no longer experience life, no longer experience joy, love, hate, discovery, beauty or any of the many things that make a human a human and that particular human that is you, you. It’s all gone and it’s never coming back. And no monster or demon or undead creature on this world can match that for sheer terror. Losing control over one’s own body and mind, over one’s own soul: It’s a nightmare from which there is no return, no redemption. There is no Van Helsing to save you, no vaccine to cure you and no priest to die for you. You’re gone for good and you’re good… for nothing.

29 Comments |

submit

29 Responses The Fear of Losing Control

Posted By Andrew : October 12, 2011 9:50 am

I think there is an additional common thread. These threats circumvent our normal defenses. I can’t call the police or lock the doors. (Just like dementia, eat fiber on the treadmill all day long and it ain’t gonna help.)

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 10:04 am

Yeah, there’s no defense against it, nothing you can do to stop it. You can burn pods and destroy greenhouses but once the first person has gone under, the rest is inevitable.

Of course, I’m sure someone will mention it so I might as well. The original Body Snatchers has two endings, one first-cut and one re-shoot. The first-cut ending had Kevin McCarthy running through the streets saying, “You’re next!” with no hope of stopping it. The re-shoot framed the story with his relating of the events in a police station and the pods being discovered and, it is implied, eradicated by the authorities.

It’s interesting because it would seem the stark, downbeat version strikes too deep a chord, that it not only could happen but is essentially unstoppable.

Posted By Tom S : October 12, 2011 10:35 am

The two most frightening forms of horror, to me, are Cronenbergian body horror and Philip K. Dick metaphysical kind- the one, in which your self (mentally, physically, or both) becomes something other than you, as in The Fly, and the other, in which either you discover that the construct of your self is in some way inherently a lie- you are an android programmed to think you are a certain person, or the world you know is inherently false, or the way you see the world is totally incompatible with the reality others share.

The Twilight Zone didn’t touch on the former a lot- at least, not in episodes I’ve seen- but it did the latter all the goddamn time. The terror of not being able to share what you’re seeing (the Shatner gremlin episode, notably, but basically like half the series) or of unbecoming (as in a personal favorite, And When the Sky Was Opened) is, to me, far more primal and nightmarish than any particular phobia, death or spiders or plane crashes or what have you. And both that form and body horror are about an ultimate loss of control- a loss that penetrates even your inner being, your self. And as you point out, not only is that far more frightening than a knife wielding maniac, it’s also something people are more likely to contend with in the real world.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 11:31 am

The terror of When the Sky was Opened is not only losing your existence but knowing that no one will even remember you ever existed in the first place. Why is that so important? I don’t know, but it is. There’s something important knowing that, at least, there will be some confirmation of your existing once you’re gone. Without even that, it’s like discovering you never existed at all, since nothing you have ever done will leave a sign that it ever happened.

And, by the way, I threw together a short film of Rod Taylor in that episode saying “Harringon” or “Ed” repeatedly just because his multiple deliveries amuse me so much (in a good way, I mean) – You can find it here.

Posted By Tom S : October 12, 2011 11:49 am

In When the Sky Was Opened, there’s a combination of living a world he can’t share- Taylor knows something happened, but he can’t make anyone else understand it, and even his own documentary evidence (the note he wrote to himself) betrays him, and then the knowledge that it will also happen to him, and on top of that the total erasure of his existence.

It’s a much more serious threat than death, it means that every impact you’ve ever had on the world will be taken back- I mean, it’s a biological imperative to reproduce yourself in some way, be it genetic or mimetic, and being unmade means that there’s nothing you ever did will have any lasting effect. Of course that’s terrifying.

Taylor’s great in that episode, playing someone scared out of his mind. I thought he was intolerably smug in The Birds, and there’s a hint of that in TZ when he’s palling around at the bar with Harrington (Harrington!) but it’s stripped away from him almost immediately, and the aftereffect of it makes his terror have more of an impact.

