Freaks
(1932)
"History,
religion, folklore and literature abound in tales of
the misfits who have altered the world's course. Goliath,
Calaban, Frankenstein, Glouchester, Tom Thumb, and Kaiser
Wilhelm are just a few whose fame is world wide."
- excerpt from the opening title card of "Freaks"
Tod Browning's cult classic may have been exactly what
it intended to be in 1932, a cinematic freak show, but
by today's standards it's a pretty tame. Browning should
have just taken his camera inside the circus sideshow
to bring us a look of the unusual oddities it contains
but he makes the mistake of trying to do much more than
that; He wants to give us a plot as well. This is a
silly mistake as he must, of course, cast real circus
sideshow freaks in the lead roles. These unusual people
may be interesting to gawk at, for a few moments at
least, but they can't, of course, act at all. To help
cover this atrocious problem, Browning hires other normal
looking actors who can't act too. The finished product
is a stilted, amateurish, film that would have quickly
and quietly disappeared from the American landscape
if it weren't for the wonderful images of all these
real freaks - and the loving demeanor with which Browning
films them.
Browning had scored a huge success the year before with
a moody, creepy atmospheric film called "Dracula," starring
Bela Lugosi. But "Freaks" looks like a film directed
more by that other Lugosi maven, Ed Wood. The plot,
the sets, the dialogue and the acting are not stark
and atmospheric but stark and drab. Everything looks
awful until the climactic chase scene at the film's
end. This, at least, is classic Browning. Still, the
director is right in concentrating on the unusual folks
in the film - and to make the film in the first place.
It's just that he would have done better to take a more
documentary like approach. He rightly shows us some
of the human oddities doing tricks and stunts, the like
of which probably paid their bills for years on the
circus sideshow circuit. The most obvious of the moments
comes when Rardion, The Human Torso, a paraplegic with
no limbs whatsoever wrapped very tightly in a gunny
sack, lights a cigarette with a wooden match using only
his lips. This moment, of course, has nothing at all
to do with Browning's silly plot here. Browning also
brings us plenty of pinheads (Schlitzy, Zip and Pip),
a Bearded Lady, Siamese Twins (Daisy and Violet Hilton),
a half-man/half-woman (billed as Josephine Joseph),
and another interesting and unusual person, the half
boy, Johnny Eck. A torso with two long arms who runs
around as quickly as a monkey, Eck is always interesting
to watch. He travels faster and more easily than most
of us do with our two legs. A documentary about this
one guy alone would be more interesting than what we
get here. This is one of "Freaks" major flaws, we don't
learn anything about the stars of the film and, what
must be, their interesting life stories.
Instead, Browning contrives a insipid plot about a love
affair between a midget and a normal sized woman. The
woman, of course, is out for the little guy's inheritance.
This might be an okay story if Browning had good actors
to carry out the plot. Instead we get midgets Harry
and Daisy Earles (brother and sister in real life) playing
star-crossed lovers. Olga Baclanova is cast as the love
interest. Trouble is not only can these main characters
not act, they have thick and undeniable accents which
makes almost all of their dialogue practically unintelligible.
It's a good thing the plot is so simple otherwise we'd
never understand what's going on from listening to them
talk. The Earles even speak in German at times, for
goodness sakes. It's all hopelessly
muddled.
Worse yet, Browning adds another subplot, involving
Wallace Ford and Leila Hyams as lovers. At least they
are after Leila leaves strong man Henry Victor. This
sidetrack isn't as poorly acted as the main plot, although
Hyams tries her best to ham it up, it's just completely
dull. It has no point except to establish the normal
couple as allies to the "Freaks" when all is said and
done. It really doesn't help Browning's point. We want
the "different"' people to take care of themselves.
In fact, they do - so there is really no reason for
this sub plot at all.
One thing the film does have is sexual innuendo. Ford
and Hyams have what must be a sexual relationship in
the film, they live together after all. And Hyams leaves
what seems like a sexual relationship with Victor to
establish this one. It's actually quite daring. More
racy is the dialogue the Siamese twins share with their
male suitors. One, already married to a stuttering fool,
is of course present when her sister woos with another
man. As her sister kisses her boyfriend, the other,
who is back to back with her sister and ignoring the
proceedings by knitting, suddenly smiles like she is
feeling and enjoying the kiss. Even more outrageous
is the talk of the sisters being together, as they always
must be, while one is enjoying her married life with
her stuttering husband. Browning toys verbally with
all this innuendo quite interestingly. At one point,
the sisters partners each invite the other to visit,
as if they will somehow ever be separate. Browning's
wink and nod to the obvious here is subtle and charming,
never bold, yet it must have seems quite outrageous
at the time. This leads me to another solution to Browning's
problematic plot and bad actors. The Hilton sisters
are quite good here and handle all the romantic aspects
of their subplot with ease. A story with these characters
at the forefront might have been much more successful.
Still, despite all this grousing, there is an undescribable
charm to Tod Browning's "Freaks." A simplicity of style,
a bit of nostalgia and a care for the world's less fortunate.
Browning lenses the proceedings with love more than
morbid curiosity. From the opening frame we are never
supposed to be shocked by what we see. We may be initially,
at first. Of course, we are only human and this is 1932.
But our shock quickly turns to intrigue. And, finally,
our interest towards these gentle creatures morphs yet
again into concern for their well-being. We want to
talk to them, to laugh with them, to get to know them
better. From the Mongoloid pinheads to the Human Torso,
Browning makes these unusual humans attractive to us.
He shows them as they really are. Surprisingly, unlike
in the circus sideshow where most of them probably existed,
Browning's film offers these persons a place to feel
at home, a place to be themselves. If
only for just an hour.
Notes: Also released as "Nature's Mistakes." Some prints
are missing the brief epilogue which features the reunion
of "Hans" and "Frieda" in his mansion. At one time,
at least three different endings existed, owing mostly
to the edited endings.
At least one source credits Louise Beavers for appearing
as a maid in the film. I don't recall seeing her.
Suggest by the short story "Spurs" by Tod Robbins. This
first appeared in "Munsey's" Magazine in February, 1923.
Uncredited crew and background: Screenplay by Willis
Goldbeck and Leon Gordon, Dialogue by Edgar Allan Woolf
(surely a pseudonym) and Al Boasberg, Photography by
Merritt B. Gerstad.
Browning had incredible trouble getting the film exhibited.
It was banned in many cities because of the "Freaks"
in the film and, surprisingly, not do to the sexual
innuendo.
Browning apparently worked in a circus as some point
in his early life.
Earles also appeared in Browning's 1925 silent film
"The Unholy Three" playing a midget disguised as a baby.
He reprised that role in Jack Conway's 1930 sound remake
of the film. It is said that Earles also suggested this
story to Browning for a film.
The Hilton sisters, who died in 1969, had a starring
role in the 1950 exploitation picture "Chained for Life."
More
of Lodger's reviews indexed alphabetically! Just click
your favorite letter to go there.
a
b c
d e
f g
h i
j k
l m
n o
p q
r s
t u
v w
x y
z
HOME
|
