By ROB FREESE
Although I was well aware of the Hysteria Lives! website and had read Justin Kerswell’s The Teenage Slasher Movie Book, I somehow didn’t catch up with THE HYSTERIA CONTINUES! podcast until last year. (For any fans of The Teenage Slasher Movie Book, you’ll be happy to know that Kerswell is hard at work on a new book covering the “From Hell” thrillers made between 1987 to 1996.)
A combination of the Hysteria Lives! and co-host Joseph Henson’s forums, The Body Count Continues…, THE HYSTERIA CONTINUES! is comprised of lifelong hack-and-slash fans from around the globe, a perfect melding of slasher devotees from North America and Europe. (Justin is currently in Spain, Erik Threlfall is in Ireland and Joseph Henson and Nathan Johnson are in the southern U.S.)
When I began listening, I was struck by the foursome’s sense of fun and the genuineness with which the co-hosts regarded their subject matter. Among all the stinging barbs, sketchy double entendres, constant teasing and flip insults, there is a real sense of friendship among these scholars of slash that those listening can share. When you’re in the world of The Hysteria Continues, you’re with friends.
THE HYSTERIA CONTINUES! celebrates its fifteenth anniversary in January 2026, and this year, it switched to a vidcast format you can watch on YouTube. In addition to the 340 episodes they have recorded since January 2011, the show has another 255 exclusive Patreon episodes available. Since THE HYSTERIA CONTINUES’ participation in the release of Vinegar Syndrome’s Night Train to Terror (1985) in 2013, the podcast has also provided over 100 commentaries for companies, including Arrow Video, 88 Films and others.
I was beyond excited when THE HYSTERIA CONTINUES’ crew invited me to talk about my slasher book and discuss the intricacies of Stu Segal’s 1976 classic, Drive-in Massacre. When we finished discussing the movie, I was given the opportunity to ask them a couple of slasher-related questions.
What is it about slasher movies that has kept you watching for most of your life?
Justin Kerswell: For me, things have changed. When I was younger, I did seek out more transgressive movies like Maniac (1980) and Necromantik (1988). As I’ve gotten older, though, I’ve kind of gone back to my original love, the films that really set me on the path. The first slasher movie I saw on VHS tape was Friday the 13th (1980). So, I’ve always been looking for something along those lines, all of those films like My Bloody Valentine (1981) that I still love. Part of it now is nostalgia, but I think it’s also the setup of them – the idea of this monster or killer after a group of teenagers and the cat-and-mouse of it. Also, the camaraderie of the characters and the fact that they’re not assholes, unlike in a lot of modern films. You usually get these clichés, very thinly drawn characters, but [in these films] they’re fun. Even the asshole characters are fun. There’s nostalgia watching them, but I think the central setup is like a carnival ride or a roller coaster. That’s what I really enjoy, and it’s something that keeps me coming back.
Erik Threlfall: Yeah, I would agree. A lot of it is nostalgia value for me. My first slasher exposure was Halloween II (1981), which was on Irish television in 1985 on Halloween night. I was really scared by it, terrified. I was 11 years old. I had no frame of reference back then, but I loved Halloween II. It’s still possibly one of my favorite slasher films. I don’t think anything has ever come close to exceeding it. It has huge plot-holes and flaws with its storytelling, but in terms of its scares and suspense, I think it’s top-notch.
“HALLOWEEN II” (1981)
I like the simplicity of the slasher movie. I’ve often equated it to a pop song, which is three minutes of going, “Oh, baby, I love you.” It might not have any kind of depth or resonance, but it’s catchy as hell, and you can listen to it over and over again. I’m much more inclined to go back and watch an ’80s movie than I am to watch a modern one. A lot of the modern ones are trying to put a twist on the slasher because they don’t want to be seen as old hat, but I find I’m more drawn to the ones that are trying to be like the slashers of the late ‘70s and early ‘80s. Even something like Thanksgiving (2023), I thought, was quite effective because it kept to the nuts and bolts of what a slasher movie is. It’s a formula that I like, and I like seeing it repeated ad nauseam, so I was never bothered by this idea that all the Friday the 13th films are the same. I’m like, “Yeah, but that’s the joy of them, that they’re all the same.”
Joseph Henson: I try to look at it from a character standpoint. Critics tend to dump on slasher films because they “don’t have very good characterization,” but I disagree. I think no other genre or sub-genre of movie does for character what slasher films do. Even if they’re not that deeply drawn, if you put them all together, you get a kind of magic you don’t get from other genres. That’s kind of how I got drawn into films, personally, because when you like the characters, it creates suspense when they’re gonna die. If you don’t like the characters, what’s the point? I think that’s what really drew me to them, and that’s what keeps me coming back to them, especially the old ones. I don’t tend to go back to the newer ones because I don’t like the characters. Maybe it’s a generational gap, I don’t know.
