From horror cinema to the human body: an off-topic with no brakes

From Freddy Krueger to communal showers: the anatomy of an off-topic

A thread peine in the Guardería (a Spanish forum's off-topic section) has gone from discussing Almodóvar's filmography to debating the evolutionary function of the gluteus maximus. The conversation starts with a statement of intent about cinema, drifts into US politics, moves on to nudity in sports locker rooms, stops at Dragon Ball and ends analyzing the shower scene in *A Nightmare on Elm Street* shot by shot. The off-topic, that genre which consists of having no topic at all, finds its purest form here.

The first paradox is that the starting point was cinema. **The elevator sequence in *The Shining*** is cited as an example of tension without cheap jump scares, and from there the thread becomes a catalogue of preferences and pet peeves. Almodóvar and the Goya Awards (Spain's main film prizes) are dismissed as "the usual clique"; the Oscars, as a gala "with more bow ties and less shame." The recurring diagnosis: awards handed out among buddies while real cinema starves.

From politics to the locker room: how the focus shifts

The thread soon jumps from the screen to current affairs. **Donald Trump** comes up alongside the rejection he provokes in the media, and the conversation gets tangled in a comparison with the Nancy dictator, dismissed as a worn-out trope. The criticism then turns to figures in the Democratic Party, and there the analysis gets cruder: they are accused of hypocrisy and it is claimed that **Obama carried out the most deportations**. These are opinions, not verified facts, and should be read as such.

The strangest turn comes with nudity. The discussion covers why men shower together without a problem but cover up when a woman walks in, describing that behavior as **a male bubble that bursts with female presence**. The conversation leans on the co-ed shower scene in *Starship Troopers*, noting that **Verhoeven got naked himself to direct it** and thus encourage the cast. The reading that prevails: it was not a plea for shared intimacy, but a demonstration of how a militaristic state erases individual modesty.

Dragon Ball, Avatar and the art of spotting the flaws

Anime enters as nostalgic territory. **Dragon Ball** is championed as a masterpiece of adventure in its early stages, while *Super* is dismissed as an attempt to milk the franchise until it bleeds. Self-aware criticism is the dominant tone: they love the work, not the brand. *Avatar* gets similar treatment: Cameron is acknowledged as a craftsman of spectacle, but it is pointed out that, effects aside, the story is "Pocahontas in space."

**Leonardo DiCaprio**'s career is read as a smart commercial move: moving on from *Titanic* and never repeating the romantic formula. And the off-topic even allows itself a digression on the look of smartphones, with a debate over whether a phone is a computer with a touchscreen emulating a telephone. None of this has anything to do with what came before. That, precisely, is the method.

Pavor as the common thread: from Hooper to Craven

The densest part of the thread is devoted to pavor cinema. *The Texas Chain Saw Massacre* is analyzed as a blunt punch inspired by **Ed Gein**, the Wisconsin farmer who also inspired Norman Bates, and the anecdote is mentioned that **Guillermo del Toro became a vegetarian after watching it**. In *Friday the 13th*, **Pamela Voorhees** is championed as the original villain, along with the fact that **Betsy Palmer took the role because she needed to buy a car** and thought the film was garbage.

The main course comes with *A Nightmare on Elm Street*. The shower scene is analyzed in which **Marshall Bell** appears naked without a body double, with body hair, a belly and pimples, and it is interpreted as a shared dream among the characters. The conclusion defended: that real body, far from the gym-catalogue ideal, is what makes the scene hold up over the years. And as a bonus, the fact that **Johnny Depp** was mere eye candy in his first role, and that the image that survives is Freddy's hand rising from the bathtub.

The curiosity about what repels us

The thread closes with a confession: the attraction to films that make you uncomfortable, like *Happiness*, knowing in advance they will leave a bad taste. The diagnosis offered is that it is not masochism, but poorly channeled curiosity. Those who seek out the disturbing knowing its fruta come prepared for the worst.

The conclusion is that the off-topic works like an organism: it has no topic, it has a metabolism. It enters through Kubrick, exits through the anatomy of the gluteus, and along the way leaves an encyclopedic tour of 1970s and 80s pavor cinema. Does anyone remember where it all started?