![\"PaperCuts-web\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cemeterydance.com\/extras\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/06\/PaperCuts-web.jpg?resize=468%2C60\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
![\"danse\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cemeterydance.com\/extras\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/danse-179x300.gif?resize=179%2C300\")
So far this column has been about two things: horror fiction and horror film. And where they overlap. With various digressions where it has suited my mood.<\/p>\n
But the name \u201cPaper Cuts\u201d is broad enough that it shouldn\u2019t limit our book discussions purely to fiction titles. Right?<\/p>\n
In that spirit, here are four nonfiction film books (some criticism, some history, some reference) that I<\/em> think every horror film fan should read.<\/p>\n Yeah. \u201cI think…\u201d This is by no means a \u201cdefinitive\u201d or \u201ctop\u201d list.<\/p>\n For example, I\u2019m sure someone will tell me that I\u2019m remiss for not including Stephen King\u2019s 1981 survey of the genre, Danse Macabre<\/em>. But you\u2019re reading this article on Cemetery Dance Online<\/em>. Do you need me to tell you to read a King book? In fact, let\u2019s just assume that everyone here has read Danse Macabre<\/em>, but if you haven\u2019t: there\u2019s the secret \u201cfifth film book every horror fan should read!\u201d While DM is nominally a survey of the entire horror genre, fiction and film, most of King\u2019s anecdotes and analysis favor film, or relate print source material to film. But, love <\/em>Mr. King as I may, I do take issue with his insistence that many horror films (especially on the lower budget end of the spectrum) succeed through \u201caccident\u201d and reach sophistication of theme through the same method.*<\/p>\n And because we are living in the age of binge-watching, I\u2019ve accompanied each of the following titles with a list of films that you should be ingesting alongside them. Many of these books overlap slightly in their subjects (both Slumber Party Massacre<\/em> and Targets<\/em> could have been listed in 3 out of the 4, for example), and each book mentions way more than the 5 or 6 films I\u2019ve listed as primers for each.<\/p>\n If I really<\/em> wanted to do my due diligence, I would have limited my film picks to movies that are available on the various streaming platforms. But I didn\u2019t want<\/em> to limit myself. I will say that every film I\u2019m listing is readily available on DVD or Blu-Ray (I think<\/em>). Long live physical media!<\/p>\n Easily the most challenging and unclassifiable title on this list, Janisse\u2019s book mixes autobiographical self-reflection with film criticism (often within the same paragraphs) to make sense of a life of movie-watching and an accomplished career in film festival-programming.<\/p>\n Split into two parts, the first half of this illustrated (B&W photos with a few pages of color inserts) tome is a personal narrative that skips around in its film chronology and reads like an intriguing and dense patchwork of memoir and cinema studies. The second half of the book is a reference text dedicated to a \u201cCompendium of Female Neurosis,\u201d a series of capsule write-ups that stretches alphabetically from Alice, Sweet Alice<\/em> (1976) to Wound<\/em> (2010).<\/p>\n What to watch while you read:<\/strong> Like the subtitle suggests, Janisse\u2019s book does not limit itself to the horror genre, but encompasses all of exploitation film (and often references beyond). But there is a killer horror-only playlist to be carved out of the book\u2019s index. To limit your personal film festival to a sane length, I suggest: Cat People<\/em> (1942), The Whip and The Body<\/em> (1963), Let\u2019s Scare Jessica to Death <\/em>(1971), The Brood <\/em>(1979) and May<\/em> (2003).<\/p>\n I was at a loss as to whether I should include this more recent biography or Roger Corman\u2019s autobiography How I Made A Hundred Movies In Hollywood and Never Lost a Dime<\/em>, which is also a lot of fun. I went with Nashawaty\u2019s book because it goes over much of the same information, but adds some fresh perspectives to the story of Corman\u2019s career in the form of interviews with his many collaborators and admirers (Scorsese, Landis, Dante, Coppala, and more make appearances).<\/p>\n Using interviews and traditional biography, Nashawaty takes Corman\u2019s career from his birth all the way up\u00a0 to his recent straight-to-cable producer credits (something the 1998 autobiography doesn\u2019t cover. How can we live without mention of Sharktopus<\/em>?). Chapters are broken up by interludes that go in-depth to discuss selected entries in Corman\u2019s filmography. With the scope and sheer number of films covered, Nashawaty\u2019s oversized and illustrated volume is a cut above your normal coffee-table book. There are plenty of pretty pictures (posters and production stills), but there\u2019s also some real substance here.<\/p>\n While the positive and negative aspects of his influence can be debated (he\u2019s done way more good than bad, I say), there can be no arguing that Roger Corman changed the way movies were made; and, in the process, profoundly influenced the horror genre.<\/p>\n What to watch while you read: <\/strong>If you wanted a portrait of Corman as a horror director, you could just marathon five\u00a0or six of his Poe films (only five years of his career, end-to-end) and have a pretty good time. But I\u2019ve tried to include something from every era of directing and producing on this mix-tape: Bucket of Blood<\/em> (1959), Masque of the Red Death<\/em> (1964), The Dunwich Horror<\/em> (1970), Death Race 2000<\/em> (1975), Slumber Party Massacre<\/em> (1981), and\u2014to round things out\u2014Carnosaur <\/em>(1993). Because, if you watch all these in a row, you\u2019re going to be delirious by that point anyway.