Editorials
5 Slashers That Will Have You Yelling, “GOOD FOR HER!”
Horror is often misinterpreted as a male-dominated genre devoid of women characters with nuance. But horror is a genre that relishes in subversion, and here women are rightfully capable of anything, including murder. In the real world, women are often punished for not being likable enough, or for not subscribing to any patriarchal notions of femininity. Horror levels the playing field for women in a way that I really admire: within horror, a woman can be unpleasant, monstrous, and human, and still have people wishing for her success.
I’m always fighting for women’s rights and women’s wrongs. Sometimes in horror, women’s wrongs are justified!
5 Slashers That You Make You Think “Good for Her!”
Red, US
Jordan Peele’s sophomore hit Us is a pointed class analysis disguised as a slasher film and pits protagonist Adelaide “Addy” (Lupita Nyong’o) Wilson against her doppelganger Red in a fight for survival. As a clone “tethered” to Addy, Red has been forced to live underground and subsist on rabbits. Red eventually organizes the other clones (#unionpower) to escape and take their rightful place above ground.
And Red had a point! Why was she confined to darkness while Addy lived her life in comfort? Red’s remarkable organizing power, undervalued empathy and natural leadership had me rooting for her to swap places with Addy the entire time.
Pearl, Pearl, and X
It’s been a year since we were first introduced to Pearl, and it already feels like she has reached icon status. But it comes as no surprise since Pearl, played by a delightfully unhinged Mia Goth, is an offbeat horny woman isolated with her strict parents during a global pandemic. Is it any surprise she became a murderer?
Pearl dreams of the day she can escape life on the farm and become somebody. Pearl’s ambitions are not uncommon: youth, notoriety, sex. The youthful Pearl exemplifies a woman that will stop at nothing to get what she wants, and God help those who stand in her way.
The elderly Pearl we meet in X is resentful of the perky and horny youths renting her guest house to shoot a porno, and the guests dismiss Pearl as old and creepy. They don’t give much thought to how much she was like them when she was their age, and how they may end up like her with time. But Pearl quickly reminds them what she is capable of by using weapons around the farm and her devoted pet alligator to dispose of them. Pearl is a star, indeed.
Nami Matsushima / Matsu the Scorpion, Female Prisoner #701: Scorpion
An epic revenge story like none other, the Female Prisoner #701 series pits Matsu the Scorpion [Meiko Kaji] against a laundry list of foes in her attempts to escape prison and enact vengeance on those responsible for imprisonment. In Scorpion, we are introduced to a young Matsu, who is used by her cop boyfriend in exchange for a bribe from the Yakuza. After a failed attempt at revenge, Matsu winds up in prison fighting against abusive guards and murderous inmates.
Matsu is an unforgettable character that serves looks and vengeance as she stalks her victims in a black trench coat and a floppy hat. She is a survivor who overcomes the worst abuse imaginable to right the wrongs committed against her, and as the petty woman that I am, her insatiable lust for Revenge is #relatable.
Cecilia, Sissy
Sissy (Aisha Dee) prefers you call her Cecilia, thank you very much. Cecilia is a mental wellness influencer that pushes overpriced self-care items and prattles on about acceptance and safe spaces. She runs into her childhood best friend Emma, who invites her to her bachelorette party.
Her childhood bully/Emma’s maid of honor Alex is also in attendance, and she quickly shows that she hasn’t changed at all. Cecilia soon spirals back into her prepubescent “Sissy the sissy” days, and the result is an outlandish bloodbath that makes you question who the real victims may actually be.
Cecilia tears through her bullies in increasingly deranged ways while she retreats further into her “safe space” (read: slips into madness). But Cecilia does manage to confront her “best friend” Emma for abandoning her all those years ago and comes to terms with her own eccentricities. Honestly, Cecilia did absolutely nothing wrong, although her methods for getting rid of her tormentors may be a little unorthodox.
Amber, Scream V
Is Amber the Founding Mother of Requels? After a disappointing Stab 8, the cunning and ambitious Amber (Mikey Madison) decided to take matters into her own hands and bring Woodsboro the requel they deserved. She may represent a toxic faction of the horror fanbase, but it takes a brave soul to stand up and say we deserved better than Halloween Ends— I mean, say that sometimes a franchise needs to go back to its roots and remember what made it so special.
Amber also managed to get Sidney Fucking Prescott back for one last ride, uncover Sam’s lineage and her connection to the franchise’s past, and may or may not have inspired Sam to follow in her footsteps. That’s Mother!
I’m declaring 2023 the Year of the SlasHER, and I hope to see more unhinged women on the silver screen. Let me know what other slasHERs should be on the list!
