During my graduate studies, I became interested in what critics were calling the “New French Extremity,” a strand of auteur filmmaking (and critical scholarship) highlighting a fascinating intersection in French filmmaking: aesthetic traditions of form and content that characterized mid-to-late twentieth-century European art cinema, and elements of the (primarily American and Italian) exploitation genre films that had, for many years at that time, figured centrally in my recreational film viewing and participation in cult cinema fan culture. As I began to investigate the existing scholarship surrounding the New French Extremity (or NFE), I was impressed to find most of it had successfully transcended what is commonly known as the “media effects model” of cinematic violence and “deviant” sexuality in film. There was a definite sense in much of this NFE scholarship that ideas about causal or even correlative relationships between violence in (and outside of) films were outdated, lacking empirical validity, and obstructive to the kinds of deeper critical analysis these texts invite though their innovative styles and dynamic presentation. At the same time, the divided reactions and sensational controversies that linked these films as much as any aesthetic commonality were part of what drew me toward them as objects of cultural study. I saw in the films of the New French Extremity a unique critical opportunity. I spent a portion of my prior studies in scholarly defense of the merits and cultural significance of contemporary horror films. Despite serious engagement from certain prestigious scholars and critics (Robin Wood, Alan Jones, Mark Kermode), the popular horror film has been a favorite target for derision not only in academic circles, but in popular discourse more broadly (with a swift dismissal usually reserved for pornography).

Fat Girl, Irréversible, Trouble Every Day, Twentynine Palms; these films planted a theoretical seed. These were cinematic artworks that possessed the impact of horror films—not just in psychological (and physiological) impact on the spectator—but in their potential cultural impact as well. The visceral affective quality of these films drew the sort of high-profile controversies that so often act as flashpoints for larger cultural debates. The films were shocking and abrasive—but defensible as serious films, by serious filmmakers clearly pursuing more than box office (or as is more commonly the case with horror, straight-to-video distribution) revenue.