I’m Getting Really F***ing Sick Of Every Modern Horror Movie’s Borderline Necessity To ‘Kill The Dog’ And ‘Kill The Cat.’ Enough, Already
Ah, yes. I remember the first time that I saw this exercised so casually in a modern horror movie. It was in the Unrated Version of 2009’s Drag Me To Hell.
In order to appease the evil spirit of an old woman that she did not give a 3rd loan extension to (it’s all quite dumb really) at the bank she works for, Alison Lohman‘s character sacrifices her kitten by stabbing it to death in a way that is meant to be so tastelessly wacky — it qualifies as dark comedy, or too-outrageous-to-be-considered-cruel-or-taken-seriously. The kitten is off-screen as Lohman reluctantly thrusts the knife up and down in a stabbing motion while the kitten cries, and fake kitten blood shoots up into the air. Next scene, Lohman is in the backyard burying the dead kitten. And it’s all played for laughs. And you know what? I get it. Because of course, I get it. It seemed fresh at the time but needless to say, it did not age well.
That full scene, by the way, did not make it into the theatrical cut, and was instead, edited into a bloodless death, where the scene cuts away to an exterior shot of the house, while Lohman murders the kitten off-screen… in which the scene then just smash cuts to her burying the kitten— but really, does it even matter at that point? Back then, the decision to murder this really cute kitten pretty much went against what you were expecting. And, you were probably expecting the film to not kill off the cute kitten. So, in a sense, it worked. At the time.
I’m not saying Drag Me To Hell was the first film of its genre to normalize animal cruelty but it was the first film of its kind to have exceptionally positive reviews from critics, and single-handedly jumpstarted — what I believe to be — everything we know and hate about the modern horror film genre of today. Drag Me To Hell is one of the most smuggly obnoxious films I’ve ever seen. A film that I hate so much, that I’m going to dedicate one of my very last publishings to — just explain exactly why I hate it so much.
Another film that comes to mind, surprisingly, is last year’s sleeper horror film — and It Follows ripoff — 2022’s Smile. A film that wasn't necessarily bad, but was so forgettable — I only remember two things about it: 1) it has a really cool-looking monster at the end, and 2) an unusually indulgent scene involving the main character’s birthday gift to her little nephew involving the unboxing of the main character’s dead cat in front of a room full of kids and parents at the nephew’s birthday party. In 2022. It’s because of this one scene, that I will not recommend the movie Smile to pretty much anyone. Because why would I? And I hate to say it but the scene itself is so shamelessly exploitive, it almost works… that is, if you DON’T like animals.
Even this year’s unsurprising memefuck theatrical killer doll hit M3GAN is guilty of this stupid trope. M3gan kills a neighbor’s dog at about the halfway point. Granted, the dog is presented as a minor antagonist but still — as soon as the dog is introduced near the beginning of the film, we know it’s going to die. It has too. It’s an unwritten rule of modern horror films. Not even Chucky (with the exception of the rats that Chucky inadvertently killed in the first movie while he cranked up the gas stove in order to primarily assist him in blowing up the house, and killing Eddie Caputo — but that’s another story) directly killed anyone’s cat or dog in the original Child’s Play trilogy… in fact, it wasn’t until the stunningly mediocre 2019 Child’s Play remake starring Aubrey Plaza, does Mark Hamill Chucky finally get his chance to kill the family’s cat. Because of course he does. It was 2019, and that’s just how modern horror rolls.
Who knew that fucking Cocaine Bear would be the odd one out? It never killed the cocaine-fueled bear, or her cocaine-fueled cubs. Which was a nice surprise. Cocaine Bear even lets the cute little dog live. Another nice touch, courtesy of an Elizabeth Banks-directed horror comedy featuring a drug addicted black bear that murders a bunch of people.
Are mainstream studios so fucking stupid that — they think that if modern horror movies were to go cold turkey on this obsession of theirs with killing family pets, and various animal characters as a way to up the body count, that the masses of filmgoers are going to complain? Do they think this is what people regularly want to see in their horror films? Do they really think that killing animals ups the stakes? Or that killing animals ups the fear factor? Fuck no.
I think I speak for everyone when I say this… We don’t want to see any more horror movies that depict the abuse, or torture of a helpless animal — as a routine checkpoint — just to get the stupid fucking story from Point A to Point B.
And to be honest, it doesn’t even matter what genre the film is. The on-screen, or off-screen physical abuse or murder of a helpless animal in a mainstream feature film is not only cheap, it’s insanely out of touch. The highlighted killing of animal characters particularly in modern horror, is simply just punching down, and it always has been.
