1920s, German cinema, Halloween Horror Film Freedonia, Horror/Eerie

Nosferatu: A Symphony Of Horror (1922)

.

Nosferatu: Eine Symphone Des Grauens
aka Nosferatu ; Nosferatu: A Symphony Of Terror ; Nosferatu the Vampire ; The Twelfth Hour – A Night of Horror; Dracula

    
Director: Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau
Screenwriter: Henrik Galeen

By Roderick Heath

In the history of film only a few images are granted the rarefied status of becoming instantly recognisable and a lodestone of cinematic meaning. That sort of pop culture stature is particularly uncommon with movies over a century old. Those ranks might include Charlie Chaplin’s Little Tramp, Buster Keaton’s deadpan, and Rudolph Valentino in his sheik’s habit, and little else. Oh, and the core images of Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror, of the titular vampire, with spindly physique, pointed teeth, and bald pate, lurking in grainy footage that looks like it was filmed directly from someone’s subconscious, his angular shadow sliding over walls like a nightmare, his hideous, mysteriously evil visage lurking over a woman in her bed. I remember the first time I saw it, which was not in the film itself but excerpted for the opening credits of a TV show I used to watch when I was about five or six years old, with the vampire’s image appearing under the grandly sonorous tones of the opening of Mahler’s Fifth. The mere fact I can remember that conveys its haunting power. It wasn’t until many years later that I actually got to see the whole film. Indeed, we’re lucky that Nosferatu survives for us, given its notorious history as a film, but survive it did to have an essentially endless impact on Horror cinema in specific and cinema as a whole. Friedrich Wilhelm Murnau, born in Bielefeld, Germany, was 34 years old when Nosferatu was released. Murnau’s father, Heinrich Plumpe, owned a cloth factory, giving his son and siblings a comfortable upbringing which they spent indulging literary and theatrical tastes. Friedrich, known for his coldly superior attitude even as a boy, grew up extremely tall and unapologetically queer, and took the name Murnau from a town near Lake Staffel he lived in for a time. Whilst studying at university Murnau became involved with student theatre productions, and the famed theatre director Max Reinhardt was impressed enough when he caught one of his performances that he invited him to train at his acting school.

Murnau’s budding career was halted by World War I, serving at first in the infantry and then as a gunner and observer in the Imperial German Flying Corps, weathering several crashes until a forced landing in Switzerland saw him interned. Murnau spent the rest of the war directing prisoners in plays and writing his first film script. After the war Murnau started a film studio with actor Conrad Veidt, and made his filmmaking debut with The Boy in Blue (1919), a film inspired by Thomas Gainsborough’s famous painting, and he quickly captured attention with a string of films in the next few years, many of them lost, including The Haunted Castle (1921) and The Burning Soil (1922). Der Januskopf (1920) first evinced Murnau’s fascination for material in what would eventually be called the Horror genre, and his attraction to darkly psychological and oneiric overtones in a manner that would soon see him adopted as a hero for the fledgling Surrealist art movement. The film, which starred Veidt and featured a young Bela Lugosi in a minor role, also proved the first of Murnau’s attempts to film popular books without permission, as Der Januskopf was a thinly disguised variation on Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Murnau got away with that, in part because German storytelling was already rife with doppelganger-themed stories, and German cinema had been merrily filching from British literary properties like Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes tales for years already. But when Murnau made Nosferatu, this time a very slightly disguised adaptation of Bram Stoker’s Dracula, he found himself and his movie in trouble. Stoker had died a few years earlier, but his widow zealously protected his estate, and hearing about the movie had a British court move an injunction to seize and destroy every copy of Murnau’s film.

Fortunately, in the chaotic state of Germany in the early 1920s, this order was unenforceable, but it’s one reason why Nosferatu only exists today in a curtailed and, despite restorations aplenty, still pretty rough form. And indeed, Murnau’s oeuvre has greatly suffered from lost work, including his debut and his 1929 Hollywood film 4 Devils. The film’s persecution nonetheless helped make it the first and last production by Prana Film, a studio set up in part by artist and occultist Albin Grau, which went bankrupt. Murnau recovered from the experience of seeing his radical new artwork almost destroyed as those who did see it acclaimed him as a major new filmmaker. The succes de scandale led to him making his ambitious German masterworks The Last Laugh (1924) and Faust (1926), before a move to Hollywood. There he was greeted with the pomp and budgets of a prestige filmmaker, his movies there including Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans (1927), City Girl (1930), and Tabu: A Story of the South Seas (1931), before his sudden death in a car crash a week before the latter film premiered, at the age of 42.

Despite its skin-of-the-teeth survival, what survives of Nosferatu is still astonishingly powerful and mesmerising. It’s a film that feels like a transmission from the secret, labyrinthine heart of cinema, a relic and a fount, from which the young but rapidly maturing art form split and forked in various directions, towards genre and art-house, narrative and experimental. Every other film of Dracula is after a fashion a remake of Nosferatu, with, more specifically, Werner Herzog’s 1979 version offered as a specific, sometimes shot-for-shot recreation and reclamation; The Witch (2015) and The Northman (2022) director Robert Eggers is reportedly planning another. Nosferatu followed The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1919), the film that defined the German Expressionist cinema movement, and whilst it absorbed aspects of its example, particularly in exploiting the crude palette of cinematography at the time to use light and shadow as expressive tools and play with form as captured by the camera, but Murnau’s signature choice was to adopt a more solid and realistic approach, shooting most of the film on location and explicitly contrasting solid, palpable places with infiltrations of the nightmarish.

Murnau’s personal artistic preoccupations lay with evoking the most basic and primal side of human existence – love and hate in particular, and attending states from fear and desire to humiliation and greed. His later collaborations with the screenwriter Carl Mayer, who gained his break in movies as the cowriter of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, hinged on Mayer’s feeling for far more everyday experience, and the two found their ideal place of expression in movies that allowed Murnau to extrapolate the extreme, the elemental, from the commonplace. The Last Laugh was a portrait of a hotel’s impressively dressed doorman who finds himself relentless degraded after he gets too old, as a bitter portrait of a Germany battered to its knees after the war capped with a supremely sarcastic triumph. In Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans, the central married couple step between extreme states of passion and murderous hate, and the queasy, tormenting mixture of lust and aspiration that almost drives the loving husband to kill his wife visualised as the ghostly wraith of the femme fatale plucking at his heart, and the final survival of the couple weathering literal stormy waters came touched with flashes of transcendental experience. For Faust, Murnau took on the most essential of German stories with a similarly extreme dichotomy whilst also following Goethe’s redemptive arc for its hero, Faust’s pact with the sardonic Mephistopheles finally cancelled and Faust reclaimed by a beautiful male angel. In Murnau’s major films, chased with an obsessive intensity perhaps stemming from Murnau’s obsessive reading of Nietzsche as a youth, the core characters are people who, whether titanic or insignificant in worldly terms, do battle with forces both inside themselves and beyond their control with the twinned promise of either annihilating them or rendering them immortal.

Nosferatu contrasts the later social and psychological analysis and sophistication of Murnau’s films by taking on Stoker’s story and partly revising it, whilst still leaning on its driving notion of evil in literal form, the dread-inducing vampire lurking in the fringes of civilisation and plotting his course to its heart: in Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans the demon lover is a psychic conjuration built around a much less impressive person, here it’s real and wants to eat you up. Murnau, in freely adapting Stoker’s storyline, also transcribed it into something more deeply and specifically German, via the script written by Henrik Galeen, who had already written Paul Wegener’s first tilt at filming The Golem (1915) and would go on to write his second (1922) as well as other essential films of the German Expressionist Horror moment including Waxworks (1924), The Student of Prague (1926), and Alraune (1928). The storyline of their film more or less follows Stoker, but with changes that range from the superficial, with character names changed, to the suggestive and deeply consequential. Jonathan and Mina Harker become Thomas Hutter (Gustav von Wangenheim) and wife Ellen (Greta Schröder). Renfield becomes Knock (Alexander Granach). Professor Van Helsing is split apart, one part becoming Professor Bulwer (Gustav Botz), a scientist influenced by Paracelsus, who gives learned, obscure lectures on life forms like the Venus Fly Trap that live on the bodily fluids of other life forms. Another part is blended with Dr Seward as Professor Sievers (John Gottowt), who serves somewhat unluckily as doctor to the Hutters. Count Dracula himself becomes Count Orlok (Max Schreck), also sometimes referred to as Nosferatu. That word, which has no clear linguistic root, was used in Stoker’s novel as a folkloric Transylvanian term denoting the living dead. Shipowner Harding (Georg H. Schnell) and his sister Ruth (Ruth Landshoff) supplant several of the novel’s supporting characters, with Ruth seeming to be nominated to fulfil the role of Lucy Westenra. What’s most telling about some of this is that these adapted elements are present in a purely vestigial way, in a narrative that otherwise hones away distractions to focus on its central, bizarre romantic triangle – Orlok, Hutter, and Ellen.

So, young Hutter is the real estate agent, resident of the fictitious German city of Wisborg, a locale created with filming about Lubeck and Wismar, sometimes in the 1830s. Newly married to Ellen, Hutter wants to get on with upward mobility, and his employer, Knock, gives him a chance to get in on a major deal, if he’ll travel to Transylvania and arrange a real estate purchase in Wisborg for Orlok. Knock suggests selling to Orlok the large, jagged-roofed structure which lies across a canal from Hutter’s own residence. Hutter, thrilled, rushes home to tell Ellen about his mission and their eminent good fortune, but Ellen is stricken with foreboding which both put down to merely displeasure at being separated for so long. Hutter sets out on horseback and travels across central Europe to the fringe of the Carpathian Mountains, and spends a night in a tavern where the innkeeper (Guido Herzfeld) is disturbed Hutter’s stated goal, and later Hutter finds a book placed in his room entitled, reassuringly, Of Vampires, Monstrous Ghosts, Sorcery, and The Seven Deadly Sins. Hutter starts reading the book and becomes increasingly disturbed, but awakens in the morning to the bucolic scenes of the rural area and forgets it all. After being abandoned by his coach driver, who refuses to go any further, Hutter tramps his way up a mountain path into the high, jagged reaches of the mountains, until he’s picked up by a coach supposedly sent by Count Orlok.

Dracula was written as an epistolary novel – that is, a narrative presented through fake letters, diary entries, and other writings by the characters. This was essentially the classic literary equivalent of a modern found footage movie, designed to create a slightly more credulous attitude through the realistic texture of personal experience and eyewitness account. As if seeking their own device to induce a sense of distanced credulity, Murnau and Galeen present their narrative as an historical account as recorded in an obscure (and imaginary) book entitled A Chronicle of the Great Plague of Wisborg – Anno Domini 1838. The pages of the book provide many of the intertitles of the film, as if dramatizing the recorded events. Cinematographer Fritz Arno Wagner’s photography evokes a mood of tranquillity and homey settlement in the environs of Wisborg, with its ivy-clad bourgeois houses and picturesque medieval streets. It’s a vision of a lost Germany, indeed before Germany actually existed, perhaps charged with nostalgic longing for a presumed audience all too rueful of the price of modernity, and also allowing Murnau to skip around technological infrastructure like trains and dip into the last days of a world that travelled no fast than horse or wind. The only note of the unsettling struck in Wisborg comes from the old buildings Knock suggests Hutter sell, lurking across the way from Hutter’s own house like a cancerous polyp amidst the civility.

Knock himself is similarly peculiar and discomfortingly out of place, a leering oddball playing at being the commanding burger, like a hangover from that medieval proto-Germany subsisting in the oncoming industrial age, much as Orlok will represent the intrusion of an even more ancient and alien zone in those sun-dappled streets. Knock is introduced eagerly reading Orlok’s correspondence eagerly, scrawled over with Orlok’s demotic letters and arcane symbols, which hint that Orlok has ensnared Knock’s imagination with promises of cabalistic lore. As a variation on Renfield from Stoker’s novel, where the character was simply an inmate of Seward’s sanatorium randomly chosen to be Dracula’s helpmate and emissary, Knock instead prefigured a common practice of later adaptations of making the character connected to, or sometimes even supplanting (as in the 1931 Tod Browning version), Harker himself as the luckless real estate agent sent to meet the Count. The Hardings are friends of the Hutters who take Ellen in whilst her husband is away.

The film’s first, most memorable title card declares: “Nosferatu. Does this word not sound like the midnight call of the Bird of Death? Do not utter it, or the images of life will fade – into pale shadows and ghostly dreams will rise from your heart and feed your Blood.” The mood of gentle morbid menace immediately suggested her is reinforced as Hutter’s journey becomes not merely a physical trip of so arduousness but one that will transgress some barrier of the liminal. “Go quickly, travel safely, my young friend, to the land of ghosts,” Knock tells Hutter, and Hutter himself formulates his journey with enthusiasm to Ellen: “I am going far away to the land of robbers and ghosts.” When Hutter reads the book left for him in the Transylvanian inn, he peruses a particularly vital passage: “From the seed of Belial came forth the Vampire – Nosferatu – which lieth and feedeth on the Blood of Mankind, and, unredeemed, maketh his abode in the frightful caves, graves and coffins filled with accursed earth from the fields of the Black Death.” This passage becomes crucial to understanding the film’s assimilation of Stoker’s story and its twistings of the familiar story and imagery, recasting the vampire as a special kind of evil, connected with the fear not just of disease but of the darkest kind, the epidemic that swept through Europe and decimated its heartlands.

In his remake, Herzog would transmute Hutter’s climb into the Carpathians into one of his rapturous interludes, complete with the opening of Wagner’s “Das Rheingold” swirling on the soundtrack and Herzog’s beloved rivers of mountain mist. Murnau’s version is less spectacular but, in its way, more subtly disquieting, shooting in real, rugged peaks of raw stone. Once his coach driver forces him to alight, Hutter crosses a wooden bridge spanning a mountain stream, and a title card reads, “When he crossed the bridge, the phantoms came to meet him.” Murnau immediately supplies the first of his cinematic coups as he cuts to Orlok’s carriage leaving his high-perched castle and descending to meet Hutter. Murnau clips frame out of scenes of Orlok’s actions to make them fast, stuttering, hallucinatory. He uses under-cranked film to make the advance of the coach unnaturally fast and jangly – which ironically is how just about every silent film would be forced to look when projected at the wrong speed for decades – whilst Orlok’s sharp and startling features leer out from under his guise as the coachman. As it brings Hutter back towards Orlok’s castle, Murnau interpolates a shot printed in negative, the foregrounded elements embossed with silver and the sky a pool of darkness: this is Hutter crossing the last, most profound barrier he’s been destined to cross since leaving his home, the one between natural and unnatural, reality and dream, living and dead.

For extra weird effect, Murnau has driver, coach, and horses all wrapped in black cloth, and the horses wear hoods and masks, making them seem like living statues. Murnau’s take on Stoker’s motifs is illustrated in the barest terms when Hutter and Orlok first meet properly. Each is framed by an arching gateway at the castle entrance, presented as mirror images in effect, Hutter with the forest and daylight behind but with the doors slowly swinging shut once he passes through, Orlok with darkness at his back. Hutter representing the ordinary, the normal man, Orlok his dark antithesis, the twisted thing lurking within the psyche, usually kept at bay by ritual and social norms but reigning in this pocket of existence, and looking for his ticket to escape into the world. Orlok lurches into view, an uncanny figure with a stiff gait, huge, blazing eyes, jutting raptor’s nose and tight-clenched hands with long, claw-like nails, his appearance made slightly more normal by insisting on wearing a cap that hides his nearly hairless scalp and jutting ears. Murnau’s concept for Orlok makes him into a visual rhyme for the rats that follow his plague-ridden trail, a carrion-feeding rodent loaned vaguely human shape. When he’s more completely revealed later to Hutter and others, with head and pointed teeth blatant, he abandons all pretence to moving or acting like a living things, standing unnaturally straight, moving in spasmodic fashion, rising from his coffin bolt upright.

Orlok is, then, conceptually quite a different thing to Stoker’s creation. Dracula, whilst visibly rejuvenated by supping blood in the course of Harker’s visit to his castle, was nonetheless still a normal-looking being, charismatic and sociable, a vampire who could easily, once properly transplanted to Blighty, become a nocturnal guerrilla in a supernatural war, with the signifiers of his strangeness emerging more subtly if, at last, manifestly. Orlok rather represents a distinct continental take on the image of the vampire, something play-acting at being human, and not that competently. Some interpretations of Nosferatu have taken Orlok as an embodiment of anti-Semitic caricature, the image of the insidious foreign invader bringing filth and disease in his wake. Given Murnau’s lack of any such prejudice, and the screenwriter himself being Jewish, that interpretation feels like a product of a desire to interpret just about anything out of Germany between the wars to be rife with signs of proto-Nazism. That said, there persists a discomforting grey zone where folkloric reference and socially prejudiced caricature can intersect, which one evolved from the other becoming blurred and hard to reckon.

Dracula as a story has always been a bit of a double-edged blade in terms of its reflection of social values, even if at the end of the day it exists more fully in the realm of psychological symbolism, a first frisson in a popular culture facing an evolving understanding of the forces lurking within the limits of the psyche thought previously to be immutable. Dracula can be said to at once record a British anxiety before a Europe where different, older, more repressive political paradigms were more the norm than democracy when Stoker wrote his book, with Dracula the spirit of a menacingly dominating and dictatorial spirit anticipatory of elements of German militarism, Nazism, and Stalinism, ideas that subjugate populaces and drain their vitality, just as much as he can be said to represent a more reactionary anxiety before the idea of foreignness itself, Dracula the emblematic foreigner moving in to steal our women. Murnau and Galeen’s alteration to the story, bringing Orlok to German shores rather than English, required the earlier historical setting – in Stoker, Orlok had to reach an island by sea, where Transylvania, then in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, was just a couple of days away by train – and provoked, as if by association, a different sense of social-historical meaning, one invoked by the references to the Black Death. This also connects with the radically different way Murnau approaches the oncoming contest of Orlok, Hutter, and Ellen.

Murnau lets an edge of peculiar comedy, bordering on the satirical, permeate his adaptation, particularly in Hutter’s general obliviousness to the bewildering things all around him. Orlok tells Hutter he’s late, having kept him waiting until after midnight. Hutter eats at Orlok’s dining table whilst the Count leafs through Hutter’s documentation. Hutter perceives the oddness of his host as Orlok peers over the top of a letter from Knock, written in the same esoteric hand as his own, whilst a medieval clock, sporting a figurine in the form of a skeleton raising a cup in sardonic toasting whilst its other hand holds the hammer that rings the bell, strikes midnight. “Your wife has a beautiful neck…” Orlok coos when he beholds Ellen’s portrait, accidentally dropped on the dining table by Hutter, admiration of physical form and raw bloodlust converging in manner that’s wryly blatant in outlining Orlok’s tastes. Hutter’s own cringing before Orlok’s overeager alarm and interest when he cuts his finger whilst slicing bread again nudges comic exaggeration, and later Hutter finishes up literally hiding under the covers of bed when he spies Orlok waiting outside his room, his monstrosity now patent, marching like an automaton with stiff legs and arms, eyes swivelling in their sockets with unnatural focus, his two, rodent-like fangs now exposed in his mouth.

This vignette, whilst touched with black humour, is at the same time one of Murnau’s coups of creepiness, with the first look at Orlok at his most ghoulish generating a sense of the inexorable, Hutter stricken by his defenceless position to the point where he’s reduced to a cringing child before this menace advancing on his room. Hutter’s credulity has already been stoked by further readings of the book from the inn, which describes the monster called Nosferatu who drinks blood, “his hellish elixir of life.” He’s only saved by the finest filament of mystical and emotional connection to a counteracting and salving force – his bond with Ellen, who awakens screaming in her bedroom as Orlok’s shadow falls upon her husband, causing the vampire to retreat. The edge of comedy resurges towards the film’s end when Knock, having gone completely lunatic as Orlok comes into proximity, leading the townsfolk of Wisborg in a wild chase around the city, finally straddling a rooftop to mock and jeer them whilst stones are flung up him in an effort to dislodge him. Here Murnau lets an edge of perverse delight in his representatives of evil, upending the superficial calm of his period setting in a manner that contrasts the ultimate celebration of authority over the lunatic asylum in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari: in Murnau the loonies are loose and play.

Perhaps the most mystique-shrouded aspect of Nosferatu for a long time star Schreck: given that the word schreck means “sudden scare” or “fright” in German, many took took it to be a stage name for another, perhaps well-known actor in heavy disguise. The combination of the film’s aura of the inscrutable and the obscurity of the actor helped give rise to a hardly serious but amusing urban legend that Murnau had in fact employed a real vampire, an idea filmmaker E. Elias Merhige took as the seed for his Shadow of the Vampire (2000): Merhige’s film sported Willem Dafoe as the conniving vampire and John Malkovich as a Murnau too distracted by his art to care about his cast and crew. As silly as the myth was, watching Nosferatu it’s not that impossible to understand. But Schreck was in fact the actor’s  real name, a hard-working actor who was by all accounts a bit of an oddball who liked playing grotesques, and whose wife Fanny also appears in the film as a nurse who cares for Hutter. Schreck’s incarnation of this notion of the vampire is emblazoned on the imagination

Murnau dissolves from a suggestive shot of Orlok advancing on Hutter after he cuts his finger to the next morning as “the shadows of the night left Hutter,” to Hutter asleep and slumped in the same chair. He awakens, cheered by the sun if bewildered by his apparent, total solitude in the cavernous castle, and dismissing the two small holes he finds on his throat as the bites of mosquitos. He writes a letter to Ellen mentioning this, and manages to wave down a cautious horseman riding past the castle to take the letter and post it. During the night he has his terrifying encounter with Orlok, and, after Ellen’s awakening somehow wards off the vampire, Hutter survives to the following morning when he goes in search of where the fiend hides during the day. He locates Orlok, stretched out in a sarcophagus in the castle basement, and flees back to his room. From there he looks down into the castle courtyard, witnessing as Orlok loads up a wagon with coffins filled with earth, his labours rendered uncanny by Murnau’s film tricks, combining sped-up motion and skipped frames to render his actions impossibly fast and hallucinatory. 

The greater part of Nosferatu’s singular, lingering spell on filmmakers in particular might well stem from these moments when Murnau wields a self-conscious sense of film technique as the essence of the uncanny. To be a film lover is to always be communing with the past, even if only the past of last year, to be seeing the dead. The further one delves back through the ages of cinema, through the high silent era to the earliest, flickering examples of the art captured by the likes of Thomas Edison and the Lumiere brothers on their tinker-toy cameras, the more powerful and undeniable a feeling comes of gazing at the edge of the liminal, of the recorded, of the captured impression of time, illusory and yet also powerfully real. People long dead, moving, talking, laughing dancing, looking back at the camera to the eye of the operator, the artist, the inventor, the audience, held in the frames of celluloid and transmitted by however many intervening mediums. Nosferatu is likely the oldest film most people who watch it have ever seen, and the way Murnau stamped his imagination on the film courts that sense of communion, that magic encoded in the film’s form: Nosferatu beams out to us from the edge of memory, of the psyche. The images of Orlok reinforce that impression – his shadow slinking across walls, his crepuscular visage looming over hapless, arrested victims or catching moonglow as he gazes out of the dark manse across the water, as if the incarnation of the collective id for all of bourgeois civilisation.

