This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. It needs additional citations for verification. Tagged since February 2009. It may need to be rewritten entirely to comply with Wikipedia's quality standards. Tagged since April 2012. It may contain original research. Tagged since May 2011. Its tone or style may not reflect the formal tone used on Wikipedia. Tagged since April 2011.

A cult film, also commonly referred to as a cult classic, is a film that has acquired a cult following with a specific group of fans.^[1] Often, cult movies have failed to achieve fame outside the small fanbases; however, there have been exceptions that have managed to gain fame among mainstream audiences. Many cult movies have gone on to transcend their original cult status and have become recognized as classics; others are of the "so bad it's good" variety and are destined to remain in obscurity. Cult films often become the source of a thriving, obsessive, and elaborate subculture of fandom, hence the analogy to cults. However, not every film with a devoted fanbase is necessarily a cult film. Usually, cult films have limited but very special, noted appeal. Cult films are often known to be eccentric, often do not follow traditional standards of mainstream cinema and usually explore topics not considered in any way mainstream—yet there are examples that are relatively normal. Many are often considered controversial because they step outside standard narrative and technical conventions.^[2]

General overview[link]

A cult film is a movie that attracts a devoted group of followers or obsessive fans, often despite having failed commercially on its initial release. The term also describes films that have remained popular over a long period of time amongst a small group of followers. Although they may only have a short cinema life, cult films often enjoy ongoing popularity through long runs on video, thus being issued in video "runs" with more copies than other movies. The movie Office Space (1999), which lost money during its box office run, managed to turn significant profits when word-of-mouth made it a popular video rental and purchase. Harold and Maude (1971) was not successful financially at the time of its original release, but has since earned a cult following and has become successful following its video and DVD releases. Many cult films were independent films and were not expected by their creators to have mainstream success. Sometimes the audience response to a cult film is somewhat different than what was intended by the film makers. Cult films usually offer something different or innovative in comparison to mainstream films, but cult films can also be popular across a wide audience.

A film can be both a major studio release and a cult film, particularly if despite its affiliation with a major studio, it failed to achieve broad success on either the theatrical or home video markets but was championed by a small number of dedicated film fanatics who seek out lesser-known offerings. It is also true that the content of certain films (such as dark subjects, alienation, transgressive content, or other controversial subject matter) can also decide whether or not a film is a "cult film", regardless of the film's budget or studio affiliations. An example may be Paul Verhoeven's big budgeted, highly sexualized Showgirls (1995), initially intended to be a drama film about the rise of a Las Vegas stripper, that flopped both critically and commercially when released theatrically; afterward, it enjoyed success on the home video market, generating more than $100 million from video rentals.^[4] Today, it is a favorite of gay audiences and audiences in general have considered it to be a comedy thanks to frequent midnight movie showings. According to activist writer Naomi Klein, ironic enjoyment of the film initially arose among those with the video before MGM, the film's chief marketer, capitalized on the idea. MGM noticed the video was performing all right, since "trendy twenty-somethings were throwing Showgirls irony parties, laughing sardonically at the implausibly poor screenplay and shrieking with horror at the aerobic sexual encounters."^[5]

History[link]

1959 to 1970s[link]

Plan 9 from Outer Space (1959) and other films by Edward D. Wood, Jr. were considered cult classics,^[6] attracting devotees who reveled in his incompetence. Other low-budget science fiction and horror films of the 1950s (for example Robot Monster), along with exploitation films of the 1930s, which resurfaced in the home video market of the 1980s (including the infamous Reefer Madness), were accorded that status.

The low budget horror film Night of the Living Dead (1968) directed by George A. Romero earned moderate box office takings but was critically polarized at the time. However, the culture of Vietnam-era United States had a tremendous impact on the film and the film was given a cult status^{[by whom?]} after playing frequently at midnight movie circuits. It is so thoroughly laden with critiques of late-1960s American society that one historian described the film as "subversive on many levels."^[7] While not the first zombie film made, Night of the Living Dead influenced countless films and is perhaps the defining influence on the modern pop-culture zombie archetype.^[8] The film is the first of six Dead films (completed or pending) directed by Romero.

