Interview With Insidious Chapter 3 Director Leigh Whannell
Insidious Director Leigh Whannell Shares the Secret to Scaring People
The June 5 release of Insidious: Chapter 3 is just around the corner, and we're expecting more terror than ever before. This time around, you can experience the horror yourself with the Insidious: Into The Further 4D Virtual Reality Experience, which is a free, immersive adventure that will put you right in the action. The thrilling experience — which we witnessed first-hand, and let's just say it's pretty freaky — will be touring across the nation up until the film's release. The teasers for the prequel show the origins of "The Further," aka the spirit realm that plays a key role in the first two films. We recently sat down with the film's director, Leigh Whannell, who also wrote all three installments and created the infamous Saw franchise. Keep reading to see what he had to say about the latest addition, and get excited for all the other horror movies on the horizon.
POPSUGAR: Insidious: Chapter 3 is a prequel, but the main character has a lot in common with Allison, the girl in a wheelchair whom we meet at the end of Chapter 2. Is there any connection between the two? Are they dealing with the same entity?
Leigh Whannell: This film is not connected to the end of part two. There are some similarities, as you point out, with the main characters . . . you know, the wheelchair and everything. It's almost like this film is the consolation prize for those who really want to know what happened at the end of Chapter 2. I always say to people, any disappointment that one might have about Chapter 2 will instantly evaporate when they see Lin Shaye on screen. She's not a ghost, she's not dead, she's alive. And she's such a great actress. She really puts on a great performance in this one.
PS: Was there a scene you had to cut to preserve the PG-13 rating?
LW: There was something involving a leash. I won't give you any specific details, but it involved someone on a leash. I was looking at it kind of like, "Hmmm . . . that might stray a little far into BDSM stuff for PG-13." So, that was probably the only one I had to cut against my better judgment. But, I am almost surprised with what we get away with because, the film has a real violence to it. The atmosphere is really dreadful, so I was happy we got to do that within the confines of that rating.
![PS: Totally fair. So, you've been doing this horror thing for a decade now. A little more, in fact. What's the secret to scaring people?
LW: I actually think the secret to scaring people is all in the buildup. A lot of people think a burst of violence or [jump scares] . . . that's where the scare lies. And that might be the payoff, but I think it's got to come after a long, drawn-out moment. You know, it's like a roller coaster going up. The reason it's so creepy is because you hear the . . . [impression of a roller coaster escalating]. So, I actually think the secret is in the long buildup, and the more you can draw it out.
PS: And what separates a crappy horror movie from a great one?
LW: Wow! OK, so, do we have an hour to talk about this? Essentially, the difference between a crappy horror film and great one is really, first and foremost, personal taste. I can argue all day with a horror fan about whether a film is underrated or not. What I think is missing from horror films is people taking them really seriously. People talk about that "golden age" of the '70s, where big directors took horror films very seriously. If you look at The Exorcist, William Friedkin is treating that like a documentary. I would love to see that come back in horror. I would love to see some bigger directors not be afraid of this genre, and this sort of gateway genre that they can't touch. Can you imagine Christopher Nolan making a horror film? You just wouldn't hear of it now. But I think in the '70s, he may have. I would have loved to see that. I just think, for up-and-coming directors, just take it really seriously. Because, the minute you don't, it's going to be crappy.](https://media1.popsugar-assets.com/files/thumbor/t_g1MzNJhtBgLE3ymrTKnrn_iSo/fit-in/1024x1024/filters:format_auto-!!-:strip_icc-!!-/2015/04/23/934/n/1922283/65c25dc5c2ebd4fa_4092_D10_03110_R_CROP1427739444/i/PS-Totally-fair-So-youve-been-doing-horror-thing.jpg "PS: Totally fair. So, you've been doing this horror thing for a decade now. A little more, in fact. What's the secret to scaring people?
LW: I actually think the secret to scaring people is all in the buildup. A lot of people think a burst of violence or [jump scares] . . . that's where the scare lies. And that might be the payoff, but I think it's got to come after a long, drawn-out moment. You know, it's like a roller coaster going up. The reason it's so creepy is because you hear the . . . [impression of a roller coaster escalating]. So, I actually think the secret is in the long buildup, and the more you can draw it out.
PS: And what separates a crappy horror movie from a great one?
LW: Wow! OK, so, do we have an hour to talk about this? Essentially, the difference between a crappy horror film and great one is really, first and foremost, personal taste. I can argue all day with a horror fan about whether a film is underrated or not. What I think is missing from horror films is people taking them really seriously. People talk about that \"golden age\" of the '70s, where big directors took horror films very seriously. If you look at The Exorcist, William Friedkin is treating that like a documentary. I would love to see that come back in horror. I would love to see some bigger directors not be afraid of this genre, and this sort of gateway genre that they can't touch. Can you imagine Christopher Nolan making a horror film? You just wouldn't hear of it now. But I think in the '70s, he may have. I would have loved to see that. I just think, for up-and-coming directors, just take it really seriously. Because, the minute you don't, it's going to be crappy.")