More practically, Murnau’s use of pure camera effect to communicate Orlok’s supernatural power removes the film out of the realm of the theatrical and places it entirely in a cinematic realm. Murnau’s approach recalls the lingering example of Georges Méliès’ mischievous sense of film’s reality-shaping capacity, able to conjure and erase at will, rather than using props or special effects. Even Orlok’s ultimate destruction is finally wrought not with makeup effects or pyrotechnics, but erasing from the film itself, via double-exposure, as if rejected by the subliminal rationality of film, which does after all turn money into light: no room for dream-beings in that equation. This also makes Nosferatu feel like a crucial crossroads for cinema as a whole, marking a moment when playing freely with the very stuff of film could expand the way narrative is communicated and received, and also be done for its own sake. If the first age of cinema, a little less than three decades, of commercial cinema had been a process where the essence of narrative cinema and its most essential devices were invented and pieced together, Nosferatu is an iconographic moment of the third, where that expressive potential could be warped and widened and finally led off down other paths, towards the purely abstract and experimental, the surreal and the associative.

Nosferatu is also a film haunted by history itself, made by people who just weathered a terrible war in a country going through a deep economic and social shock, made all the more subtly terrible in grappling with the horrible persistence of a morbid atmosphere pervading everything, infesting everything. In this regard it connects as much with Abel Gance’s J’accuse (1919), which more directly tackled the theme of the renascent war dead haunting the living, as it does to than with The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, which portrayed a thrall captive to a manipulative will and the world as an insane asylum. In Nosferatu Murnau and Galeen place far most emphasis on the first quarter of Dracula, turning it into almost the whole movie. That’s understandable given an evergreen complaint about the novel is that it never matches the menacing splendour of Harker’s journey to Dracula’s castle and his experiences there. This is in part because of Murnau’s new emphasis on Orlok as a voyager, setting out from his Carpathian lair to arrive at the Wisborg waterfront – an arrival Murnau declares in the most effectively deadpan way as he notes the derelict, disease-ridden, monster-carrying ship Orlok has come in drifting into view against those quaint Gothic buildings and clean, orderly streets. And Orlok’s voyage has a singular purpose as immediate goal, a rendezvous with Ellen, a meeting both know on some level must come.

So, Murnau shows Orlok’s coffins being borne down river on a wooden raft, a vignette that feels like an incidental rough draft for the folkloric world of Sergei Paradjanov’s Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors (1964). One of Murnau’s most potent choices throughout the film, in contrast to the stylised and setbound evocations of Browning’s Dracula or the ironically humdrum realism of Terence Fisher’s 1958 version, was to film as much in real locales, so the mountains are authentically jagged and the river wild-looking rather than conjurations of the matte artist, and it helps rather than hinders the creation of his rarefied atmosphere, contrasting the oneiric with the realistic but finding ways to make each bleed into the other, perhaps reaching a zenith with that shot of the ship arriving in Wisborg. Orlok’s voyage is staged on a real vessel, as Murnau includes the most famous and essential image Stoker provided of the dead captain tied to the steering wheel, portraying the captain (Max Nemetz) making this fearful choice, one charged with the quality of both accepting and defying fate and evil, after seeing two of his sailors (Wolfgang Heinz and Albert Venohr) leap overboard in abject terror. The sailors, knowing something on board the ship, here called the Empusa, is killing their comrades, descend into the hull to uncover whatever is lurking. One brave man starts hacking at one of Orlok’s caskets with a hatchet, only to stir a horde of rats to pour out. Orlok himself stands up like a flagpole being erected and waves one of his clawed fingers like a chiding schoolteacher, his unreal and malignant physical presence enough to turn stolid men mad.

The Empusa leaves disease in its wake as the rats that slip out from Orlok’s boxes infect the port of embarkation, and once it makes landfall as its destination Wisborg too falls under the plague’s spell, an arrival denoted, in another of Murnau’s visual coups, by a column of mourners carrying coffins of the dead through the town centre. Another hint of Murnau’s deadpan humour arises with the sight of Orlok, poking his head out of the Empusa’s cargo hold with a grin of famished delight, then carries a coffin in awkward fashion away from the waterfront to the domicile Hutter has furnished him with. The next day Harding and other representatives from a maritime association investigate the mystery of the ship and its gruesome crew, and quickly realise that a deadly gift the vessel has left in their town, too late to prevent the plague taking holding in the city. This is another element of the story Murnau and Galeen subtly emphasise, with Orlok either ensnaring the imagination of the petty power seekers of Wisborg, in the form of Knock, or humiliating and entrapping them, like Hutter, or turning their business into a disease-trafficking parody of itself, as he does to Harding and the other shipowners.

Hutter for his part manages to escape Orlok’s castle by tying bedclothes together and lowering himself down the vertiginous wall beyond his chamber window, dropping to the ground below with a combined moan of pain and relief. He spends a spell being cared for in a hospital before setting out in pursuit of the Count. On the way Hutter is tormented by fevers and spectral lunacies, his inner being in turmoil that must last until his dark mirror is finally exorcised, and that can only happen through Hutter losing his beloved, a motif touched with fervent if anxious and reactionary erotic undertones. It’s only in the film’s last portion that Murnau’s intention in his personalised digestion of the Dracula mythos is, and that is to transform it into something redolent far more of a specific German art tradition: that of “Death and the Maiden.” That motif grew out of the classic medieval artistic idea of the Tötetanz, or Dance of Death. The “Death and the Maiden” motif zeroed in the eternal clash of life and death, as visualised through the quintessence of life, a young, beautiful, fertile woman, and the personification of Death, often skeletal, hideous, or at least gaunt and draped in black, and usually male. This association carried a powerful if sickly sexual dimension. Many “Death and the Maiden” artworks were produced in the 1500s, but found a revival in the waning Romantic period of the 1800s and the early Modernist era, as the most well-known today likely being two musical pieces by Franz Schubert, a song he wrote based on a poem with that title, later incorporated into a longer string quartet piece.

Thus, rather than the ironically romantic aspect of Dracula as a seductive presence, that fierce and sexy love child of Bronte’s Heathcliff and Richardson’s Lovelace with a bit of Eurotrash chic thrown in, Murnau presents Orlok as a version of death incarnate, hideous and wizened, setting his sights on Ellen as the embodiment of feminine virtue and selfless good. But she also sets her sights on Orlok, once she begins to perceive the true nature of the tragedy eating at Wisborg and her own marriage, after a shattered and sickly Hutter returns home. One of Murnau’s greatest images is of Ellen waiting on the shoreline for a ship bearing Hutter home, her resting tired and faint on a bench, with ornate crucifixes of a burial ground for those drowned at sea studding the sand about her. Once Hutter is home and the plague spreading in Wisborg, Ellen points out a sight she has becomes privy to, perhaps Murnau’s most genuinely eerie and disturbing, all the more so for its almost subliminal effect: Ellen gestures out of the marital bedroom window to the house across the canal, where Orlok’s white, wedge-shaped head can be seen peering relentlessly out of a high window. “That is how I see it every night!” Ellen declares to Hutter, who tries to laugh off the sight, but cringes in terror when alone, knowing very well who is staring at his window.

A level of clumsiness manifests in Nosferatu on a pure story level, as the film never seems to quite find what all of its characters and their gestures are present for. There are vignettes of Ruth being frightened and Harding being investigative. The introduction of Professor Bulwer, giving his inferring lectures about likenesses in nature, sees him become not a potential Van Helsing but Murnau’s ironic emblem of science as ineffectual in contending with profound problems, locked in a zone of winnowing out miniscule facts. These loose threads still give Murnau space to keep evolving his ideas and deploy sonorous imagery, like Ruth awakening in terror in the night after a breeze rustles her curtains and knocks out a window. A title card notes that “the panic stricken town was looking for a scape-goat: it chose Knock” before the chase for the mad agent begins, suggesting a truly fascinating segue in theme as Nosferaty could become more completely a portrait of a society disintegrating in the face of fear and disruption, even if this doesn’t really lead to much more than Knock’s comic rampage. A rampage which, at least, seems to have left a seed in the mind of both Lang, for Metropolis (1927), and maybe even the makers of King Kong (1933), the rooftops become a battleground where embodiments of anarchy rule and mock the hoipolloi below.

Some of this might have resulted from the film’s many, crude reedits, but most fundamentally it’s because of where Murnau finally drags the storyline. Ellen, having read in her husband’s trusty Transylvanian book that the only way to halt a vampire’s reign of terror is for an innocent woman to willingly offer herself as prey to the monster and keep it enraptured until dawn destroys it. Surveying the columns of the dead out in the street and knowing well the carnage will continue until Orlok is destroyed, and feeling the constant pull of his mesmeric gaze from the windows across, decides that she must be the one to do it. Pretending to be ill, she has Hutter go to fetch Professor Sievers. Most of the film’s most famous and endlessly excerpted images come from its last five minutes, as Ellen prostrates herself on her bed and waits for Orlok to enter, the vampire sneaking up the stairwell into her room and hovering over her: where earlier her lover’s connection to Hutter and the thread of evil fate linking her to Orlok forestalled his attack, now Orlok’s shadow falls over her and the projected form of his outreached hand covers her heart and clenches, Ellen withering under the malign influence. Orlok stoops to drink his fill of his “elixir,” only to slowly raise his head in anxious realisation when he hears the cock crow. Orlok stands just in time for the daw light to fall in through the window and cause him to fade away like a dream of the night. He’s mourned only by Knock, his pathetic and once again imprisoned disciple, whilst a wisp of smoke wafts up from where Orlok stood.

But Orlok was no dream, and the force of dark knowledge he represented, the antithetical side of passion, draining and corrupting, claims its last victim in Ellen herself, who dies in Hutter’s arms whilst the old and bewildered Sievers muses on the scene of pathos. A last title comes from the framing chronicle which notes that the plague vanished along with Orlok, and Murnau offers a last glimpse of Orlok’s castle, freed from whatever illusory enchantment held it, now revealed as a broken ruin. The resolution is, even for 1922, old-fashioned, almost antiquarian in its enshrining of a classically sentimental view of female sexuality and self-sacrifice. Ellen passively offers herself up as the monster’s love object and food, and dies from poison of dark sexuality Orlok left her infested with. With the important corollary that this is also Ellen’s form of strength brought to bear. Nobody else in Nosferatu is even so faintly determined, clear-headed and aware as Ellen, who sits night after night with the demon staring at her and grows in conviction that only a ritual, a display of infinite good, can counter infinite evil. Ellen’s sacrificial gesture is one held profound in Murnau’s art, where the redemptive power of love is constantly reiterated, whether it be for friends in The Last Laugh or Gretchen for Faust and in the ultimate reunion of the couple in Sunrise: Murnau always reveals this crucial sliver of idealistic conviction without any shred of irony, dark as his imagination could become. Nosferatu’s ultimate message is that only love can exorcise the demons of war, pestilence, and ruination gripping Murnau’s homeland. Of course, unfortunately, many chose the very opposite emotion for the task.

Standard
1960s, Halloween Horror Film Freedonia, Historical, Horror/Eerie, Scifi

The Sorcerers (1967) / Witchfinder General (1968)

.

Director: Michael Reeves
Screenwriters: Tom Baker, Michael Reeves, John Burke (uncredited) / Tom Baker, Michael Reeves

By Roderick Heath

Michael Reeves’s death at the age of 25 is one of the rawest cheats and tragedies of film history. The English wunderkind, born in 1943, was connected to a wealthy family through his quite unwealthy mother, and the poor relations finally came in for an inheritance when Reeves was 17. By that time Reeves’s cinephilia was already well advanced. At the age of 11 he had made his first home movie, roping in his friends and future collaborators Tom Baker and Ian Ogilvy to help him film and act in it: the result, Carrion, featured Ogilvy as a psycho who attacks a girl in a wheelchair, and sported tracking shots accomplished with a Super 8 camera set up on a tea trolley. An auspicious and forebodingly violence-themed ground zero for the budding director, who, upon coming into his aforementioned windfall, used it to catch a plane to Hollywood and seek out his favourite director, Don Siegel. Lavishing effusive praise on the bewildered but flattered old veteran proved a good way to help Reeves break into the movie industry.

A couple of years later, now barely in his twenties, Reeves’s prodigious ability was first hinted when he was employed as an assistant director on the Italian horror film Castle of the Living Dead (1964), a film made under the typically stringent conditions of low-budget continental genre films of the day, when anything that could help speed up shooting was welcome. Reeves so quickly impressed the film’s producer Paul Maslansky that he and the film’s writer, Warren Keifer, were both invited to shoot portions of the move themselves. Both of them went without credit, the movie credited instead to genre journeyman Luciano Ricci under his regular pseudonym Herbert Wise, but the interesting visual texture, alive to location filming in a manner rare for movies of the type usually weren’t at the time, suggests the depth of Reeves’s impact. That film also proved a starting point for another major talent, Donald Sutherland, employed in a dual acting role. Maslansky gave Reeves the chance to make his credited debut the following year, with La Sorella di Satana, usually known as The She Beast in English, the story of an executed witch returning from the dead, starring Barbara Steele, the English fetish object of Italian Gothic horror, and Ogilvy, now grown up into a starkly handsome potential star. An awkwardly produced and padded film, La Sorella di Satana nonetheless showed further flashes of Reeves’s great talent in conjuring atmospheric visuals and articulating a radical sensibility interlaced with classical genre concerns and clichés.

Reeves’s cult stature nonetheless rests firmly on the two subsequent films he made back in England, The Sorcerers and Witchfinder General, works that saw Reeves moving into high gear, still working within the limits of the genre film world he had found his foothold in but also displaying uncommon ambition and intelligence. On each film Reeves was required to employ a legendary but ageing star deeply associated with the genre – Boris Karloff in The Sorcerers, and Vincent Price on Witchfinder General, and he helped them give performances amongst their very best. This involved some conflict with Price, who kept hitting the same grandiose and showy notes he was reputed for, only to be constantly coaxed to deliver a more reserved performance, which Price didn’t entirely get the point of until he saw the completed film. On Karloff’s part his work with Reeves helped prime him for the following year’s salutary Targets. The success of Witchfinder General, which became one of the many cause celebre films dealing in bloody violence in the late 1960s, made Reeves a hot property, and he was bombarded with potential projects, and the one that really seemed to get him fired up was an offer to make Easy Rider (1969). But a tendency to depression Reeves had managed to keep fairly well-hidden up until that point now came upon him and proved paralysing, and he died in 1969 after taking antidepressants following a heavy night of drinking.

What Reeves might have become if he hadn’t died has always been one of those what-if questions of movie lore. He might very well have melted down prematurely, as did so many promising young talents of the 1960s movie scene, particularly given the British film industry began to implode through the next decade. He might also have become a rival to Steven Spielberg or Ridley Scott, or, even if he wasn’t bound for such exalted ranks, a figure equal to David Cronenberg and George Romero in the 1970s horror panoply, and one who could have found another path in a decade that ended with the doldrums of the slasher movie coming on, particularly considering most of the better British horror films of the period, like Piers Haggard’s The Blood on Satan’s Claw (1971) and Robin Hardy’s The Wicker Man (1973), owe much to Reeves’s template. The special genius of The Sorcerers and Witchfinder General lies in the way they fulfil their basic genre film requirements but also bring a level of conceptual depth and critical awareness altogether rare at the time. The Sorcerers began life as a screenplay written by John Burke, but Reeves and Baker rewrote it so heavily Burke insisted on only taking a story credit.

Reeves appeared and worked in horror cinema at a time when the genre was moving towards a great shift in its basic stylistics, thematic preoccupations, and stock plotlines, from the revival of Gothic horror kicked off by Hammer Films towards the more substantial influence of Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960) and Mario Bava’s proto-giallo films, reorienting the genre’s imagination to less metaphorical takes on personal and social anxieties, with vampires, werewolves, and various supernatural wraiths about to be generally supplanted by more human and substantial threats. Reeves’s own career reflected that shift, moving from the variations on familiar Gothic horror imagery and malevolent spirits in Castle of the Living Dead and La Sorella di Satana, to find possibilities for dread in more immediate and realistic concerns, or, in the case of The Sorcerers, finding a new, pseudoscientific vehicle for exploring the old idea of possession. The Sorcerers, in dealing with an entirely contemporary landscape, and, despite its historical setting, Witchfinder General with its blankly beheld, unstylised violence and harsh, tangible filming approach where the landscapes feel palpable enough to smell, marked important moments in that genre shift. The two films are also notably similar not just in their common conceptual preoccupations, but by their rigorous sense of form. Each takes up a basic, driving concept as sufficient, proceeding with a near-relentless internal logic and scarcely wasting a frame in telling their stories.

The Sorcerers for instance proceeds from a simple but brilliant conceit, one that presents front and centre an essential metaphor for the cinematic experience itself. Indeed, the film’s similarity to Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom (1960) goes beyond their closeness as horror movies set amidst modern London’s more mundane districts: both movies are preoccupied with the very nature of cinema. Burke, Reeves, and Baker nonetheless went a step further than Powell, in their idea of a psychiatrist’s mind-bending invention. The psychiatrist in question is Professor Marcus Monserrat (Karloff), a once-renowned therapist and academic who’s been reduced to treating nervous ailments like facial twitches in a trickle of patients. His clients are attracted by advertisements pinned in shops close to the shabby apartment he keeps with his wife Estelle (Catherine Lacey), where they’ve been subsisting for thirty years, ever since Marcus’s career was destroyed by a succession of journalistic exposes on his outlandish ideas. Nonetheless, Marcus has, in a spare room of the apartment, painstakingly constructed an electronic apparatus that will allow him not only to induce a hypnotic state of unconscious control over a human subject, but that will allow the subject’s controllers to share in his physical and emotional sensations remotely.

Connecting The Sorcerers and Witchfinder General is a reflexive but considered fascination for violence delivered as a virtual spectator sport, provoking chaotic and primal emotions for both the objects of and wielders of that violence, but also manipulated as a vehicle for other, more insidious needs. In both, figures of authority impose their will on and gratify their needs through luckless innocents, a motif laced with bitter meditation on the “generation gap” often perceived at the heart of the 1960s social schisms, as well as political dimensions given the general concern stemming from the Vietnam War of young people being forced to go and fight old men’s wars. In The Sorcerers this angle of approach is given more ironic and sympathetic tilt at first, as Reeves presents the state of pathos the Monserrats live in, their old, creaking bodies and barren existence, find they have a tool in their grasp that allows them to escape the cage of their own flesh and experience. They gain their ideal subject in Mike Roscoe (Ogilvy), a superficially phlegmatic but exasperated hipster who seems to have evolved a resistance to the easy thrills of Swinging London’s nightspots: he only drinks Coca-Cola when out, seems to have tried every drug around and found it wanting, and is even antsy and distractible when out on a date with the beautiful continental woman Nicole (Elizabeth Ercy), who he ditches briefly to be entertained by his patronised pal Alan (Victor Henry) whilst seeking something indefinable.

What he finds is Marcus, who, his eye caught by the young man, follows him into a café and promises him a unique experience. “What are you selling?” Mike enquires testily: “Blue movies?” “Nothing as dull as that,” Marcus smiles with roguish assurance, and later promises, “Dazzling, indescribable experiences – complete abandonment with no thought of remorse.” Mike takes Marcus up on his veritable but obscure dare, and comes up to his apartment. Reeves has suggested the mysterious trove in Monserrat’s spare room earlier as the professor opens the door and surveys his creation without it actually being shown, menacing music instead hinting at the scene beyond. Mike then sees the room with the audience, beholding a space that looks like it beamed in directly from a Star Trek episode, with smooth white walls and weird devices festooning the space. Estelle helps her husband in coaxing the young subject to take his seat at the heart of the machine with headset in place. Marcus starts up the machine, his subject assailed with a torturous cacophony of electronic sounds and visual stimuli, which just happen to look a lot like the sorts of pulsating psychedelic imagery becoming a popular fixture projected at rock music shows in the late ‘60s. When the process concludes, Mike is in a mesmerised state, under the influence of both Marcus and Estelle, who experiment tentatively at making him obey their will, including sending him to the kitchen to crush an egg in his hand.

The Sorcerers suggests the immediate influence of two earlier, major, recent horror films – Peeping Tom and also Roman Polanski’s breakthrough hit Repulsion (1965), with its emphasis on an insidious breakdown of a personality in the seemingly placid and gritty surrounds of London; the casting of Ercy, a French-German actress, echoes both of those films’ use of European actors in leading roles, but with the twist here that the foreigner isn’t the one going nuts. Instead it’s Ogilvy, perfectly incarnating a brand of astringently phlegmatic but picture-perfect and coldly charismatic young male hipster, one whose brusque and insensate attitude to the people around him finally gains its exponentially worse comeuppance as the Monserrats make him their vehicle for exploring a world they’re entirely cut off from. “A boy who’s bored,” Marcus notes as he and Estelle discuss who their ideal subject should be, “Out looking for something.” Mike’s frustrated scorn for the tired pleasures of Swinging London nightlife and the women in his life contrasts the Monserrats’ desire to indulge those pleasures, and they push Mike to, amongst other things, pick up singer Laura Ladd (Sally Sheridan), a singer who belts out bluesy numbers in the club Mike, Alan, and Nicole frequent most, despite Mike not liking her. Mike explains to the increasingly exasperated Nicole that he keeps having blackouts and patches of amnesia.

For Monserrat, his invention means not just vindication for his ridiculed theories and years of obscurity, but also a device with enormous therapeutic and lifestyle potential, something that can help deliver other elderly people from their cages of their wearing bodies and limited experience, amongst other things. Once he proves his process works, Marcus wants to immediately present it to the world. Estelle however talks him into indulging their newfound power just a little, as a small recompense for all the privation they’ve suffered, a request that Marcus uneasily accedes to, allowing Estelle to use Mike as remote control agent to steal her a lush fur coat from a boutique: Mike smashes his way into the store and eludes an investigating Bobby. But the darker potential of this starts to assert itself as Estelle finds she has a deeper influence over Mike than her husband, proving her will superior to his and beginning to indulge more potent and illicit thrills, first pushing Mike to indulge the petty buzz of borrowing Alan’s motorbike without asking, but then taking it to dangerous levels as she pushes him to speed, endangering both himself and Nicole as she clings on for dear life. When confronted by an irate Alan when returning the bike to the car mechanic shop where Alan works, Estelle urges Mike to hit Alan, sparking a rough fight, with Estelle then pushing Mike to bring ruthless violence to bear, swatting Alan’s boss Ron (Alf Joint) with a wrench and leaving both men dazed and bloodied on the ground. Nicole is horrified and Mike bewildered by it all, flees.

The Sorcerers can be viewed as a particularly skewed and modern take on a string of movies Karloff had made in the early 1940s, which saw him cast as sympathetic but ill-fated scientists whose experiments go terribly wrong, of which The Invisible Ray (1936) and The Devil Commands (1941) are the best. Marcus plays the Mephistophelian lurer to Mike’s callow Faust, but tries to back out of the logic of a situation he’s contrived when he’s appalled to realise he’s unleashed the evil as well as healing potential of his invention. The unique cunning of The Sorcerers stems from the way Reeves utilises a not-uncommon idea in sci-fi and horror fiction, the device that allows some sort of puppet master influence, in a manner that nonetheless becomes an entirely coherent commentary on his movie itself, indeed of cinema itself, this machine that allows a viewer to share, for a spell, all the vicarious thrills of another life, and all that flows from that immersion, good and bad. Marcus’s promise to Mike of “complete abandonment with no thought of remorse” is the promise every film makes to its audience. The narrative form may insist on purveying some brand of officially moral, artistic, and intellectual structure to what it portrays, but the fragments within it often provide nonetheless some reflection of and indulgence of the provocative and amoral acts, beyond the pale of everyday life, from rape to murder to drug use, or even far more mundane things, minor treacheries of faith and loyalty and right thinking. The spiralling path the Monserrats find themselves on becomes a partial metaphor on a game Reeves was already well aware he was playing, as cinema in the late 1960s was being pushed inexorably to provide more and more extreme thrills, as the last veils of censorship fell away and the need of filmmakers to attract audiences away from television found this the easiest way.