John Waters' Pink Flamingos (1972), was wildly controversial (being an exercise in "poor taste") featuring incest and coprophagia, became the best known of a group of campy midnight films focusing on sexual perversions and fetishism.^[9] Filmed on weekends in Waters's hometown of Baltimore, with a mile-long extension cord as a power conduit, it was also crucial in inspiring the growth of the independent film movement.^[10] In 1973, the Elgin Theater started midnight screenings of both Pink Flamingos and a crime drama from Jamaica with a remarkable soundtrack. In its mainstream release, The Harder They Come (1972) had been a flop, panned by critics after its U.S. distributor, Roger Corman's New World Pictures, marketed it as a blaxploitation picture. Re-released as a midnight film, it screened around the country for six years, helping spur the popularity of reggae in the United States. While the midnight-movie potential of certain films was recognized only some time after they opened, a number during this period were distributed to take advantage of the market from the beginning—in 1973, for instance, Broken Goddess, Dragula, The White Whore and the Bit Player, and Elevator Girls in Bondage (as well as Pink Flamingos) had their New York premieres at midnight screenings.^[11] In 1974, midnight opener Flesh Gordon evidenced how the phenomenon lent itself to flirtations with pornography. Films within the genre may include being drawn from real-life events.

The picture, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, satirizes conventions of science fiction and horror films, and includes elements of transvestism, incest and homosexuality – all within the context of a musical film. The film received little critical attention or mainstream cinema exhibition when first released in 1975, but built up a base of fans who repeatedly showed up at midnight screenings at inexpensive neighborhood cinemas, dressed in costume and "participating" in the film by doing such things as throwing rice during its wedding scene.^[12] In this case, the film intentionally ridiculed its own subject matter, thereby entering into the spirit of sarcastic fun often surrounding the attainment of cult status. Much of the attention has stemmed from the fanbase, rather than the film itself.^[13] Network television, cable television and pay-per-view stations have also changed the nature of cult films. David Lynch's experimental Eraserhead (1977), an example of shoe-string surrealism was a flop both critically and commercially, yet was saved from obscurity thanks to home video in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Comedy films have also been cult classics. In 1979, Steven Spielberg, after two blockbuster hits (Jaws and Close Encounters of the Third Kind), decided to try the comedy genre with 1941, set days after the attack on Pearl Harbor. The film, spoofing popular film genres of the 1940s (and World War II in general), is considered by critics as Spielberg's first flop, although it made a small profit for Columbia Pictures and Universal Studios compared to Spielberg's earlier (and later) blockbuster hits. It gained a cult following after it aired in an extended version on the U.S. ABC network, and years after on Laserdisc and DVD.

1980s to present[link]

The commercial viability of the sort of big-city arthouses that launched outsider pictures for the midnight movie circuit began to decline in the late 1970s as broad social and economic shifts weakened their countercultural base. Leading midnight movie venues were beginning to fold as early as 1977 – that year, New York's Bijou switched back permanently to the live entertainment for which it had been built, and the Elgin, after a brief run with gay porn, shut down completely.^[14] In succeeding years, the popularization of the VCR and the expansion of movie-viewing possibilities on cable television meant the death of many additional independent theaters, which as a result, developed a stream of newer cult films. Possibly the first of these was the biographical Mommie Dearest (1981), which details the life of Joan Crawford and her alleged abusive relationship with her adopted daughter. The over-acting by Faye Dunaway as Crawford gave the film a campy tone, and critics were very negative towards the film. While Dunaway garnered some critical acclaim for her astonishing physical metamorphosis and her portrayal of Crawford (finishing a narrow second in the voting for the New York Film Critics Circle Awards for Best Actress of the Year), she also received a Razzie Award for Worst Actress and caused considerable damage to her career. It did manage to develop a cult classic status, especially with gay audiences and became famous for Dunaway's emphasis on the line "No wire hangers, ever!", when urging her daughter not to use them in her closet.