There’s even an entire website dedicated to spotlighting the obnoxiousness of this cliche called doesthedogdie.com, in which there are exact time codes given, for every listed movie depicting any form of animal cruelty, so that you’ll know beforehand to skip that particular scene or, better yet — to just skip the whole fucking movie altogether. Because that’s just how common and out-of-hand this cliche in modern horror films truly is, and it’s also a testament to how many people are fucking sick of it, and don’t want to see it.
Horror movies were not always like this. Exhibit A: 1979’s Alien. Sigourney Weaver aka Ripley’s orange tabby cat, Jonesy. An iconic badass female lead, with an even more iconic badass sidekick, Jonsey the cat. We fear for the safety of this orange tabby cat as much as the film’s heroine does throughout the entire 3rd Act. And the film does not cheap out, nor does it disappoint. Both Ripley and Jonsey make it out alive, the sole survivors of the film.
Alien is hailed as one of the scariest films of all-time… and it didn’t even need to kill the cat to earn that achievement. It’s about as close to perfect as a film can get, considering the time it was made. But the relevancy of Alien is what has really transcended all of these years, and the fact that it does not insult the intelligence of its audience.
Another prime example — take a look at the original Canadian slasher classic, 1974’s Black Christmas. The first of its kind, and a masterpiece in its own right. And — a film with plenty of characters to kill… but the cat isn’t one of them. And Black Christmas has a clever way of teasing this cat in and out of the line of death at this sorority house, while its strictly the human characters only, that make up the film’s body count.
And yeah, yeah, there are even unfortunate exceptions to my point — when it comes to anomalies within the Italian giallo sub genre, and cult horror phases from the 1970’s and 1980’s, with shit like 1980’s Cannibal Holocaust. Which I have actually seen. Once. And yes, I can accept to an extent, that those times were different.
When I say that the casual depiction of killing helpless animals in modern horror such as cats, and dogs is cheap, what I’m referring to is that — it serves no purpose. It never serves a purpose. Not to the plot, and not to people who love horror movies. In no reasonable way whatsofuckingever — does it elevate the story, style, tone, atmosphere, characters — it is simply a buzzkill that ruins the whole experience, for me, at least.
And I’m not saying a lovable domesticated animal character should never die in a movie, or a horror movie, for that matter… what I’m saying is — the level of cruelty and depravity gone into the exploitative, and gratuitous nature, of the particular killings in the movies of said fictional animals, I think should generate a lot of questions about the people who’ve made these fucking movies. And the only reason I would question this is because — it happens in so many modern horror movies. Over and over again.
The killing of an innocent animal in horror movies ONLY WORKS — when it is unexpected. But that’s just not how horror movies operate anymore. Now, horror movies are so fucking predictable, that when any modern horror movie, in all of its profound laziness — introduces the protagonist’s lovable tabby cat, or loyal golden retriever, near the beginning of the story… I get to literally look over at the person next to me and go, “Jeez, I wonder how much further we’re going to get before the dog dies.” And — I know I’m not the only one who does this.
The killing of an innocent animal in a horror movie CAN be done correctly.
For over 20 years, my favorite film of all-time has been Mary Harron’s 2000 adaptation American Psycho, which has no less than TWO scenes of animal cruelty depicted — but… it’s exactly how it’s done in both cases that makes it, what I think is acceptable, considering how casually more recent horror movies would depict it. In American Psycho, Patrick Bateman murders a homeless man. He stabs the homeless man to death, no blood is shown… then, Bateman recomposes himself and stomps the homeless man’s dog to death. On paper — it sounds horrible. And on-screen, it should be even more horrible. However, in both reality, and in execution (pardon the pun), it’s a blink-and-you-missed-it moment. And the action of the dog being killed is done using an aerial wide shot, at an angle, and from a distance. There is nothing exploitive about it. There’s nothing glamorous, or graphic about it. There is no lingering on the death of the dog. It’s simply something that just happened, and you weren’t expecting it. And, that’s it — next scene.
The OTHER scene in American Psycho, is a bit of a surreal moment… Patrick Bateman is standing at an ATM machine. A small stray cat rubs against his leg. Bateman picks up the stray cat. The screen on the ATM machine reads: “Feed Me A Stray Cat.” Without really even hesitating, Bateman removes his pistol and aims it at the cat as if he’s going to shoot the cat, while trying to insert said stray cat into the tiny slip dispenser of the ATM machine — (I, um — out of context, it really doesn’t make a whole lot of sense) But then — this woman confronts Bateman before he shoots the cat. So, then Bateman decides to just kill the woman instead. Wise choice. Bateman — getting his murder fix then and there — then proceeds to put the small stray cat down, unharmed. And the stray cat gets away.
In hindsight, the film American Psycho did animal killing correctly.
In modern horror movies, the killing of helpless animals is officially a cliche. In modern horror movies, the killing of helpless animals is not scary. In modern horror movies, the killing of helpless animals is not enjoyable. It is a cliche. It’s currently the worst one that I can possibly think of. Nobody fucking likes it. NOBODY.