Whilst the specific social milieu of the late-1960s hip scene Reeves encompasses is inevitably dated, the tension between youth and age is an eternal one, and moreover Reeves makes ingenious use of the sociological inferences common in 1967 and now in that generational face-off, evoking the way the media gets off on reports of youthful bad behaviour and transmits it through to people simultaneously afraid and envious. In many ways The Sorcerers not only anticipates but outclasses Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange (1971) in the way it explores that tabloid obsession with the figure of the rampant young psycho on a spree by looking not just towards ineffectual ways of contending with such social problems but considering what purpose they serve, however incidentally, in that society, and also in filmed representations. The logical extreme Reeves takes it all too is also bound up with another phenomenon reemerging when he made the film – feminism, albeit given a characteristically acidic twist. Estelle, playing the dutiful and long-suffering wife to the wounded male genius, finds herself empowered to an incredible, superhuman degree, and upon realising that her willpower exceeds her husband’s, begins not only to enjoy fighting and defeating him on a psychic level, but also indulging increasingly nefarious thrills without giving much of a damn for what Marcus or anyone thinks, particularly considering there’s no way of connecting her to Mike’s crimes, freed indeed from all need for remorse or moderation, only the pure pleasure of an unleashed will to power.

Witchfinder General approaches a similar preoccupation without the overt genre-enabled metaphor of Marcus’s machine, instead using its historical setting to forge a world where such exploitation and monstrous enthralment can be indulged. The narrative of the later film, adapted from a novel with the same title by Ronald Bassett, draws very broadly on a real historical figure, Matthew Hopkins, who stalked the byways of Civil War-era England seeking out and condemning those accused of witchcraft, in a campaign heavily coloured by religious and regional sectarianism: the film’s title was also a popular nickname he was granted in those heady days of different brands of authority bestriding the normally becalmed fields of England, raining down death in all its guises. The real Hopkins died of consumption at the age of 27, after about three years of activity. Reeves however was not that interested in the usual angle on such figures, like that espoused in Benjamin Christensen’s Haxan (1921) or Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, which analyse the heady stew of social prejudice, misunderstood psychological phenomena, and hysterical religious doctrines. Witchfinder General is more interested in analysing personal relations of power, and wielding a cogent metaphor for the zeitgeist of its making, being the increasingly fervent and angry tone of late 1960s where the youth culture revolved inescapably around the Vietnam War.

Reeves, originally wanted Donald Pleasance to play the heavily fictionalised take in the script he and Baker wrote, a reasonable choice that would have fit well with the portrait of the man, but when American International Pictures contributed financing they insisted on Price, then in haughty, hangdog middle age. Reeves opens the film with a sequence that coldly and starkly portrays the iniquitous brutality and social investment Reeves perceives in the tale of Hopkins and others like him, as an elderly woman, convicted of witchcraft, is dragged screaming and struggling out of a small town and hung from a gibbet on a windswept hillside, whilst Hopkins watches impassively from his horse at a distance from the actual machinery of the so-called justice. Hopkins travels from town to town on the invite of cliques in each locality, to accuse, process, and execute anyone who both provokes the fear and anger of their fellows but doesn’t have the strength to ward off Hopkins and the mobs that meet and collaborate with him. Hopkins employs John Stearne (Robert Russell) as his extremely eager torturer: where Hopkins regards Stearne as a useful ruffian and minion and little else, Stearne refers to his and Hopkins’ enterprise as a partnership. Hopkins also finds young women in each locale to force into sexual servitude for a time, using whatever leverage he has.

Even if Price wasn’t quite sure what Reeves wanted of him, Reeves certainly got it: Price’s Hopkins radiates a disdain for people that goes far beyond simple hypocrisy and into a realm of pure misanthropic attitude, considering everyone around to be some kind of useful stooge or temporary ally, a victim to be used and flung aside, or foe to be ruthlessly exterminated, and all of them sinners to one degree or another and so with no practical difference between the best and the worse. To a certain extent, indeed, landing Price rather than Pleasance in the part likely incidentally helped Reeves; Price’s formidable appearance amplifies this quality of characterisation rather than making Hopkins merely a sleazy opportunist. Next on Hopkins’ project of cleansing is the small Suffolk town of Brandeston, where he’s been called to investigate the local priest, John Lowes (Rupert Davies), who is mostly suspected – with some justification – of still harbouring Roman Catholic loyalties and so is regarded as satanic agent by his neighbours. His niece Sara (Hilary Dwyer) is his ward and housekeeper, and she has a lover, Richard Marshall (Ogilvy), currently serving with the rank of Cornet in the Parliamentary Army. Given some leave after saving his commander Captain Gordon Michael Beint during a skirmish with some Royalists, he heads to Brandeston and stays with the Lowes, as the priest, worried about their safety, suggests Richard marry Sara and get her away from the locale. The match is set but Richard has to go back to his company for a spell.

In the meantime Hopkins and Stearne breeze into town, and with the aid of their contacts in Brandeston apprehend the priest. Stearne tortures him by pricking his back with a spike, seeking the invisible, insensitive “devil’s mark” supposedly left on the body to seal a satanic pact. Sara makes her own, more palpable deal with the devil as she makes plain to Hopkins she’ll give him sexual favours if he lets her uncle be. Hopkins agrees and tells Stearne to get busy with other suspects. Stearne, himself taken by Sara, rapes her in a field, and when Hopkins is told of this by a witness, the Witchfinder, readily resumes the torture of Lowes, and finally has him and another woman hung after a session of witch-ducking, a session that leaves one woman drowned, and, thus, declared innocent. Richard, sent out on a mission to buy horses for the army with a big battle expected soon, overhears from a trader about the trial and immediately goes AWOL, galloping to Brandeston. There he finds Sara alive but distraught and wracked with guilt and pain, whilst her father’s church has been desecrated. In the mess of the church Richard gets Sara to kneel with him and pledge themselves in marriage over his cavalry sabre, but also vows revenge on Hopkins, and cannot countenance anything else until he gains that revenge. He runs into Stearne in a tavern during his hunt whilst Hopkins is visiting another town, and gets into a brawl with him: the tavern keeper intervenes to let Stearne flee by knocking Richard out, and Stearne alerts Hopkins when they meet on the road.

Hopkins’ charged and umbilical relationship with Stearne offers a new arrangement of the one evinced by the Monserrats, and also their connection to Mike in The Sorcerers. A chain of use and abuse, proxies and doppelgangers, amanuenses and dupes, victims and perpetrators, one constantly shading into the other. Stearne, a more plebeian, less strategically shrewd, if hardly more innocent figure than Hopkins, provides the relish for actually inflicting pain and suffering. Hopkins is happy to employ that pleasure taken in skill, but evidently considers himself superior to it. Hopkins knows well that part of his prestige comes from having layers of insulation, social, religious, and legal as well as in terms of dirty work, between him and the bloody actuality of his labours. They give not just a veneer of respectability, but also an even more pleasurable manifestation of it: even better than to torture someone without consequence is to prove one’s power by motivating that torture. Hopkins nonetheless literally cannot leave Stearne behind, although the two men are separated at one point when they’re stopped by a roundhead patrol: Hopkins, fleeing without a second thought for Stearne’s fate, guns down a soldier to secure his getaway, whilst Stearne is briefly captured and only escapes after a more personal and vicious struggle that sees him stab a soldier to death with his spike for finding the devil’s mark. Stearne vows a reckoning with Hopkins, but when he comes upon him again, Hopkins quickly and easily suborns him again without any concern by calling for him to resume his work.

As with The Sorcerers, Reeves’s political subtexts in Witchfinder General skid in many directions. Hopkins resembles a pseudo-historical take on totalitarian state inquisitors and Stearne the kind of man who helps keep such people in their jobs, one unleashing the other. Given that relatively few films have dealt seriously with the milieu of the English Civil War, particularly with the jarring mixture of high moral purpose espoused by the people fighting it and the disruption and disorientation unleashed by it on the ground level, Witchfinder General is particularly keen to reflect a sort of folk history portrait of perhaps the most subtly ugly front of a war, one where neighbours turn on each-other and petty tyrants grow like weeds, an approach that also connects to the Vietnam War epoch. An early scene of Richard saving his captain from a Royalist soldier, who sneaks through the underbrush close to where the roundheads have converged in the sun-speckled woods, suggests a distant analogue for the constant game of hunt and ambush played in the Vietnamese forests. A little more facetiously, if arguably honouring the ancient traditions of English bawdiness, Reeves rhymes the increasingly liberated culture of the ‘60s era with that with the upturned apple carts of the Civil War as Richard and Sara abscond for a night of passion, with Richard ironically wielding her uncle’s words as well as his tacit approval of their union: “Didn’t you uncle just say you must early to bed? And isn’t he a wise man?”

Reeves avoids the expected in presenting a clash between such premarital carnality and other such outbreaks of pagan practice amidst the chaos of war and the moral order Hopkins nominally maintains, in part because Hopkins himself is freely indulging his own sexual wont, with Reeves delivering his bitterest punchline when the Witchfinder, learning Stearne has soiled his private pleasure, moves on from Sara with icy lack of care. This sense of careless detachment from consequence and misanthropic divorcement is equally apparent as the by-product of Marcus Monserrat’s invention in The Sorcerers, and the way it hands Estelle in particular a tool to indulge the darkest desires. Estelle makes Mike seek out a female acquaintance, Audrey Woods (Susan George), who’s happy to see him, only for him to stab her to death with a pair of scissors in the most sublime/awful consummation of machine’s potential: Estelle shivers with orgasmic pleasure in finally getting to indulge a long-suppressed desire to assault and destroy things that invite jealousy and longing, and she soon compels Mike to repeat the act with Laura. In both films, the membrane that keeps people civilised is tested and found easily broken, a point most famously made in the final scene of Witchfinder General, depicting as it does understandable thirst for revenge becoming lunatic bloodlust and frustration and the complete collapse of moral meaning. Are we good people because we are intrinsically peaceable and empathetic and wrongdoing is aberrant, or is that a state that can only exist so long as a rarefied balance of tensions defining the relationship of individual to group? This interest would also fuel much horror cinema in the future, particularly Wes Craven’s films. In this way Reeves offers a loaded commentary on the logic not merely of the puritanical code of the witchfinder but, again, the nature of war as a corroder of all social values, reducing the best people to maniacal beasts.

Witchfinder General was retitled The Conqueror Worm for its initial US release, to make it seem like one of the Edgar Allan Poe films Price had made with Roger Corman and AIP, whilst different edits drifted around for decades afterwards, helping ironically to increase the film’s mystique. The film nonetheless found significant success, grossing $1.5 million in the US alone against its relatively miniscule £75,000 budget. As well as inflecting the Folk horror trend of the 1970s, Reeves’s film begat a string of horror films about cruel inquisitors, most of them made in Germany. The look of Witchfinder General, accomplished in Reeves’ collaboration with the great cinematographer John Coquillon, proved particularly influential. Coquillon would go on to collaborate regularly in that period with Sam Peckinpah. The feeling of connection between Reeves and Peckinpah goes beyond this, that said. Witchfinder General anticipates the same choleric, Sadean logic Peckinpah would bring to bear on The Wild Bunch (1969) and Straw Dogs (1971), with their determined depiction of the most violent and barbaric aspects of humanity, coexisting with a desperate effort to crawl out of the muck. At the end of an excruciating sequence of a woman being burned alive, Reeves delivers his most vicious joke in the sight of some village children roasting potatoes in the charcoal of the auto-da-fe, a vignette strongly reminiscent of the one Peckinpah offers at the opening of The Wild Bunch.

Witchfinder General also manages the rare feat of straddling genres easily. The bloody violence and air of slowly cranking, finally incipient lunacy certainly makes it count as horror, but it also shifts at points throughout into a war movie, historical drama, revenge thriller, and a sort of English Western, with Richard cast as the mounted avenger dashing on his noble steed across the fields, to the strains of Paul Ferris’s score, which toggles between a sweeping romanticism and flourishes of folk music and more standard thriller scoring for the era. Reeves films his landscapes with a similarly ironic sensibility, a stylistic approach that would essentially birth the so-called “Folk horror” style that would similarly hinge on a deceptive blend of the bucolic and the menacing. It’s worth comparing the heavily stylised approach Bava and John Llewellyn Moxey took a few years earlier, with La Maschera del Demonio (1960) and The City of the Dead (1960) respectively, in dealing with similar depictions of witch trials and executions and thematic territory. Instead, Reeves and Coquillon’s camera sweep a very real world, capturing the rural pastures, the pools of mud and dancing horses, the grass-framed lanes and thorn-fringed woods, the grey-stone churches and pebble paths, with all the evocation of yeoman virtue and pastoral crudeness befitting the artistic exaltation of John Constable or William Blake. But these come edged with hints of menace and gathering darkness in surveys of gaunt trees, looming clouds over silhouetted gibbets and hanging trees, and low, flare-casting sunsets charged with romantic tristesse, all of which would become fixtures in the cinematography over the next decade. Moments of the grotesque are approached with the same deadpan sense of strange beauty – pocks of red blood spurting from the backs jabbed with Stearne’s blade, fire wrapping around a screaming victim.

After failing to run the witchfinding duo down, Richard returns to his company and is lucky to avoid a court-martial through his captain’s good graces. After distinguishing himself at the Battle of Naseby, Oliver Cromwell (Patrick Wymark) assigns Richard to chase down the king, who’s rumoured to be fleeing to the East Anglia coast, and he sets off in the company of Troopers Swallow (Nicky Henson) and Harcourt (John Trenaman). Wymark’s brief appearance as Cromwell – he also narrates the film at the outset – sees the film’s fictional drama intersect cleverly with the history, with Wymark expertly capturing some essence of the future Lord Protector, professing his desire to have his success at Naseby remembered as a success for godliness and expressing delight in good food after a well-earned victory, all with the self-certified attitude of a man who knows what real power is and how to use it. Cromwell casually promotes Richard to Captain whilst assigning him to chase down the king, giving him a perfect window to also pursue Hopkins. After learning the king has managed to sail away, Richard heads for a rendezvous with Sara, who’s staying in the town of Lavenham. Richard however is unaware that Hopkins has set up in that town as well, and, knowing Sara is there, lies in wait for him.

On closer inspection it’s possible to view both The Sorcerers and Witchfinder General as Reeves exploring and trying to come to grips with his own depressive streak. This feels particularly cogent with The Sorcerers, in its portrait of a young man who seems to have everything going for him yet finds himself at the mercy of a force that steals his time, fragments his thoughts, saps his sense of self, and drives him to irrational places. In Witchfinder General it registers more in the film’s unflinching appraisal of infernal possibilities underlying the placid world, a world with its comforting trappings surgically cut away, where just about all that’s good and noble is systematically ruined. Reeves also meditates wryly on the illusive nature of the hipster universe Mike drifts amidst in The Sorcerers, the gyrating youngsters all trying to look chic whilst holding down jobs like Mike in a shop and Alan as a car mechanic. The antique store Mike works in is called, with amusing double meaning, “The Glory Hole,” where he is at one point faced with a testy customer (Gerald Campion) who comes in, pokes around the wares, and asks for a telephone, but doesn’t want the antique kind Mike offers him: “In that case you’re not much use to me are you?” This offhand but meaningful feel for social station is echoed again in Witchfinder General, where war has to a great extent benefited Richard in bringing him rank and connection, and also gives him the chance to marry Sara, a match that was unlikely before the war as Richard whilst a landowner only has a small farm. Indeed, the way the social disruption has benefitted him also applies to Hopkins and Stearne.

The innermost core of both The Sorcerers and Witchfinder General is nonetheless the preoccupation with violence, not as a mere anomaly in human life but an entire paradigm, questioning what keeps it at bay as well as what unleashes it, and its eruption means for the world in small and at large. The most violent and horrific moment in The Sorcerers isn’t Mike’s murders, but the crucial scene in which Estelle, realising she can overpower her husband, responds to his decision to deprogram Mike by smashing his apparatus, the pleasure of release and violent action etched into her aged face. Marcus tries desperately to stop her, but she easily topples him by kicking his cane out from under him, using the cane as her implement of destruction on the machine before then walloping Marcus on the brow with it. Knocking Marcus out gives Estelle a chance to tie him with arms spread to a cabinet. Once she has him at bay, Estelle tries to feed nasty-looking forward purely to keep his strength up to engage in more “competitions.” Here is a truly dark and evil vision of an old and exhausted marriage, the utter antithesis of the kind celebrated in a song from the same year, The Beatles’ “When I’m Sixty-Four,” finding its terminus in elder abuse and pure domestic violence and tragedy. Similarly, Hopkins utilising his sway to force women like Sara into his bed isn’t the most spectacularly ugly of his acts, but it is in a way the most familiar and excruciating (and as good as Karloff and Ogilvy are, Lacey steals the film off them). Both The Sorcerers and Witchfinder General also climax with Reeves taking on a basic, goading problem for anyone writing an action thriller – that moment when a protagonist is tied up and entirely at bay, with Marcus tethered to a cupboard and Richard finally bound and captive at the mercy of Hopkins and Stearne, forced to watch as Sara is brutalised with malignant design and purpose.

Reeves, despite his diptych’s forward-lunging approach to story, still inserts great little asides that let in jots of comic relief that aren’t allowed to get distracting, like the scene in The Sorcerers with the antique storie customer and another vignette with an over-eager Jewish deli manager (Meier Tzelniker) that feel harested from everyday life around London, and a cameo in Witchfinder General from Steptoe himself, Wilfrid Brambell, as Master Loach (“Witchfinding? Oh, that’s nice, that’s very nice!”), a rambling horse dealer who sells a nag to Stearne and accidentally helps him find Hopkins after their separation. Hopkins meanwhile, having set up in Lavenham, supervises the bleak spectacle of a young woman (Maggie Kimberly) being executed through Hopkins’ new innovation of being lowered slowly and face-first into the blaze, whilst her husband is held at bay by some village men. This couple, whilst not even named on screen, are vital counterparts and mirrors to Richard and Sara, illustrating the worst end they could come to, and the husband is similarly driven to revenge against Hopkins, trying to attack him with a knife only to be shot in the gut by the quick-draw witchfinder. This however proves to be key to Hopkins and Stearnes’ ultimate undoing, as the husband, not yet dead, manages to tell Swallow and Harcourt, on the search for their leader, that Richard and Sara, having been captured by Hopkins’ connivance, have been taken to a nearby castle.

Swallow and Harcourt ultimately play the same role in Witchfinder General as Alan and Nicole in The Sorcerers: both duos try to intervene in a dismal situation but do so just a hair too late, and the story must end with the degradation and downfall of the nominally innocent as well as the self-consuming comeuppance of the villains. Alan and Nicole, realising after Laura’s body is discovered that Mike was the last one with her and seeing the connection with Audrey’s slaying too, decide to track Mike down and try to dispel their fears, even two detectives (Ivor Dean and Peter Fraser) are on the trail too, rummaging through Mike’s flat. When Alan and Nicole confront Mike in the antique store, Estelle urges Mike to lash out violently and then flee in a stolen car. The police chase down Mike as he speeds recklessly through the London streets. But Marcus finally regains control not by trying to temper Estelle’s destructive impulse but to take it to its greatest extreme, and knowing well that physical damage Mike takes will manifest on their bodies: Marcus compels Mike to drive pell-mell into a building sight, crashing the car and burning to death within it. Marcus manages to breathe a last apology to his wife as he performs the ultimate act of self-sacrifice and punishment, and Reeves caps the film, by dissolving from the licking flames of the burning car to the sight of Marcus and Estelle now charred corpses.

Witchfinder General’s more famous, and notorious, climax is even darker, delivering the coldest possible parody of a situation most action films would present in heroic terms in depicting the turning of the worm and justified payback. Hopkins and Stearne relish having Richard and Sara at bay, Stearne now riddling Sara’s back with the same bloody stigmata as he did her father, whilst Richard levels on Hopkins a dead-eyed glare and promise to kill him, a promise Hopkins has heard a hundred times already and takes smirking delight in. Meanwhile Swallow and Harcourt try to bluff their way past Hopkins’ local ally (Peter Haigh) and finally bet fight him to gain access to the dungeon. Whilst Hopkins delights in threatening to burn Sara’s flesh with a cruciform branding iron, he orders Stearne to untie Richard and bring him close to watch. The ruckus upstairs gives Richard a split-second chance to knock Stearne down and throw off his bonds, delivering the spur of his boot to Stearne’s eye and leaving him writhing agony whilst advancing on Hopkins with an axe. Swallow and Harcourt arrive to behold another awful spectacle, that of Richard repeatedly swatting the agonised Hopkins with the axe, and Swallow shoots the witchfinder dead to put him out his misery. Richard, mad-eyed and distraught, begins to repeatedly bellow, “You took him from me! You took him from me!”, whilst Sara begins to shriek in crazed shock. Whilst The Sorcerers in some ways develops its driving ideas in close concert with its narrative form more completely than Witchfinder General, it’s not as full-blooded and delirium-producing as a work of directorial realisation, and in its climax Witchfinder General hits a truly raw nerve, capping the film with its haunting note of unresolved pain and spiralling madness. Sara’s wail becomes an entire philosophical statement, the scream ever-echoing from all that’s unresolved and unjust in the world’s deep, dank history.

Standard
1960s, Fantasy, Halloween Horror Film Freedonia, Horror/Eerie, Scifi

Night Tide (1961) / Queen Of Blood (1966)

.

Director / Screenwriter: Curtis Harrington

By Roderick Heath

When I was a young boy, no more than six years old, my mother and I visited a funfair built on a pier, a place of fascinating if weary fantasias that would demolished just a few years later. We ventured at one point into the hall of mirrors and after a while realised we simply couldn’t find our way out. Eventually we did locate a door, which proved to emerge on the narrow gangway at the pier’s edge, green seawater lapping around the pylons beneath, and we traversed that path back to the world. That incident has remained intense in my memory ever since. Only a couple of years later the pier would be demolished, replaced by nothing that would so thoroughly infiltrate a child’s imagination. It is one reason I nonetheless feel a powerful personal connection with Curtis Harrington’s Night Tide.

Harrington, born in Los Angeles in 1926, made his first short films when still a teenager. Around the same time he had his first sexual experience with a fellow, male student, a footballer, and in Harrington’s art meditations on love and eroticism were so often to be wound in deeply with his art. Harrington’s early work included a version of Edgar Allan Poe’s Fall of the House of Usher (1942), a subject he would return to with his last completed work, Usher (2000). After graduating college with a degree in film studies he immediately deepened his credibility as a cineaste by publishing a book on Josef von Sternberg at the age of 22, and he would retain his stature as an archivist through helping preserve James Whale’s The Old Dark House (1932). He served as cinematographer on Kenneth Anger’s Puce Moment (1948) and later played a role in his Inauguration of the Pleasure Dome (1954). In this period he also became connected with the mystic Thelema movement founded by Aleister Crowley, which Anger was deeply involved with, and he encountered another acolyte, Marjorie Cameron, an artist and performer who would eventually have an important onscreen role in his feature film debut. Cameron had been married to Jack Parsons, a senior figure in the movement and also a rocket engineering pioneer who had helped found the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and Harrington made Cameron’s artwork the subject of one of his documentary The Wormwood Star (1956).

Harrington also met and worked with fellow experimental film pioneer Maya Deren, who had her own esoteric religious creed as a practicing voodoo priestess, and spent a period working as an assistant to high-profile producer Jerry Wald, before venturing out to announce his emergence as a director of full-length films with Night Tide. Harrington’s original screenplay for his debut, based on a short story he wrote and initially called The Girl From Beneath The Sea, was sold to Roger Corman in 1956, but also reportedly had a meeting with interested financiers connected to the gangster Mickey Cohen. The film was eventually produced by Aram Kantarian on a stringent budget of $75,000. Completed in 1961, Night Tide had its premiere and appeared at film festivals, gaining plaudits in many quarters. But proper release was delayed for several reasons, including, according to star Dennis Hopper, the lack of a Hollywood filmmakers’ union seal of approval, and because the production entity, Virgo, couldn’t pay Pathé Films for their lab processing work, and it wasn’t until Corman stepped in to negotiate a deal with Pathé and the film was taken up for distribution by American International Pictures, that it finally entered general release in 1963. Hopper credited the film’s unusual journey as helping spark the American independent film movement, in proving that movies could be made and released outside the nominal system, leading on to the likes of his own Easy Rider (1969).

