They will be touched, groped, verbally assaulted, emotionally disturbed and electrically shocked.
Holding the waiver all people entering must sign is the character Cardinal Sin, who dons a Roman Catholic robe with an upside-down necklace he occasionally licks suggestively.
"Are you ready for this?" the actor asks glancing over the waivers.
26 comments:
Wow – this is definitely a very serious take on the classic haunted house attraction. I think most technical theatre people have some level of interest in interactive attractions such as haunted houses – I know that growing up I have taken part in putting together numerous and always found them intriguing despite being a person who really doesn’t like scary movies! I am definitely more interested in the production side of things, although scaring people is great fun.
This attraction is surprising because I think most are used to the standard haunted house principle that “if you don’t touch them, they won’t touch you.” Similar to other attractions, such as a roller coaster, you are scared but in no real danger. This R-rated house begins to cross that line, with the physicality and aspects of verbal assault on patrons. I think this attraction takes some big risks in blurring the lines between a scary but safe attraction, and an actually terrifying or disturbing experience. But hey, I guess someone’s gotta do it, because sure know there’s people out there ready to pay for it.
It’s reassuring to see that the company is mindful of not taking things too far. I think the use of a safe-word, allowing participants to remove themselves at any point, helps to prevent anyone from having an experience that crosses any serious boundaries. This is the most significant difference between the house and an actual traumatic experience.
There are two things particularly interesting to me about this article. The first is that the subject matter of the actual experience (justifiably so) is kept hidden. With experiences that are visceral and immersive, and rely heavily on shock and disturbing images/feelings, it is incredibly important to consider the social ramifications that may be tied along with them. Now, there is a difference between trivializing truly awful real-life instances (plane crashes, sexual assault, etc.) and using horrific subject matter such as cult-like rituals, disturbing clowns, or whatever it may be. The important thing about it is that, as long as it is taking into consideration its social implications of subject matter, the experience itself is an exciting way to amp up the haunted house experience that many are familiar with.
The other aspect that I find incredibly intriguing about this article, and one that I have struggle with myself, is that of shock in relation to catharsis. While, in an Aristotelian sense, shock isn't a valuable tool for catharsis, there is definitely something to be said for the potential ways that it can inspire strong emotions. Now the question, and more for theatrical pieces that care about this stuff, is whether or not there is a way for the piece to transform or carry those strong emotions from shock into a communal experience that ignites catharsis. In the case of the crying woman mentioned in this article, I wonder if that is a socially beneficial response to the work (regardless of the fact that it achieves its mission). Ultimately, the major benefit here is that the use of horror and immersion ought to be experimented further in the realm of theatricality, as it is often not accomplished to a powerful end.
Wow, what a crazy idea! As someone who is very easily scared, the thought of a haunted house where you are touched and pushed around is completely and utterly terrifying to me. I definitely wouldn’t be able to get through even one minute of this house. I definitely don’t understand the allure of being terrified for fun, but apparently many people do! That being said, the technical and design elements of this haunted house seem really interesting. There was an earlier article about a different haunted house, and ever since reading that article I have a new appreciation and consideration for haunted houses, and the idea of them being immersive theater. I think this article exemplifies that concept even further, not just with the literal physical connection between “actors” and “audience members” that is described, but even in the picture slideshow; you can see the backstage areas, performers getting into costume, getting makeup applied, and the shots are captioned as being before or during “dress rehearsals”. This is interactive theater at its finest!
However, I think that one crosses into very dangerous territory when physical contact is allowed. I feel like, more than anything, fear and shock can paralyze someone into not thinking straight, or forgetting the context of the situation they’re in. Even with the use of a spooky safe-word, I would still be afraid of something going awry. Although hopefully if someone willfully decides to participate in this, they know what they may be getting into and are able to stay aware of their surroundings!
This is everything I would hate in a Haunted house. But for someone who doesn’t have the knee jerk reaction to fight back when someone sneaks up on them, this may be the coolest haunted house there is, and maybe actually scary, instead of just weird and forcefully contrived to be ‘scary’. When I was a kid they used to be able to touch you, but clearly that was decided to be inappropriate, so people just started jumping at you and yelling. Its totally not for me, but I think its historical you get treated by a suggestively licking clergy member. You should realize what you are getting yourself into when you have to sign the waver, and I am a full believer in if you are going to go into a haunted house you should be actually scared and disturbed now just mildly entertained and amused by the over use of blood. Good for the man who created this and I hope it lasts for years to come. It is also in Vegas and most things are rated R, and I think that it will fit in really well with all he other antics on the strip.