Editorials
The Final Girl Was Never Me, Rewriting Survival in Black Horror
I learned early on that I was not supposed to make it to the end of a horror movie. As a kid, I was drawn to slashers before I fully understood them. The VHS covers promised danger, chaos, and a kind of freedom that felt transgressive. Horror was loud, bloody, and thrilling in ways other genres were not. But the longer I watched, the clearer the rules became. The girl who survives is careful. She is observant. She is often white. She is someone the camera stays with, someone whose fear is treated as meaningful, even noble. Everyone else exists to prove the stakes. Black characters, especially Black girls, rarely make it past the first half of the movie.
The Final Girl as a Moral Framework
The final girl is not just a character archetype, she is a moral system. In classic slashers, survival is tied to innocence, restraint, and respectability. The final girl is allowed to be scared, but not unruly. She can scream, but only when it is justified. She can fight back, but only at the climax, after enduring enough suffering to earn it. Her survival reassures the audience that order can be restored. Those values were never built with Blackness in mind.
When Black characters appear in these films, they are rarely framed as people the story wants to protect. We are friends, sidekicks, background figures, or early warnings. Our deaths are fast and functional. Sometimes they are shocking. Sometimes they are played for humor. Rarely are they treated as losses the film wants us to mourn. The camera does not linger. The narrative does not slow down to grieve.
Watching Yourself Disappear as a Black Horror Fan
As a Black horror fan, I learned to accept this without ever being asked to. Loving the genre meant learning how to watch myself disappear. Horror trained me to identify with survivors who did not look like me, whose fear was treated as universal, while Black pain was treated as inevitable. Even knowing it was fiction, the pattern settled in. Who gets to live tells you who is expected to matter. This is why the final girl feels fundamentally different when she is Black.
When Black filmmakers and writers began reshaping the genre, the shift was not cosmetic. Films like Candyman, Get Out, and later Black-led horror did not simply place Black characters into existing formulas. They questioned the formulas themselves. The threat was no longer just a masked killer or a supernatural force. It was history, memory, and systems that follow Black characters no matter where they go. In these stories, survival is not about purity. It is about awareness.
Survival Through Awareness, Not Obedience
Black final girls do not survive because they obey the rules. They survive because they recognize the trap. Their fear is layered with cultural knowledge and lived experience. When danger appears, it is rarely surprising. It is familiar. The horror comes from seeing it made literal.
When a Black woman runs in a horror movie now, she is not just running from a monster. She is running from everything that has told her she should not be there, that she is disposable, that her fear does not deserve space. Her survival feels radical because it contradicts the genre’s long history of erasure.
Complexity, Joy, and Humanity in Black Horror
What makes this evolution powerful is that Black horror does not limit itself to suffering. Even when it confronts violence and trauma, it also makes room for humor, desire, anger, and joy. Black characters are allowed to be complex without being punished for it. They can be loud, flawed, scared, and still deserving of survival.
For me, the first time I saw a Black character positioned as someone the story wanted to protect, it was disorienting. I did not realize how much I had internalized until that moment. I was used to bracing myself for disappointment, for the early exit, for the confirmation that this ending was not meant for me. Seeing a Black woman make it to the final frame did not just change how I watched horror, it changed how I understood its power.
Survival as Defiance in Black Horror Cinema
Horror has always been about fear, but fear is shaped by context. For communities that already live with heightened vulnerability, survival fantasies carry a different weight. Black horror understands this. It treats survival not as a reward, but as an act of defiance.
When Black creators take control of the genre, they do more than add representation. They reframe what horror is allowed to care about. The final girl no longer exists to reassure the audience. She exists to endure, to remember, and to refuse erasure.
Loving Horror While Watching It Change
I still love classic slashers. I still enjoy their excess and chaos. But I watch differently now. I notice who the camera follows, whose pain is given time, whose death is treated as unavoidable. Horror did not always love us back, but Black creators are teaching it how.
The final girl was never me, until she was. And the genre is stronger for it.
Editorials
Choosing Shock Value Over Writers Is Very Telling
There is a huge difference between a movie being remembered for being good and a movie being remembered because it’s controversial. As a writer, I can forgive an okay film with an amazing script. However, I find it frustrating when it feels like no one believed in the project, so just leaned into the controversy. Stunts were pulled, shock value was sought after, and I am now wondering when the creatives stopped believing in their project.
Animal Cruelty as Shock Value in Horror Cinema
Cannibal Holocaust, a pivotal step toward found footage horror films as we know them today, is remembered for all of the scenes of sexual assault and the murder of actual animals. This takes away from its historical significance because the first thing I remember about it is watching a turtle get murdered and ripped apart. I have a similar issue with Wake in Fright. It’s hard to remember Donald Pleasence, Gary Bond, or the queer implications of this thriller because the filmmaker had kangaroos executed for this film. The scene feels like it goes on forever, and I’m yet to understand why murdering animals needed to be part of the process.
I finally watched Megan is Missing a couple of years ago, and the exploitative nature of the assault of a fourteen-year-old is what stays with me. Whatever Michael Goi’s intentions were, they were lost because the shock factor of that moment outweighs everything else.