Nathan Johnson: I would probably echo what everyone else has said. I can’t remember a time in my life before slasher movies. I’ve been watching them since, I mean – I feel like I was 4 or 5 years old watching slasher movies. I was the only grandchild on my dad’s side of the family, so I was very spoiled. If I wanted to watch slasher movies, I was going to get to watch them. I just always remember loving them. Nostalgia plays a huge part in it for me still; they’ve just been part of my life for so long. This is also coming from somebody who didn’t have any friends growing up. So, the movies were my friends.
JH: Yeah, I didn’t have any friends either, Nathan. I made friends with movies.
NJ: Exactly! Those were my friendships, Friday the 13th and The Slumber Party Massacre (1982).
JK: Well, that’s all really sad because I had loads of friends. I didn’t know I was on a podcast with so many losers.
JH: They only count as friends if they’re alive.
NJ: The corpses in the graveyard don’t count as friends, Justin.
If you were to recommend an ’80s slasher triple feature to someone not familiar with slasher films, what three films would you pick?
“FRIDAY THE 13TH” (1980)
JK: I think, if you’re trying to educate someone, what’s interesting or difficult is that I know with somebody in their 20s, Gen Z – I know from listening to people who have children of that age that they don’t find comedies like Are You Being Served? (1972-1985) funny. They don’t really understand that kind of cruel humor that was part of my growing up. So, it’s interesting to think about how people of that age would get on with these movies. But I would say Friday the 13th, when I saw that movie at a revival screening about twenty years ago with an audience, they treated it as a bit of camp and were laughing at it, but when the violence started, it was quite impactful to the audience. They weren’t expecting it to be quite so violent and quite so gory. So, I think Friday the 13th would be a good one.
“A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET” (1984)
If you couldn’t have the original Halloween (1978), then I agree with Erik that Halloween II is kind of formative. Then, for the third one, although it’s not my favorite franchise, I would say A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984). But it’s not set in stone, and it’s pretty fluid. I’ve got a poster for a double bill of The Funhouse and My Bloody Valentine, and things like that would be fun to recreate for people.
ET: Yeah, I would have chosen two of Justin’s three there, Halloween II and Friday the 13th. To give you some different answers, I would possibly go with My Bloody Valentine in its uncut form. Like Justin, I screened Friday the 13th to friends at a kind of horror-themed party, and Friday the 13th went down like a storm. Prom Night (1980), which was the follow-up film, went down like a lead balloon. I’m thinking that’s because there aren’t the violent shocks in Prom Night like there are in Friday the 13th.
I’m also going to pick Pieces (1982), because I think it is a great example of the high camp that European slasher movies provided in the ‘80s. It also has all the gory highlights that I think would go down well with an audience. For the third one, what would I go for? Maybe The Prowler (1981)? You know what, I would go for A Nightmare on Elm Street Part 3: Dream Warriors (1987), which is effects-tastic. I think it would keep the attention of a Gen Zer.
“PIECES” (1982)
JH: This is very difficult, but if I’m going toward getting someone to like slasher films, I’m gonna go from a character standpoint again. First, I would say if you want to see a large group of characters in a great film get totally terrified, then go with Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981). It has a lot of chase scenes and character camaraderie, and it’s got a finale that’s almost perfect.
Then I would say April Fool’s Day (1986). Not only does that movie have a large cast and good camaraderie, but it also puts a twist on what you expect from a slasher movie. Then I would say, to balance it all out, if you want a movie that’s pretty much perfect on all fronts and has all the characters you could like, all the gore you could want, the mystery and the revelation, I would have to go with My Bloody Valentine.
NJ: Just an honorable mention…
ET: Here we go. Here we go…
JK: Here we go…
NJ: Okay, okay, okay. Honorable mention to my favorite movie of all time, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. But it is ‘74, so it wouldn’t be included in the ’80s list. If you’re going to sit down and watch some slasher movies with me, this is what we’re gonna need to watch: First, we need to watch Friday the 13th Part V (1985), because you’re going to see a lot of slasher deaths – slasher hijinks, as I would call it. We’re gonna follow that up with Don’t Go in the Woods (1981) because it also has a lot of fun slasher kills. It’s fantastic, and it’s never boring. It’s a fun popcorn film. Lastly, we’re gonna follow it up with Nail Gun Massacre (1985), which is also a lot of fun and has a bunch of fun one-liners.