Posted By Rachel : October 12, 2011 12:34 pm

Tom S., I think you’re quite right about Taylor’s smugness in The Birds (although part of it might just be the fact that his character is a placeholder anyway, something for the ladies to fight over, like a somewhat livelier John Gavin) vs. his effectiveness in “When the Sky Was Opened.”

On the note of body horror, I would add the Outer Limits episode, “Architects of Fear.” That one shook me. Not just that Robert Culp has to face the reality of his body turning into this monstrous bird-kneed alien thing, but that he has to die as this voiceless creature. In front of his wife, who understands it too late. With the added kicker that his sacrifice meant nothing and that those incompetent scientists who transformed him are probably going to do everything they can to cover it all up.

Without taking this comment box to add every single loss-of-identity horror story, I still have to put in a mention for Seconds, one of the most nihilistic horror films I’ve ever seen. Not only do you lose your identity, but guess what? Your identity wasn’t worth much in the first place!

Posted By bill r. : October 12, 2011 12:45 pm

On the vampire idea, I think what you describe is handled quite well in INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE, which I think is pretty underrated. In that film, Brad Pitt chooses to become a vampire because the only other choice offered to him by Cruise’s Lestat is death. Once he’s been transformed, his morality starts to kick in. His torment does not come, as you suggest, from not being able to live without killing humans, because he can live without that, but from the desire to do so against his moral restrictions. A terrible novel I read recently, and a better but deeply flawed one I’m currently grinding my way through, try to address these issues but both are too wound up in reminding us that we should like the protagonist to really get into it like INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE does (film only, I haven’t read the book).

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 12:54 pm

it’s a biological imperative to reproduce yourself in some way, be it genetic or mimetic…

It is and that’s why it’s such a deeply rooted fear, one that speaks to our very biological mechanisms.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 12:57 pm

Rachel, Seconds was a movie I almost added into the mix here. How sad that you live a whole life only to find out it pretty much amounted to nothing. Not something most people want to face. That scene later in the movie, when the newly refurbished man, Rock Hudson, goes to see his wife/widow (if you haven’t seen the movie none of this will make sense so there’s no real need for a spoiler warning) and she says, basically, “No, I don’t really miss him. Don’t remember him doing much, to be honest.” It’s devastating.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 1:03 pm

Bill – Interview with a Vampire remains unseen by me in its entirety. I watched the beginning years ago on cable and then saw bits and pieces here and there but never caught enough mojo off of it to want to sit through the whole thing. Maybe I should. I think a part of it, honestly, is Tom Cruise having the lead. I like him in some stuff, like Magnolia and Tropical Thunder, but hated him as a vampire. Boy, it just bugged me and I never wanted to go back to it. But the idea of having the desire to kill against one’s moral restrictions is a fascinating one and I should give it another try.

Or maybe they could just remake it for me with a different actor.

Posted By bill r. : October 12, 2011 1:03 pm

Also, sorry if my comment is off the topic of loss of identity, but I sort of meant that the loss of a controllable moral compass is what’s at play here.

Posted By bill r. : October 12, 2011 1:04 pm

“Or maybe they could just remake it for me with a different actor.”

I’ll ask.

Posted By Rachel : October 12, 2011 1:08 pm

Oh yes, that scene is so quietly brutal. I can’t help thinking most other movies would have gone the, “You don’t know what you have ’til it’s gone” route and Hudson would have had his George Bailey realization and that would have been the tragedy.

Here though? He really did waste his life. And then the movie proceeds to stomp all over one of humanity’s favorite fantasies: the idea that all we need is a second chance and we’ll do better.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 1:27 pm

I’ll ask.

Bill, thanks for that. If they ask for preferences, tell them Billy Bob Thornton would be my first choice, followed by Emmanuel Lewis and, in a pinch, Gary Busey.

I sort of meant that the loss of a controllable moral compass is what’s at play here.