While Rocky Horror soldiered on, by then a phenomenon unto itself, and new films like The Warriors (1979), The Gods Must Be Crazy (1980), The Evil Dead (1981), Heavy Metal (1981), and Pink Floyd The Wall (1982)—all from mainstream distributors—were picked up by the midnight movie circuit, the core of exhibitors that energized the movement was disappearing. Ridley Scott's Blade Runner (1982) was financially unsuccessful upon its initial release. The film was, however, re-released in 1992 and achieved cult status. It has since become a leading example of the science fiction genre.

In 1984, The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension, starring Peter Weller as Buckaroo Banzai, whose latest experiment opens the door to the 8th dimension and unwittingly starts an interstellar battle for the world. Directed by W.D. Richter the film has since received cult status. Entertainment Weekly ranked Buckaroo Banzai as No.43 in their Top 50 Cult Movies.^[15]

Also in 1984, Dino De Laurentiis released Dune, based on Frank Herbert's best-selling sci-fi novel. Directed by David Lynch, the film was a big-budget flop, partially because the movie had already been edited from an intended three-to-four hours to 137 minutes, leaving the story incomprehensible. Knowing that a great deal of footage had been deleted, Universal Studios took it upon themselves to release a longer version for syndicated television and thereby, return some of the cohesiveness to the story. Thus, Dune became a cult classic, albeit too late, as David Lynch had removed his name from the credits of the television cut. Both major versions have been successful thanks to a recent DVD release.

1985 saw the making of two Arnon Milchan films that were, like Dune before it, substantially altered by Universal Studios in an attempt to find a mainstream audience. Terry Gilliam's Brazil (1985), a dystopian science fiction film about a man's relationship with the woman of his dreams became a huge failure (largely because of the difficulties involved in marketing the film), yet was critically acclaimed and subsequently revitalized by video releases. Then, by the time Legend, directed by Ridley Scott, opened in European theatres, it had already been edited by 20 minutes by Universal. Having failed at the U.K. box office, it was further edited by five minutes for U.S. release a year later and Jerry Goldsmith's original orchestral score replaced by a rock score by Tangerine Dream. Interest in the missing footage and score helped to build the film's cult status, which paid off when in 2002, DVD audiences finally saw Legend in a version closer to director Scott's intent.

A year later, David Lynch's highly influential neo-noir thriller Blue Velvet (1986), having initially failed at the box office (because of its limited release in theatres), was revitalized with video releases in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The film became hugely controversial and well-known because of its bizarre, often graphic depiction of small town America and male–female relationships featuring a psychotic Dennis Hopper and his drug-fueled sexual relationship with Dorothy Vallens, played by Isabella Rossellini. Lynch continued his career with various other cult films: Wild at Heart (1990), Lost Highway (1997) and the critically acclaimed Mulholland Dr. (2001) as well as his short lived cult phenomenon television series Twin Peaks (1990–91), and its subsequent movie adaptation: Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me (1992). Another cult item is the Jim Jarmusch film from 1989 Mystery Train, which includes Joe Strummer and Tom Waits.

Alan Parker's hybrid mystery/horror film, Angel Heart (1987), starring Mickey Rourke and Robert De Niro, fared poorly at the box office, only just breaking even.^[16] Despite this, the film became a hit once released on VHS, and has become a cult classic since, known for its spooky tone, Michael Seresin's cinematography, the sad and spooky score by Trevor Jones, and an unusual but effective blend of genres. Two of the movie's producers, Andrew G. Vajna and Mario Kassar, also produced the cult film Jacob's Ladder which had a similar narrative structure, as well as a 'twist' ending.