On the back of the film’s modest success, Harrington signed a deal with Corman that saw him fashion two films, Voyage to the Prehistoric Planet (1965) and Queen of Blood, built around footage repurposed from Russian sci-fi films Corman had bought the international rights to. In this venture he followed Francis Ford Coppola, who had concocted Battle Beyond The Sun (1963), and preceding Peter Bogdanovich’s foray with Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women (1967). Harrington’s small but fascinating oeuvre has long been a secret trove for movie lovers, not least because he rode at the vanguard of a generation of American filmmakers defined by an obsessive film buff background and not spawned by the studio system, laying groundwork for the emergence of the New Hollywood, Movie Brat, and later Indie Film movements. As a queer filmmaker, Harrington became a defining figure for a cinema overtly inflected with a camp sensibility. Night Tide meditates in a subtle way on the problems of finding love and contending with an inner nature that feels alien and aberrant in a world without guidance and care. His more overt works in that mode include Queen of Blood, which essentially depicts a monster drag queen from outer space. What’s the Matter with Helen? (1971) and Whoever Slew Auntie Roo? (1971) emerged as a diptych extending a brand established by Robert Aldrich’s Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1963), built around diva turns by aging star actresses, with Harrington adding his own, specific edge of absurd fetishism, fuelled by the screeching friction between a decayed age of Hollywood glamour screeching and fetid landscapes of small-timers and small-towners. Games (1967) began as a mischievously decadent and colourful portrait of a threesome enjoying sexual adventures and dangerous thrills, before devolving into a variation on Les Diaboliques (1955) in its second half. Harrington also did much work in television, whilst his last feature was 1985’s Sylvia Kristel vehicle Mata Hari.

Even if Harrington’s career was ultimately disappointing given his initial promise, few horror films wield the inscrutable allure and nigh-perfect exploration of a very specific mood as his early work, Night Tide in particular, a portrait in eerie disquiet and forlorn romanticism, with a lilt of fairy-tale charm. It can be easily described as a film nerd’s remake-cum-personal assimilation of the Jacques Tourneur-directed, Val Lewton-produced Cat People (1942), offering a variation on that film’s basic proposition of a lonely young woman obsessed by a monstrous identity she fears taking her over. But that doesn’t entirely do it justice, as Harrington also renders it a portrait of a time, a place, a culture, a way of thinking and feeling. Night Tide is infused with a quality that, like much of the best low-budget genre film, adapts to circumstance to imbue happenstance realism with a carefully wrought stylisation, recorded in lucid black-and-white that edges into the suggestive and the surreal at calculated moments. By contrast, Queen of Blood is a cobbled chimera of a movie, one that can indeed be likened to the kind of sideshow attraction the mystique of which Harrington celebrated in his previous film, this one seeing Harrington move to a freaky fantasia of space exploration loaded with elements inescapably prefiguring Alien (1979) and charged with a sickly eroticism registering in its fervent colour photography. Both films nonetheless are charged with a virtually unique signature of dreamy atmosphere and perverse obsessions laced into their narratives.

Harrington’s semi-underground connections are apparent in Night Tide not only in his visual textures, but also in the ideal poetic-realist locale he chose, the authentic-feeling evocation he offers of the seamy beauty and tacky magic of bohemian atmosphere of Venice, California, circa 1961. A housing development and resort locale built on the coast on the fringes of Los Angeles in the early 1900s, Venice was created in deliberate mimicry of the Italian city, complete with dug canals and manifold bridges. After being annexed as a suburb of LA in the 1920s, Venice fell upon hard times, and the cheapness of the housing began attracting immigrants and bohemians in droves, leading to its slow renaissance: today of course it’s one of Los Angeles’s most famous and pricey locales. When Harrington made his movie the subcultural enclave mixed with the remnants of the two-bit carnival culture that had once been the town’s characteristic and the faux-Italianate architecture stood cheek-by-jowl with opportunistic oil drilling equipment and virtual slums, weaving an odd, more than faintly unreal atmosphere. That atmosphere had already been ingeniously exploited by Orson Welles as he had the town stand in for the fictional border town depicted in Touch Of Evil (1958), and Night Tide strongly suggests Harrington was working as much under Welles’ influence as Val Lewton and Cat People, although arguably its sea-salts-and-tall-stories atmosphere is closer to The Lady From Shanghai (1946) and The Immortal Story (1968) than that of Touch Of Evil’s sleazy virtuosity.

Hopper plays Johnny Drake, a young sailor from the Midwest who, on leave in Los Angeles, visits the Venice waterfront, and ventures into a coffee house called the Blue Grotto, where an excellent jazz combo plays. Johnny settles alone at a table and surveys his surrounds, the vista of his gaze filled with either couples out on dates or other solitary people, some of them looking a little scarily to a young man’s eye like warnings of aging alone. Johnny’s eye finally lights on Mora (Linda Lawson), a solitary, nervous young woman listening intently to the music. Johnny asks to sit with her on the pretext of a better view, and begins a fumbling effort to strike up a conversation despite her display of absorption in the jazz. A strange, haughty lady (Cameron) swans around the coffee house and addresses Mora in Greek, plainly disturbing her and causing her to leave the nightspot in a hurry. Johnny, bewildered, follows her out and walks with her to her place of residence, which proves to be an apartment over a funfair hall containing a merry-go-round, on a pier jutting out into the dark ocean. Johnny’s attempt to kiss Mora is rebuffed, but when he makes an anxious appeal to see her again she agrees and tells him to come around for breakfast the following day. Johnny, joyful at making a connection, climbs onto the railing of the pier and walks its narrow way.

Harrington quickly places his two essential young lovers in a context at once palpable and dreamlike, touched with ethereal romanticism but also with a faint tremor of disquiet beneath it. Mora seems like Johnny’s deepest fantasy made flesh at first glance, lovely and innocent-seeming, but curiously isolated, as distinct and adrift as he is despite being a familiar fixture in this place he’s gravitated to, available but also trailed by some indefinable mystery that soon starts to resolve into something concrete. Her encounter with Cameron’s strange woman recreates the scene in Cat People where Elizabeth Russell’s mysterious beauty abruptly addresses Simone Simon’s Irina as “Sister,” and with a similar suggestion of some binding identity, some otherness, a quality that only those who share recognise. Although Harrington’s variation has a slightly different emphasis, in part because Cameron is considerably older than Lawson and so there’s less the crackle of forbidden sexuality being grazed and more of a conspiracy of elders, a slant that proves relevant as the film unfolds and the strange woman’s role in the affair is left tantalising at the very end. Johnny’s attempt to draw Mora in for a romantic clinch resolves with a similarly furtive and agonised note even as Johnny tries to be bold, only exposing his desperation.

The next day, when he shows up for breakfast, Johnny is treated to a meal of fresh mackerel Mora purchased, and they eat together in the balcony of her flat, which commands views of the ocean and the Venice beachfront, with only the presence of the raucous merry-go-round below as a price to pay, which Mora doesn’t mind anyway. Johnny, when Mora asks what his story is, responds with heavy-footed humour, “I’m in the United States navy!” but then explains how he cared for his sickly mother until her death, and then joined the navy to see the world, but hasn’t gotten any further than a sojourn in Hawaii and his current posting at the San Piedro Naval Base. Mora meanwhile is cagier about her background, but starts to reveal it as she introduces Johnny later to her adoptive father, Captain Samuel Murdock (Gavin Muir), who is also her employer in a peculiar means of living. Mora poses as a mermaid in a sideshow attraction, reclining in serene stasis, wearing a glittering fake tail and resting underneath a tank of water pretending to brush the hair of a long wig in listless fashion, hair which later seems to transform into the entrapping tentacles of a great octopus. Harrington’s fondness for a fairy-tale like mood is further amplified by Mora’s Snow White-like touch with animals, a seagull that hovers around the balcony interrupting breakfast by landing and allowing Mora to pet it lovingly. The notion that both Johnny and Mora have been trapped in a sort of delayed development, one part adult, one part still child, is signalled in both Johnny’s sailor suit and Mora’s abode.

“I guess we’re all a little afraid of what we love,” Johnny comments when Mora describes her simultaneous attraction to the ocean and her anxiety before it, offering the essential theme of both Night Tide and Queen of Blood, films in which desire and need blend with a death-urge as realised through alluring femmes fatale, and with the common quality apparent in both Mora and her alien counterpart in the subsequent film of being obliged through basic biological obligation to act in ways that may incidentally destroy others. With Night Tide Harrington found a perfect canvas to transfer over to commercial feature cinema ideas and preoccupations of the experimental film world he’d sprung from. The ticky-tacky wonderland of the fairground where Mora lives and works is a space where illusion reigns, falseness has its own reality, and childhood and adulthood can commune. Mora’s job is pitched exactly at the point where a childish delight in and need for transportation and simmering, nascent erotic longing converge in the image of the lounging mermaid, desirable and pathetic, alluring and amusing, fetishistic and untouchable, a vision resolving out the Jungian depths.

Similar in its sparse ambience and fetish for decaying public infrastructure, to Herk Harvey’s incidental companion piece Carnival of Souls (1962), Night Tide is different to that film in its warmer, less moralistic tone. It also anticipates later work by George Romero, including The Amusement Park (1972) and Martin (1976) – particularly the latter, in explicitly contrasting the alienated anxieties of youthful characters with a repressive, imposed dread of their inner selves, creating a homicidal impulse in an otherwise innocent protagonist who can’t find any other way out of their obsessions – a cunning metaphor for the way the past is always inescapable when the present is devoid of coherent alternative. In Night Tide this anxiety slowly coaxed out of Mora as she and Johnny draw close, but only becomes clear when Murdock finally tells Johnny that he found Mora as a child on a tiny Greek island, and believes she belongs to the race of legendary sirens, and, despite her superficial innocence inevitably gives in to urges to lure in and then kill men who want to be her lover. Johnny finds this idea offensively absurd, but quickly confirms Mora believes it to be true, wearing away at the fabric of her essentially placid psyche, even believing that the oceanic sound within a seashell is proof of her otherworldly connection.

Harrington pays tribute to Lewton’s films not only in atmosphere and psychological tone but also in a humanist theme, with the eclectic swirl of weird but decent characters who Johnny encounters, essentially adopting the young man, and the evoked fragility of the psyche and the innocence of young people: small acts of kindness and cruelty count for a lot in this landscape. The villainy, which proves to stem from a distinctly earthly and immediate source, stems from a desperate desire to not be abandoned, but finally creates a situation that destroys exactly what it seeks to control. Harrington’s sexuality offers a constant undercurrent, mediated and universalised through the threat of the younger man to the older in stealing away his object of adoration, and the dogged threat of total abandonment that haunts all. Another detectable influence on the film is the French artist and filmmaker Jean Cocteau, with his crisp yet treacherous visions of beautiful demon lovers and numinous portals riddling the mundane as expostulated in Beauty and the Beast (1946) and Orphée (1949), and Harrington even got a chance to make the connection plainer with a cameo in the Blue Grotto scene by Barbette, a former circus star who had appeared in Cocteau’s debut, Blood of a Poet (1932). Hues of the surrealist interest in the dreamscape’s horizon point where sex and death blend and unify, which Anger in particular had delighted, and the fascination with dark doubles and mysterious pursuers Deren had conjured in Meshes of the Afternoon (1944), are repurposed as narratively functional by Harrington.

The figuration of Mora as a cursed destroyer of men is part and parcel with her unique awareness and connection to the natural world, the girl who can coax seagulls into her arms also claims to hear the denizens of the ocean calling to her. This in turn provokes Johnny to determined but ineffectual efforts to break this absurd chain of thinking. Johnny first hears hints of this enigma through people who know Mora, including the merry-go-round operator (Tom Dillon), his shy but helpful and slightly gossipy granddaughter Ellen Sands (Luana Anders), and charmingly batty fortune teller Madame Romanovitch (Marjorie Eaton), a trio he encounters one afternoon gathered in the hall below Mora’s apartement. Ellen, perpetually helpful, brings coffee and tea – the latter for Madame Abramovitch, who laments the popularity of teabags impacts on her ability to read the leaves – whilst a friendly but dogged detective, Henderson (H.E. West), hovers around the pier, quizzed over an ongoing investigation. His visit finally gives the others an excuse to tell Johnny about how Mora’s last two boyfriends, both young, pleasant men like himself, vanished without trace. When Johnny and Mora attend a beach party thrown by the local bohemian crowd, Mora’s love of dancing is coaxed on by the encouraging musicians, her performances plainly a fixture of such gatherings.

This sequence is one Harrington’s little treasures of mood-setting and style. Mora, with her delight in trance-like, almost incantatory dancing, her own pagan paranoia finding temporary shelter within the sensual, life-loving undercurrents in the bohemian nightlife as recorded by Harrington, Mora’s alternations of spasmodic and elegant movements move from a steady, dreamy lilt in accord with the gently rapped bongo drums before building to ecstatic crescendos and back again. Harrington’s camera adopts her point of view as she spins around. The strange woman appears in the distance on the beach, licked at by the bonfire light, and then suddenly close at hand like a taunting memento mori amidst the life and pleasure, scaring Mora out of her fugue and causing her to faint. Another illustration of Harrington’s capacity to weave an uncanny atmosphere follows the scene of Johnny learning about the missing men from the trio by the merry-go-round. As he listens with extreme dubiousness to their accounts, a phone call comes through for him, who’s surprised as nobody knows where he is, and the call cuts out as he answers.

But he then sees the mystery woman, wearing as always a black dress with a gossamer wrap and veil, walking swiftly and stiffly along the street outside, and begins tracking her. The woman’s progress takes her into the decayed and industrially marked zones behind the waterfront, where the woman’s silks swirl in the wind as she traverses a landscape of wooden canal bridges and oil derricks, entering a slum of whitewashed walls, unnervingly self-motivated rocking chairs, and fearful, unspeaking children, transforms an everyday landscape into something charged with exotic threat and ambiguity. She vanishes just as Johnny halts outside a large, quasi-Italianate house, plainly a relic of the neighbourhood’s better days, that rocking chair still moving on the porch, a shadowy figure hovering in a high window, a young Latin girl playing nearby on the rubble-strewn ground who did not see the woman. Johnny knocks on the large house’s door and finds to his surprise this is Murdock’s house. The aging captain is glad to see Johnny and, inviting him in, starts knocking back stiff drinks with him, and then well ahead of him, as he explains how he encountered Mora and what he believes to be the truth of her.

Murdock’s house, with its fake old world charisma and fortress-like affectation without and the old sea dog’s trove of anecdotal experience, cherished mythos, and bizarre keepsakes within again, like Harrington’s feel for the Venice fairground, captures a frisson welling from things draped in a folkloric and fantastical mystique, finding glee in what’s improbable and tacky about it all, as well as what seems to withhold some actual, genuine, enticing mystery, that connection with a legendary pass when, without media to process and transmit it for us, the world really was as large and myth and the truths it contained were as variable as the minds that passed through it. Johnny recoils in shock and continues to squirm in disgust after finding a severed hand in a jar, a gift Murdock claims was given him by the Sultan of Marrakech as a curio, and came from a thief. Murdock’s increasingly tipsy admonitions against getting close to Mora finally see him fade into boozy snoozing, after Murdock has pointed out the door of what used to be Mora’s bedroom. Johnny ventures up there and finds the stuff of his lover’s childhood – a mattress, a dangling fishing net, and an open window with billowing drapes, imagery straight out of surrealist art, with Harrington’s camera moving forward into the darkness beyond the window and into the dreamy nothingness.

Harrington delights in compositions encompassing crude artworks painted on fairground walls and sprawling, intricate wallpaper patterns, carved motifs on furniture, and the pretentious yet run-down architecture and décor of the locale, all charged with a sense of awareness of the charm in seemingly the most casually noted and ephemeral expressions of finely detailed expression and a need for wonder – all qualities presented as a basic, binding aspect of the human story. The bric-a-brac scattered around Murdock and Mora’s homes are keepsakes of lives lived in both roaming interest and biting solitude, filled with signifiers of another demi-world that haunts them at night, the call of the sea and ports beyond. The world under Harrington’s eye is a place constantly defined and redefined by the finite delights of the human eye and soul at war with an entropic power eating away at the edges of this city by the sea. Madame Romanovitch, who tries to warn Johnny about ill-omens in his future, is worth comparing to the equally bogus figure Marlene Dietrich played in Touch of Evil in paying tribute to the delight inherent in such dubious mysticism: whilst Dietrich’s character is all lazy-eyed, exotic sexuality and Eaton’s is a chipper, tea-swilling bohemian, both present the notion that their flagrantly inauthentic magic contains something ever so teasingly real. Romanovitch, telling Johnny’s fortune, identifies him with the Knight of Cups in the tarot, and like many a knight-errant out of myth, he is defined by his simultaneous purity and drive to penetrate the mysterious female at all costs.

Night Tide was a vital career moment for Hopper, as his first film acting work after being virtually blackballed by Hollywood following butting heads with veteran director Henry Hathaway on From Hell to Texas (1958). After spending time deepening his study of Method acting and plying his alternate trade as a photographer, Hopper was handed his first lead role by Harrington, and for an actor later so associated with displays of bravura ranging from earthy passion to livewire instability to arch monstrosity, his performance here is a thing of quiet, reflective, and empathetic beauty, projecting a naïve and vulnerable charm whilst also investing Johnny with a degree of angular eccentricity and protean awkwardness. His dialogue is delivered with a spasmodic lilt that suggests the lack of experience Johnny has communicating, his eyes alight with bewilderment and eagerness before the world even as he begins to develop a sense of determination in contending with the perversity presented to him, his instincts steering him true, but also contending with a situation he cannot entirely understand until it’s almost too late. Brilliant flourishes abound in his performance, from the tiny double-take he does when laying eyes on a beautiful, solitary woman, to the panting, hysterical ball he folds into after surviving a near-homicide.

Harrington employs two striking dream sequences late in the film. The first sees Johnny, becoming discernibly paranoid and credulous with all the small, silly but niggling facts piling up about him, waiting in her apartment for Mora to come out of her bathroom. He falls asleep, and dreams of her emerging from the bathroom and approaching him with a decorous intensity to embrace him on her couch, but then transforming into her mermaid guise, her legs become a glittering, twitching mermaid tail, and then into an octopus that folds him a deadly,s mothering grip, long tendrils of hair becoming entwining tentacles. Later, he dreams of a rendezvous with Mora in mermaid guise, seated on the rocks above surging surf, brushing her hair and regarding herself in a hand mirror with monstrous narcissism, becoming Johnny’s own as he sees his own face in the mirror, before Mora is taken by a wave and swept out to sea despite his attempt to hold onto her hand, Mora laughing mockingly as she vanishes. Here Harrington gets to shift entirely into the realm of dream logic and a particular brand of cheapjack surrealism whilst effectively drawing out his deepest themes of the simultaneous danger and thrill of encountering a lover, the feeling of at once being completed and being annihilated in getting close to another being, a note he’d reiterate in a different tenor in Queen Of Blood.

Awakening with a scream from the first nightmare, Johnny finds Mora missing, and tracks her down below the pier where she stands against a pylon under the wharf, being swatted by the surf, gripped by hysteria in believing her seaborne sires and siblings are calling for her: Johnny dashes down to fetch her out. Harrington grazes explicitly queer territory with a sense of allusive humour as Johnny decides to head to a bathhouse whilst Mora sleeps off the ordeal, discovering another curious abode of twisted veils and winding sheets and shadowplay on walls. “Girlfriend ain’t treatin’ you all right?” the masseur Bruno (Ben Roseman) asks as he works over Johnny and notices his tension, before Murdock appears, and the masseur proposes to the older man, “Hello Captain – do you want me to pound you later?” Murdock questions Johnny about Mora’s behaviour, noting with foreboding import: “You must be especially careful now at the time of the full moon – because that’s when the tides pull the strongest.” Johnny is, despite his refusal of credulity, perturbed when Mora, after resolving to ignore her fit and attendant anxieties, proposes they go scuba diving together at a spot along the coast, but eventually she wins out.

As they swim together and inspect a shining object on the seafloor, Mora suddenly attacks Johnny, cutting his airhose with a knife and ripping away his mask. Johnny manages to flee to the surface and climbs into to their dinghy, whilst Mora swims away. Johnny, after recovering from a spasm of profound shock, waits for ages in the dinghy, but Mora doesn’t return. Johnny retreats to a hotel in Venice where he squirms in his bed. The next morning, Johnny is puzzled when he sees in the paper no report of Mora being missing and the ad for the mermaid show still included. He heads to the carnival and finds Murdock still spruiking if without his usual zest, but upon venturing insides the show finds Mora’s pathetic, staring corpse lying in the water of the tank. Murdock confronts him with a pistol, commenting, “The murderer always returns to the scene of his crime…You had to see the result of your monstrous act!” “But I loved her,” Johnny murmurs, before ducking and shoving over the tank, which crashes against Murdock and disarms him, his wildly fired gun attracting two cops who intervene whilst Mora’s body lies at the feet of both men who contended for her possession, but fatefully sprawled on her paltry fake patriarch.

The meaningful upshot of Harrington’s little mythos here is the reveal that Mora eventually became entranced and convinced by Murdock’s lies, which were intended to keep her close to him – Harrington’s final, cunningly conceived metaphor for the way so many social paradigms are constructed. A postscript scene sees Murdock confess to inventing the whole siren story to keep Mora under his control and having killed her previous boyfriends, is reminiscent of the deflating tone of the psychiatrist’s explanation in Psycho (1960). Like that scene, this one lets in the cleansing light of rationalism whilst still leaving the identity of the mystery woman unclear – most likely she was someone Murdock hired to help enforce his illusion, but nobody else remembers seeing her, contriving to retain an ever so slight note of lingering, oneiric threat. It’s as if Harrington was paying heed to fashion but still giving a hint as to his truest faith. The authentic touch of romantic tragedy offered is leavened slightly by the promise Johnny faces a future with Ellen, who, with her more solicitous and practical touch, comes to the police station to give him a cup of coffee.

In his first work for Corman, Coppola had refashioned the Soviet film Nebo Zovyot (1959) into Battle Beyond the Sun (1962), a partial remake-cum-adaptation: Harrington was given Planeta Bur (1959) and did more or less the same thing, inserting new scenes with Faith Domergue and Basil Rathbone but following the original film. Harrington didn’t think it worth putting his name to, instead crediting himself with the pseudonym John Sebastian. With Queen of Blood, Harrington grew bolder: utilising footage from Mechte Navstrechu (1963) as well Nebo Zovyot once more, he followed a similar procedure in the first half but then swerved into his own storyline. Queen of Blood, whilst inevitably fractured as an artefact, nonetheless proves eventually to achieve a strikingly similar mood of dreamlike immersion and near-subliminal strangeness to Night Tide, assimilating the inherited footage into itself as Harrington’s new footage mimics design elements of the original but also submits the existing material to his audio effects and careful editing. Harrington applied a lush approach to making a colour film, more than a little strongly reminiscent of Mario Bava in the war of drenching, uncanny hues, suggesting Harrington had likely watched some of the Italian maestro’s work. That said, Queen of Blood came out at virtually the same time as Bava’s Terrore nella Spazio (1966), with both films often cited as evident influences on Alien, revealing how both directors came up with strikingly similar ideas for how to transfer the allure of Gothic horror into a science fiction setting independently.

