The Making of Poltergeist and the Use of Real Skeletons
The 1982 horror classic Poltergeist, directed by Tobe Hooper and produced by Steven Spielberg, is renowned for its haunting storyline and groundbreaking special effects. The film tells the story of a suburban family whose home is invaded by malevolent spirits, leading to terrifying and tragic events. What many viewers might not know is that one of the film’s most iconic scenes involved a decision that would go on to become the stuff of Hollywood legend.
1. The Infamous Pool Scene
The specific scene in question occurs near the end of the movie, when the mother, played by JoBeth Williams, is dragged into a muddy pool filled with skeletons. It’s a pivotal moment in the film, visually striking and terrifying. However, it was later revealed that the skeletons used in this scene were not merely plastic props—they were real human skeletons.
2. Why Real Skeletons Were Used
At the time, using real skeletons in movies was not entirely uncommon in Hollywood. The rationale behind this decision was practical rather than macabre: real skeletons were reportedly cheaper and more realistic than plastic replicas, which would have been more difficult and expensive to produce with the same level of detail. This practice was not unique to Poltergeist—real human remains had been used in other films as well, such as The House on Haunted Hill (1959) and Dawn of the Dead (1978).
3. The Aftermath and Reaction
The revelation that real skeletons were used in Poltergeist sparked a wave of controversy and fascination. Some were horrified by the idea, seeing it as a deeply unethical practice that disrespected the dead. Others were intrigued by the macabre nature of the decision, adding an extra layer of horror to the already terrifying film. The fact that this information became widely known only after the film’s release contributed to its mythic status, making Poltergeist not just a horror movie, but a film surrounded by its own dark aura.
Ethical Implications of Using Real Human Remains in Film
The use of real skeletons in Poltergeist raises significant ethical questions. While the practice may have been driven by practicality, it forces us to consider the moral implications of using human remains for entertainment purposes.
1. The Respect for the Deceased
One of the primary ethical concerns revolves around the respect owed to the deceased. Human remains, regardless of their source, carry with them a history, a life that was once lived. Using these remains as mere props in a film can be seen as a violation of the dignity of the individuals to whom they belonged. In many cultures, the dead are treated with reverence, and their remains are handled with care to honor their memory. The idea of using skeletons in such a cavalier manner in a movie set, where they are subjected to water, mud, and physical interaction, seems to disregard this respect.
2. Consent and Ethical Sourcing
Another key issue is consent. Did the individuals whose skeletons were used consent to their remains being used in this way? Most likely, they did not. The skeletons were reportedly obtained through medical supply companies that sourced them from various parts of the world, often without explicit consent from the deceased or their families. This raises questions about the ethical sourcing of human remains and whether it is ever justifiable to use them without clear and informed consent.
3. The Impact on Those Involved
The use of real skeletons may also have had a psychological impact on the actors and crew members involved in the production. Knowing that they were working with real human remains could have added an element of unease or discomfort to their experience on set. JoBeth Williams, who performed in the infamous pool scene, later expressed her own discomfort with the revelation that the skeletons were real. This adds another layer to the ethical debate: is it fair to put actors in a position where they are unknowingly interacting with real human remains?
The Legacy of Poltergeist and the Birth of a Curse
The decision to use real skeletons in Poltergeist has not only sparked ethical debates but has also contributed to the film’s lasting legacy in the form of what is often referred to as the “Poltergeist curse.” This idea, fueled by a series of tragic events surrounding the film’s cast and crew, suggests that the use of real skeletons may have brought about a supernatural curse.
1. The “Poltergeist Curse”
The so-called curse is linked to several untimely and tragic deaths of cast members, most notably Heather O’Rourke, who played the young daughter Carol Anne, and Dominique Dunne, who played her older sister. O’Rourke died at the age of 12 due to complications from a medical condition, and Dunne was murdered by her ex-boyfriend at the age of 22. These events, along with other misfortunes experienced by the cast and crew, have led to speculation that the film was cursed.
While there is no evidence to support the existence of a curse, the idea has become part of the film’s mythos, adding to its aura of fear and mystery. The use of real skeletons is often cited as a potential cause of the curse, as some believe that disturbing the dead in such a way could invite negative supernatural consequences.
2. The Role of Urban Legends in Horror
The “Poltergeist curse” and the story of the real skeletons contribute to the broader tradition of urban legends within the horror genre. Horror films often play on real-life fears and anxieties, and the idea that a film itself could be cursed blurs the line between fiction and reality. These legends serve to enhance the horror experience for audiences, making the film’s story feel more real and more terrifying.
Urban legends also serve as a way for society to grapple with the ethical and moral questions raised by horror films. The story of the Poltergeist skeletons forces us to confront the uncomfortable reality of how far filmmakers will go to achieve realism, and whether the ends justify the means.
The Evolution of Ethics in Filmmaking
The controversy surrounding the use of real skeletons in Poltergeist reflects a broader evolution in the ethics of filmmaking. Over the years, there has been a growing awareness and sensitivity to the treatment of human remains, animals, and people in the film industry.
1. Changes in Industry Standards
Since the 1980s, there have been significant changes in industry standards regarding the use of human remains and other sensitive materials in film. Today, the use of real human skeletons in movies would likely be met with widespread condemnation, both from the public and within the industry itself. Advances in special effects and CGI have also made it possible to create realistic skeletons and other props without the need to use real human remains, reducing the ethical dilemmas faced by filmmakers.
2. The Role of Ethical Guidelines
Modern filmmaking is governed by a range of ethical guidelines and best practices designed to protect the dignity and rights of individuals, both living and deceased. These guidelines cover everything from the treatment of animals on set to the portrayal of sensitive subjects. The controversy surrounding Poltergeist serves as a reminder of the importance of these guidelines and the need for filmmakers to consider the ethical implications of their creative choices.
3. The Responsibility of Filmmakers
Ultimately, filmmakers have a responsibility to consider the impact of their decisions on all those involved in the production process, as well as on the audience. The use of real skeletons in Poltergeist may have been intended to enhance the realism of the film, but it also raises important questions about the ethical boundaries of art and entertainment. Filmmakers must weigh the desire for authenticity against the need to respect the dignity of the human beings whose remains are involved.
Conclusion
The statement “The 1982 movie Poltergeist used real skeletons” is more than just a piece of cinematic trivia—it is a gateway into a deeper discussion about ethics, fear, and the power of storytelling. The decision to use real human remains in the film reflects the complex and sometimes troubling history of the film industry’s pursuit of realism. It also highlights the ongoing tension between artistic expression and ethical responsibility.