Michael Lehmann's satirical teenage comedy Heathers (1989), starring Winona Ryder and Christian Slater, was intended to take on the John Hughes teenage films (The Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles) and give them a much darker, realistic and comedic approach. However, the film was a failure at the box office (mainly because of its limited release). Despite this, it was hugely popular on VHS in the early 1990s and launched cutting-edge dialogue spoken by its characters ('What's your damage?', 'I love my dead, gay son!') into mainstream popular culture. In 1993, the comedy horror Army of Darkness, a sequel to the Evil Dead series, was released. The movie had a considerably higher budget than the prior two Evil Dead films. The budget was estimated to be around $11 million; while Evil Dead II had a budget of $3.5 million and The Evil Dead a budget of $350,000. At the box office, Army of Darkness was not a big success as hoped, only grossing $11,501,093 domestically. After its video release, however, it obtained a cult following, along with the other two films in the trilogy. One of the most successful of the 1990s generation of cult films was the Australian drag queen road saga The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (1994). One of the theaters to show it regularly at midnight was New York's Waverly (also now closed), where Rocky Horror had played for a house record ninety-five weeks. Writer/director Todd Solondz, a favorite cult director, had his first major success with the black comedy Welcome to the Dollhouse (1995), a brutally-honest look at the persecution of a young junior high student by her classmates. His next film was the challenging, controversial dark comedy of sex and perversion in American suburbia—titled Happiness (1998). The Big Lebowski (1998) was a flop on its initial release, yet became a cult classic and has been called "the first cult film of the Internet era."^[17] Disney's Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001) had a disappointing box office performance but is considered to be a "cult favorite" because of its unique art and animation style inspired by comic book artist Mike Mignola.^[18]

Older films are also popular on the circuit, appreciated largely in an imposed camp fashion—a midnight movie tradition that goes back to the 1972 revival of the hectoring anti-drug movie Reefer Madness (1938).^[19] (Tod Browning's 1932 horror classic Freaks, the original midnight movie revival, is both too dark and too sociologically acute to readily consume as camp.) Where the irony with which Reefer Madness was adopted as a midnight favorite had its roots in a countercultural sensibility, in the latter's place there is now the paradoxical element of nostalgia: the leading revivals currently on the circuit ironically include clearly non-cult films like John Hughes oeuvre—The Breakfast Club (1985), Pretty in Pink (1986), and Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986), which were major studio productions and popular and financially successful during their original releases, and the teen adventure film The Goonies (1985).^[20]

Cult films within a particular culture[link]

Occasionally, a film can become the object of a cult following within a particular region or culture if it has some unusual significance to that region or culture. An example is the cult status of British comedic actor Norman Wisdom's films in Albania. Wisdom's films, in which he usually played a family man worker who outsmarts his boss, were some of the few Western films considered acceptable by the country's communist rulers, thus Albanians grew familiar and attached to Wisdom. Curiously, he and his films are now acquiring nostalgic cult status in Britain. Another example is the place of The Wizard of Oz (1939) in American and British gay culture, although a widely viewed and historically important film in greater American culture. Some gay men refer to themselves as "friends of Dorothy". Singin' in the Rain is another film adopted by American gay culture which used to regularly be shown during the 1980s and early 1990s for extended runs. Slaves of New York, Can't Stop the Music, and A Night in Heaven have also found a cult audience in the gay community.

In the world of anime, the MTV spoof series Ultracity 6060 created by Beavis and Butt-head animator Mike Judge has become a hard-to-acquire cult classic among American anime fans. Judge's gory send-up When Animated Animals Attack is also a cult hit among animation festival fans in North America, as are the works of Don Hertzfeldt (Billy's Balloon, Rejected, The Meaning of Life) and Robert Smigel.

The 1938 anti-marijuana propaganda film Reefer Madness has become a cult film within the stoner subculture due to its humorously sensationalized, outdated, and inaccurate descriptions of the effects of marijuana. 20th Century Fox and Legend Films released a colorized version of the film on DVD on April 20, 2004, a reference to its ironic appeal (see 420 (cannabis culture)). The World War II-era Department of Agriculture film Hemp for Victory, encouraging the growing of hemp for war uses, has achieved a similar cult status. Entry-level IT workers and white-collar American workers alike have given Mike Judge's 1999 comedy film Office Space a cult following because of its heroic portrayal of ordinary office employees who become fed up with their jobs. Belgian cult films Man Bites Dog with Benoit Poelvoorde and Camping Cosmos starring cult figures like Lolo Ferrari, Noël Godin, and Arno Hintjens, are an element of the Belgian visual landscape.