Queen of Blood also takes on the basic notion of a literal femme fatale more directly than Night Tide. The plot involves humanity responding an overture from an alien race in the year 1990, a time when, in the film’s timeline, space travel has become advanced and missions are increasingly far-flung. The International Institute of Space Technology provides a thriving hub for the assembled mental might and capability of the Earth, under the administration of Dr Farraday (Basil Rathbone). Astronaut and communications specialist Laura James (Judi Meredith) is the first to pick up the alien signals, which she lets her boyfriend and fellow astronaut Allan Brenner (John Saxon) listen to, resolving at first only as rhythmic noise. Farraday however successfully translates the signals, and informs the assembled personnel of the Institute of the nature of the aliens and their friendly intentions. The aliens successfully launch a probe to the Earth which streaks through the atmosphere and lands in the ocean, and soon after announce their intention to send an ambassadorial mission. Laura picks up a transmission from the ambassadorial craft however that reveals a disaster en route, forcing a crash-landing on Mars. Farraday elects to send the Oceano I and II craft on the mission of rescuing the ambassadors.

Farraday, Laura, and Allan all travel to a moonbase which controls the various deep space missions, along with the appointed commander for the Oceano I, Anders Brockman (Robert Boon) and crewman Paul Grant (Hopper): Laura is assigned to go with them by Farraday, whilst Allan is assigned to the Oceano II, which will set out several days later as backup. After weathering a sunburst, the Oceano I, lightly damaged, still makes it to Mars and lands, but upon finding the crashed alien ship only find one being aboard, and theorise others likely ejected on an escape craft. With the Oceano II unready for launch yet, Allan and Tony Barrata (Don Eitner) volunteer to take the smaller craft Meteor, which is ready, to deploy the satellite more quickly, but the Meteor’s lack of fuel means they’ll have to effect a crossing from Phobos to Mars with their own escape shuttle and return on the Oceano I. The two men reach Phobos and launch the satellite, only to find the alien lifeboat is actually marooned on Phobos. They rescue the one survivor on board, a weirdly beautiful woman (Florence Marly), and given their own escape shuttle can only take two people, one of the men has to stay with the Meteor to be picked up later by the Oceano II. Allan initially intends staying, but Tony demands they flip for it and loses, so Allan takes the woman down to Mars. He carries the alien woman across country to the Oceano I, met along the way by Anders and Paul after they weather out a storm. Finally, reassured that Tony will be rescued by Farraday, the Oceano I sets out for home.

Some of all this is definitely narrative make-work to utilise the inherited footage, and the film doesn’t really, properly find its proper path until half-way through. Most of the work Coppola applied to Battle Beyond The Sun was hiding the Soviet markings and imagery in the movie he was revising; Harrington is much less fastidious, letting the Soviet red star appear on tail fins now and then and keeping a wide shot of a meeting, supposedly at the Space Institute, with Sputnik in a mural. But then again Harrington’s vaguely internationalist governing setup perhaps isn’t so averse to a bit of Commie influence. The disparity between the elaborate beauty and design care of the Soviet films, which were major productions for the time and place, and the cheap infrastructure of Harrington’s footage, is amusing, but also tapped for interesting contrasts. The visions of the alien environs and personnel Harrington extrapolates from the older film, with their bold, flowing, spherical designs and buildings, their lush look with smoky greys and suturing reds, have a baroque flavour sharply different to the functional technocracy (and blatant cheapness) of the Earthlings’ places and craft. The uneasy mating of harvested Soviet epic spectacle with ramshackle Hollywood make-do can be taken as its own subtext, a clash of cultural opposites, ironic given how usually it’s seen the other way around, with other film cultures anxiously emulating the grandeur and slickness of Hollywood product: rather the Soviet films Corman was making use were better-produced than a great deal of Hollywood sci-fi.

Nonetheless, Harrington does something creative and memorable with the intercut footage, the visions of blazing retrorockets firing in the void, a plastic Mars glowing above the crags of Phobos, and furious winds rummaging the red planet’s soil in seething waves. Harrington assimilates it all in a manner that renders it all similar to Johnny’s wanderings in Venice in Night Tide, evoking a restless poetic desolation, a search for meaning and connection that is only to be granted in a specifically cruel way, the toing and froing of all the anxious astronauts and their hardware a wild goose chase that does, at the end, prove to be in service of something, but that something isn’t what anyone but the aliens had in mind. Harrington’s experimental film background undoubtedly was of use here, given the way filmmakers in that realm often mined old movies, disassembling them shot by shot and recombining them for flashes of mysterious art, like Joseph Cornell’s Rose Hobart (1936), or Anger’s use of footage from The King of Kings (1927) in Scorpio Rising (1963). Harrington manages to conjure an atmosphere similar to what Byron Haskin managed on his Robinson Crusoe On Mars (1964), finding a place where pulp adventuring and an elusive genre poetry mate. Harrington exacerbates the mood with the electronic sound effects and Leonard Moran’s pulsing, shimmering electronic music, reminiscent of Forbidden Planet (1956), applied over the spacefaring footage and the early scenes of the aliens communicating with the humans and sending out their emissaries. In a linked manner, Harrington’s film is preoccupied by cosmic ambition and the infinite possible, all heralded in the first half, giving way to a narrative that corkscrews inwards in portraying seething hunger, predatory desire, and the most primal truths of existence.

Harrington gets off on the arch joke of the two contrasting women at the film’s heart, both of them with frost-blonde hair, Meredith’s ice-cream-scoop bob sculpted within an inch of its life but rounded to a feminine planetoid, where Marly’s alien sports a thrusting beehive, queenly and vaguely phallic all at once. Amongst other things she’s camp culture’s ür-ancestor to the women in The B-52’s, the Coneheads, and the fake Martian woman in Tim Burton’s Mars Attacks! (1996). Meredith, a former ice skating star who turned to acting, had previously most notably played the sweetheart princess briefly but memorably transformed into a cackling, spectacularly dressed witch in Nathan Juran’s Jack The Giant Killer (1962); here she’s handed the regulation role of the one girl on the spaceship, but she’s also gifted a reasonably unfussy role in the drama, with Farraday mentioning his confidence in her, and Allan not voicing any sexist qualms about his woman heading off into danger, the two merely being frustrated when they find Farraday’s assigning them to different ships. Allan displays his quality when he readily volunteers to help out the Oceano mission with the risky flight to Phobos, and then immediately desists from his immediate object of reaching Laura when the situation changes, establishing his readiness to put the mission before his needs. In contrast to Laura, Marly’s alien woman comes with green skin, rubbery-textured skin, blood-red lips, and bright blond hair jutting in a beehive crown: her eyes gain a phosphorescent glow when she asserts a powerful telepathic will that prove able to suborn the men around her, a marvellous actualisation of the metaphor for her sexual charisma and exotic allure.

Saxon, still relatively early in his days as an ubiquitous B-movie star, is called upon by Harrington to inhabit a quality very similar to Johnny in Night Tide, as Allan’s sense of innate disgust and scepticism when faced with a set of new, disturbing truths becomes blatant even as others insist on a cover story that runs counter to good sense. Tony for his part gets off lightly even when it seems he’s had bad luck in being stuck on Phobos, electing to spend his time taking and experimenting with soil samples. Anders and Paul are along, seemingly for scientific rationality and also for the presumed masculine variey, but actually prove to be food. In Harrington’s central coup of darkly humorous-horrific irony, the rescued alien, first revived in the company of the four humans who have laboured so long and hard to save her, beholds Paul with delight, then Anders with even more evident appreciation, and then finally Allan with beaming ecstasy – only to then wilt with bitchy aggravation when she sees Laura. “Our visitor doesn’t seem to get along too well her own sex,” Anders comments as he assigns Paul to tending to her needs rather than Laura, and Paul coaxingly gets her to try drinking water, Paul’s manner like a parent tending to a baby whilst the alien all but purrs with stirred quasi-erotic wont that’s inseparable from a different kind of thirst. Harrington fought hard with Corman to cast Marly as his interstellar vampire, in part because she was a friend, and because he felt she had just the right, exotic allure required for the role. Marly, a French actress who had appeared in René Clement’s Les Maudits (1947) nearly twenty years earlier but had suffered through accidental blacklist after coming to Hollywood, certainly had exotic allure in spades with her architectural cheekbones and eyes that almost seemed to glow like a big cat’s even without the pencil spots Harrington trains on them when the alien is enthralling her male prey.

Harrington finally puts over the icy-cold joke of his alien woman proving under the superficial humanity to be something different, as she waits for the right moment to get Paul alone. Paul, on watch with the other asleep, surveys his fellow astronauts and seeks out the alien woman in her room, a throbbing red beacon light bathing the set and a buzzing on the soundtrack that sounds suggestively like bees. Finally the alien woman emerges from the shadows, drenched in the blood-red light but the green of her skin undimmed as her hand climbs eagerly up his chest, her eyes glowing brilliant and cat-like, mesmerising her prey for an assault Harrington films as an intimate and eager clinch, but the next day Anders tries to wake Paul but finds him unresponsive, and realises he’s cold and dead. Upon finding the woman blood-glutted, tell-tale trickles of crimson leaking from her mouth still, the three remaining astronauts recoil in horror, but Anders quickly determines to deal calmly and understandingly with the problem: “How can we expect her to conform to our ideas of proper behaviour?” he rebukes Allan and Laura who immediately brand her as a monster: “Is there such a difference between blood and a rare beefsteak?” he prods further whilst mentioning the unknown factors of the aliens’ society and ideas of morality, given the woman might be as he calls her a “kind of intellectual insect,” or even more plant-like than animal given the high chlorophyll content in her skin.

Here Harrington mischievously explores the ambiguities of social expectation and moral codes as expected of the individual in ignorance of their true nature, a topic of ever-fraught meaning, but also gives it his own sarcastic twist, presenting characters who don’t have the good sense to realise their gut instincts are correct. Soon after Anders has his own deadly encounter with the alien, in one of Harrington’s most cleverly executed, effectively hallucinatory scenes. Anders, moved by an intangible feeling in the eerily quiet and lit crew cabin as the weird buzzing noise builds, looks through an open bulkhead door towards the alien’s chamber with the throbbing red beacon, as if perceiving something that refuses to resolve. At first he only seems to behold an empty room, but after blinking catches sight of the alien advancing on him in a sinuous prowl, with bright eyes and fixed, unsettling smile. Anders takes up his gun to defend himself, but with her mesmeric eyes ablaze he drops it and stands defenceless to her ravenous need, her hungry lips parting around her wickedly bared teeth. After finding Anders dead, Allan and Laura elect to try and hold the woman at bay for the rest of the voyage by tying her to a bunk, but she uses psychic power to burn through the rope holding her.

Queen Of Blood’s release in the same year Star Trek premiered is another suggestive coincidence: film and series both betrayed a compulsive fascination with a future of space travel where the primeval often lurks under the technocratic surfaces and monstrosities lurk within deceptive exteriors, as illustrated by an episode of Star Trek like its official debut episode “The Man Trap,” and illustrated with lurid, virtually fauvist colours that seem to be vivid and palpable but actually imbue everything on screen with the instability of surrealism. Queen Of Blood also connects to that other central fixture of modern sci-fi, Star Wars (1977), through the participation of Gary Kurtz as production manager: I can’t help but wonder if something of Harrington’s use of sound in specific to generate a weird and alien atmosphere might well have been transmitted on through Kurtz to the production ethos of George Lucas, who was, ironically, one of the relatively few Movie Brats to not spend a phase in the Corman apparatus. John Cline’s artwork under the opening credits recall Corman’s love for prefacing his films with paintings of a stylised modernist bent that helped announce his stripped-down textures, here promising outlandishly colourful blossoms on lunar landscapes under dark stars. Harrington’s penchant for including cameo performances from friends and fellow aficionados, or charged with an air of meaning in connection to the subcultures he loved, extends to an appearance by the legendary author and archivist Forrest J. Ackerman as Farraday’s aide.

As for Farraday himself, he’s gifted with the still-imposing and innately sensible tones of Rathbone, who at the age of 74 was looking gaunt and tired even with enough dye in his hair to stain a river (this would prove Rathbone’s second-last film), in playing the avuncular and wise authority figure, a status that suddenly comes into doubt right at the end. The Queen of Blood’s reign ends in an anticlimactic fashion but Harrington still manages another marvellously creep moment as Laura  awakens from a nap and searches for Allan, the spaceship interior weirdly quiet and deserted-feeling. At last she finds him lying prone and mesmerised in the control room, whilst the alien laps his blood with leisurely glee from a bite on his wrist. Laura grabs her and they have a tussle that Harrington wryly renders a catfight, Laura’s nails leaving long oozing scratches in the alien’s back, green blood leaking out. The alien shrieks in bewildering anguish and dashes away, and Laura revives Allan. They track the alien back to the crew cabin and find her dead, bled out from her seemingly paltry wounds. Allan’s best theory is that she was a haemophiliac, associating that trait as on Earth with royalty. Then Laura discovers the most disturbing legacy of their adventure: the queen has left the spaceship infested with her bulbous, throbbing eggs, laid in nooks all about the interior.

Like the sad meditation on the nature of love and the things it drives people to do that caps Night Tide, here Harrington offers his skewed and mordant take on biological essentialism and the results of the urge to go forth and multiply, bringing the film to a shuddering halt with a sickly evocation of a different kind of propagation that is nonetheless merely a variant. This is also where the similarities to Alien and its sequels come most sharply to the fore, opening the door as it does to a new age of fantastical cinema with a compulsive fascination for physical perversity and a new survey of metaphor for an age where the body lies at the nexus of so many anxieties. Laura and Allan anticipate the ship having to be sterilised laboriously, but instead find Farraday, like the late Anders before him Farraday, is overjoyed to have these specimens survive for study, and has them collected. Harrington fades out on the sight of a tray full of the eggs – realised however amusingly as throbbing rubber bulbs set in green jell-o – containing all their potential danger and wonder for a human race whose curiosity is too often stronger than its good sense.

Standard
1930s, Halloween Horror Film Freedonia, Horror/Eerie, Thriller

The Black Cat (1934)

.

Director: Edgar G. Ulmer
Screenwriter: Peter Ruric

By Roderick Heath

Edgar G. Ulmer has long been renowned as something like the poet laureate of B-movies. The one-time fresh talent of Mittel Europan theatre and cinema who finished up labouring in the treadmill of low-budget Hollywood screen filler, but eventually found champions as the consummate auteur, bringing levels of ingenuity, passion, and invested creativity to even the most demeaned product he took on, with a late, salutary prayer to be granted absolution for all the work he’d taken on just to make a living. One of a seemingly endless rank of notable early filmmakers whose lives began in the about-to-crumble Austro-Hungarian Empire, Ulmer was born in 1904 in the city of Olomouc, today in Czechia. He lost his father in the First World War, a bleak turn of fate that left a perpetual mark on not just the man but his art, expressed most profoundly and directly in The Black Cat, his Hollywood debut and one of biggest hits from Universal Picture’s legendary run of horror films in the 1930s. Some of the hazy mystique surround Ulmer’s career is sourced in his own, often disputed claims about who he worked with and what he worked on, as he estimated he’d made some 127 films over the course of his nearly forty-year career. Weathering the grim post-Great War years as he grew up, Ulmer faced hunger and anti-Semitism, but he soon busied himself by heading to Vienna and studying architecture and philosophy, whilst also dabbling in theatre work as an actor and set designer.

Ulmer found a mentor in the renowned theatrical director Max Reinhardt, who recognised the young man’s design talent and employed him on several productions, including his first American sojourn. This gave Ulmer his ticket into the movie world, where he worked with an array of cinema talents including F.W. Murnau for certain and, more dubiously, Paul Wegener and Fritz Lang; he also later claimed to have gained his first directing experience doing uncredited work on some short Westerns, including The Border Sheriff (1926), around the same time he followed Murnau to Hollywood to work on Sunrise: A Story of Two Humans (1927). What is certain is that Ulmer returned to Europe to help make People On Sunday (1929), a sprawling portrait of late-Weimar Berlin’s young people enjoying a weekend, and a work that was also a fascinating nexus of emerging, motivated movie talent: Ulmer codirected with Robert Siodmak, the film sported script input from Siodmak’s brother Curt and Billy Wilder, and Fred Zinneman and Eugen Schüfftan were part of the cinematography team. Ulmer went back to Hollywood to make his official, solo feature debut, Damaged Lives (1933), a low-budget drama about the touchy subject of venereal disease. Ulmer’s career seemed assured with the success of The Black Cat, but his life took another sharp turn when he fell in love with Shirley Castle (Kassler), who was at the time wife to producer Max Alexander, nephew of Universal honcho Carl Laemmle.

Ulmer’s part in a major Hollywood scandal went down about as well as expected: Shirley divorced Alexander and fled with Ulmer to New York, leaving the young director in career purgatory. Ulmer found refuge making “ethnic” and “race” films. The former were movies for immigrant communities, shot in Yiddish and Ukrainian, including the well-regarded Green Fields (1937); the latter were for Black audiences, much like those Oscar Micheaux was making at the same time: Ulmer’s Moon Over Harlem (1939), starred Cora Green, who was also in Micheaux’s Swing! (1938). Proving himself able to work in such stifled and stringent circumstances, Ulmer was hired by the Producers Releasing Corporation or PRC, a fledgling studio somewhat unique in the Hollywood of the day in that it was “poverty row” production outfit, that is one specialising in very low-budget films without major stars, but had its own, small studio. Over the next few years Ulmer mastered the fine art of making potent movies on the lean PRC budgets. He became the studio’s unofficial production chief as well as making his own films, for which he was often called “the King of PRC,” whilst Shirley had become his constant collaborator, even writing several of his movies.

Ulmer’s stringent yet artful and compelling works in this period, like Bluebeard (1944) and Strange Illusion (1945), set the scene for his other most famous film, the 1945 deadbeat-noir classic Detour, which, with its forlornly ironic portrait of a luckless pianist who finds himself victim of an increasingly cruel set of impossible circumstances, exemplified Ulmer’s mordant mature perspective. The film’s success helped Ulmer get bigger budgets, including the Hedy Lamarr vehicle The Strange Woman (1946) and the Zachary Scott-starring Reckless (1948), which some have called his proper masterpiece. After PRC broke up in the late ‘40s, Ulmer, rather than taking job offers at bigger studios, resumed a wandering career as an independent talent, including imbuing a bewitching visual mood and eccentric thoughtfulnes upon the ultra-cheap and awkwardly written sci-fi thriller The Man From Planet X (1951), the rather less good but likeable The Daughter of Dr. Jekyll (1957), and a late attempt to get in on the late 1950s peplum film craze with Hannibal (1959), a film that unfortunately, thanks to producer interference, decided to casually rewrite history at the end, much to Ulmer’s chagrin. His career finally ran out of steam just as he was receiving interest from the new generation of auteurist film critics, and after a debilitating stroke died in 1976.

As well as proving Ulmer’s one moment of major Hollywood success and profile, The Black Cat was also a big deal as the first occasion the two big, fresh-minted stars of the 1930s horror movie craze and whose names still ring with the familiarity of genre legend, Béla Lugosi and Boris Karloff, starring together. Much irony was implicit in their oft-entwined careers: Karloff had received his big break playing the Frankenstein’s Monster in James Whale’s 1931 hit after Lugosi had turned it down, disliking the idea of being caked in makeup in a mute role, but Karloff, after proving what an actor could do in such a part, had quickly proven in films like The Mask of Fu Manchu (1932), Scarface (1932), The Mummy (1932), and The Ghoul (1933) that he was an actor of great range, and was already being billed over Lugosi here. That a work as odd as The Black Cat could have been so popular feels a bit hallucinatory, rather like the film itself. It’s an undoubted high water mark for the Universal horror brand, triangulated with the simmering poetic menace as The Mummy and the raucous virtuosity of Bride of Frankenstein (1935). But where those films defined an era and a style that’s now virtually vanished, Ulmer’s film, whilst arguably more uneven, still feels potently modern, wielding a unique mixture of originality, aesthetic daring, and thematic depth that makes it virtually unique in the genre.

The Black Cat’s deceptive title plainly stemmed from Universal wanting to extend its horror brand, reliant on famous authors in the genre like Bram Stoker and Mary Shelley. After the studio and Lugosi gained another hit with the Edgar Allen Poe adaptation Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932), two more Poe-inspired movies would follow in the form of Ulmer’s film and Lew Landers’ The Raven (1936), both of which, instead of presenting straight adaptations of the author’s stories, instead riffed on their themes and imagery. Ulmer came up with the story with Peter Ruric, a thriller writer who usually wrote under the name Paul Cain, who then penned the screenplay. An extra dimension of peculiarity invested in The Black Cat stems from Ulmer’s simultaneous embrace of and self-conscious inversion of the already well-defined Gothic horror strain. The film revolves around the familiar genre motifs of the dread lord of the creepy manse with his cellar-full of dark secrets out in the Carpathian wilds. The holidaying everyday folk who find themselves trapped in a situation of macabre strangeness. The singleminded avenger pitting himself against the evil overlord. Ulmer subverts these motifs in turn, whilst rooting the drama as a whole in his lingering meditation on his own traumatic youth.

The explosion of Hollywood’s horror cinema arrived after a decade or so of dark fantasias made in European cinema, when the Great Depression finally unlocked the same forlorn attitude in American audiences that had dogged the Continental crowds since the Great War. And yet The Black Cat was, oddly, the one genre film on either side of the Atlantic to make an explicit connection between the social and psychological fallout of the war. Abel Gance’s J’Accuse! (1919), with its climactic imagery of the war dead crawling out of their graves to accuse the living, had touched on similar territory, and it wasn’t really a horror film. The Black Cat, in its own, rarefied way, opened the door then for a type of horror movie that was still decades away from having its day, one more overtly intrigued by the connection between social and psychological horror, as well as its more grisly, sadistic, and erotically aware flourishes, kept muted with eliding devices though they are. Ulmer’s film begins with the Orient Express departing Budapest (illustrated in part with recycled footage from Shanghai Express, 1932), carrying the newlywed couple Peter (David Manners) and Joan Alison (Jacqueline Wells, who would be known for most of her career under the name Julie Bishop), spending their honeymoon on a jaunt through Eastern Europe.

Owing to a ticketing mixup they find themselves sharing their compartment with a strange man who introduces himself as Dr Vitus Werdergast (Lugosi): in a cunning gesture that betrays both Ulmer’s felicity of framing and Lugosi’s sense of theatrical impact, Vitus first appears over the shoulder of the conductor, removing his hat with a smoothly enigmatic gesture before revealing his face. A sublime tension between reality and fantasy is mooted quickly as part of the texture of The Black Cat, similar in some respects to Whale’s The Old Dark House (1932) but swerving from its satirical lilt, except in brief flashes of knowing humour deployed by the characters. Ulmer introduces a prototypical metatextual touch in making Peter a writer of mystery novels, or, as he describes himself, “One of America’s greatest writers – of unimportant books.” Where a more typical variation on that idea would present Peter with an odd version of his own kinds of story, Ulmer pushes a step further than many takes on such an idea in confronting Peter with a situation that renders his own potted tales ineffectual. A joke at the fadeout involves Peter being appalled to see a newspaper review of his new book being criticised as unbelievable, after the surreal experience he and Joan have just weathered. The ordinary, wholesome brand of romantic passion Peter and Joan are sharing is contrasted with undercurrents of simmering, morbid fetishism and strange mania that first manifest when Peter, nodding awake with Joan still asleep next to him in their compartment set, glimpsing Werdergast brushing a hand very delicately across Joan’s hair in her oblivious state.