When Shock Value Replaces Meaningful Horror
It feels gross and like yet another male filmmaker mishandling assault on camera. Meanwhile, the film was serving its purpose and had other truly disturbing imagery that would have gotten a reaction out of audiences. It also would have allowed for more discussion about the film as a whole, instead of that scene that becomes the conversation. It’s another instance of male filmmakers mishandling the weight of sexual assault on film.
Things Aren’t Getting Better
However, the movies mentioned above are from different eras. We’d like to think filmmakers by now understand that shock factor doesn’t equal a quality movie. We would be wrong to assume that, though, because Dashcam (2021) didn’t stop at basing a character on an awful person. They actually cast the Trump-loving, anti-vax, and very vocal bigot Annie Hardy to play the character. This led to horror fans familiar with her brand of ignorance being turned off before the movie was even released. It also undid a lot of the goodwill that director Rob Savage earned with his previous movie, Host. To make matters worse, Savage repeatedly defended the choice all over the internet. At one point, he tried to blame her behavior on mental health, and people pointed out that doesn’t excuse racism, antisemitism, and homophobia.
Some of Annie’s Infamous Tweets
This is an especially head-scratching situation in this case. The team was riding the steam of a very popular found footage film. They were also primed to make a video game called Ghosts that had a successful crowdfunding campaign. People would have shown up for this before casting for shock value became the priority. We have had multiple films similar to this that sidestepped using known monsters. What was the reason? The idea came about because of her show, but any actress could’ve pulled that off. It was irresponsible to attempt to give this woman an even bigger platform . It was also the ultimate sign that no one was serious about this project.
Have We Tried Trying?
While making chaotic choices is one way to be memorable, is it worth it? In theory, someone(s) spent a lot of time and energy writing these stories. Wouldn’t actual storytellers prefer people to compliment their work instead? Celebrating their imagination, uniqueness, and skill instead of yelling about controversy and shock value. This isn’t a censorship thing. I’m used to being unimpressed with movies and asking, “What was the reason?” As a writer, I also know that there are ways to elicit responses from people without traumatizing them. We are literally tasked with putting characters and situations on the page that make people think and feel. Which is why going through the process of getting an idea greenlit and then leaning into something ghoulish like animal cruelty is baffling. Instead of casting a known Twitter bigot, you could just write a character based on assholes of that ilk.
Whenever I see films coming out that seem more interested in courting controversy than trying to find their audiences, I pause. I cannot help but wonder who really decided this. Clearly, someone didn’t believe in the script and felt that upsetting people for the wrong reasons was the move. That outdated idea that any press is good press snuffed out whatever spark initially got people on board for the film. It is sad that someone(s) didn’t believe in the power of the written word. They doubted the effectiveness of storytelling and decided to go big in the wrong ways. Instead of stepping it up in the script department and figuring out if the proposed stunt is a band-aid for something missing on the page, they decided to go nuclear. They shocked us in the worst of ways, and now we are stuck on impact rather than intention.
How Did We Get Here?
I’m not trying to sound like a boomer, but the rise of social media has made this worse over the years. Studios seemingly want controversial content rather than actual art. The pursuit of going viral has replaced the idea of trying to actually do or say something. It’s all about adding AI to movies to spark outrage and make it trend. The worst people you know are getting cast in movies, so they can cry witch hunt when accountability enters the chat. Shocking the people for the wrong reasons seems to sadly be at main goal too often.
How did we get here? I’m seriously asking. I mean, we know capitalism and people who don’t value art buying studios are a huge part of it. However, I feel like there is a missing piece of this puzzle. Maybe it’s just collective brain rot, and I want it to be more than that because I know the power of a good script. Hell, I know the power of a mid script in the hands of the right person. I want to believe in writers even if their vision is in the shadows of a circus.
Is The Shock Value Worth It?
What do I know, though? I’m just a girl, sitting in front of a computer, asking the industry to believe in writers again. Back scripts that actually say something instead of figuring out how get them canceled. Make movies that spark conversation for legitimate reasons instead of incredibly head-scratching decisions that pull focus. Some of us deserve smart movies that challenge us for the right reasons. That’s why we flock to the original ideas, live for international films, and look to indie filmmakers. We crave disrupters who manage to break the cycle of crap we constantly get spoon-fed.
That’s what inspires me to keep beating my head against the wall. It’s what gives me hope that I’ll get to make things one day. Maybe I’m naive, but I want to at least try because I love writing. I don’t want to just cast a real bigot and call it a day. Not when I can write characters based on bigots and hopefully prompt actual conversation. I want my people discussing my dialogue and metaphors, instead of animal cruelty that makes people sick. In a perfect world the system would allow more room for that. We deserve scripts that can stand on their own without shock value leading TikTok to talk.