So-bad-they're-good cult films and camp classics[link]

Many films enjoy cult status because they may be seen as ridiculously awful, for example Plan 9 from Outer Space (1958) or The Room (2003). The critic Michael Medved characterized examples of the "so bad it's good" class of low-budget cult film through books such as The Golden Turkey Awards. These films include such financially fruitless and critically scorned films, such as Showgirls, The Lonely Lady, Mommie Dearest, Cool as Ice, Boxing Helena, Manos: The Hands of Fate, North, The Wicker Man, Fatal Deviation, Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2, and Troll 2, which have become inadvertent comedies to film buffs. Movies have even achieved cult status by successfully imitating the awfulnesses of so-bad-it's-good movies (The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra and Amazon Women on the Moon being just two examples).

In other cases, little-known or forgotten films from the past are revived as cult films, largely because they may be considered goofy and senseless by modern standards, with laughable special effects and corny plotlines. These include Hobgoblins, Maximum Overdrive, Howard the Duck, Breakin', The Beastmaster, Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, The Creeping Terror, Robot Monster, The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies, Attack of the 50 Foot Woman, The Man Who Saves the World and the works of Edward D. Wood, Jr. The Beastmaster is an example of the strange vectors which can lead to cult filmdom, as its reputation stems as much from ubiquitous cable-TV overplay as anything in the film itself.^{[citation needed]}

These films should not be confused with comedic cult movies like The Toxic Avenger, Bad Taste, Army of Darkness, Murder By Death, Spaceballs, and the films of John Waters, which purposely utilize elements from films "so bad they're good" for comedic effect. This may be seen as related to the artistic style known as "camp".

See also[link]

• B-movie
• List of cult films
• Underground film
• Cinema Insomnia
• Sleeper hit

References[link]

This article gives a general cultural account of "cult". For its usage in the original sense of "veneration" or "religious practice", see Cult (religious practice). For its use in a scientific, sociological context see New religious movement. For other uses, see Cult (disambiguation).

The word cult in current popular usage usually refers to a new religious movement or other group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre.^[1] The word originally denoted a system of ritual practices. The word was first used in the early 17th century denoting homage paid to a divinity and derived from the French culte or Latin cultus, ‘worship’, from cult-, ‘inhabited, cultivated, worshipped,’ from the verb colere, 'care, cultivation'.^{[citation needed]}

In the 1930s cults became the object of sociological study in the context of the study of religious behavior. They have been criticized by mainstream Christians for their unorthodox beliefs.^{[citation needed]} In the 1970s the anticult movement arose, partly motivated by acts of violence and other crimes committed by members of some cults (notably the Manson Family and People's Temple). Some of the claims of the anticult movement have been disputed by other scholars, leading to further controversies.

Government reaction to cults has also led to controversy. Cults have also been featured in popular culture.

Origin[link]

Origins in sociology[link]

The concept of "cult" was introduced into sociological classification in 1932 by American sociologist Howard P. Becker as an expansion of German theologian Ernst Troeltsch's church-sect typology. Troeltsch's aim was to distinguish between three main types of religious behavior: churchly, sectarian and mystical. Becker created four categories out of Troeltsch's first two by splitting church into "ecclesia" and "denomination", and sect into "sect" and "cult".^[2] Like Troeltsch's "mystical religion", Becker's cults were small religious groups lacking in organization and emphasizing the private nature of personal beliefs.^[3] Later formulations built on these characteristics while placing an additional emphasis on cults as deviant religious groups "deriving their inspiration from outside of the predominant religious culture".^[4] This deviation is often thought to lead to a high degree of tension between the group and the more mainstream culture surrounding it, a characteristic shared with religious sects.^[5] Sociologists still maintain that unlike sects, which are products of religious schism and therefore maintain a continuity with traditional beliefs and practices, "cults" arise spontaneously around novel beliefs and practices.^[6]