Vitus, rather than acting abashed in being caught at this, calmly tells Peter, “I beg your indulgence my friend. Eighteen years ago I left a girl, so like your lovely wife, to go to war. Kaiser and country, you know. She was my wife.” Vitus asks Peter if he ever heard of Kurgal, and when Peter shakes his head explains it’s a prison located above Lake Baikal, a perfect hellhole, and one he’s just, finally escaped from after being captured by the Russians during the war. “Many men have gone there,” Vitus notes with a purr of portentous meaning, “Few have returned…I have returned.” Dissolve to the train arriving in the town of Wiezegrad, in a pouring rainstorm, where the Alisons, Vitus, and his hulking Siberian servant Thamal (Harry Cording) board a bus that will take them to a hotel at the resort town of Gömbös. The bus driver (George Davis) explains the road they’re on was built by the Austrian army and runs through an area that was, during the war, the battlefield of Marmorus, “The greatest graveyard in the world.” “Tens of thousands of men died here,” the driver recalls whilst the Alisons smile with tight scepticism, “The ravine down there was piled twelve deep with dead and wounded me. The little river below was swollen red, a raging torrent of blood.” Above the road is the ruin of old Fort Marmorus, the object of the great battles below: flashing lightning illuminates the new, Bauhaus-style house erected atop the ruin, which the driver says was built by “Engineer Poelzig,” a name that makes Werdergast wince.

The driver suddenly loses control on the muddy road and crashes through a guardrail. The driver is killed and Joan takes a gash to the chest, forcing the stranded passengers to grope their up through the stormy murk to the house. Ulmer’s careful assault on familiar visual syntax first appears here as he cuts from the sight of the screaming passengers inside the bus to a shot of a small tree toppling as the bus hits it, and then fading a bewildering shot that, when lightning flashes again, proves to be the bus lying on its side with the driver’s dead face seen through the shattered windscreen, hovering in a way that defies normal framing niceties. After the three remaining men start squelching their way up the hill whilst carrying the unconscious Joan and luggage, Ulmer offers one of the few (semi-) clear glimpses of Poelzig’s house offered in the film, a weird block of rectilinear solidity atop the old fortress bastions, a crude road snaking up past a vast field of crucifixes. This is Ulmer’s wilfully weird reimagining of the classic Gothic image of the ruined castle and eerie graveyard as an outpost of a very recent apocalypse. The hard, clean modernism of Poelzig’s house is presented with perfect visual economy not, as such architecture would be a few years later in Things To Come (1936), as the spirit of the new supplanting the old and broken, but rather as a metaphor for a rebuilt post-war age and its sanitising pretences grafted haphazardly upon a still-raw scar in the world.

Ulmer’s study of architecture when the Bauhaus movement was flourishing certainly inspired this twist on the familiar, as well as informing its symbolic meaning with very personal dimensions: Vitus would very well be Ulmer’s own father, lost and thought dead in the endless carnage, come back to find his wife and child. First entrance to Poelzig’s house sees the camera, cut free of any apparent escorting presence, instead becoming an animate presence in its own right in exploring the house with its gleaming, capacious interior, the sweeping, steely curve of the staircase cutting across a grid of white lattice, smooth metallic fixtures and glossy surfaces everywhere. Ulmer wasn’t the first director to make something of a tension between traditional genre imagery and the nascent brand of modernist construction and technology – Michael Curtiz had touched on a similar disparity with Doctor X (1932) – but again took it a little further in investing the disparity with a level of immediate thematic import. Poelzig’s house is exact opposite of the delicious cliché of the old dark house but in its way even more menacing and perverse.

The house proves to be a product of Poelzig’s specific mind, rooms linked in unexpected ways, different identities kept in different spaces. The camera, courtesy of cinematographer John Mescall, begins the first of its many peculiar, roving movements without any focal character, the character instead becoming the character, suggesting a disembodied presence. Ulmer wasn’t the first director to do this in a horror movie – Paul Leni had done it on The Cat and the Canary (1927), as had Karl Freund on The Mummy – but he does systematise the impulse and turn it into a proper cinematic motif that carries its own suggestive weight. Meanwhile Ulmer’s vision of a bright and pretty ultra-modern hell includes the intercom in Poelzig’s room that lights up as a voice comes through it, lingers in a kind of zone of menacing futurism that would later be fetishised in very different ways in the James Bond films and the more self-conscious blend of retro and high-tech tropes in movies like Judex (1963) and Batman (1989). Poelzig himself (Karloff), awakened from his slumber by the buzzing intercom, is first glimpsed through draped gauze around his bed. The curling blonde hair of a beautiful young woman, his wife Karen (Lucille Lund), is visible by his side. Poelzig sits up, black and stiff, like something that’s already gone through some gate between life and death, part animate sphinx, part perverse homunculus, recalling the uncanny effect of Murnau’s Nosferatu (1922) vaulting erect from his coffin but in a less overt way. The union of Eros and Thanatos in one large, comfortable bed, and hard as it is to believe, the film only gets kinkier henceforth.

Poelzig’s Majordomo (Egon Brecher), who greets the sodden and tattered visitors, looks like a newspaper cartoonist’s particularly lurid caricature of Lugosi reflecting the actor’s usual genre image back at him even as Ulmer installs the actor in a more restrained and peculiar type of role. Here Ulmer might be making a little sport of Lugosi’s image, but also feeds into a motif of fragmented personas and doubled visages that resounds throughout the film. The Majordomo could be the aspect of Vitus that is a degraded thrall to Poelzig’s satanic stature and imperious will, even as the rest of him arrives on a mission of vengeance that awaits the perfect moment to announce itself. Lugosi’s capacity to project a sinister romanticism, crucial to the impact he made playing Dracula in Tod Browning’s 1931 film, here is given a new tenor with Karloff instead playing the role of the demonically powerful enslaver of women. Vitus’ lingering yearning is first evinced in that earlier moment of running his hand over Joan’s hair, at once tender and intrusive, nostalgic and furiously mindful, wistfully longing and seething with ruined erotic need. Poelzig, after getting out of bed and coming down to meet his guests, maintains a tense, boding silence, only saying, “Of course” in response to Vitus’ carefully eliding requests for aid and shelter for his hapless companions, and barely responding in the subsequent scene in which Vitus makes plain the stakes of the drama and the causes of his wrath.

That turns out to be sourced in his awareness that Poelzig sold out the fortress defences to the Russians, resulting its overthrow and the death and capture of an untold number of defenders. Vitus himself was taken prisoner, and is also aware that Poelzig at some point laid claim to Vitus’ wife Karen, telling her Vitus had been killed, and his daughter of the same name. Poelzig’s implacable attitude, restrained to commenting, “Vitus, you are mad,” swivels on a dime towards generous politeness when Peter interrupts their confrontation, solicitously offering the clueless outsider a drink. Whilst the three men chat amiably about the atmosphere of death hanging about, Vitus’s real, violently irrational streak is revealed when he sees a black cat, a pet of Poelzig, wander into the architect’s office: so alarmed and repelled is he by the animal’s presence Vitus snatches up a palette knife and hurls it at the cat, killing it. Joan enters in a state which Vitus describes as common to people under the influence of the sedative he gave her, rendering them in something like a mediumistic state of sensitivity to their surrounds, and Joan is brielfy transformed by narcotic and situation into a darkly knowing priestess. Unfazed by the killing of the animal, she questions, with a hard lilt, “You are frightened doctor?” and looks to Poelzig with a gaze of strangely knowing, suppliant intensity. “He is the unfortunate victim of one of commoner phobias,” Poelzig explains to her in regard to Vitus’ act, with a lilt of sibilant satisfaction: “But in an extreme form. He has an intense and all-consuming horror…of cats.” Peter’s comment about Vitus’s talk being redolent of “supernatural baloney” inpires one of Lugosi’s most famous and excerpted lines of sinisterly accented dialogue: “Supernatural, perhaps…baloney? Perhaps not. There are many things…under the sun.”

An open secret of The Black Cat was that Ulmer and Ruric, in essentially ignoring Poe’s story, took heavy licence instead from that eternally inspirational figure for morbid fantasy, the mystic and artist Aleister Crowley (who amongst others inspired the villains in W. Somerset Maugham’s The Magician, filmed by Rex Ingram in 1926, and Dennis Wheatley’s The Devil Rides Out, filmed much later by Terence Fisher). Crowley had found recent, ruinous tabloid fame in the early 1930s after his unsuccessful attempt to sue the publishers of Laughing Torso, a memoir by his former acolyte, the Welsh writer Nina Hamnett. Poelzig’s house is a fantastically reconceived take on Crowley’s Abbey of Thelema, and reports by some former followers about the drinking of a black cat’s blood in one of Crowley’s ceremonies, seem to have inspired Vitus’s horror before Poelzig’s cat. Vitus mentions folk legends about the black cat being a deathless emblem of evil, endlessly reincarnated, perhaps hinting such fantasies are at the root of his phobia, or, perhaps, given what soon emerges about Poelzig’s life and work, Vitus knows well the uses Poelzig puts his cats to in the alleged Crowley manner. Later, another appearance of a cat, likely just one more of the many Poelzig keeps or the same one resurrected by occult forces, again wrenches a violently spasmodic and humiliating reaction from Vitus. In the meantime, after Joan is safely put back to bed to be restored to chirpy obliviousness but not before planting a voraciously desirous kiss on her husband before passing out, Vitus contrives to swap assigned bedrooms with Peter and keep their connecting door open, something Peter is glad to agree to given how freaked out he’s becoming in this place.

Poelzig meanwhile, now caressing that mysterious other cat, descends into old interior of Fort Marmorus, now the labyrinthine substructure of his house, where he keeps a most particular parlour of secrets. In what used to be the chart room for plotting the fire of the fort’s long-range guns, he keeps a number of beautiful, dead women, all carefully preserved in pristine splendour, contained in glass cases and hung to seemingly hover, one with hair as if caught in a rush of air, as if caught between state of spirit and their actual, lifelessly corporeal states. These startling images finally tip the film into a realm of truly freakish perversity beyond the historic abstractions mentioned beforehand. Ulmer here substantiates the link with Poe, and his obsessively morbid and entombed fetish-lovers, but given a new spin by Ulmer and Ruric, seeing not a kind of inverted transcendental urge that sees love breaching the shoals of death but as something more actively malevolent. Poelzig, the self-appointed minister and midwife of death as religion, exists at the exact meeting place of sexual obsession and murderous annihilation, driven to suborn the things that tantalise and obsess a man to the degree that they can only exist in perfection in such a state.

One of the dead women is Vitus’s wife Karen; his now-grown daughter is the Karen upstairs in Poelzig’s bed, contained by his willpower and hypnotism, but that proves a fragile bond, and Poelzig eventually prefers to kill the thing he loves rather than lose it. He stashes the cat in a rotating turret, knowing well it will emerge when he later brings Vitus down. Poelzig storms into the bedroom he placed Vitus in to have their argument out further, only to find Peter in the bed, awakening in blinking bewilderment, whilst Vitus appears in the doorway, drawing the briefly embarrassed Poelzig away. Poelzig leads Vitus down through the warren of cement walls and ironwork to show him his peculiar collection. “She died,” Poelzig explains, “Of pneumonia. She was never very strong, you know.” Poelzig and Vitus gaze with the same expressions of tantalised ardour and pain at the freeze-dried Karen, but with the enormous disparity of a man who’s tried to keep a grip on beauty and the one appalled to find her in such a state. Vitus, before he can shoot Poelzig with a gun he’s kept handy, is terrified by the cat’s appearance, Vitus recoiling and crashing back through one of the glass, wall-length plotting charts that contrast the grotesque collection with their own, cool calculus of Armageddon.

Ulmer delivers his most remarkable scene as Poelzig escorts Vitus back out of the fort, moving through doorways and up spiralling stairs, all conveyed by the camera’s motion, now more firmly excising the living presence of the two men as Poelzig comments, “Are we both not the living dead?” The two men become spirits haunting the old fortress, acting out the still-unresolved spiritual side of the war they were hero and villain of. Karloff’s unique voice heard on the sound as Poelzig expostulates, now with the sardonic confidence of a man who knows he has the upper hand, “Now you come here playing avenging angel, childishly thirsting for my blood…We shall play a game, you and I. A game of death if you like.” Something about this scene, with Ulmer’s directorial daring matched to a cunningly articulated theme, comes to close to some ideal of horror cinema the genre too rarely approaches, entering a rhapsodic zone of pure film allied to a sense of its own haunted nature.

Ulmer’s peculiar directorial flourishes are elsewhere slipperier in their assiduous efforts to unmoor the viewer from the usually crisp confines of classical Hollywood technique. Poelzig’s first sight of the Alisons, as Vitus dresses Joan’s wound, sees Poelzig slowly push open the room door with a menacing crescendo on the soundtrack befitting the first time his uncanny visage is seen properly in the film. But Ulmer’s subtler emphasis falls on the act of Poelzig seeing Joan: Ulmer punctuates the act of looking not with a cut but a dissolve, as if evoking the numinous power of both Poelzig’s immediate realistion, shared with Vitus, that Joan is another, eerily necessary doppelganger of the late Karen brought into this game for a fateful reason, and the mystic nature of attraction itself, something that pulls one in like gravity rather than allowing a quick, clean, rational edit. Ulmer lingers on a shot of Vitus washing his hands in a bowl of water brought to him by Poelzig’s serving maid (Anna Duncan), allowing Lugosi to hint at Vitus’s lingering medical skill and ethic, whilst also hinting at the ritualistic, a flourish of counteractive white magic, a cleansing moment to offset Poelzig’s bottomless evil. When Peter elects to take Joan back to their room, Ulmer moves in for a close-up of Poelzig’s hand suddenly clenching the arm on a nude art deco sculpture of a nubile young woman on a desk, making patent Poelzig’s firming determination to lay claim to Joan in his manner, shot through with intimations of both erotic desire and monstrous will.

Poelzig’s return to his bed after the basement tour illustrates the depth of that will as he easily pacifies the fretting young Karen. Evidently having long since suborned her mind with hypnotic effort, Poelzig drives her back into thoughtless slumber with a wave of his hand, ordering her to remain in the bedroom for all of the following day, to ensure her presence will not become known to her father. Poelzig marrying first mother and then daughter, the latter subsisting in a perpetually enthralled fugue with her mother’s frigid corpse below, has a lode of seedy suggestiveness remarkably bold for a mainstream film of its time. “You are the very core and meaning of my life,” Poelzig notes to the bewitched woman, before taking up his bedtime reading – the details of a black mass ritual. Karen maintains an air of the childlike, a fairy-tale orphan utterly entrapped by the dark sorcerer, and one who will not get a happy ending: when she stumbles into Joan’s room, Joan, realising who she is, tells her that her father is alive and in the house at that moment. Karen isn’t immediately credulous, but for Poelzig, overhearing the conversation, even that much violation of his imperium is inconsolable: he stalks into the room, urges Karen out via a connecting door, and Joan cringes in terror when she hears Karen’s scream of pain echoing. Joan herself is elect to be the sacrifice at Poelzig’s next black mass, with the architect accepting Vitus’s challenge to play a game of chess with him with Joan’s life the stake.

For all its ghoulishness and gravitas, The Black Cat is also riddled with comic asides. Some of them work well enough in the context, like Peter and Joan’s shared jokes, emblazoning them as a couple stumbling into this scenario out of a different movie, including trying to pronounce Poelzig’s name correctly. There are hints of a dry-ice vein of knowing elsewhere in Ulmer’s simultaneous embrace of and games with familiar genre ideas and imagery. Less successful is an extended vignette with a pair of dim ethnic policemen (Albert Conti and Henry Armetta), sent to Poelzig’s house to enquire about the bus crash, squabbling over which of their home towns is the nicer place to visit. The film suffers much less from the incessant comic relief often inserted into horror films of the period, but to a certain extent that makes this stuff stick out more sorely, particularly given them film’s extremely brief running time at just over an hour. Similarly, Heinz Roemheld’s almost incessant score, decorated with plentiful quotes from Schubert and Bruchner, is a little aggravating, albeit in a way many found effective at the time, lending the movie a neurotically insistent tenor similar to the score of the also Lugosi-starring White Zombie (1932).

Ulmer would revisit and amend many of the concepts he explores in The Black Cat. Detour would hinge on its antihero’s foolish act of identity theft and entrance into a netherworld, edging into the ambiguous zone where Poe and Ulmer’s imagination met, where individuals become mere generational iterations, personas transient, identity porous. Bluebeard would return to the figure of the obsessive mastermind slaying his objects of desire and figuratively remaking them as the puppets under his control (notably, that film’s star John Carradine has one of his many early bit parts here towards the end as the organist for Poelzig’s cabal), whilst The Strange Woman would to a great extent invert the gender expectations in portraying an antiheroine with a similarly possessive streak, and Ruthless would present Zachary Scott’s character as Poelzig-like in his overriding desire to possess everything belonging to a rival. The title character of The Man From Planet X , a film that would offer in its threadbare yet ingenious fashion make commentary on the emerging brand of 1950s alien invasion films, would like Vitus be a figure driven to destructive ends after being mistreated and betrayed.

Ulmer’s influence and anticipations were likewise strong. Of all the great Old Hollywood directors with European backgrounds, Ulmer might well have been the one with the most immediate connections to avant garde artistic mind of the 1920s, and his films share a proto-existentialist sense of horror and alienation and unstable sense of genre. Detour would bridge the era of Kafka and the Theatre of the Absurd and the still-to-come moment of “alienation cinema” of Michelangelo Antonioni – indeed Antonioni would partly remake Detour as The Passenger (1975). Ingmar Bergman, a fan of Lugosi and the early Universal horror films, seems to have pretty blatantly lifted the notion of a game of chess played with life-and-death stakes for The Seventh Seal (1957). Whilst Ulmer’s more lurid, outright violence and perversity contrasts the suggestive approach of Val Lewton, that other Eastern European poet of the macabre would take up elements of Ulmer’s approach on The Black Cat, a film where by the usual horror standard virtually nothing happens, with both the Lewton-produced, Mark Robson-directed The Seventh Victim (1943) and Isle of the Dead (1945) betraying considerable influence. Later directors ranging from William Castle (The House on Haunted Hill, 1958) to Curtis Harrington (Games, 1967) and Michael Giacchino (Werewolf By Night, 2022) would pay homage to Ulmer’s peculiar blend of Gothic and Modernist tropes. Michael Mann’s The Keep (1983), with its neck-twisting cinematic geography and sculptural blend of the atavistic and the stylised, and Manhunter (1987) with its grinning, gentlemanly monster locked inside a glistening, sterile modern lunatic asylum, both owe something to Ulmer’s example. In rather odder permutation, Lugosi’s “Supernatural, perhaps” line would be sampled for use in songs and soundtracks in later decades, most particularly The Monkees’ vehicle Head (1968).

That Vitus and Poelzig are two halves of one person is hinted in the hemispheric nature of their disciplines – Vitus a psychiatrist, Poelzig the architect, as if Ulmer was consciously setting the two sides of his education in combat, surgeon of the mind versus the artificer of concrete. Poelzig the ultimate sadist and Vitus the ultimate martyr, even to the point when their roles finally, gruesomely reverse: surely the ultimate sadist must harbour somewhere within a desire for the ultimate pain. Ulmer, like his characters, plays games where the stakes are sensed in that mediumistic way: nothing Poelzig does, for most of the narrative, is ovetly threatening or hostile, and yet the strangeness rattles Peter, who becomes determined to leave the house with Joan. Poelzig’s scene of settling into bed with Karen, which makes clear who she is, sees Ulmer cut away to Vitus in his room with Thamal, the servant drawing out a knife with an evident intention of fulfilling his employer’s will and deal out a quick, bloody, well-deserved death to the architect, but Vitus stops him for reasons that are never entirely spelt out, but seem rooted in Vitus’s desire to expose and destroy Poelzig’s circle of fellow Satanists as well their priest, a game that needs to be played right to the brink: so Vitus tells his servant that until that brink moment arrives Thamal must act as Poelzig’s servant rather than his own.

Vitus is the film’s protagonist where both the Alisons are mere innocents abroad (although Manners, who had been stuck play proper, rather wet gentlemen in Dracula and The Mummy, here at least gets to be a much more vigorous, humorous presence), and yet Vitus is never a reassuring figure, with the suggestion that he like Poelzig has been left less than properly human by what’s befallen him. Ulmer never makes explicit whether Poelzig’s turn to Satanism preceded the war, making his act of betrayal a special, monumental sacrifice to dark forces, or whether he turned to it afterwards, as a way of imposing shape and sense upon his actions and the carnage of the war. That Ulmer was very likely musing on the rise of Nazism in Germany with The Black Cat is reflected in his ultimate conception of Poelzig, who can certainly work as a metaphor for Nazism both in root and outlook. Poelzig is the twisted branch grown off a blighted tree, one who can only be countered by an equal and opposite force. The architect offers an artist-impresario who tries to force his own experience of war into something coherent by becoming a would-be master of death and pain, and extending this special privilege to his followers, his strange, angular gestures communicating on some level beneath the rational and liminal. The double-X formed sculpture that serves as Poelzig’s sacrificial altar and cult emblem, nominally a mockery of the Christian cross, can also then be taken as a lampoon of the Swastika.

That Vitus is well aware of Poelzig’s proclivities seems to hint they were already developed when Vitus knew the architect pre-war. Finding the visiting policemen can’t give them a lift because they ride bicycles, Peter resolves simply to walk to town, whilst Vitus and Poelzig play their game of chess with alien intensity. “I beg your pardon, but do you play chess?” Poelzig asks Peter at one point, as if in some coded language befitting a sport of those who truly engage with existence, to Peter’s bemused answer of no. “Then we will go on with our game,” Poelzig tells Peter after he announces his intention to leave, his customary politeness hardening into something more foreboding. Vitus loses the game, and Vitus fulfils his unspoken pledge by having Thamal knock Peter out and imprison Joan. Peter is cast into an odd prison, a rotating turret down in the fort, whilst Joan is prepared for the black mass, held in Poelzig’s Satanic chapel, a space of angular metallic forms and that double-X standard, upon which Joan is hung for the climactic ritual.

The film’s air of inexplicable menace never entirely dispels even as the stakes are laid out in entirely human and concrete terms: some enigmatic force makes itself apparent when one of Poelzig’s female cultists, turning around during the ceremony and seeming to glimpse something, suddenly screams and faints. This distraction gives Vitus and Thamal their chance to snatch Joan from her cross and escape down into the fort with her. Whether this is the result of some contrivance from Vitus, even just the woman’s alertness to the presence of his singular, vengeful will, or a random flash of hysterical reaction, or an actual manifestation of a supernatural or even divine influence, is left entirely ambiguous. Joan herself faints similarly under Poelzig’s mesmeric gaze, and the way Ulmer frames her hanging on the cross, at the top of his frame hanging into it, with Poelzig looming out of focus beyond before turning and closing on her, extends his disconcerting sense of space and action. Ulmer cuts the black mass ceremony into odd shards of cubist action, cutting between Poelzig’s ritualistic gestures and the cultists donning their robes and lifting their hoods in robotic lockstep, ranks dressed in patterns of white and black, like a mockery not so much of church ritual but military, framed in a way that renders them abstract. Then Ulmer moves in for delirious close-ups on their variously expectant, desirous, decadent expressions, the dedicated followers of evil fashion seen less as authentically wicked than as people seeking some proof, even in the negative, of a world beyond the world.