“FRIDAY THE 13TH PART V: A NEW BEGINNING” (1985)
JH: See, you guys, picking three movies is too difficult. I mean, from your standpoint, I can say, yeah, movies you can pick to get somebody into the genre. But now that Nathan is mentioning Friday the 13th Part V and Nail Gun Massacre, I’m like, maybe I want these people to just dive into the deep end of trash.
NJ: I just want them to sit there with me and riff these movies with me.
As slasher fans, I think we all play that fantasy game of “If they asked me to come up with a story for such-and-such, I’d do this.” I don’t think anyone will be surprised if a 50th anniversary Halloween movie is released in a couple of years. What would your story be for a remake, reboot or sequel to any installment in the franchise?
JK: I think the interesting thing about Halloween, and something that I don’t think has really been explored, is the supernatural aspect of Michael Myers’ character. The Michael Myers character is flesh and blood, but also the Boogeyman. So, a sequel has to be floated as “The Ghost of Michael Myers.” Spoiler alert: At the end of Halloween Ends (2022), he’s put through a grinding machine. Having said that, we’re all seasoned enough watchers of slasher movies to know it doesn’t matter what you do to the Boogeyman, you can’t kill him. I’d want something that plays off the resurrection of Michael Myers through some kind of supernatural angle, having a slasher movie with a ghost. I think it would be interesting to take it back to the spirit of Halloween – goblins and witches and all those kinds of things. The Samhain thing.
“HALLOWEEN” (1978)
ET: I kind of agree with Justin about the supernatural angle. I think I’d make it a direct sequel to Halloween II and have Michael resurrected a la Jason in Jason Lives (1986). I would love to see it stripped back to how the first two films were. Scare machines. Halloween 4 (1988) and 5 (1989) got too bogged down with Jamie Lloyd and that type of stuff. For me, the Halloween films don’t need a plot. The joy of Halloween and Halloween II is that they’re scary. I don’t get that vibe from Part 4 onward.
Even remake Halloween if you must, but not in the Rob Zombie fashion. I would have no problem with someone sticking a metal pole into Michael Myers… Justin, stop laughing… And he’s resurrected by a lightning bolt, as long as the film is scary. I’d do a very back-to-basics movie with very little emphasis on trauma and trying to install themes when it’s kind of a franchise that, for me, doesn’t need themes.
Joseph: Three words. MICHAEL. IN. SPACE.
JK: [Groans]
ET: Because it was so successful for Hellraiser, Leprechaun and Critters.
JH: No. My actual idea is that I think they’ve done everything with Halloween. They’ve tried to remake it with Rob Zombie. They’ve tried to recapture that feeling with the recent trilogy. They’ve taken Michael the supernatural route. They put him in a hospital. They’ve resurrected him. My idea: If it’s gonna be the 50th anniversary – and I don’t think they can do this because it’s a lot of cast and crew members that are no longer with us – but I would set it as a 50th-anniversary screening of all the movies and all the cast and crew are there, and there’s a fan who dresses up as the original Michael Myers because he’s upset with a lot of members of the cast and crew, who maybe changed the mask or did things differently. He starts killing off the cast and crew one by one in this huge movie theater. Make it extravagant, kill off some big names like Jamie Lee Curtis and Danielle Harris to up the stakes. Make it suspenseful. Yeah, I’d take that whole meta-approach because Halloween, I don’t think, has done that. That’s the one thing they haven’t done, and that’s the one thing they really have left, honestly. That’s my approach.
NJ: In this one, I’d have Jamie and Laurie Strode retire to a beach, sipping Mai Tais, so they’re safe. Nothing bad will ever happen to them ever again. I guess my idea would follow a much cheesier route than scary because that’s what I love. I would just have Michael get resurrected, and Haddonfield is throwing a humongous carnival, complete with a giant haunted house they built to look like the Meyers’ house. Michael stumbles into this huge carnival and just goes crazy.
ET: Would that be in 3-D, Nathan?
JK: That’s another thing. It needs to be in 3-D because, originally, Debra Hill wanted Halloween II to be in 3-D.
NJ: And they’re gonna throw a knife at a cop, and it’s gonna come out of the screen.
JK: It’s funny, you saying that, because that sparks another idea. What if they take his DNA, and you have a Halloween/Jurassic Park kind of crossover? Halloween Park, where they use the DNA to resurrect Michael Myers, and they have lots of him. So when you go to this park, you have a lot of Michael Myerses. They have a scene where they go on a buggy, and then there are loads of Michael Myerses running through the grass like that scene in Jurassic Park when they see the dinosaurs for the first time. There are so many different ideas, aren’t there?