Popularizing the word: Anti-cult movements and their impact[link]

In the 1940s, the long held opposition by some established Christian denominations to non-Christian religions or/and supposedly heretical, or counterfeit, pseudo-Christian sects crystallized into a more organized "Christian countercult movement" in the United States (using a doctrinal definition comparing the essential doctrines of established, Bible-based Christianity with the other groups deemed heretical). For those belonging to the movement, all religious groups claiming to be Christian, but deemed outside of Christian orthodoxy, were considered "cults".^[7] As more foreign religious traditions found their way into the United States, the religious movements they brought with them attracted even fiercer resistance. This was especially true for movements incorporating mystical or exotic new beliefs and those with charismatic, authoritarian leaders. They widened their scope to also critique (from a Bible-based, traditional Christian perspective) world religions and the occult, including the eclectic New Age Movement.

In the early 1970s, a secular opposition movement to "cult" groups had taken shape. The organizations that formed the secular "Anti-cult movement" (ACM) often acted on behalf of relatives of "cult" converts who did not believe their loved ones could have altered their lives so drastically by their own free will. A few psychologists and sociologists working in this field lent credibility to their disbelief by suggesting that "brainwashing techniques" were used to maintain the loyalty of "cult" members.^[8] The belief that cults "brainwashed" their members became a unifying theme among cult critics and in the more extreme corners of the Anti-cult movement techniques like the sometimes forceful "deprogramming" of "cult members" becoming standard practice.^[9]

In the meantime, a handful of high profile crimes were committed by groups identified as cults, or by the groups' leaders. The mass suicides committed by members of the People's Temple in Jonestown, Guyana, and the Manson Family murders are perhaps the most prominent examples in American popular culture. The publicity of these crimes, as amplified by the Anti-cult movement, influenced the popular perception of new religious movements^{[citation needed]}. In the mass media, and among average citizens, "cult" gained an increasingly negative connotation, becoming associated with things like kidnapping, brainwashing, psychological abuse, sexual abuse and other criminal activity, and mass suicide. While most of these negative qualities usually have real documented precedents in the activities of a very small minority of new religious groups, mass culture often extends them to any religious group viewed as culturally deviant, however peaceful or law abiding it may be.^[10][11][12]

In the late 1980s, psychologists and sociologists started to abandon theories like brainwashing and mind-control. While scholars may believe that various less dramatic coercive psychological mechanisms could influence group members, they came to see conversion to new religious movements principally as an act of a rational choice.^[13][14] Most sociologists and scholars of religion also began to reject the word "cult" altogether because of its negative connotations in mass culture. Some began to advocate the use of new terms like "new religious movement", "alternative religion" or "novel religion" to describe most of the groups that had come to be referred to as "cults",^[15] yet none of these terms have had much success in popular culture or in the media. Other scholars have pushed to redeem the word as one fit for neutral academic discourse,^[16] while researchers aligned with the Anti-cult movement have attempted to reduce the negative connotations being associated with all such groups by classifying only some as "destructive cults".

The study of cults[link]

While most scholars no longer refer to any new religious movements as cults, some sociologists still favor retaining the word as it was used in church-sect typologies. For this value-neutral use of the word, please refer to new religious movements. Other scholars and non-academic researchers who use the word do so from explicitly critical perspectives which focus on the relationship between cult groups and the individual people who join them. These perspectives share the assumption that some form of coercive persuasion or mind control is used to recruit and maintain members by suppressing their ability to reason, think critically, and make choices in their own best interest. However, most social scientists believe that mind control theories have no scientific merit in relation to religious movements.