Meanwhile, down in the turret prison, Peter manages to find a control switch that lets him rotate the turret and escape into a locked antechamber, where he lies in wait for the Majordomo to enter, knocking him out and escaping. Poelzig, tossing away his priestly robe, chases Vitus and Thamal down into the fort, whilst the Majordomo recovers and shoots Thamal, but Thamal proves too tough to kill quickly, still overpowering and mortally injuring the Majordomo. Joan, reviving, is initially afraid of Vitus but he makes clear he’s saved her, and she tells him about Karen’s presence in the house. Vitus, trying to get information about her from the dying Majordomo finds her body under a sheet in Poelzig’s taxidermy room. Poelzig bursts in on the sight and he and Vitus struggle, Vitus overpowering his foe with the bloody-mouthed Thamal’s last effort of strength for help. They shackle Poelzig to his own embalming rack, as Vitus comments with mad exultation, with stripped shirt, and promises the most brutal revenge he can conceive of. Selecting a nice scalpel for the job, he begins slicing the skin off Poelzig to his writhing wails of agony, finally writing a sonnet of pain on the very flesh of the great evildoer in a ghastly but appropriate echo of medieval torture doled out upon the accused witch. Ulmer’s coup here is in handing Vitus a revenge that is, in its way, deserved to the last skin flap, but also grotesque to an extreme. Of course, Ulmer can’t show the kind of gore such a scene entails in a 1934 film, but gets as close as possible by portraying it in silhouette, Vitus merrily dabbing away at Poelzig’s face with the blade, whilst his wails of pleading agony, though muted so as not to be too vivid, are still audible on the soundtrack.

Despite the distancing devices this is incredibly strong stuff, perhaps all the more so for suggesting rather than explicitly portraying, and whilst other horror films of the moment were playing just as rough, like the women being bled dry of blood in Murders in the Rue Morgue and the homoerotic torture in The Mask of Fu Manchu, this one might have played its own part in auguring in the Production Code the following year. Vitus does pay a moralistic price for finally losing control. When Peter, having retrieved the Majordomo’s pistol, shoots Vitus through the locked, barred door to the room when he thinks Vitus is attacking Joan when he actually tries to help her let her husband in. Vitus, seemingly barely perturbed by his own imminent death, warns the Alisons they have five minutes to escape the fort, before flipping a switch that will ignite the old dynamite charges still lodged under Marmorus, whilst narrating his actions to the apparently still-living Poelzig with a tone of mordant acceptance. The couple of course manage to get out just before the whole hilltop erupts in thunder, and flag down a vehicle, before finally being restored to the train on the way out of the nightmare zone again. The leave-‘em-laughing coda tries to set jangled nerves to rest, but the dark dreams The Black Cat lets out proved impossible to put back in the box.

Standard
1960s, Crime/Detective, Epic, Horror/Eerie, Japanese cinema, Thriller

A Fugitive From The Past (1965)

.

Kiga Kaikyo; aka Straits of Hunger

Director: Tomu Uchida
Screenwriter: Naoyuki Suzuki

By Roderick Heath

A Fugitive From The Past has been repeatedly voted by Japanese critics as one of the best films ever made in their country. But the film and its director, Tomu Uchida, remain largely obscure outside it. Uchida’s life contained some swerves worthy of his own epic narratives. Born in 1898, Uchida was born with the given name Tsunejirō but chose a professional name that translates, most evocatively, as “to spit out dreams.” Uchida gained a reputation at Nikkatsu Studios as a screenwriter and quickly graduated to directing. His films were hailed for their politically progressive bent and dashes of satire, but only four of his pre-World War II works survive today. Foiled in his time by increasingly strict censorship to ply his political agenda, Uchida quit Nikkatsu in 1941 and, after a failed bid to start his own production company, joined a Japanese sponsored film company being set up in occupied Manchuria. Uchida never got to make a movie there, but after the war’s end he stayed on in China until 1953. When he finally returned to Japan, Uchida joined Toei Studios, and quickly re-established himself with Bloody Spear at Mount Fuji (1955), a comeback that won him immediate plaudits. He sustained his commercial fortunes with a series about Miyamoto Musashi, which some prefer to Hiroki Inagaki’s better-known Samurai trilogy.

Uchida’s subsequent work became admired in spite of his nominal status as a studio hand for his ability to take on any studio assignment and bend it to fit his interest, and tackle it with such restive creative energy that even as a new generation of spiky filmmaking talents emerged in the so-called Japanese New Wave, Uchida not only kept up but forced the pace. Many perceived Uchida’s post-war work as taking on a darker, less idealistic hue, bearing the imprint of what he had seen in the war’s closing years out in the failed imperial annexes, and remained even more determined to wrestle with social issues, including with his 1958 film The Outsiders, which dealt with the often marginalised Ainu people of Hokkaido. A Fugitive From The Past was not his last film (that would be the sixth entry in his Musashi series, released in 1971), but it’s generally taken to be his crowning achievement. Uchida’s film takes up an expansive vantage, connecting the fetid post-war climes and the rapidly evolving, wilfully blinders-wearing country it was becoming by the 1960s, and noting how one connects to the other. A Fugitive From The Past, based on a novel by Tsutomu Minakami and produced at Toei Studios, can be broadly described as a crime drama, a manhunt tale familiar from generations of police procedurals, but mixed in with a contemporary, cinematic take on classics of early realist fiction, particularly Victor Hugo’s Les Miserables and Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment, and added dashes of film noir and neorealism.

Uchida uses this framework to depict Japan’s recovery from hard-scrabble desperation to economic powerhouse, but with suppurating wounds to body and soul still under the veneer of restored prosperity. The film begins in September 1947, a time when the landscape is crawling with repatriated servicemen and colonists left deprived and without a toehold in a land that’s already been devastated by war. A powerful typhoon rolls in from the Pacific to pummel northern Japan, destroying towns and causing the sinking of the Sounmaru, a coastal passenger vessel, whilst crossing the Tsugarū Strait between Hokkaido and Honshu. This event, whilst fictional, seems inspired by a destructive typhoon that did much the same in 1954, and Uchida uses some newsreel footage from it. Two ex-servicemen and jailbirds, Hachiro Numata (Itsuma Mogami) and Chukichi Kijima (Mitsuo Andô), break into the house of a pawnbroker named Sasada to rob it, finally killing Sasada, his wife, and child, and set fire to the house to cover their tracks. The fire spreads and soon consumes the entire town of Iwanai, driven by the typhoon’s strengthening wind. The two criminals meet up with a third man, Takichi Inugai (Rentarō Mikuni), a big and muscular man, and they try to make their escape by train to the coast and then by ferry, but the typhoon shuts down the train. Walking to the shore, the three men see the frenzied rescue operation being thrown together to save the passengers of the Sounmaru. The fugitives take a rowboat and pretend to be in the rescue party, braving the choppy seas.

Amidst the destruction and chaos wrought by the typhoon, evidence of malfeasance soon begins to emerge. Rescue workers sifting through the rubble of Iwanai discover the dead family. As well as the 532 victims from the Sounmaru retrieved from the waters of the strait, searchers find the bodies of two unidentified men who don’t seem to have been aboard that vessel and who bear signs of having been bludgeoned rather than drowned. The assigned police investigator, Detective Yumisaka (Junzaburō Ban), has the two men buried rather than cremated, so they might be identified later. He soon gets a visit from a prison director, Sumoto (Genji Kawai) who has guessed the two dead men are Numata and Kijima because the recent crime sounds very much like the one that landed Numata in jail in the first place. When one of Yumisaka’s deputies interviews the manager of a hot spring hotel the Sasadas stayed at, he learns Numata and Kijima stayed there at the same time in the company of Inugai, the one man now not accounted for. Yumisaka, assembling the clues he’s uncovered, theorises that Inugai killed the other two men to claim all 800,000 yen they stole, dumped their bodies in the strait, and continued on to land on the shore of Shimokito Peninsula, Honshu’s northernmost point. There, Yumisaka decides when he finds a pile of ashes that Inugai disposed of the boat not by trying to sink it, but used his great strength the drag it piece by piece up a cliff face and burn it up on a bonfire.

One reason perhaps A Fugitive From The Past speaks so potently to Japanese viewers but finds difficulty in translation is that Uchida offers the film as a succession of fractured and furiously alternated styles of moviemaking. To foreign viewers then and now, Japanese cinema might mean the observational domesticity of Yasujiro Ozu, the concerted naturalism of Kenji Mizoguchi, the hard modernist glaze of Akira Kurosawa and Masaki Kobayashi, the jagged iconoclasm of Shohei Imamura, Nagisa Oshima, or Seijun Suzuki, or the anxious fantasies of Ishiro Honda. Uchida defies any categorisation with this film because he seems to contain all of the above, compressing eras and modes of cinema into a uniquely effective gestalt that seems determined to try and use every tool at his disposal. Within the first half-hour he moves through aesthetic postures of coolly detailed docudrama, urgent noir adventure, and expressionist-surrealist spiritual fable. Uchida’s films had already experimented in radical stylistic shifts: his 1962 film The Mad Fox blended aspects of kabuki theatre and madcap animation for a result that’s been called one of the weirdest movies ever made. An introductory voiceover in A Fugitive From The Past recalls the kabuki tradition of the explanatory benshi, pronouncing sonorously over footage of the rolling waves of Tsugaru that “love and hate reside in its depths, people with great hearts tortured by misery.”

Uchida wields this instability to articulate his sense of things at war – past and present, law and criminal, nature and human systems, individual and cosmic order, earthbound bodies and spiritual planes. It also suits the film’s winding narrative flow, shifting between viewpoints at will to weave an impression of an epoch as well as individuals. The opening recounts the events of the typhoon, shifting from the benshi-like voice to a more familiar kind of narrator recounting the events of the disaster in dry, factual-sounding detail over interpolated documentary footage. This gives way to staged, frenetic impressions of disaster. Rescuers pushing boats into the surf. Survivors of the Sounmaru clinging to a life raft. Fishing boats bearing burning torches bearing down on the capsized hull of the ship. From the outset Uchida’s attempts to make the texture of the film itself expressive are apparent: he shot the film on 16mm and blew it up 35mm to achieve a grainy, rough-hewn look at war with the inherent elegance of the widescreen framing. He frequently makes recourse to vertiginous-feeling handheld camerawork. The three criminals flee the scene of the crime in shuddering tracking shots, and brave the pummelling elements in their need to reach the coast. As Yumisaka begins to piece together the various twists in the mystery, he first envisions the three criminals together burning their boat, an imagined scene that Uchida films in negative effect, a device he’ll return to repeatedly throughout the film to evoke delirium and frenzy in interludes suggesting the lurking, insidious presence of uncanny forces at work.

Yumisaka’s detective work is on the money, as Inugai meanwhile is making the arduous trek across a stretch of blasted and ash-strewn volcanic ground. Gaining forested area, Inugai comes across a hut and peeks within. There he sees an Itako, a kind of medium, performing a spirit-summoning rite for some mourning relatives: Inugai is highly disturbed by the woman’s performance, including her seemingly blind white eyes and baleful promises of hell and damnation, as if sensing his presence and addressing him. Again Uchida shifts into negative image, smudging distinction between Inugai’s pathologically guilty viewpoint and the actual presence of uncanny forces. Fleeing onwards, Inugai boards a train to the town of Ominato. Yae Sugito (Sachiko Hidari), a young woman also on the train, sees Inugai’s desperately famished expression and shares some rice dumplings she has. Later, when he reaches Ominato, Inugai again encounters Yae, who is working as a prostitute in a local brothel in a failing effort to pay of some lingering family debts because her father is unable to work. Yae, delighted to see Inugai again, invites him into her room in the brothel. Inugai proves an eccentric, unstable, obsessive personality, immediately smitten with Inugai, despite his deeply alienated and traumatised disquiet. She tries to groom him, clipping his ragged nails and cutting his hair and shaving him, and soon she provokes him into having sex with her.

Uchida turns this seduction into a vignette at once intimate and peculiarly, almost indescribably epic. Yae is driven into paroxysms of laughter and wild behaviour as she mocks the rhetoric of the Itako that so frightened Inugai. She freaks out Inugai by wrapping herself in a blanket to impersonate a ghost, still howling with laughter, and wrestles with him until she provokes him into sex, bodies twisted in weird angles with intimations of violence – Inugai wraps his fingers around Yae’s throat in the throes of orgasm. Over all lurks the fog-shrouded heights of Osorezan, “the mountain that makes dead people talk,” the same volcano Inugai hiked over, and a candle flickers by a shrine dedicated to the mountain. Uchida deploys negative effects here again, and shoots the whole thing in one long, disorientating handheld shot, and scores the scene with uncanny-sounding monk chants. The next day Yae finds Inugai gone but has left behind 35,000 yen from the loot, an amount that allows Yae to quit whoring, get medical aid for her father, help her siblings, and finally set out on what she hopes will be a life-changing journey to live in Tokyo. Before she can depart, Yumisaka interviews her, having heard she entertained a tall stranger, but Yae puts him off the scent by giving false details for Inugai: “Help the cops?” she mutters disdainfully to herself after he leaves.

A Fugitive From The Past’s story traces the geographical length and historical breadth of Japan, with its bifurcated structure eventually leaping to the late 1950s, by which time the country has settled with at least an acceptable façade of calm and prosperity. The survey of the state of Japan in the first half presents a bleak picture of poverty-stricken, hopeless, violently uprooted people, a common state that connects people even if they’re not aware of it. The damage wrought by the typhoon can be read as a metaphorical version of the wartime bombing the country suffered, much as the storyline itself deals with the spectre of many wrongs taken and given during the war without explicitly hinging on this legacy. Uchida tells several different stories entwined with the core detective story, and the film’s multiple focal points – cops, criminals, waif – each elucidate a different reality contained with the nominally shared one. Inugai’s flight and attempts to elude capture, and the deliberate ambiguity of just what transpired out there on the stormy strait, is one story. The detective chasing him at first is the hero of another, if a semi-tragic one. Early on Uchida offers a scene of Yumisaka and his wife (Sachi Shindô) and two sons, who despite his having a solid job still resort to rationing to keep food on the table, and connects this with Inugai’s desperation and Yae’s entrapment. Yumisaka, who suffers from a chest ailment causing him to have coughing fits that only seem to grow worse over the course of the decade portrayed, becomes obsessed with locating Inugai and bringing him to book, the classic cop’s “white whale,” the cold case they can’t let go of. This fixation we later find causes his downfall and reduction to working as a guard in a reformatory. But it’s Yae whose viewpoint becomes the bridge of the two eras.

After Inugai’s pay-off to Yae, the film follows her entirely for a time. Just as Yumisaka remains preoccupied with Inugai as the emblem of all that’s evil at loose in the world, Yae keeps alive the flame of worship for him not just as a lover but a symbol of beneficence in all manifestations, whilst trying to make her way in the melting pot of Tokyo. Here the film pivots away from the police investigation and the running fugitive to become a quasi-neorealist portrait of Yae’s experiences, a city teeming with desperate and uprooted people. The capital proves a violent, dirty, teeming place, with a home in a shack on the fringe wastelands whilst working as a waitress-cum-spruiker for a tiny bar in the shanty world that’s sprung up in the lower depths of the cityscape. Uchida saves his most impressive technical feat for his first shot locating Yae in Tokyo, a long-take that begins with a rapid pullback zoom shot as he finds Yae trying to attract customers to the bar amidst prostitutes and good-time girls flocking about American GIs and other men. A gang of cops start chasing the hookers, driving Yae and the other women through the streets, camera tracking them as they dash until Yae breaks away from the others and takes refuge behind a pillar, the cops running past her. A poster Yae leans on comments, “to pay your taxes makes democracy work”. The shot still continues as it reaches as high as possible in a tracking crane shot, watching as Yae threads her way through the streets teeming with humanity and commerce, until finally reaching the refuge of her bar.

Yae’s workplace is a glorified cupboard with liquor bottles, frequented by local small-time hoods, and soon bigger gangsters looking to control the area. Blackouts are common. “Nothing to eat, no electricity, the girls sleep with the Yankees – it’s the end of the world!” one hood groans. Yae finds herself unwillingly caught between two mobs, one gangster showing her favour by giving her a gift of money, another taking the gift and then giving it back in a show of coercive magnanimity. Later Yae beholds a violent battle between the gangs, sparking a police intervention. Meanwhile Yumisaka has tracked Yae to Tokyo, after he becomes newly convinced she met Inugai, and he starts a stakeout of her home, only for Yae to see him as stares off in distraction when she comes home, and flees. Finally Yae finds work in another brothel, and even after the manager warns her, ““Certain clients are very brutal – do you know what I mean?”, she breaks tearfully in her happiness to have found refuge from the world. In the brothel she amasses a sizeable sum of money over the next few years. Finally Yae and the other whores in the brothel are told their trade is going to be outlawed, a signal step in the enforcement of a new age of moral and social order. At the same time, Yae sees a newspaper article about a reputable flour milling magnate named Kyōichirō Tarumi who’s recently made a large charitable donation for rehabilitating ex-cons, and immediately recognises his photo: Inugai.

Yae’s consuming passion for Inugai manifests in a most singular fashion, in a touch reminiscent of Luis Bunuel: she keeps a piece of Inugai’s clipped toenails as a totem, even fetish, of her benefactor. She occasionally unwraps it carefully from the piece of old newspaper she keeps it in, to pay homage and talk to as if personally communing with Inugai, dedicating her earnings to it, and even lying flat and caressing herself with it. Later, this totem of a deep and abiding passion becomes an exhibit in a crime investigation, transformed in the most dramatic fashion whilst remaining comically inert. Yae rather strongly recalls Les Miserables’ Fantine in her pathos, and she’s just as doomed. She travels to the town of Maizuru where the man named Tarumi lives, and settles down to talk with him in his house. When she reveals herself, Tarumi laughingly denies being Inugai, but when Yae sees his hand, still bearing the deformed marks of an injury he had when she met him, she erupts in hysterical delight and embraces him in frantic fashion just as she did years before. Inugai, desperate to dampen her shrieks, clamps his hand over her mouth, only to accidentally throttle her. When one of his employees, Takenaka (Junnosuke Takasu) enters and sees him with the corpse, Inugai chases him down and kills him too. He takes the two bodies to the coastline and dumps them in the ocean, hoping that even if they’re found they’ll be presumed to be a pair of lovers who killed themselves. When the bodies are found, the police investigator assigned to the grim discovery this time is the young and robust Detective Ajimura (Ken Takakura), who has his job made a little simpler by finding Yae’s newspaper clipping of the story about Tarumi still in her pocket.

Uchida released A Fugitive From The Past at a fraught moment in the history of Japanese cinema when the great classical period of the national cinema in the post-war moment was in decline and facing a change in generations and outlooks. Mizoguchi and Ozu had died, and Kurosawa had just released Red Beard (1965) ahead of a subsequent decade of heartbreak. Uchida’s film on the other hand seems like the work of a director just getting started, his unstable aesthetic melding some of the most classically admirable aspects of the national cinema with a new boldness, charged with nearly punkish energy in places, alternated with a dreamy poise and terse realism. A Fugitive From The Past bears some resemblance to a couple of Kurosawa’s well-known crime dramas: his post-war manhunt tale Stray Dog (1949) and the similarly odyssean, crisply widescreen-clamped kidnapping saga High and Low (1962), and the scenes of Yae in Tokyo recall not just Stray Dog but the likes of Mizoguchi’s reconstruction dramas too, like Women of the Night (1948). It also has similarities to Anatole Litvak’s The Night of the Generals (1967) in portraying the hunt for a murderer after years of eluding police, similarly spanning and describing the post-war age. But A Fugitive From The Past is very much its own thing, scarcely with a likeness in cinema then and now, with its blend of rigorous detail flecked with surreal touches and overtones of spiritual parable, although Uchida’s much younger compatriots like Suzuki and Kihachi Okamoto were in a similar zone. The film’s influence would in turn be felt: Shohei Imamura would offer a direct tip of the hat to A Fugitive From Justice with his own epic depiction of a wandering killer, Vengeance Is Mine (1979), by casting Mikuni as the father of his nefarious outlaw.

Uchida connects Yae and Yumisaka in their disconsolate and meditative states, picking out in dawn vigils weighing the needs and quests that possess them. Yae, after fleeing her workplace when cops look for her there, sits staring down at some homeless urchins huddled around a scrap wood fire on some steps by a garbage-clogged canal. Yumisaka wanders from his home down to the shoreline, in a scene of hazy poetry, the detritus of a pummelled modern civilisation – beached hulks and dreary lights and spidery power masts – littered amidst swaying reeds and shrines and distant mountains under watery clouds out of a Ukiyo-e painting, as the policeman ponders the details of the case all the while. The shift from one timeframe to another is simply stated by the sight of a train trundling through the rebuilt Tokyo, giving way in turn to the sight of a crowd enjoying festivities, Yae and other prostitutes merrily rocking in their midst. The crucial scene of Yae and Inugai’s first tussle, with its depiction of chaotic emotions and bodies, matched to dread-provoking musical and visual cues suggesting this is taking place in a hellish netherworld, recalls Nabuo Nakagawa’s efforts at illustrating a Buddhist concept of Hell after a similarly realistic crime drama in Jigoku (1960), although Uchida stops short of actually depicting the netherworld. He rather presents this sense of dread presentiment as psychological, pushing Inugai and Yae towards destruction.

Yae’s wild and inchoate passion for Inugai seems to come of a distant past, a survival of primal feeling into a septic modern age, violently contrasting Inugai’s status as a construct of that modern age, fleeing poverty and a grim determinism in identity – he’s later revealed to have come from a dirt-poor background – in favour of a constructed veneer of respectability. As a young policeman notes late in the film when trying to formulate an understanding of his quarry, the very presence of a large sum of money to a man like Inugai entirely distorts gravity and rewrites all morality. Uchida contrasts his hunger, however understandable, with Yae’s use of the money he gives her, using it to save her family, and becoming a spur to accumulating her own small fortune, however painfully earned. Inugai proves no Monsieur Madeleine, but his lot is laden with bleak ironies that could break a saint – the only deliberate crime he’s ultimately guilty of is the murder of Takenaka, even if both his end and Yae’s stem directly from his overriding need to hang onto the identity he’s given himself in the world.

Meanwhile the two generations of detective, Yumisaka and Ajimura, try to understand such jagged, cruel, incoherent personal experiences via the scant traces left in their wake. Yumisaka keeps a bundle of ash from the burned boat in a handkerchief, a rhyme and companion piece of tell-tale evidence to Yae’s toenail shrine: both prove crucial in the climactic scenes to cracking Inugai’s mask of denial, signifying as they do to him moments of terrible consequence for himself, events that suddenly have physical substance, rather than remaining quarantined in memory. Yumisaka and his fellow cops’ efforts are recounted with a precise depiction of method, trackers following virtually invisible threads that lead off into the tangled heart of a frenzied age. In these portions, A Fugitive From The Past tells a relatively conventional detective story, albeit one that’s patient and countenances the apparent breakdown of the method: Yumisaka eventually runs into a dead end, and realises it’s a human foiling him, in the form of Yae, who has the natural peasant’s disdain for representatives of power, however well-motivated. Even the briefest moment of taking his eyes off the prize, when he fails to see Yae at her Tokyo shack, costs him to an incalculable degree. Despite all this the detectives become the only ones left to testify to Yae’s life, gleaning great facts from signifiers as seemingly pathetic as a toenail, the cops revealed as frustrated artists and priests trying to understand the nature of desire, loss, guilt, and death. The very idea of detective work is then ultimately changed from something dryly factual to a process demanding empathy and a feel for implication.

