It’s become a fad lately to trumpet the claim that certain horror films aren’t actually horror. This is a stance primarily taken by people and publications that don’t actually cover the horror scene (you know who you are). It seems that unless a film features a masked killer and approximately 4.7 litres of spilled blood (that’s a little over a gallon, my dear Americans), it’s more likely to be labelled a “suspense” film or a “thriller” than a horror film.

Yes, even if it involves ghosts.

Yes, even if it involves a family that kidnaps, tortures, and appropriates the bodies of its victims.

Yes, even if it involves a deadly plague and nightmarish dream sequences that heavily imply a monstrous presence in the forest, even if the real monster was really inside of us the entire time.

I’ve never met a bandwagon I didn’t immediately want to mount, so I’ve put together a list of new and innovative ways through which we can detract from and deny the entire horror genre.

  • Haunting stories aren’t really horror, they are non-corporeal dramas.
  • Found footage films aren’t really horror, they are documentary thrillers.
  • Slasher films aren’t really horror, they are unconventional romantic comedies.
  • Plague and zombie stories aren’t really horror, they are medical message films.
  • Witch stories aren’t really horror, they are fantasy chick flicks.
  • Vampire stories aren’t really horror, they are dental adventures.
  • Werewolf stories aren’t really horror, they are canidsploitation films.
  • Bodysnatching films aren’t really horror, they are modified espionage capers.

If we all agree to adopt these terms going forward, maybe horror as a genre can be completely erased in the next five years since, apparently, it’s better to deny a film’s character than to embrace and uplift an incredible and often misunderstood genre.