The concept behind this attraction, if you could call it that, is a haunted house scary enough to "scare a 45-year old man." While that may seem like a lofty goal for a haunted house, this haunted house is different. For one, it qualifies as R-rated, or at least graphic enough to merit a safe word. This may seem like a shoddily disguised publicity ploy, an advertising gimmick, if you will, until you realize that this is for a very good reason.
This haunted house allows for physical contact, something that can, without the correct precautions, very easily make an entertainment experience become a severely traumatic experience.
In a day and age where trigger warnings adorn news articles, and we, as a culture, are becoming more sensitive to the experiences of others, this haunted house stands as a statement about the sheer power of audiences. if there weren't a demand to be scared shitless by actors manhandling you through a haunted house, one wouldn't exist. Yet here we are, just a few states away from a haunted house with more lawyers than a pharmaceutical company. If that doesnt say something about the power of effective entertainment, or even the definition of what being "entertained" means, I don't know that does.
Having haunted houses that the participants need to sign waivers to is something that seems like a specifically 21st century ideal. One could easily go to your local haunted house and have people jump through windows and walk around in bloody rags, and you'll be scared in the moment and then talk about how much fun you had. The methodology behind these "extreme" haunted houses is the exact other end of the spectrum. You have no idea what you'll be getting yourself into, only that you must be prepared for being "touched, groped, verbally assaulted, emotionally disturbed and electrically shocked". Now, none of these things will kill you, but each of the things that will happen are an escape from the day to day, and are tailor made to make you feel specifically in danger. Walking out of a haunted house like this is a badge of courage, one that says you looked absolute terror in the face and made it out. They have a safe word, but rarely will people use it, only because they don't want to be the one that had to. The reason I say this is a modern diea is because like for most has become a monotonous cycle of getting up, going to class or work, doing your work, and going home, with rarely any true sense of feeling alive thrown in. These houses allow your salaryman to feel as if he is put into a situation where his life has value, if only for the reason that if he is pushed too hard he will die, which is a true thrill. Put people's extreme fears in a room, throw that person into the room alone, and watch their life flash before their eyes. Freed from the shackles of snapchat and facebook, in that moment, the person is alive.
Considering I had my eyes closed the entire time I went on a haunted hay ride I can't see myself every willingly going to a place like this, but I think that the idea is really cool. People are constantly trying to push boundaries to shock audiences in all other mediums, so why not in haunted houses? With the dramatic advancement of special effects in horror movies it takes a lot more to scare people than it used to. Something that would have terrified someone fifty years ago can now be easily brushed off, or even become laughable. In order to remain scary haunted houses are going to have to keep up with this advancement. It is true that allowing physical contact could be potentially dangerous, or lead to a lawsuit. However, I think as long as what's going to happen is made explicitly known to the consumer then this issue could be avoided. Right now this company is walking a fine line between being scary and damaging, but I hope that they continue to expand their horizons.
I love haunted houses. I love building them. I love working in them. I love/hate walking through them. One of the items on my list while looking at colleges was whether or not the school did haunted houses (Unfortunately Carnegie does not, but I'm fairly certain my arcade peice and a future playground peice will involve some form of horror). I am a huge supporter of horror movies and really any type of performance designed to scare the living hell out of people. That being said, the concept of this house is terrifying. I fully support the profanity and harassment. The waivers are fine (it's a tad to cold and corporate feeling, but I see it as a necessity). I do not feel comfortable with a haunted house breaking the physical barrier. The general rule of haunted houses is "you don't touch the actors and they don't touch you". This rule is there for a purpose. It's not like some guy just sat around one day and decided that physical contact shouldn't be a thing. This rule is there to protect the actors. When you scare someone, they stop thinking rationally. When someone in that state is touched, it creates the feeling of being attacked, and a lot of people will respond with aggression. In short, actors who touch audience members get hurt. This "R-rated" haunted house just seems like a bad idea and, personally, I wouldn't go.
