Skip to main content

Spheres of Orientation: On Why Don Coscarelli’s Phantasm Series Is More Cerebral than One Might Think

  • Chapter
Embodiment and Horror Cinema
  • 313 Accesses

Abstract

One of the things medics and first aiders test for in victims of intracranial trauma is flaws in their neuropsychological orientation, or their degree of alertness to person, place, time, and event—in short, their responsiveness to questions about who they are, where they are, what date it is, and the situation that they are in. Those who watch Don Coscarelli’s four Phantasm films might feel as though they too suffer from such a trauma, from a sense of disorientation stemming from the strange recurrent images in the series of an unearthly mortician whose suits do not fit and who steals cadavers in order to reanimate them; of the dwarf minions who slavishly follow this villain’s orders; of the metal orbs that float about a mausoleum’s corridors, targeting intruders for destruction; and of the access-ways that the orbs, if caught, open up to another dimension, a desert wilderness in which inhuman shapes shamble about unseeingly. The Phantasm series thus seems anomalous in the tradition of continuity filmmaking, as it conforms to a cause-and-effect mode of storytelling that, rather than wrapping up its narrative mysteries in a rationally or emotionally satisfying way, raises more and more questions throughout the course of the exposition about just what is going on in these films. To summarize the incredibly anti-elucidative story arc of the series might run thus: the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm), a mysterious undertaker from another dimension, travels from town to town in order to steal the corpses from their cemeteries; crush them down into an army of “Lurkers,” or mindless dwarf underlings; transplant their cerebra into “Sentinels,” or flying weaponizable metallic spheres; and use them all to either wage an intergalactic war or repopulate the earth with zombie slaves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Wheeler Winston Dixon, A History of Horror (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2011), 118–19.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Matei Calinescu, Five Faces of Modernity: Modernism, Avant-Garde, Decadence, Kitsch, Postmodernism (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1987), 16.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jean-François Lyotard, The Inhuman, trans. Geoffrey Bennington and Rachel Bowlby (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1991), 25.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lisa Zunshine, Getting Inside Your Head: What Cognitive Science Can Tell Us about Popular Culture (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012), 15, 17.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Stanley Cavell, Cavell on Film, ed. William Rothman (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005), 126.

    Google Scholar 

  6. John Kenneth Muir, Horror Films of the 1970s (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2002), 611.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lev Manovich, The Language of New Media (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2001), 22–23.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Colin McGinn, The Power of Movies: How Mind and Screen Interact (New York: Vintage, 2007), 18.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Anne Friedberg, Window Shopping: Cinema and the Postmodern (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1994), 165.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Patricia Pisters, The Neuro-Image: A Deleuzian Film-Philosophy of Digital Screen Culture. (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2012), 81.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2014 Larrie Dudenhoeffer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dudenhoeffer, L. (2014). Spheres of Orientation: On Why Don Coscarelli’s Phantasm Series Is More Cerebral than One Might Think. In: Embodiment and Horror Cinema. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137404961_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics