Cinema of Cruelty in Streaming Platforms: Eroticized Perversity in Chernobyl and Years and Years

What is this article about?

This article explores how the cinema of cruelty, originally moralist and subversive, has been transformed into an abject aesthetic in streaming-era TV series. Authors Fernández-Rodríguez, Romero-Rodríguez, and Puebla analyze Chernobyl and Years and Years to reveal how violence, pain, and pessimism are now stylized and commodified for mass consumption.

Why is it important?

This article explains that contemporary prestige series embrace pornography of horror and abjection, detaching cruelty from moral reflection. Instead of denouncing injustice, many streaming narratives use it as a tool for emotional shock and viewer retention, shaping a new entertainment standard based on nihilistic immersion.

Key Findings

1. Moral cinema becomes abject spectacle

• The original moralist vision of cruelty (Bazin, Daney) has shifted into visceral entertainment.

• Series aesthetics blur the line between denunciation and emotional provocation.

2. Streaming redefines cruelty as immersive

• Platforms like HBO employ slow motion, close-ups, and rich color grading to eroticize disaster.

• Both Chernobyl and Years and Years highlight systemic failure through hyper-realistic suffering.

3. Bingeable despair and hopelessness

• Tragic narratives are packaged for aesthetic consumption, feeding a dystopian demand.

• Audiences consume cruelty passively, distanced from real-world consequences.

Case Study Highlights

Years and Years (BBC/HBO, 2019)

• Depicts a dystopian UK society collapsing under political extremism and tech obsession.

• Uses moralizing speeches and fourth-wall breaks to simulate social critique.

• Concludes with transhumanist escapism: abandoning the human for the machine.

Chernobyl (HBO, 2019)

• Recounts the 1986 nuclear disaster with dramatic precision and poetic visual horror.

• Scenes like “The Bridge of Death” and animal executions exemplify hyper-stylized cruelty.

• Despite real events, the series aestheticizes trauma, minimizing historical context.

Theoretical Context

• Rivette and Daney warned against abjection in cinema: violence without ethics.

• Bazin’s cinema of cruelty was subversive and humanistic; now it’s often nihilistic and decorative.

• The article coins the concept of “mainstream canon of cruelty” for bingeable despair.

FAQs

Q: What is the pornography of horror?
A: It refers to the excessive and aestheticized portrayal of suffering, used to entertain rather than to provoke ethical reflection.

Q: Do these series have a moral purpose?
A: They claim to—but often, aesthetic spectacle overshadows ethical messages.

Q: What’s wrong with representing cruelty artistically?
A: When cruelty is divorced from context or critique, it becomes voyeuristic and normalizes despair.

Q: Why does this matter for media studies?
A: Because it reveals how the streaming industry repackages social critique into consumable nihilism, undermining democratic and ethical engagement.