Mind control[link]

Studies have identified a number of key steps in coercive persuasion:^[17][18]

1. People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations;
2. Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;
3. They receive what seems to be unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader or group;
4. They get a new identity based on the group;
5. They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives and the mainstream culture) and their access to information is severely controlled.^[19]

This view is disputed by scholars such as James Gene^[20] and Bette Nove Evans.^[21] Society for the Scientific Study of Religion^[22] stated in 1990 that there was not sufficient research to permit a consensus on the matter and that "one should not automatically equate the techniques involved in the process of physical coercion and control with those of nonphysical coercion and control".

Potential for harm[link]

In the opinion of Benjamin Zablacki, a professor of Sociology at Rutgers University, groups that have been characterized as cults are at high risk of becoming abusive to members. He states that this is in part due to members' adulation of charismatic leaders contributing to the leaders becoming corrupted by power. Zablocki defines a cult as an ideological organization held together by charismatic relationships and the demand of total commitment.^[23] According to Barrett, the most common accusation made against groups referred to as cults is sexual abuse (See some allegations made by former members). According to Kranenborg, some groups are risky when they advise their members not to use regular medical care.^[24]

Joining[link]

Michael Langone, executive director of the International Cultic Studies Association, gives three different models for conversion. Under Langone's deliberative model, people are said to join cults primarily because of how they view a particular group. Langone notes that this view is most favored among sociologists and religious scholars. Under the "psychodynamic model," popular with some mental health professionals, individuals choose to join for fulfillment of subconscious psychological needs. Finally, the "thought reform model" states that people do not join because of their own psychological needs, but because of the group's influence through forms of psychological manipulation. Langone claims that those mental health experts who have more direct experience with large numbers of cultists tend to favor this latter view.^[25]

Some scholars favor one particular view, or combined elements of each. According to Marc Galanter, Professor of Psychiatry at NYU,^[26] typical reasons why people join cults include a search for community and a spiritual quest. Sociologists Stark and Bainbridge, in discussing the process by which individuals join new religious groups, have even questioned the utility of the concept of conversion, suggesting that affiliation is a more useful concept.^[27]

In the 1960s sociologist John Lofland lived with Unification Church missionary Young Oon Kim and a small group of American church members in California and studied their activities in trying to promote their beliefs and win new members. Lofland noted that most of their efforts were ineffective and that most of the people who joined did so because of personal relationships with other members, often family relationships.^[28] Lofland published his findings in 1964 as a doctorial thesis entitled: "The World Savers: A Field Study of Cult Processes," and in 1966 in book form by Prentice-Hall as Doomsday Cult: A Study of Conversion, Proselytization, and Maintenance of Faith. It is considered to be one of the most important and widely cited studies of the process of religious conversion.^[29][30]

Leaving[link]

There are several ways people leave a cult:^[31][32] Popular authors Conway and Siegelman conducted a survey and published it in the book Snapping regarding after-cult effects and deprogramming and concluded that people deprogrammed had fewer problems than people not deprogrammed. The BBC writes that, "in a survey done by Jill Mytton on 200 former cult members most of them reported problems adjusting to society and about a third would benefit from some counseling".^[33]

Ronald Burks, in a study comparing Group Psychological Abuse Scale (GPA) and Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) scores in 132 former members of cults and cultic relationships, found a positive correlation between intensity of reform environment as measured by the GPA and cognitive impairment as measured by the NIS. Additional findings were a reduced earning potential in view of the education level that corroborates earlier studies of cult critics (Martin 1993; Singer & Ofshe, 1990; West & Martin, 1994) and significant levels of depression and dissociation agreeing with Conway & Siegelman, (1982), Lewis & Bromley, (1987) and Martin, et al. (1992).^[34]

Sociologists Bromley and Hadden note a lack of empirical support for claimed consequences of having been a member of a "cult" or "sect", and substantial empirical evidence against it. These include the fact that the overwhelming proportion of people who get involved in NRMs leave, most short of two years; the overwhelming proportion of people who leave do so of their own volition; and that two-thirds (67%) felt "wiser for the experience."^[35]