So, why do so many modern horror movies have this cliche? Is it the studios? That’s what would surprise me the least. I would blame the studios before I would blame the filmmakers because — it’s the studios, that get the final say. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if some asshole studio executive is watching a rough cut of the latest Conjuring side quest and says, “Woah — woah — woah — where’s the dead dog?! And where’s the dead cat?! The domestic box-office charts, and the international box office, and social media trends, and the worthless-cockstain analysis from all of our pointless audience polling, and the Hollywood AI fuckwheel algorithm — they ALL call for at least ONE of those TWO to be fucking dead at some point, GodDamnit…! Here’s $5 million for reshoots.”
It wouldn’t shock me if that’s the way it all went down.
We live in the year 2023. I think it’s pretty much unanimous at this point that — the general public loves animals. Especially, cats and dogs.
So why does almost every modern horror movie think that it’s necessary to kill them at some point…?
I… I don’t know. I guess it’s beyond my comprehension.
Now you might also be saying, “Well, Jesse. It IS fiction.”
To which I would respond, “No shit.”
But come on. I mean, fuck. There’s always plenty of human characters to kill. PLENTY OF THEM. And — I personally don’t care if they’re men or women — I say, Kill the fictional people. KILL THEM ALL — before killing the fictional dog. Or the fictional cat.
Why heavily preference the killing of human beings over animals in horror films, you may ask?
Well… because the killing of people, and the killing of animals are two completely different things — in movies. Almost anyone can connect with an animal, especially a dog, or a cat. That’s why in the real world — pets are so popular. Pets and animals can fill a void, that other human beings cannot.
I’m not a licensed psychologist but I would guess that pets and animals are the average person’s best bet at potentially coping with loneliness long-term, over their relationship with another person.
Also, animals are innocent. Which is why it’s a shame (and a mystery) that people still seem to have no problem eating them, but I digress.
People, on the other hand, are NOT innocent. People are shit (mostly). Especially, when they’re characters in movies. And, hey — they’re not real, anyway. So who the fuck cares if they die, instead of the family dog.
Here, I have a proposal for modern horror films with mainstream distribution. I say we trade up. I say trade in your weird obsession with the killing of helpless animal characters for… the killing of human characters that also just happen to be small children.
Why not? You’ll get no complaints out of me. It’s a damn good trade.
I’m here to make a case. For modern horror movies to kill more characters that are small children, and yes, even babies, and infants.
Why switch to killing human characters that also happen to be small children, babies, and toddlers, you ask?
Because that’s fucking hardcore. It sends a message to the audience that in THIS modern horror movie — the stakes are high. And what better way to get that point across in your modern horror movie than by making it clear that even the child characters are not safe, and that they too, are allowed to be included in the body count, as well.
And that goes to show that your modern horror movie isn’t fucking around. Come hell or high water, we’re gonna be killing small children characters in our modern horror movies from now on.
And let’s fucking face it… almost nobody likes babies, or children (unless they’re your own, of course). I guess I should say, nobody really gives a fuck if other people’s children die, anyway.
Now, if you think that sounds cold-hearted of me, even though I’m only referring to my optimism surrounding the potential deaths of fictional characters, you have to remember what planet I live on. Hell, I live in a country where people openly care more about their right to have a sensual relationship with their own firearms, than they care about the general safety of their own children, and other people’s children. When real children of real parents die in my country from a mass shooting, nobody does a fucking thing. Americans give their thoughts and prayers that aren’t real, and then they pray to a god that isn’t real, and then they keep voting Republican — and it’s just the same stupid shit over, and over. They simply don’t give a fuck if children die, until the dead children are theirs. They’re like characters in a modern horror movie. If only.
So, quite frankly, I think my heart’s in the right place.
Most of today’s modern horror filmmakers and studios that release horror movies are such chickenshit pussies, that they don’t even have the balls to depict the death of a small child character in a prominent horror franchise… With the exception of Stephen King adaptations. Stephen King is not afraid to kill children in his stories. I guess that’s why he’s the best.
But no. The studios would much rather play it safe, even though it probably wouldn’t negatively effect box office at all. And with zero self-awareness, by continuing the gratuitous empty gesture of killing an innocent cat, or dog character in a way that doesn’t move the audience in the slightest. The only way it moves the audience… toward the exit of the fucking movie theater that they just wasted their $20 on. And that is well before the credits have started rolling.
[I plan for this to be one of my last semi-comedic articles, or publishings in general on Medium. Considering the level of success I’ve been achieving lately on the film festival circuit, it’s probably no longer within my immediate interests (and it’s for the best), that I no longer use a forum to openly bash and criticize other filmmakers’ and studios’ hard work, considering I’m inevitably going to be working amongst them — and even though these articles are partially written for comedic effect.]