This seems super intense oh my god. I do not know how I would react to a haunted house like this. I do not think I have been in a real scary haunted house before. I feel like I would laugh and think it was a joke for a normal one, but it seems like that would not be the case for The Gates of Hell. If you have to sign a waiver just to walk into a haunted house, you know it is going to be crazy. The fact that they touch you and grope you is kind of unsettling because these are people you do not know and I do not know how I would feel with them touching me. I would feel so awkward especially because I know they are just actors. I think I should try an easier haunted house before I attempt anything like The Gates of Hell.
This is very far for a haunted house to go. But, with the way that entertainment is progressing, it just seems like another step. Attractions now are all about how immersive the experience is. Haunted houses have always been a successful thing, especially around Halloween time, but as the author points out, they are normally geared to teenagers and The Gates of Hell is looking to terrify everyone at any age. I think that this will spread and soon other places will take their haunted houses farther into the new R rated zone. I personally, would have no interest in this type of thing as I hate horror movies but I know many people who would love to try to brave The Gates of Hell. It is a great business that I know will get a lot of attention, both positive and negative. From a designer stand point I think the designers must of had such a great time to make every nightmare you ever had come to life.
Kudos to the creators of Freakling Bros. for having a crazy idea and following through with it. I have to say that though I love haunted houses, I wouldn't dare step into this haunted house with the fear of being groped or electrocuted. It's so difficult to bridge the gap between consent and non-consent, especially in a haunted house or interactive theatre opportunity. You're signing away your right to sue, but who gets to decide if one of the performers take it too far on a customer? It's a very fine line. The people that actually want this sort of stuff scare me -- there's this very interactive Halloween experience that is similar to the Gates of Hell, and it terrifies me as much as this does. You and a group of friends go out into a 10 acre field to go 'camping', and for twenty-four hours a team of chain saw massacres terrify you all and 'kill' off everyone until the game is done. That's the sort of stuff that I wouldn't mind being a part of the creative team at all, but actually experiencing it? Nope.
I really am glad that this exists, a haunted house with a disclaimer that allows them to really play with the effects that we all try to create as theatre practitioners. Yes, it is a different objective, but often times our goal is the same as those that create haunted houses; to create a believable atmospheric environment. We discovered this a little during arcade last year, when you want to create a creepy or disturbing environment, jump scares and lunging surprising things are very powerful. If you’re touched by them, physically, it becomes even more powerful.
That all being said, I’m interested in knowing what kind of rules the performers have. I’m sure they’re very specific and plentiful, you don’t know how people will react when they’re scared sometimes. You just don’t. Clearly if they’ve added a safe word and a waiver to the experience, they aren’t messing around at all.
I am really really glad that something like this exists. It is no secret that I think that we as a culture are too squeamish and scared of not being politically correct for our own good. I am reminded of the mark twain quote that “censorship is like telling a man he cant have a steak because a baby cant chew it.” Suing someone or a company for providing a service that you paid for, and didn’t like, is equally ridiculous if they properly informed you of what it would be before hand. If the the point of this haunted house really is to scare people, then I feel like it shouldn’t stop short of any of the things that actually terrify us. If there was a way for a haunted house to convince me that all of my friends hated me and that my family was disappointed in me, I would consider that haunted house a dramatic success. I hope that this place’s waver looks something like “We wont hurt you or do anything else permanent, otherwise anything else is fair game.”
Basically at any point in my life, even as a child, I would have loved something like this. As an adult, I realize this is because I am a naturally theatrical person so, even if something was too scary, I would have totally committed and enjoyed it. Reading this article, I really couldn’t understand why something like a haunted house is not considered a theatrical event. The only thing they do that is similar to theatre is calling the characters “actors.” I feel like this kind of thing should be considered theatre one hundred percent, it should extend and grow into something with written dialogue and cues and plot and everything like that. Sleep No More explored this idea, but I think ever haunted house in the country should label themselves as a theatre, that’s when things could really get scary. We could create a whole new type of theatre that forces the audience to be emotionally and physically invested, if they agree, they could become a character entirely by themselves.