No, I think that works in well with the theme here. The first question I ask in this regard, at the top of the piece, is what if you no longer have a choice so it definitely ties in. Having no ability to choose that which is morally acceptable to yourself is a frightening prospect indeed.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 1:30 pm

Yeah, Rachel, I think the movie ultimately states, “Most of us waste our lives and if given a second chance would waste it again.” He doesn’t even make an attempt to reconnect with her after the conversation. No attempt to rekindle a new romance with her (she not knowing, of course, who he is) or anything. He just leaves and announces, amazingly, that he wants to start over again. Pal, if the first two didn’t work, the third doesn’t stand much of a chance.

Posted By Tom S : October 12, 2011 3:10 pm

Bill R:

I think vampire mythology absolutely does fit into this discussion, particularly because the traditional vampire loses its soul in exchange for immortality.

It’s become somewhat diluted through a change in ideas of what the soul means, but historically, the soul is the self- the idea that the soul is something extrinsic that you can lose and still exist is a misunderstanding of that, I think. A body without a soul, in a very literal way, is no longer you- it’s a ghastly parody, a zombie with your brain and your memories and an inherent bent towards evil.

I think Rice’s vampires are a variation on that idea- their loss of soul is in some ways more metaphorical- but I think losing your sense of morals and ethics is losing yourself, and that’s always been the metaphor of vampirism. Which is why Tony Soprano and Walter White are such terrifying characters.

Posted By Tom S : October 12, 2011 3:15 pm

Speaking of Seconds and It’s A Wonderful Lifep has anyone seen The Family Man? It’s meant to be a sort of “it’s not too late!” warning about focusing on friends and family instead of business, and as such puts the lead into a parallel world in which he’s a small time business owner rather than a Big Important Wall Street guy- and has him deal with that, and come to value it and so forth, and eventually choose that over going back to his Wall Street life.

It then takes all that away from him, and puts him back in that life anyway. And we’re supposed to accept that he will see this as a learning opportunity, instead of an incredibly cruel joke at his expense, one that gives him things to value expressly so it can make him feel emptier without them.

It’s funny, because played as a Twilight Zone-esque vision of Hell- being given a life to invest in, only to unmake it and put you back into nothing- would work extremely well, but played as a Awww drama it’s just infuriating.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 3:58 pm

Tom, no, I never saw that. I did however see the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode that also works as a kind of It’s a Wonderful Life in that Picard wants to try another life, one where he didn’t take so many foolish risks and gets the chance to, via Q. Instead of a massive change in which up is down and black is white, ala It’s a Wonderful Life, everything is the same except he’s a dull science officer in Starfleet, forever stuck in middle management. And then Q leaves him to rot there in his new life (but, of course, eventually comes back and puts everything back in order). I just like that they made the alternate universe not evil or extraordinary but plain old dull where no one ever knew Picard had it in him to be a captain, which, of course, is what drives him crazy.

Posted By Emgee : October 12, 2011 4:26 pm

Weren’t the people in Body Snatchers replaced by replica’s rather than turned into mindless automatons themselves? Not that that’s less frightening, but it puts a different slant to the argument.
With which i however heartily agree; another movie that comes to mind is the Stepford Wives in which housewives are more or less turned into braindead zombies for their husbands benefit. Granted, they don’t eat flesh, but they joyously iron shirts and knit sweaters. Now that’s creepy!

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 4:31 pm

Emgee, yes, the pods replace you, however, it’s kind of implied that they take your brain with them, that is, they seem to have your memories of who everyone is for instance so you’re almost kind of trapped in there, unable to get out.

Stepford Wives is a great example that I can’t believe I forgot to mention. In that one, it’s pure replacement, where the original wife is killed and a robot put in her place. For Katherine Ross though, the realization is there before it happens. And that last scene in the grocery store is definitely chilling.

