Margaux and I take a look at Krampus, a surprisingly straightforward yuletide horror film.
Trevor: This is the second time that I’ve watched Krampus, and it’s a movie I more or less enjoy, but hoo boy does it get off to a rough start. That opening montage isn’t nearly as trenchant an insight as it thinks it. Satires on consumerism (which in a lot of ways Krampus is aiming to be, I think) are always pretty ham-fisted – think Dawn of the Dead. The first few minutes of Krampus sets it up to be a more tongue-in-cheek movie than it is, which is a shame, because this is a mostly solid, bleak horror film. I think the comedic actors in the cast (Adam Scott, David Koechner) convinced people this was a horror-comedy. I don’t find it very funny, but I do enjoy it. How did it work for you?
Margaux: This is also the second time I’ve watched Krampus and I enjoyed more this go around than the first, mainly for a lot of the reasons you just listed, although I still think it struggles with tone. The way it was pitched and promoted would lead you to believe it’s horror-comedy in the vein of Tucker and Dale (which is about as pitch perfect as that genre gets), so I remember feeling cheated by the movie the first time I saw it, there weren’t enough yucks to make it full-on funny, and I didn’t think it was scary enough to be straight up horror. But I actually really like the cold open because I hate the holidays and this is kind of what I picture when people tell me to “get into the giving spirit.” That being said, that cold open does not encapsulate what this movie is really about, or if it does, I have to do a lot more mental math to untangle what it’s trying to say and I’m just not about that life. The best I can do is liken this cold open to The Disaster Artist, you could cut it out and nothing would change the outcome of this movie, it’s sort of pointless.
Trevor: I like that the film takes a pretty standard Christmas movie plot – family gathering wherein the spirit of Christmas is rediscovered – and embraces the existential horror of losing sight of the spirit of togetherness and giving that the holiday is supposed to present. Don’t get me wrong, it can get a bit on the nose – especially in the character of Max, who sports the obligatory hair-helmet of child actors, seen in Liar Liar or Jurassic World – but Krampus isn’t afraid to get uncomfortable. The scene where Max’s ghoulish cousins read his letter to Santa is discomfiting, and also surprisingly sad.
Margaux: Yes, Krampus and Home Alone share a lot the same beats in the first act; a shitty family comes together despite the fact they don’t like each other very much, and the kid (Max and/or Culkin) make a wish their family would just stop being assholes for one day. Except everyone dies at the end in Krampus, spoiler alert.
Trevor: There’s a lot of tones being thrown around here, which could undo the film entirely. But the smart thing about the casting here is that the ensemble is made up mostly of supporting actors like Scott, Koechner, and Toni Collette. They’re used to and practiced at establishing character quickly and effectively.
Margaux: The cast is definitely elevating the material; Allison Tolman, Scott, Koechner, and Collette, they keep the movie from getting too eye-roll worthy. And I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels this way, but Aunt Dorothy is me in 20 years, “I didn’t even like kids when I was one”. But I think one thing the movie does that bugs me is it confuses the myth of Krampus (or maybe what I’ve been told about the anti-Claus isn’t totally correct, which is entirely possible). Isn’t Krampus just supposed to kidnap ungrateful kids at Christmas? Isn’t he more like a Pennywise type? Adults can’t see him, and he serves to terrorize children? Maybe a holiday movie about kidnapping children is not what studios are going to throw a bunch of money at. What I’m trying to say is, the IP of Krampus is sound, I’m just not sure this execution was what I expected or even wanted from an anti-Christmas movie.
Trevor: I don’t know much about the myth of Krampus, but those things get twisted around all the time; my guess is that “Krampus kills people” is easier to pull off, because this film is structured like a siege movie. I’m guessing budget was involved. And I’m actually okay with that, because a lot of time, effort, and money went into the design of the titular monster, and in my opinion it looks wonderful. Krampus’s enormous size and agility is very effective (as is the ever-increasing number of snowmen in the yard), and the sleigh bells attached to its chain are unsettling in a way that hearkens back to A Christmas Carol. So if they went with the easier narrative route in order to give us a better monster, I’m okay with that.
Margaux: The production design of Krampus’s minions, like the elves or the gross as fuck Jack-in-the-box (who is most def down to fuckkkk) was exceptionally repulsive and really worked for me in terms of creep factor. But the CGI, murderous Gingerbread Men, again, sound IP, but that’s where it got so goofy and comical, I wasn’t sure if we were supposed to be scared or laugh or both. And German Grandma’s flashback to her experience with the Krampus took me out of the movie. I don’t understand why it needed to be animated, it didn’t do anything or add to the story, I actually think it would’ve been scarier to see it acted out with IRL actors. It felt like it was part of different movie that they wanted to repurpose and shoehorned in.
