Information to Users
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly fi'om the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI University Microfilms international A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 Nortfi Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9211203 Horror in the 1980’s: A comparative analysis of violent content in independent studio and major studio horror movies Porco, James Franklin, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1991 UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 HORROR IN THE 1980'S: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF VIOLENT CONTENT IN INDEPENDENT STUDIO AND MAJOR STUDIO HORROR MOVIES DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By James Franklin Porco, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1991 Dissertation Committee Approved by T. McCain J. Dimmick ^ ^ -- Adviser Ro Samarajiva Department of Communication ACKNOWLEDGMENT To my wife, Karen, words cannot express your patience, understanding, and willingness to endure, with me, the vicissitudes of my endeavors. I express sincere appreciation to Dr. Thomas McCain for his guidance and insight throughout the research. Thanks go to Dr. Rohan Samarajiva and Dr. John Dimmick, for their comments and suggestions. 11 VITA August 2, 1962..................... Born - Cleveland, Ohio 1985................................ B.A. , Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio 1985-1987.......................... Teaching Assistant, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio 1987. .............................. M.A. , Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio 1987-1989.......................... Teaching Assistant, The Ohio State University, Department of Communication, Columbus, Ohio 1989-1991.......................... Research Assistant, WOSU-AM-FM-TV, Columbus, Ohio PUBLICATIONS Neuendorf, K., Brentar, J. and Porco, J. (1991, December) Media Technology Hardware and Human Sensory Channels: Cognitive Structures in Multidimensional Space. Communication Research Reports. 7, 100-107. Albarran, A. and Porco, J. (Fall, 1990) Measuring and Analyzing Diversification of Corporations Involved in Pay Cable. Journal of Broadcast Media. 3, 3-14. Ill Neuendorf, K., Brentar, J. and Porco, J. (1990, June). Media Exposure and its Variance across Media; Differences in Cognitive Patterns. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, Dublin, Ireland. Albarran, A. and Porco, J. (1989, April). Corporate Diversification in the Pay Cable Industry. Paper presented at the third annual Communication Research Conference, Athens, OH. FIELD OF STUDY Major Field: Communication Studies in Telecommunication, Dr. Thomas McCain Film History, Dr. Charles Harpole IV TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................ ii VITA........................................................ iii LIST OF TABLES.............................. viii LIST OF FIGURES.............................................. X CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION Context................................................... 1 Defining Graphic Violence...............................3 Need for Content Based Studies......................... 5 Dispelling Misconceptions...............................6 Film Organizations and Violent Content................ 7 Purpose..................................................13 Domination by Major Studios........................... 14 New Technology and Increased In-home viewing options................................ 23 New Technology and the Reduced Cost of Making Movies.................................. 28 The Genre of Horror in the Film Industry Stirring in The Film Industry: Antecedent Conditions to Modern Fear................. 31 The 1950's: Divestiture and Free Expression......... 31 Horror in the I950's and 1960's....................... 38 The Age of Modern Horror...............................42 Violence and Horror.................................... 46 V The Motion Picture Industry Oligopolistic Theory, Culture Industries, and Film................................................ 52 Selective Contracts and Blind Bidding................58 The Rising Cost of Film Production................... 61 Homogeneity of Product.................................62 Collusive Breakdown.................................... 64 Independents V. Majors During the 1980's ......... 65 Reducing Uncertainty; Sequels V. Exploitation....... 68 Code Authorities....................................... 75 Classification Since 1968............................. 76 X Marks the Spot....................................... 79 Horror Films and Ratings.............................. 82 Video: A Gold Mine for Independents.................. 88 Horror Films in the Age of Video..................... 90 Hypotheses ............................................. 94 CHAPTER II. METHODOLOGY Introduction............................................ 99 Graphic Violence-Defined.............................. 99 Unit of Analysis...................................... 101 Type of Violent Activity............................. 105 Explicitness...........................................110 Level of Explicitness. ................. Ill Explicitness-Applied..................................113 Coding: Initiator, Recipient, Relationship, Effect, Resistance.................... 115 Initiator of the Act .............. 117 Receiver of the Act ................................... 118 Relationship...........................................118 Effect of the Violent Action......................... 119 Resistance of the Act.................................121 Weapon Used ............................................ 123 Other Characteristics.................................124 Compiling the Database................................124 Exclusions of the Database .......................... 129 Selecting the Sample..................................130 Selecting Horror Movie Titles........................131 Pilot Tests............................................ 132 Pilot Test #1 ..........................................132 Problems associated with Pilot #1:.................. 135 Pilot Study II:....................................... 139 Results................................................ 140 Coders Coding Horror Films-The Present Study....... 141 Coding Violent Acts-The Present Study............... 143 Procedures for statistical analysis................. 145 VI CHAPTER III. RESULTS Intercoder Reliability............................... 147 Violent Acts.......................................... 150 Types of Violent Actions............................. 151 Initiator of the Violent Episode.................... 153 Recipient of a Violent Act ...........................155 Relationships......................................... 157 Effect of the Violent Action.........................158 Resistance............................................ 159 Weapon Used........................................... 160 Explicitness by Studio Type..........................162 Level of Explicitness by Year for Major Studio Films................................... 164 Violence by Studio Types............................. 169 Violence: 1980-1989.................................. 173 CHAPTER IV. DISCUSSION Introduction.......................................... 176 Level of Explicitness................................ 177 Violent Acts in Horror Films.........................183 Viewing Horror Films: The Conditions for Pleasure.......................................... 188 Suggestions for Future Research..................... 192 Implications.......................................... 194 LIST OF REFERENCES........................................ 196 APPENDICES A. Pilot Study and Results...........................213 Introduction.....................................214 Pilot Study I ................................... 214 Problems associated with Pilot #1............. 216 Pilot Study II.................................. 220 Results.......................................... 221 Type of Violent Actions.........................222 Discussion of Results...........................223 B. Code Sheet and Codebook...........................225 Violent Behavior Codesheet..................... 226 Violent Behavior