Posted By Tom S : October 12, 2011 6:53 pm

It’s also worth pointing out that the whole thing in both Body Snatchers and Stepford Wives is a metaphor- the underlying point being that whatever cultural force is making people into Stepford Wives or Pod People already, or that (as with Shaun of the Dead) there isn’t actually all that much difference.

Posted By Rachel : October 12, 2011 7:23 pm

Tom, I’ve seen The Family Man. Hard film to pin down. There’s too much intelligence put into it for it to fully succumb to its Hallmark card premise (Tea Leoni’s acting, Nicolas Cage’s slow and painful surrender to this new life). But the film’s strict adherence to being another Hollywood holiday film ultimately leaves it stranded. And the whole theme of “big business will eat away your soul but small town family life is the Only Way to Go” just started to grate on me.

I like your idea of making it a Twilight Zone episode.

Posted By Tom S : October 12, 2011 7:32 pm

Yeah, that always makes me mad, like the cliché where Dad misses the kid’s Big Game to have a meeting. Like, people who work at a tire store have to work long hours away from their families too, they just don’t get as much money for it.

Posted By Rachel : October 12, 2011 7:43 pm

Ah, the good old reliable “Businessman Who Shouts Into His Cellphone” trope. I always wondered why they shoehorned it into so many kid movies (and always from the parent’s point of view). Why would the kid be interested in this Absentee Parent Angst, anyway?

I think the kicker for me in The Family Man is when we find out that not only was Nicolas Cage unfulfilled as a big city businessman, but that Tea Leoni also becomes a cold, brittle career woman at the end. As if there’s only two routes to go in life. And one of them is EVIL.

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 12, 2011 9:57 pm

And one of them is EVIL.

That’s the one I chose.

This is especially entertaining in the 1978 version, in which it’s hard to tell who the zoned out new-agers are and who the pod people are.

Posted By Jenni : October 12, 2011 10:52 pm

After reading these posts and a very interesting article, I was wondering about the Jim Carrey movie, THE TRUMAN SHOW. I have only seen bits of it, my oldest son really liked it,i.e. thought it a well done movie. Carrey’s Truman is living his life only to find out he’s been in a make-believe world, viewed by tv viewers, and everything he has believed in, believed was happening, it’s all made up, he hasn’t really used his own free will as his will’s been manipulated by an all knowing director/show creator. I don’t think this movie was marketed as a horror film at all, but perhaps it would qualify as sci-fi/fantasy, or, another example of a good Twilight Zone plot turned into a movie?

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 13, 2011 8:43 am

Jenni, The Truman Show would definitely qualify as a case of discovering everything you thought was real, wasn’t. It did a fine job with it, too, but, for me, lacked the outrage necessary upon discovering your whole life has been a manufactured lie for the entertainment of others. Truman fights back and walks away with a smile but doesn’t deal with the true rage I think one would feel in such a circumstance, nor does he or the movie deal with the aftermath: What does a manufactured reality show character do in the real world, with real crime, real problems, etc. It’s one of the few movies where I can honestly say a sequel could have legitimately taking the character much further, and been more interesting.

Posted By cozeph jotton : October 19, 2011 12:27 am

* Wonderful post & comments! I’m suprised that no one has mentioned IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE or I MARRIED A MONSTER FROM OUTER SPACE … I tend to find both of these, especially the former, every bit as chilling as the original IotBS (I don’t really care for the ’70′s version as much as many people do) … A lot of aspects of current society tend to create a situation in which feeling that everyone has turned into zombies or aliens doesn’t always feel all that far fetched !! (P.S. “You’ll NEVER reach our minds!!!!”)

Posted By Greg Ferrara : October 19, 2011 8:00 am

I love IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE. I saw it in its original 3-D at a revival house in the late seventies (on a double-bill with CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON). Fifties sci-fi has always been among my favorite genre. You’re right, it’s a great example, too.

MovieMorlocks.com is the official blog for TCM. No topic is too obscure or niche to be excluded from our film discussions. And we welcome your comments on our blogs and bloggers.