Trevor: Okay, I want to address everything you said, in order. The gingerbread, no, didn’t work for me either. But the Jack-in-the box was pure terror, and was a wonderful creature design. I love the idea of Krampus having minions (and for some reason, the fact that the snowmen didn’t attack made them scarier; I’m not sure why).
Margaux: Seth Green is apparently one of the elves…*shoulder shrug emoji*
Trevor: But I loved the animated sequence! It was maybe my favorite part of the movie. I thought it was gorgeous, haunting in a folk-tale way, and it might have worked better with actual people, but again, I’m assuming there were budget constraints. I think it’s kind of incredible that director Michael Dougherty (Trick ‘r Treat) was able to get it in at all. We disagree on it, and that’s fine, but animated interludes are kind of 100% up my alley (see also: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 or Fargo’s “The Law of Non-Contradiction”).
Margaux: I’m not against animated interludes (please do not @ me), but sometimes they don’t work for me and THAT’S OKAY. The fact we disagree on literally 4 minutes does not mean we’re not friends anymore. As long as we both agree that Howie Jr was channeling Augustus Gloop.
Trevor: That’s who he reminded me of! Thank you, yes, we absolutely agree about that. It was kind of incongruous, but the movie doesn’t dwell on it too much. Krampus is kind of uninterested in fleshing out any of its kid character besides Max (and I enjoyed Emjay Anthony in Chef, but find him close to insufferable at times in this).
Margaux: Exactly! They try to have it both ways with the characters. They want to care just enough about the characters so that when shit starts to go down, you feel something. But they don’t want you to get too attached so when they begin to get picked off, you’re kinda like, “eh, had it coming. Except for the dog, Rosie. Max fucking murdered that damn dog and I will not hear it if you don’t agree.
Trevor: Oh, that dog’s blood is definitely on Max’s hands. What I like is that even though Howard’s family is pretty boorish, the movie doesn’t want you to be happy when any of them die. The first casualty is Howie Jr., and as awful as he is, you don’t exactly feel relieved. Honestly, it’s kind of ballsy that the first person to die in this is a kid, and it helps establish stakes, as well as show the audience exactly what kind of monster Krampus is.
Margaux: Well, the first person to die is Beth, who we don’t get know too much before she’s offed, and you almost feel worse for her because all you learn about her is that care about her little brother and she was leered at by a mall Santa.
Trevor: True; I should have said that Howie Jr. was the first on-screen death. None of the deaths are especially gruesome, but, as Dennis Reynolds knows, the horror is in the implication. That’s one scary-ass hook that Krampus is wielding.
Margaux: Let’s get to the end: Krampus gives the letter Max writes to Santa, which wasn’t necessarily negative, he just wanted his family to get along. In my eyes, as you know, his greatest offense is killing that poor pup, which doesn’t happen until after, so it begs the question, what brought the Krampus? Commercialism? The German Grandma who implores them to “keep the fire hot”?
Trevor: I feel ilke this is where the mythology gets a little muddled. There’s an anti-consumerist bent to Krampus – look how Koechner’s giant car literally rattles the house as it pulls up – but it doesn’t go quite far enough to be effective (which isn’t necessarily the film’s fault; “consumerism is bad” is such an agreed-upon point of view that it barely counts as satire). And this isn’t exactly a spiritual film (no mention of Jesus), so there’s not much in the way of forgetting the spirit of the holiday. I think Krampus shows up because there wouldn’t be a film without it. Which is fine, honestly, especially if the film works, which Krampus does, for the most part. I rarely go to horror films looking for insight.
Margaux: Alright, well, I guess it’s time to talk about how much I hate that ending.
Trevor: This won’t surprise you, but I really liked it.
Margaux: Haha it does not surprise me one bit. Before the *Biggie voice* it was a dream *end voice* reveal, I will say Max volunteering as tribute like he’s repping his district was emotionally effective. I also really like that Krampus and Tyra Banks both sustain themselves on the tears of the young. You can blame St. Elmo’s Fire, but it feels like a cop out when you discover the characters are trapped in an ornament on a Krampus Christmas tree…probably in hell. Like, have the courage of her convictions and have it end with Krampus carelessly drop a child into a hellfire pit. End credits.
Trevor: I like it because I didn’t take it as them in a dream, but rather, yes, in hell, where they wake up every day and it’s Christmas, and every day Max unwraps the Krampus bell and they all remember everything that happened and exactly where they are, doomed with the knowledge that they will have this horrible revelation every day. And yes, Max volunteering to be taken by Krampus was a nice moment. Krampus’s face is horrifying. You wanna give this thing some lumps of coal?
Margaux: Ugh, I can’t believe you convinced me the ending is actually good. Damnit! You’re right, reliving Christmas every day for the rest of your life would be 100% hell. Alright, you made a good point, we better get outta here.
Coal time, Krampus isn’t perfect, but it’s entertaining and is a nice break from all the feel-good fuckery that usually accompanies the holiday specific movies that come out every year.
2/5 lumps of coal
About Author