According to F. Derks and J. van der Lans, there is no uniform post-cult trauma. While psychological and social problems upon resignation are not uncommon, their character and intensity are greatly dependent on the personal history and on the traits of the ex-member, and on the reasons for and way of resignation.^[36]

The report of the "Swedish Government's Commission on New Religious Movements" (1998) states that the great majority of members of new religious movements derive positive experiences from their subscription to ideas or doctrines which correspond to their personal needs, and that withdrawal from these movements is usually quite undramatic, as these people leave feeling enriched by a predominantly positive experience. Although the report describes that there are a small number of withdrawals that require support (100 out of 50,000+ people), the report did not recommend that any special resources be established for their rehabilitation, as these cases are very rare.^[37]

Stuart A. Wright explores the distinction between the apostate narrative and the role of the apostate, asserting that the former follows a predictable pattern, in which the apostate utilizes a "captivity narrative" that emphasizes manipulation, entrapment and being victims of "sinister cult practices". These narratives provide a rationale for a "hostage-rescue" motif, in which cults are likened to POW camps and deprogramming as heroic hostage rescue efforts. He also makes a distinction between "leavetakers" and "apostates", asserting that despite the popular literature and lurid media accounts of stories of "rescued or recovering 'ex-cultists'", empirical studies of defectors from NRMs "generally indicate favorable, sympathetic or at the very least mixed responses toward their former group."^[38]

According to the anti-cult movement[link]

Secular cult opponents like those belonging to the anti-cult movement tend to define a "cult" as a group that tends to manipulate, exploit, and control its members. Specific factors in cult behavior are said to include manipulative and authoritarian mind control over members, communal and totalistic organization, aggressive proselytizing, systematic programs of indoctrination, and perpetuation in middle-class communities.^[39]

While acknowledging the issue of multiple definitions of the word,^[40] Michael Langone states that: "Cults are groups that often exploit members psychologically and/or financially, typically by making members comply with leadership's demands through certain types of psychological manipulation, popularly called mind control, and through the inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the group and its leaders."^[41] A similar definition is given by Louis Jolyon West:

"A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea or thing and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation from former friends and family, debilitation, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc.) designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community."^[42]

In each, the focus tends to be on the specific tactics of conversion, the negative impact on individual members, and the difficulty in leaving once indoctrination has occurred.^[43]

Criticism by former members[link]

See also: Apostasy: Other religious movements and Anti-cult movement: Former members

The role of former members, or "apostates," has been widely studied by social scientists. At times, these individuals become outspoken public critics of the groups they leave. Their motivations, the roles they play in the anti-cult movement, the validity of their testimony, and the kinds of narratives they construct, are controversial. Some scholars like David G. Bromley, Anson Shupe, and Brian R. Wilson have challenged the validity of the testimonies presented by critical former members. Wilson discusses the use of the atrocity story that is rehearsed by the apostate to explain how, by manipulation, coercion, or deceit, he was recruited to a group that he now condemns.^[44] The hostile ex-members would invariably shade the truth and blow out of proportion minor incidents, turning them into major incidents.^[45]

Stigmatization and discrimination[link]

Because of the increasingly pejorative use of the words "cult" and "cult leader" since the cult debate of the 1970s, some scholars, in addition to groups referred to as cults, argue that these are words to be avoided.^[46][47]

Catherine Wessinger (Loyola University New Orleans) has stated that the word "cult" represents just as much prejudice and antagonism as racial slurs or derogatory words for women and homosexuals.^[48] She has argued that it is important for people to become aware of the bigotry conveyed by the word, drawing attention to the way it dehumanises the group's members and their children.^[48] Labeling a group as subhuman, she says, becomes a justification for violence against it.^[48] At the same time, she adds, labeling a group a "cult" makes people feel safe, because the "violence associated with religion is split off from conventional religions, projected onto others, and imagined to involve only aberrant groups."^[48] This fails to take into account that child abuse, sexual abuse, financial extortion and warfare have also been committed by believers of mainstream religions, but the pejorative "cult" stereotype makes it easier to avoid confronting this uncomfortable fact.^[48]