I'm not sure what he means by "if they cross a line." They crossed a line. I'm not really a fan of haunted houses but I can't begin to grasp why anyone would want to do this. It just sounds mean. There is a difference between trying to scare someone, and trying to make tehm miserable. His stated mission is to make a haunted house that people can't get through. I guess he technically fulfilled this. But I don't really know what being groped, shocked, assaulted with smells, an called names has to do with fear. Maybe in a very primal sense, but if you are shocking me that's not fear, its just pain.
I am confused by all aspects of this. But also the number of people commenting that they would enjoy this. I am not sure I believe any of them. This is borderline assault on all levels. To enjoyt his you would have to be a pretty serious masochist.
Um. Where to begin? Why are we so interested in pushing ourselves to the limits? Why put yourself through emotional distress if you don’t have to? Also, how ethical are these actors if they actively enjoy scaring the ever-loving shit out of people? I know they all sign a waiver and have a safe word, but how much legal protection does that actually provide them? Also how can a patron knowingly sign a waiver when they really don’t know what’s in store for them? What about aftercare? Aftercare is a standard practice in theatre and communities like BDSM. It allows actors/sexual partners to come back to a place of emotional safety after experiencing deep and troubling emotions. I think if the owners of this haunted house were being responsible they would provide this kind of care to help prevent a lawsuit. And what is taking it too far? What does that mean?????
How is this legal? Or is it? And even if it is, why would someone want to put themselves through this? I am admittedly a horror movie junkie (the good and the bad), and I love haunted houses. But what makes them ok is that you are never actually in bodily harm. There is a level of protection that surrounds both the viewer/audience member and the institution. This obliterates that layer of protection and pushes all boundaries. Even with a waiver and safe word, this ignores the concept of Post-Traumatic Stress and how to prevent it and how to recover from it. On the flip side, I am not sure if a waiver would actually protect the company from liability if anything went wrong or if a person was diagnosed with PTSD after being groped, electrocuted, or attacked by an actor in this “haunted house”. And people oftentimes have underlying illnesses that they do not know about until they are put under extreme circumstances; this would be an opportune moment for someone to learn that they have a heart defect after being voluntarily electrocuted, and I do not think that any waiver would protect the company if that happened.
Haunted houses have always been fascinating and frightening to me. The amount of themeing involved takes a lot of time and effort to pull off correctly. I like the amount of effort put into this experience especially. there are a lot of great things to take away from a design like this but I don't know if an R-rated haunted house is the best thing to have but i guess if there was ever to be one it should be in Vegas. in a place that generally doesn't have a large majority of young kids visiting vegas provides a good place for a haunted adult experience to make a base. The physical contact thing has never been a great idea in my opinion. even the happiest characters at disneyland are only allowed to offer hugs, not force a hug onto a child. each of us are wired in different ways, even if these adults are not children and these characters are NOT disney princesses, people will react unpredictably to scary situations and I therefore wouldn't want to be on either end.
I am equal parts intrigued and worried as to what actually happens inside this haunted house. From a legal standpoint, this seems like a logistical nightmare. The waiver aspect seems fairly straightforward, but is there any legal precedent for something on this scale and of this intensity. The one aspect that seems most troublesome is the potential groping from haunted house employee to patron. The line between sexual assault and groping becomes completely subjective in this type of environment. If someone signs the waiver and essentially agrees to the groping ahead of time, how far is the haunted house employee allowed to go without any type of ramification?
Aside from that, I have never really found haunted houses as a worthwhile experience. You pay rather hefty entry fees, to potentially get scared, and have people yell and scream loudly in terror all around you. In my mind, typical haunted houses should not be frightening, because in theory you know what to expect once you’re inside. This venue, on the other hand, seems to be offering the unexpected and the psychologically disturbing. I would strongly consider going to this haunted house if it were much closer!
Holy crud! This haunted house certainly isn't screwing around, I'm quite intrigued and I think creating a haunted house fit for adults is a great idea, but something about this one puts a bad taste in my mouth. I think it's safe to say that no one likes being assaulted, groped or screamed at in a purposely "non-consensual" way. Yes, participants sign a waiver that signs then up for the experience, but it still doesn't sound too pleasant. One sentence in this article puts this idea pretty neatly : "Mollner adds the balance is if they aren't scary enough, the attraction gets a bad name, but if they cross any lines, the company gets a lawsuit." The lawsuit section is an important aspect of this because I would imagine it's very possible to come out of an experience like this scarred or shaked up. I love haunted houses and all, but I think this may be pushing the line a little too much.
