“The Babadook,” when it was released 10 years ago, didn’t seem to portend a cultural sensation.

It was the first film by a little-known Australian filmmaker, Jennifer Kent. It had that strange name. On opening weekend, it played in two theaters.

But with time, the long shadows of “The Babadook” continued to envelop moviegoers. Its recent rerelease in theaters, a decade later, was less of a reminder of a sleeper 2014 indie hit than it was a chance to revisit a horror milestone that continues to cast a dark spell.

Not many small-budget, first-feature films can be fairly said to have shifted cinema but Kent’s directorial debut may be one of them. It was at the nexus of that much-debated term “elevated horror.” But regardless of that label, it helped kick off a wave of challenging, filmmaker- driven genre movies like “It Follows,” “Get Out” and “Hereditary.”

Kent has watched all of this — and those many “Babadook” memes — unfold over the years with a mix of elation and confusion. Her film was inspired in part by the death of her father, and its horror elements likewise arise out of the suppression of emotions. A single mother (Essie Davis) is struggling with raising her young son (Noah Wiseman) years after the tragic death of her husband. A figure from a pop-up children’s book begins to appear. As things grow more intense, his name is drawn out in three chilling syllables — “Bah-Bah-Doooook” — an incantation of unprocessed grief.

This interview with Kent has been edited for clarity and length.

Q: Given that you didn’t set out to in any way “change” horror, how have you regarded the unique afterlife of “The Babadook”?

A: I’ve always been a lover of horror of all kinds. It’s a tradition that dates back to the beginning of cinema, with Carl Dreyer’s “Vampyr” and so many horror films in that early part of cinema. So I think I was just following a tradition that was firmly established in terms of what they now call “elevated horror,” which doesn’t make sense to me. I don’t think I invited anything new. I just told my version.

Q: Have you watched it again recently?

A: No, I haven’t. Even when I watched the trailer I was like: “Mistakes, mistakes.” I might slip in and watch it (during the rerelease) and see how it feels. I rarely think of it. I’m very grateful to that film but I rarely — never — refer back to it.

Q: Have your thoughts about “The Babadook” changed over time?

A: To me, the film is very pure. I really fought to make it pure. Even though it was a low-budget film, it was very uncompromising. Because I hadn’t made a film, I was an untested entity, so everyone had their two cents worth. They wanted to change the end or make a sequel or make it more gory, and I was just adamant about keeping it pure. So when I think of that film, I’m really proud that me and my team were able to protect it. I hope people can continue to protect their work because we need original, independent films.

Q: Rewatching “The Babadook,” I was struck by how much care you take in pulling the horror out of repressed emotions. It’s nearly an hour before the Babadook materializes, which he does after the mother shouts “Just be normal!” at her son.

A: It also comes out of a point where he’s desperately trying to warn her of the truth, and then he’s medicated. I’m not saying medication is bad, but in this case it’s very bad. That’s when the energy become a reality. I was fascinated at the time, and still am, at how people can push down so much on a world of pain and grief and continue to function. I think it brings a half life, unfortunately. I think we have to, on some level, face those painful experiences so we can enjoy the fullness of life.