<\/p>\n I imagine the stereotypical horror fan who looks at critic and journalist Jason Zinoman\u2019s credentials (theater, comedy and television critic for outlets like The New York Times <\/em>and Time Out New York<\/em>) and doubts the man\u2019s genre street-cred. \u201cIf he\u2019s such a fan why hasn\u2019t he written anything for Fango?\u201d But reading any page of Zinoman\u2019s exquisite Shock Value<\/em> should be enough to quite the trolliest of IMDB-comment dwellers.<\/p>\n In Shock Value<\/em>, Zinoman focuses on the transition in American genre film from \u201cold horror\u201d (stage-bound? studio? there\u2019s no real one descriptor) to the modern horror birthed in the late 1960s and through the \u201870s. Which may sound like a manageable slice of time, but when you step back and realize what was going on during that decade and change\u2014how many of our masters were making their first films\u2014it is a wonder that a cohesive narrative can be made out of the time period at all.<\/p>\n But not only is Shock Value<\/em> cohesive, it\u2019s endlessly readable and propulsive. While keeping tabs on all the major players in the \u201cnew horror\u201d movement (Craven, Romero, Carpenter, Hooper, et. al), Zinoman shows special affinity and empathy for Dan O\u2019Bannon, turning the Alien<\/em> (1979) scribe into the secret hero of this narrative.<\/p>\n While the book recounts many anecdotes that horror fans will find themselves familiar with, there\u2019s sure to be one or two that surprise you. But more than the \u201cfacts,\u201d what\u2019s great about Zinoman\u2019s book is how it humanizes these creators, exploring their interests outside of the genre and how those interests led to their films. Shock Value<\/em> offers an easily digestible overview of horror\u2019s busiest decade and becomes the perfect springboard for further reading and\/or watching.<\/p>\n What to watch while you read:<\/strong> Last House on the Left<\/em> (1972), Dark Star<\/em> (1974), The Texas Chain Saw Massacre<\/em> (1974), and Targets<\/em> (1968)**<\/p>\n As far as I\u2019m concerned: this is the big one. And that\u2019s probably my personal bias, I accept that. I\u2019d attempted to read Clover\u2019s 1992 book early in high school, but found that I was ill-equipped (in both the films-watched and maturity categories). But I got a second chance in college when I took a class called \u201cGender and Horror Film\u201d and this was our textbook (saved some campus bookstore money, already having it).<\/p>\n There is a newer \u201cPrinceton Classics\u201d edition released last year, with a new introduction by the author, but it doesn\u2019t matter what edition you get: Clover\u2019s ideas are influential regardless of era. Especially her chapter on Final Girls. Clover\u2019s is an exploration and articulation of the idea that, in the new introduction, the author admits has been dulled and misinterpreted in the years since 1992. And she\u2019s right: horror fans own the label now, but Clover\u2019s use of the term is not an all-in-one endorsement or empowerment tract. You should go to the source and read Men, Women, and Chain Saws<\/em>. After that first chapter you\u2019ll continue on and read Clover\u2019s explications of possession films, the rape-revenge genre (which also couches the city\/country divide), and voyeurism.<\/p>\n What to watch while you read: <\/strong>For this category I\u2019ve tried to remember back to the films Clover gives the most page-time. At the forefront of that list is I Spit On Your Grave<\/em> (1977). That\u2019s probably not the best way to start or end the \u201cfun\u201d of a movie marathon, but the movie\u2019s gotta be mentioned. In addition: Peeping Tom<\/em> (1960), Don\u2019t Look Now<\/em> (1973), Dressed To Kill<\/em> (1980), and, for the \u201cfinal girl\u201d chapter, you can\u2019t go wrong with Halloween<\/em> (1978).<\/p>\n There we go. Another list. One outfitted with four smaller lists. I\u2019ve gone full list-ception. Come back next month for some hardcore genre discussion.<\/p>\n *King\u2019s the first to admit, throughout the text, that he\u2019s a man of dubious taste. That subjectivity is nowhere more in evidence than the newer edition\u2019s introduction where he extols the virtues of Diary of the Dead<\/em> (yuck) and Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2<\/em> (a movie that makes most fans say yuck, but I actually kind of agree with him about).<\/strong><\/p>\n **the second time this film has made an appearance in our humble column<\/strong><\/p>\n Adam Cesare is a New Yorker who lives in Philadelphia. He studied English and film at Boston University. His books include <\/em>Mercy House,\u00a0Video Night, The Summer Job,\u00a0and <\/em>Tribesmen.\u00a0He has an oft-neglected\u00a0website<\/a>\u00a0and tweets as @Adam_Cesare<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"![\"HOPW-paperback-new\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cemeterydance.com\/extras\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/HOPW-paperback-new-256x300.jpg?resize=256%2C300\")
4) House of Psychotic Women: An Autobiographical Topography of Female Neurosis in Horror and Exploitation Films<\/em> by Kier-La Janisse<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"corman](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cemeterydance.com\/extras\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/corman-book-220x300.jpg?resize=220%2C300\")
3) Crab Monsters, Teenage Cavemen, and Candy Stripe Nurses: Roger Corman: King of the B Movie<\/em> by Chris Nashawaty<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"shock\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cemeterydance.com\/extras\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/shock-198x300.jpg?resize=198%2C300\")
2) Shock Value: How a Few Eccentric Outsiders Gave Us Nightmares, Conquered Hollywood, and Invented Modern Horror<\/em> by Jason Zinoman<\/strong><\/p>\n![\"mwc\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cemeterydance.com\/extras\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/mwc-194x300.gif?resize=194%2C300\")
1) Men, Women, and Chain Saws: Gender in Modern Horror Film<\/em> by Carol J. Clover<\/strong><\/p>\n