Dear Harvey, Of course the tendency began with PSYCHO. But Hitchcock can not be blamed for that nor for the dreadful Friday the 13th Psycho influenced series. However, PSYCHO is a much more complex film. See "Identification and Slaughter" in a back issue of cineACTION and a current article in FILM COMMENT. Also, Le Pogue does a good economic reading in THE HITCHCOCK READER which influenced my chapter on Hitchcock in my HEARTHS OF DARKNESS: THE FAMILY IN THE AMERICAN HORROR FILM. But the visual pyrotechnic special effects did begin with a vengeance in the 80s so your ALIENS reference is relevant here. However, I also take issue with the current tendency to return to readings of horror as a fetish effect first suggested by Steve Neale in GENRE. Laura Mulvey has recently argued that the fetish conceals not just sexuality but other features relevant to culture and history. This takes the concept well beyond its limited Freudian application and into other areas. Is not the fetish nature of the special effects syndrome an attempt to drown and disavow the radical social meanings inherent since the 70s within certain textual formations. The Friday the 13th and NIGHTMARE films are still "family horror" works despite their inferiority and special effects bloodbaths. Similarly, radical aspects exist in ALIENS which Renny Christopher read as a Viet Nam allegory both in my co-edited VIETNAM WAR FILMS (McFarland, 1994) and in an article in LITERATURE/INTERPRET- ATION/THEORY. But how many members of the audience would read it that way and avoid succumbing the the visual pleasures of special effects? We are now in the realmof reader-reception. But different films do have manifold texts and not all (especially PSYCHO) are dominated by special effects. Thanks for your comments on this matter. Sincerely, Tony Williams ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]