31 Days of Horror: Day 25- Who Can Kill a Child? (1976)

Despite the gruesome creatures, flying limbs and buckets of blood, horror as a genre can feel pretty stale. For every excellent film there is a dozen forgettable or terrible ones. And there are so many that it takes a lot of wading through the rubbish to get to the interesting stuff. For each day in October I’m going to recommend a different horror film or film about horror. For the most part they won’t be the accepted classics. My selections range from the genuinely excellent to the delightfully strange with a few that are more fascinating than they are great. Hopefully there will be something for everyone and you’ll find something new to give you a scare or maybe a laugh. This is my 31 days of Horror and today I’m talking about: Who Can Kill a Child?

As the statement above says, some of the films I’ll be talking about are more interesting than they are good. Not to say that this film is bad in any way, I just think that it’s worth seeing despite several poor qualities. The number of problems I have with the film do not outweigh what the film does well. The film is Narciso Ibanez Serrador’s Who Can Kill a Child?. Killer kids are a staple of horror movies. Films like The Brood, The Children, Spider Baby and Village of the Damned have used murderous children for scares but none quite like this. Most of those films used children because there is something uniquely scary about a seemingly feeble and innocent child being capable of murder. Horror films are all about making people feel uneasy and unsafe so turning a seemingly harmless person into something to fear makes sense. Who Can Kill a Child (from now on I’ll omit the question mark from the title because it looks awkward) takes this idea and treats it a lot more seriously than any of those films. Not only is it frightening to have children be threatening but also it is frightening to find out that you are capable of killing a child. It goes against our nature to hurt children (although the film kind-of argues otherwise), and this film explores what it takes for us to forsake that.

After a lengthy sequence of documentary footage showing the effects of war on children we are introduced to holidaying couple Tom (Lewis Fiander) and Evelyn (Prunella Ransome). Evelyn is pregnant so the two of them decide to get away from the noise of the city. They head out to an island off the Spanish coast known for its beauty and seclusion. There is a small town there and people peppered across it so they won’t be completely alone. When they get there though all they see is children. At first it almost seems completely empty. Shops, homes, and basically everything just look abandoned. It eventually becomes clear that the children have killed the adults of the town. Tom and Evelyn go on the run, but they find the kids cannot be avoided so they will have to fight to survive.

The aforementioned documentary footage makes a good point but does not do it subtly. For about ten straight minutes we are shown footage and statistics from various wars depicting how children are always harmed in conflict. It kind of points out the hypocrisy that will arise later in the film, that the adults’ reluctance to fight back is pretty contradictory since so many actions of adults end up harming children anyway. Every time we decide to go to war it is inevitable that innocent kids will be killed yet these people won’t take the agency to fight back when the kids actually deserve it. We have such apathy towards atrocities far away from us. Out of sight, out of mind. That apathy is exactly what allows these children to commit the evil acts they do. We never learn what causes them to snap but the indifference of their elders definitely seems to be a part of it. What it takes for grown ups to think about the children is when they are violently confronted by them. While this is an interesting point to bring up it is done so ham fistedly. That first ten minutes are not great; it’s a pretty tiresome montage. But it puts these ideas in our head. We know where this film is going and this sequence followed by the slow build up to the horror gives us time to mull over these ideas.

As the film gets started with the actual story there is a long dread-filled build up to the instigating violent act. An almost-empty town is always ominous in this type of film and this one is particularly threatening. Having one of the main characters be pregnant certainly plays a part in this. Who is more vulnerable than an unborn child? Even having her be near these situations is tense. We’re so aware that she won’t exactly be able to run away very effectively. With every fleeting sighting of a kid walking past a window or open door gives an instant burst of fear. Especially when she’s separated from her husband. She is the protector of the baby and he is the protector of her. At the moments where they are together we almost hope the horror starts then. The longer time goes on without the scary stuff happening we become more afraid that it will begin when they’re not prepared to deal with it. In this town run by children these adults have become the most at risk. Not just because of Evelyn’s weakened state and that they are outnumbered but because the act of fighting back is initially repellent. Even though Tom sees one of the most shocking violent acts in the film he still does not want to kill a child. When the horror does start it is incredibly unsettling. Not only do the children have the capability of killing, they do it gleefully. This is all like a big game to them. They are enacting vague revenge on those that have allowed bad things to happen to them but they’re also just having fun. As they swarm around like little happy zombies baying for blood it’s hard not to be scared. Serrador’s somewhat plain visuals aid this. Rather than making any of the violence seem cool or fun (like The Children or whatnot) his camera is just an observer. While it’s not exactly documentary-like it is shot with a chilling realism that enhances the creepiness quite a bit. Violence against children and violence enacted by children is appropriately shocking because of how Serrador portrays it.

From the obnoxiously long opening to periods of stilted tedium, this is a rather flawed film. Beyond those issues though it is a really fascinating film that is effectively sinister and frightening. Some of the duller and less effective moments do make parts of the set-up a drag. But the time they allow for us to think make the pay-off that bit more impactful. Even if that isn’t the case for everyone I think the second half is good enough to forgive the failings of the first half. In the end I definitely look at Who Can Kill a Child as one of the best of the killer-kid subgenre. It is not as fun as The Children or as imaginative as The Brood but it is scarier and more thoughtful. Rather than just using killer kids as a gimmick or something to set the film apart it fully confronts its premise.