Although I've never been to a haunted house that was more than a cart driven ride where animatronic monsters and things pop out at you for jump scares, the idea of a R rated haunted house sounds like a really great way to immerse and audience in a horror experience. While I don't know if I would ever personally visit a haunted house like this, I think its a great idea to have a horror attraction that isn't aimed at scaring a younger population, but is universally terrifying to all. To me the problem with most haunted houses is that as an audience member you are often so far removed from the jump scares that there is a sense of security and peace of mind that carries through the entire attraction. After going through a house like that enough it's easy to keep a level head and avoid being afraid, but when the actors are free to do whatever they'd like with you its a completely new game. Aside from the painful electric shocks which sound pretty concerning, a haunted house like this sounds like a thrilling immersion into horror for those that seek it.
As much as I love Halloween, I don't think I'd be able to handle this. I'm really uncomfortable with the idea of being groped by strangers, even if it is part of the show, but that's just me personally. I think doing immersive theater like this is very cool and a very challenging thing to get right. I've gone to haunted houses before that are trying really hard to scare you but they just make you laugh. There's a sense of security when you know the actors can't touch you, so in here that goes out the window. There's no security blanket. I could imagine being the patron who just cried after leaving, or someone who lost there shoe. Pushing the boundaries of what people will willingly go through just for the experience is a really important part of theater, even if it's just being explored in a haunted house setting.
Honestly even reading about this haunted house made me a little uncomfortable. I like Halloween, but more of the cute little kid ringing my doorbell in a princess costume side, than the actual scary side. I've been to a few haunted houses, but I'm always the person in the back wishing that she hadn't let her friends convince her it was a good idea. I do have to give these guys some credit for finding an interesting niche in a market that I had previously thought was pretty maxed out. However, logistically, this house sounds like a nightmare (also my personal nightmare). People are so unpredictable, and you just don't know what they are going to do when you scare the hell out of them. I commend the people who try this haunted house out, especially those who make it all the way to the end, but I won't be visiting Vegas to hit the R-rated haunted house any time soon.
This sounds absolutely terrifying. I think what they have tried to do is something extremely difficult, because the balance that they are required to strike within their audience is sitting on a very fine line. How can someone be that terrified and still happy? The actors, then, have a very large responsibility to scare the patrons without pushing them too far. Without the security blanket of no physical contact, the introduction of a safe word that they mention in the article is extremely important to helping them strike this balance: patrons accept going in that their security blanket is extremely small and that they are stepping up for a serious challenge. But maybe that is what makes it fun, and is what has given this haunted house such success- it's like passing a test of courage to get through.
One of the few reasons I’ve been to a few haunted houses has been partly the fact I’ve gone with friends. The other is I know they won’t touch me. This R Rated haunted house brings about a whole new level of terrifying. I know it isn’t just me that wouldn’t be scared out of my wits. It definitely adds a whole new level of difficulty and accomplishing the task of making it through the haunted house without doing a number in your pants. There becomes the action and reaction of letting in those fears that surround you, and making them come to life. It’s no easy thing to have your fear become a reality. We have all seen the Jason movies, and Scream, and every other horror movie that gives us nightmares. No reason why we shouldn’t want to experience that kind of horror for ourselves. The only way that something like this can be successful as it is, is if the timing of the actor portraying the various characters are on point, if not the experience won’t be as scary as it could be.
Talk about what only happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. It seems that anything in Vegas most go over and beyond the expectation of what everyone is used to or wants to see. Spectacle are a huge part of the Vegas entertainment lifestyle and I'm not the biggest fan of that, but it is expected for that area in the United States. However, I do like the idea of creating a space where no one can escape. Now, obviously you won't be trapped forever, but it seems like the concept is like inception, where the maze is so complicated that it feels like there is no way out. I hope I can experience one of those houses soon since this weekend is Halloween. I love horror/thriller genre and I want to be terrified this Halloween. Maybe I can find something like this house, but sadly it won't be Vegas.
Post a Comment