Channing Matha is a third-year journalism major and writes “Curiously Crafted” for the Daily News. Her views do not necessarily reflect those of the newspaper.
No matter how many I watch, horror movies have a chokehold on me. I am consistently drawn to them as I enjoy uniquely startling narratives. Behind their imagined terrors, horror movies can contain a range of genuine tones and themes, which I find endlessly engaging.
Horror is subjective, but its influence is not. Especially in movies, horror can be a powerful medium to spur political discourse within the public.
In August 2025, Zach Cregger’s “Weapons” was released in theaters with widespread public buzz and anticipation. Following its circulation among audiences, mixed reviews about the film emerged.
Besides the typical criticism surrounding its cinematic execution and story, I noticed an abundance of disapproving responses to various fan opinions of the movie. These viewpoints pertained to certain plot and visual aspects, and the responses to them included Cregger’s words from interviews, such as his intentions and thought process behind the scenes, to counter other watchers’ speculations.
Many of these comments were politically based, with multiple references to school shootings.
Being someone who was eager for the debut of “Weapons” and loved it, I could only furrow my brow at this negative discussion and these bad reviews.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but I felt that some people misunderstood the balance between an interpretation and media literacy.
A fundamental factor of media literacy is understanding a creator’s perspective and purpose, as well as how these are brought to life. Additionally, recognizing underlying messages, biases and themes is crucial.
On the other hand, interpretations stem from the audience’s thoughts and opinions. They offer a subjective take on the features inherent to a piece of media, with one’s individual observations and experiences in mind. Interpretation is merely another part of media literacy, as media literacy involves understanding how an audience personally receives content. However, some regard them entirely differently.
Many argue that if a creator did not intend for something to be perceived in a certain way or did not intend a specific meaning with their creative choices, then an interpretation is purely wrong.
Grasping what the creator’s intentions were with their piece is just as important as acknowledging the views of audience members. Both provide unique observations. Neither is incorrect.
The public conversation around “Weapons” was mixed, spanning from praise for Cregger’s artistic choices to criticism of the plot and fan theories, with critiques mostly targeted toward political references.
Horror movies have a fairly large audience in the United States. According to an October 2024 Statista article, 40 percent of respondents in the United States enjoy watching horror movies or shows. Ultimately, this data establishes horror’s defined presence of an audience and its relatively wide reach in the country, and watching a horror movie is the first step in furthering discourse.
A political connotation is certainly not uncommon within horror, despite the belief of many. It is integrated into horror movies through the director’s intent, but oftentimes, fans point out possible political allusions. As an avid consumer and enthusiast of horror movies, I have noticed details with political undertones that other horror fans have also detected.
Jordan Peele’s directorial debut, “Get Out,” is an openly political movie. It is bursting with shocking moments, whether because of dialogue or visuals, as a criticism of performative allyship and liberal racism. Released in 2017, the film followed Chris as he met his girlfriend’s family, only to discover their terrifying agenda. Peele was blunt in his execution of the movie, incorporating symbols of racial disparity and insensitivity throughout.
In particular, I believe that deer were a key symbol within the movie, symbolizing Black people as a whole as Chris navigated a family that wanted to use his body for personal gain. Mounted deer heads littered the house in the film, and the extermination of deer was mentioned. Deer seemed to represent an aspect of “the hunt,” thus signifying the dehumanization of Black people. This movie was crystal clear in its political messaging, as it presented a critique of modern society regarding racism and insincere support for the sake of self-interest.
A majority of the horror audience is Generation Z. According to an October 2022 Deloitte article, a survey found that horror ranks third among favorite movie genres. This is significant as Gen Z plays a crucial role in politics and drives online conversation.
While “Get Out” is intentionally political, other movies are not devised to hold any political connotation, though audiences pick it up themselves. A prime example is “Alien,” a sci-fi horror released in 1979 and directed by Ridley Scott. The movie’s protagonist, Ripley, played by Sigourney Weaver, was part of a crew in which Ripley was primarily ignored. Despite Ripley’s advice being the more intelligent route during a crisis — a hostile organism on the ship — her words were disregarded.
In the end, Ripley prevailed in killing the alien, otherwise known as a xenomorph. I view this as a victory for women in the midst of authoritative dismissal, especially by men.
Weaver being the protagonist was a massive culture shock, given that women were typically not portrayed as strong, combative leads at the time. Facets of the movie can be viewed as allusions to nonconsensual sex and sexual violence, such as the initial alien implanting an infant xenomorph inside Kane, who was second-in-command. Likewise, the death of the only other female character, Lambert, invoked the same notion.
Though not an apparent political movie in its craft, it can be deconstructed as such.
Similarly, my favorite horror movie, John Carpenter’s 1978 release “Halloween,” also has political undertones. The plot depicted a masked murderer named Michael Myers returning to his hometown to locate new victims. He became fixated on a high school girl named Laurie Strode before killing her friends and attempting to bring her to the same fate.
I admire Carpenter’s craft without end. The unforgettable theme song, the suspenseful pacing and camera shots are fantastic to me. I particularly love the cold and calculated characterization of Michael Myers as a menacing figure, even though he does not speak and only walks.
Other fans and I have noted that Laurie was the only one of her friends not to have sex. Because of this, it can be considered that this choice represents the desire to return to traditional values, as during that time, post-sexual revolution opposition grew. It can be argued that it emphasizes punishment for sexually expressive women.
Despite this, it can also be contended that the film still promotes femininity through Laurie’s survival of Michael’s wrath. I perceive Laurie symbolizing female resistance to male violence. “Halloween” is not innately political, but possesses implications that can lead to such observations.
It does not matter whether one agrees with these interpretations. What matters is recognizing them in tandem with a creator’s own intentions and attempting to understand each. Engaging in discussion about those ideas is equally significant. People interpret things diversely, so bear in mind that is what it means to them, but consider what it means on a personal level.
Aside from killer soundtracks, terrifying visuals and hair-raising antagonists, horror films possess so much more. Watch the movies. Observe and evaluate. Have the conversation. Acknowledge and reflect. Effective discourse paves the way for opening one’s mind to broader and differing perspectives, especially those not initially recognized. Fear the content, not the conversation.
Contemplate that the spine-chilling, disturbing on-screen occurrences and topics may mirror a horrifying reality.