Central to this is Yumisaka’s redemptive arc: rediscovered looking shabby, defeated, and forgotten by Ajimura, the former detective nonetheless recalls his old case in perfect detail, and Ajimura decides to bring him in on the investigation. When Yumisaka takes leave of his wife and now-grown sons, the boys refuse to loan him some money for his trip, as they still feel the sullen humiliation of his father’s downfall for an obsession that’s suddenly awakened again. Nonetheless, one of the sons, Ichiro (Mineo Matsudaira), has a sudden change of heart and gives a wad of cash to the other son (Kiyoshi Matsukawa), who then runs after his father to hand it over, in a droll long shot and fade-out that scribbles a simple, sufficient signature on one aspect of the drama. Later, Ajimura’s chief (Susumu Fujita, one-time star of Kurosawa’s Sanshiro Sugata, 1943) is seen performing a tea ceremony for Yumisaka, indicating his resurgence as a man worthy of respect and honour, an elder of the tribe finally installed in his rightful place as sage counsel. Once Ajimura, the chief, and other cops settle down to interview “Tarumi”, with Yumisaka looking on in silence, Inugai fends off their questions ably with clear and vehement answers, but something about his manner leaves the chief unsatisfied, and he orders his men to go out and check on every detail of his story. Ajimura turns up the crucial evidence amongst Yae’s possessions of the toenail clipping and her stash of money, which was still wrapped in a newspaper page reporting on the Sounmaru disaster that Inugai left her his gift in.

Finally, when confronted by the toenail clipping Inugai breaks down and begins explaining the events of 1947, swearing that Numata and Kijima caused their own deaths by trying to kill each-other and Inugai himself, in their determination to claim the money. Inugai becomes insistent on the cops saying they believe this part of his account before saying anymore, and the police argue over how to make sure Inugai keeps confessing. Even Yumisaka admits that, after years of hating his phantom quarry, he thinks Inugai is telling the truth. Nonetheless he confronts Inugai in a holding cell with the bundle of ashes and tells him he hates him for his cruelty to Yae. But Inugai demands anxiously to be taken back to Hokkaido before he’ll say more. Uchida gives insight to Inugai’s mental space as the police take him north by train, as he’s haunted by Yae’s protestations of love. On the ferry crossing the Tsugarū, Yumisaka urges Inugai to aid him in a prayer ritual for Yae, tossing flowers over the side into the waters, which on this day are placid and pellucid in their shimmering beauty. Inugai promptly leaps over the railing and plunges into the sea, sinking into the depths, the cops roaring out and dashing to the stern in total impotence. Uchida fades out only after a long, boding shot looking back along the ship’s rolling wake, with the ghostly choirs echoing on the soundtrack as if welling out of the depths, a scene at once eerie and beatific, resolving a film constantly in restless motion with a last note of mourning reverie.

Standard
1950s, Horror/Eerie, Scifi

It Came From Outer Space (1953) / Tarantula (1955)

.

.

Director: Jack Arnold
Screenwriters: Harry Essex, Jack Arnold (uncredited), Ray Bradbury (uncredited) / Martin Berkeley, Robert M. Fresco

By Roderick Heath

Jack Arnold likely deserves the title of science fiction cinema’s first genuine auteur. Great and important directors had worked in the genre since the earliest days of the medium, but Arnold was the first filmmaker to demonstrate both a great love and knowledge of sci-fi, as he had consumed it voraciously when growing up, and to make most of his notable films in it. In this regard he beat out chief rival Ishirô Honda by a year, whilst Byron Haskin, who first tackled the genre in the same year Arnold did, was a less constant devotee. Arnold, whose full name was John Arnold Waks and was the son of Russian immigrants, was born in Connecticut in 1916. After studying acting and working as a vaudeville dancer, he started landing roles on Broadway, but as it did for so many, World War II proved a career hurdle. Arnold signed up to be a pilot, but a lack of planes meant he was placed with the Signal Corps, and after taking a crash course in cinematography became an assistant to the esteemed documentary filmmaker Robert Flaherty in making military films, until he finally gained his shot as a pilot and served out the war in the air. When peace came filmmaking was still on Arnold’s mind, and he formed a production outfit to make commercial shorts and documentaries, whilst also resuming his acting career now in movies. Arnold’s 1950 documentary With These Hands, a pro-union documentary about early twentieth century working conditions, garnered Arnold attention and an Oscar nomination. Arnold was soon given a shot at making a feature film by Universal, debuting with Girls in the Night, one of three movies he finished up turning out in 1953. The second was It Came From Outer Space.

It Came From Outer Space was the first of a string of successful, now-iconic sci-fi films produced by former Orson Welles collaborator and actor William Alland, hired by Universal to turn out films in the genre which was big box office business in the early 1950s. Alland and Arnold quickly followed up their breakthrough with the even more famous and popular The Creature From The Black Lagoon (1954), and its sequel Revenge of the Creature (1955). A TV play Arnold co-wrote and directed for the series Science Fiction Theatre called ‘No Food For Thought’ was quickly adapted by him into the feature Tarantula (1955) – Arnold’s lone contribution to the giant monster strand of the day’s sci-fi boom. He followed it with the film often called his masterpiece, The Incredible Shrinking Man (1956), and two less successful genre entries, The Space Children (1958) and Monster on the Campus (1958). In between these Arnold also made interesting, meaty noir and Western films like The Glass Web (1953), Man In The Shadow (1958), No Name On The Bullet (1959), the satirical comedy The Mouse That Roared (1959), and the beloved teensploitation thriller High School Confidential (1958). Arnold’s incredible pace of work through the ‘50s helped make his name synonymous with the decade’s pop culture in hindsight, but whilst he remained a busy worker, his creativity seemed to burn out as the kinds of movies he liked to make faded in popularity. He spent most of the rest of his career churning out TV episodes and directing the odd, anonymous feature, whilst amidst his late career the only movie that leaps out now is the provocatively titled Blaxploitation Western Boss Nigger (1975).

It Came From Outer Space had its genesis in an original film treatment entitled ‘The Meteor,’ written by the rising star of sci-fi and fantasy writing Ray Bradbury, who also in 1953 has his short story ‘The Fog Horn’ adapted as The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms, the movie that kicked off the ‘50s giant monster craze. Regular sci-fi screenwriter and Arnold collaborator Harry Essex was credited with the script for It Came From Outer Space, although Bradbury and Arnold reportedly had input. Bradbury’s imprint is patent in the sometimes wistfully poetic dialogue. It Came From Outer Space bears one of the most famous and evocative titles in the history of movies, encapsulating the forceful, lurid appeal the ‘50s sci-fi style with its simultaneous excitement and anxiety for the suddenly expanding limits of human existence in the burgeoning space and atomic ages, and the uneasy mood of the Cold War’s height. As if to give it an aesthetic to match its looming title, It Came From Outer Space was filmed in 3D. When David Cronenberg and his brand of gruesome, subversive body horror came along two decades later, his debut film Shivers (1975) was also called, by way inverting, They Came From Within. But It Came From Outer Space isn’t exactly the kind of movie it sounds like, and came out at a pivotal juncture for the ‘50s sci-fi movement.

The style had started off as inquisitive and yearning and fretful, evinced in early entries like Destination Moon (1950), When Worlds Collide (1951), and The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951). It Came From Outer Space continued this run of inquisitive fare, but The Thing From Another World (1951) enshrined the more common run of portrayals of malevolent alien incursion. It Came From Outer Space also, alongside William Cameron Menzies’ Invaders From Mars (1953), established the subgenre of humans being replaced or suborned by alien entities, to be taken up and given variations like Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) and I Married A Monster From Outer Space (1958). It Came From Outer Space manages the tricky task of extracting strong dramatic tension from an ambiguous situation without clear villains or immediate world-threatening stakes, choosing rather a key of eerily poetic mystery woven around a smart parable for the fear of the unknown and its crazy-making influence on the human mind, collective and individual.

For a kid out of New Haven, Arnold evinced a genuine and powerful sense of the desert as a dramatic location, first demonstrated on It Came From Outer Space and carried over to Tarantula. In both movies Arnold manages to make the seemingly bright, open, sun-broiled spaces of desert locales – generally the environs of the Mojave Desert and the rock formations of Dead Man’s Point in Lucerne Valley, California – into places capable hiding sources of danger and wonder, where you could just well believe aliens and mammoth arachnids could be lurking. A sense of atmosphere was indeed one of Arnold’s singular talents, applied to his best films: he was equally good at capturing the teeming, enclosing world of the jungle for The Creature From The Black Lagoon and slowly transforming bland suburbia into a shadowland of adventure and threat with The Incredible Shrinking Man. The brief but effective pre-title sequence of Tarantula offers a slow pan across a desert landscape, accompanied only by the sound of wind washing through the cacti, until a misshapen human figure stumbles into view, disease entering a cruel but balanced system. Arnold would take up that idea more concertedly on The Incredible Shrinking Man. Another was taking his characters sufficiently seriously and preventing the human element of his movies taking a backseat. Arnold made minor genre stars of aging former ingénues like Richard Carlson, Richard Denning, and John Agar, and interesting, undervalued starlets like Barbara Rush, Julie Adams, and Mara Corday. Some of It Came From Outer Space’s sly power stems from the intelligent way it links its romantically involved heroes’ adventures with the alien with their psychological and social travails.

At the outset of It Came From Outer Space, professional science journalist and amateur astronomer John Putnam (Carlson) is dining with girlfriend Ellen Fields (Rush) at his house in the Arizona desert, just outside the small town of Sand Rock, which Putnam’s opening narration describes as “a nice town – knowing its past and sure of its future, as it makes ready for the night and the predictable morning.” Immediately the setting is invested with qualities both specific but also microcosmic, as Arnold films the town in a hazy aerial shot as evening descends. Putnam and Ellen’s easy conversation is threaded with asides contending with their prospects, as Putnam worries he doesn’t make enough steady money to keep Ellen if they get married, something Ellen evidently isn’t particularly concerned about, as Putnam has the cast of a dreamer and thinker somewhat outside the normal run of men she knows, like the town’s sheriff Matt Warren (Charles Drake), who turns protective attentions her way and the disapproving kind on Putnam as the drama unfolds, suggesting he has foiled romantic ambitions in that direction. When the couple go out to take a look through his telescope (not a euphemism…I think), they see a huge, flaming meteorite streak through the sky and slam into the earth nearby. The duo rush to get a helicopter pilot, Pete Davis (Dave Willock) to fly them to the impact crater, and when he descends into the crater Putnam is astounded to behold a large, circular vessel, moments before it’s buried by a landslide.

It Came From Outer Space and Tarantula are connected by their use of landscape and the way the desert space is tethered to evocation of threat and the superfuturistic landscapes opened up by scientific development, even as the manifestation of those threats come from radically different angles. Arnold finds it’s precisely the primal, hallucinatory quality of the desert expanse and the quiet of the rural world that makes it perfect to host destabilising infestation, largely because it already hosts such things. Arnold delves in to notice a landscape crawling with animal life engaged in the cold business of survival through predation, and the illusion of peace to the human eye is also connected to its danger as a sparse place of heat and dryness. In a marvellous vignette in It Came From Outer Space, telephone line repairman Frank Daylon (Joe Sawyer) meditates on the shifting nature of the landscape he often works in: “After working out on the desert for fifteen year like I have you see a lot of things – hear a lot of things too. Sun in the sky and the heat – all that sand out there with the rivers, lakes that aren’t real at all – and sometimes you think that the wind gets in the wires and hum and listens and talks…”

This lilt of the poetic runs through the veins of It Came From Outer Space. The meat of the drama, on the other hand, comes with overtones of Ibsen and Arthur Miller, about the clash between the unusual individual and the prosaic community, hinted at in Putnam’s opening narration, as Putnam finds himself laughingly disbelieved when he reports seeing the spaceship in the crater. Even his astronomer friend Dr Snell (George Eldredge) doesn’t believe his report, pointing out that the physical traces around the site are consistent with a meteorite’s impact. Warren is more provocative in his dismissal, trying to use Putnam’s report and the fact Ellen is momentarily neglecting her job as a teacher to back him up to imply Putnam is a bad influence. This motif was also employed in The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms – intelligent, educated men who represent the voice of observant awareness shading into prophecy, but cannot convince others of the validity of their observations if it disturbs their worldview. Sounds familiar. Arnold gives it a more interesting spin in making Putnam a natural outsider, regarded as a bit of a weirdo by others, even Snell describing him bitingly to an assistant as “more than odd – individual and lonely. A man who thinks for himself.” Only Ellen, who is initially dubious too, sticks with Putnam, largely because as they drive home from the crater they catch sight of one of the aliens as it looms before them on the road.

Like just about every sci-fi film of the ‘50s, It Came From Outer Space is usually viewed through the prism of the era’s anti-Communist hysteria, which makes this quintessentially Bradburyesque central figure particularly telling, as the story unfolds and the nature of the alien visitors resolves from pure enigma, and Arnold wrestles with the concept of potentially fateful culture clash where both sides come to be frightened and defensive and the possibility of mutual destruction looms. Putnam’s discovery of the alien ship coincides with one of the aliens emerging from the crashed ship. Arnold resorts to the first of many point-of-view shots from the alien perspective, with the alien’s unusual vision through its single, prominent eye suggested by filming through a circular, jelly-like lens – the plain progenitor of the many similar viewpoint evocations of the lurking menace ranging through Jaws (1975) to Predator (1987) and beyond. Putnam meanwhile gazes up in awe at the huge, spherical craft with its hull decorated with hexagonal portals, and open portway through which he can glimpse machines buzzing and glowing with mysterious purpose.

This diptych of bewildered fascination set up here eventually leads to a brilliant punch-line at the film’s end, when the alien leader is revealed to have taken on Putnam’s appearance, leading to a climax that’s essentially one version of the type Putnam represent arguing with another, separated not just by their true physiognomy but history, philosophy, and scientific achievement – and the fact that the alien’s Putnam is charge indicates their evolution. Soon the aliens, whose ship crashed on top of an old gold mine which some luckless prospectors are trying to work, are moving around, waylaying people and assuming their forms in order to get their hands on equipment required to repair their ship. They claim the prospectors, and also Frank and his fellow lineman George (Russell Johnson), after the two men talk with Putnam and Ellen and Frank answers Putnam’s question as to whether they’ve seen anything unusual, “No, I haven’t seen anything – but I’m sure hearing things.” Frank lets Putnam listen to the unusual sounds vibrating through the telephone wires, a sign of the alien presence. Later, Ellen and Putnam encounter what looks like Frank but is really one of the impersonating aliens. Putnam and Ellen are bemused and suspicious at George’s suddenly changed, vacant manner, and his new habit of looking at the sun without squinting or blinking. Putnam sees an arm lying oustreteched from behind a rock, and assuing it’s Frank’s and that he’s been killed, hurriedly slips away with Ellen. Frank isn’t dead, however, and he awakens to the reality-warping sight of George awakeneing from unconsciousness with his alien double standing over him: the double assures the two men that they won’t be harmed. By the time Putnam and Ellen bring Warren back to the site, all evidence of the strange event is gone.

Arnold is a difficult filmmaker to describe, largely because he was such a no-nonsense talent at his height, his images charged with an igneous solidity, and yet able to conjure a sense of the numinous at will. It Came From Outer Space and Tarantula are brisk, supremely efficient films, both running 80 minutes, but packing in tight, well-told stories that nonetheless aren’t mere plot machines, but convey a sense of atmosphere and off-hand human detail as humdrum worlds suddenly begin to come apart at the seams. Something of Arnold’s skill is best conveyed by the scene where Putnam and Ellen encounter the alien that’s replaced George: Arnold adopts the alien viewpoint as it lurks behind the couple as they search for the linemen, only to have the creature extend a nebulous tendril that becomes a hand and touches Ellen on the shoulder, a clever special effect flourish that also provides an example of Arnold’s inventive use of the still-very new 3D frame, the required dimensional effect looming into the depth of the frame rather than out. The dark fairytale atmosphere is amplified by the way the aliens loom around the desert environs and leave trails behind them, like snails, only their passing is marked by a glittering dust that fades away after a time, claiming their human hosts in a whirl of steam and gold.

When Putnam spots ‘Frank’ and ‘George’ walking the main street of Sand Rock, he follows them and confronts them: the two doubles, holding back within the shadows of a building, don’t bother trying to fool Putnam, and assure him they need to be left to go about their business. Whenever the alien doubles are heard to speak, Arnold has their voices dubbed with ADR recording and slightly treated, so they sound disembodied. The choice of focusing part of the narrative on the two linemen, who also represent Putnam’s only real friends in the locale and who are in their way something like the film’s poetic Greek chorus at first, was personal on Bradbury’s part, as his father had worked that job in Tucson. Their replacement signals an assault on the salt-of-the-earth portion of Sand Rock whilst authority, represented by Warren, is forced gradually to concede something funny’s going on, but then becomes increasingly paranoid and frantic. Warren calls in Putnam and Ellen after dismissing their entreaties repeatedly, when Frank’s wife (Virginia Mullen) and George’s girlfriend Jane (Kathleen Hughes) report the two men have vanished together after stopping at their homes, acting strangely, and heading off with all their clothes. Warren also tells Putnam about electrical equipment being stolen all around town, after Putnam suggests the linemen were targeted for their service truck with its equipment. Ellen is soon waylaid on the road by Frank’s double and then claimed by the aliens, and a double of her appears to Putnam to lead him to a rendezvous with the alien leader in the old mind shaft. Putnam demands to see the alien’s real form before he’ll agree to try and keep the town at bay, but when the alien emerges, looking something like a cross between a slug and a bent penis with one glowing eye. Even the open-minded and rational Putnam cringes in horror before something so radically different.

Something of the film’s power and originality for its time is still conveyed by this vividly staged moment, which has always stuck in my mind like a fishhook, as well a subsequent, subtler scene where Putnam, talking over the incident with Warren later and needs a reference point for dealing with the unfamiliar. Putnam points to a scuttling tarantula on the ground and asks the sheriff what he’d do if the spider came for him, whereupon Warren simply stands on the bug, illustrating Putnam’s concerns precisely. That Arnold had similar wartime experience to Gene Roddenberry, who would later dedicate so much of Star Trek to investigating the same preoccupations as It Came From Outer Space, particularly the problem of recognising the value of intelligent life that looks and acts very differently, doesn’t feel coincidental. Later, in his squirming, ratcheting anxiety, Warren comments that more murders are committed at 92˚ Fahrenheit than at any other temperature (a speech Bradbury also deployed in his short story ‘Touched With Fire’), prior to forming a posse to root out the infesting interlopers, in a wry sidelong swipe at Western film conventions here that connects with the film’s sceptical attitude about the rousing of the communal hive, a motif with telling meaning in the context of McCarthyism’s height. Putnam is a more thoughtful and pacifistic answer to High Noon’s (1952) Will Kane as the bulwark between community and chaos. As Warren goes on the warpath, the posse causes the death of Frank’s double by catching him a roadblock and shooting at his truck until he swerves and crashes.

Perhaps the most affecting aspect of It Came From Outer Space however is that whilst it’s sci-fi in basic plot and themes, in style and mood it moves closer to fable-like fantasy, pervaded with aspects of dream logic. The aliens take on and cast off human apparel at will and travel about by flying, almost like thought. Frank’s monologue about the desert sets up a drama where reality is unstable, changelings lurk as in ancient folklore. Ellen’s alien double appears to Putnam, having changed from her usual prim apparel into a billowing black gown. This is the sort of touch which can trip a camp alarm in a modern viewer, but there is a reasonably clever motive behind it – knowing that Putnam is both their potential best ally and also most aggravating foe, the aliens have absorbed enough about humans to play on Putnam’s desire for Ellen to make him react just a little off kilter, and later almost manage to kill him by playing on this exactly. It also of course works on other levels, invoking familiar fantastical metaphor for erotic transformation, alien double Ellen embodying witchy femininity tantalising and dangerous, skirting metaphors more usually the province of vampire movies. When Putnam tries to outrun Warren’s posse and approach the aliens through the mine, Ellen’s double appears to him again and tries to fool him to falling into a crevice, as the aliens are now in the defensive. She shoots at him with an energy weapon that resembles a wand, further smudging the line between genre imagery. The ‘wand’, in a strong, simple special effect, carves great ruts in the stone walls behind Putnam, who fires back with his pistol, striking the alien who transforms back into its true form before plunging into the crevice and seeming to dissolve in the water pooling there.

Finally Putnam manages to reach the alien ship and confronts their gang of doppelgangers, including the one that’s taken on his own appearance. The alien Putnam warns off his human counterpart as he turns on the repaired drive for the spaceship, a thrumming mechanism exuding obscure but dazzling cosmic power: “You know how long we’ve worked on this? A thousand years of reaching for the stars.” The alien explains they were travelling on to their true destination only to be forced to crash-land on Earth, and intend to travel on. Putnam convinces the aliens to release their human captives and in exchange they’ll hold off the posse long enough to let the spaceship blast off, which they do by dynamiting the entrance to the mine. Finally the spaceship blasts off out of the crater, watched in awe by the humans, whilst Putnam anticipates a time when the two species will meet again and humanity is evolved enough to countenance it. This notion of a first contact that doesn’t entirely take is still a relatively underserved one, although the film’s narrative shape was likely remembered by Steven Spielberg for E.T. – The Extra-Terrestrial (1982).

Tarantula is both a companion piece to It Came From Outer Space and also a counterpoint to it in key respects. Where the earlier film is humanistic and curious and close to unique, Tarantula involves the overtly monstrous and inimical, and exemplifies a more familiar genre template. The story is driven by the failure of the same kind of Promethean scientific project that the aliens have finally succeeded in. It also inverts the core romantic situation by making protagonist Dr Matt Hastings (John Agar) a man reasonably happy in the stolid role of a doctor in another small Arizona town, this one with the slightly amended name of Desert Rock, who quickly falls under the sway of a glamorous young biology doctoral student, Stephanie ‘Steve’ Clayton (Corday), who embodies the siren call of a changing world beyond and arrives on the bus. Steve comes to town to take up a job as a research assistant to renowned scientist Professor Gerald Deemer (Leo G. Carroll). Deemer has set up a laboratory in an isolated ranch house in the desert along with two doctoral students also as assistants, Eric Jacobs and Paul Lund (both played by Eddie Parker), to work on his new project of synthesising a food hormone that can make plants and animals grow faster and larger, to cure world hunger. The opening shot I mentioned earlier sees Jacobs, face disfigured, stumbling through the desert and collapsing dead, before the opening titles roll. Jacobs’ body is found and inspected by Matt, who is bewildered by what was clearly a case of acromegalia but couldn’t possibly have developed as fast as its seems to in the course of a few days, and he approaches Deemer to learn more. Deemer confirms Jacobs had acromegalia and won’t say more, or allow an autopsy.

When Deemer returns to his house he enters his laboratory, which is filled with test animals, many of which have grown vastly outsized thanks to an experimental growth serum he and his collaborators have been developing, with the aim of increasing food supplies for a growing, hungry world population. In a neat visual joke-cum-flash of exposition, Arnold shows Deemer injecting the serum into a normal tarantula, whilst, in the background, offering sight of a tarantula already dosed several times, grown to be the size of a Great Dane and kept in a glass case. Deemer is assaulted by Lund, who has also developed acromegalia: Lund swings a chair at Deemer and smashes the big tarantula’s case, and the monstrous animal crawls ponderously out the door and vanishes in the desert whilst the two men fight and the lab catches afire. Lund knocks Deemer out and injects his prone form with the serum, before dropping dead, whilst most of the test animals perish in the fire. Deemer buries Lund’s body and acts as if nothing happened when Steve comes to work for him, and with Matt constantly popping by with questions about Jacob as well as interest in Steve. As Deemer begins to rapidly succumb to both acromegalia and accompanying mental instability, his ever-growing pet project stalks the hills and dales around Desert Rock eating up horses, cattle ranchers, and other hapless locals with voracious appetite.

Tarantula is close in setting and story to Gordon Douglas’ mighty Them! (1954), swapping out many giant ants for one huge arachnid, and because its creation involves radiation it counts as one of the many atomic monsters that lumbered across screens. Tarantula doesn’t have the dramatic force or sweep of Them! or the iconic stature of Godzilla (1954), but in one respect it’s more cogent than either, in the way it connects the monster with its creation: the tarantula isn’t spawned by accident, but is conceived as an expression of a utopian project that ultimately proves ill-conceived, quite apart from thinking making a predatory spider huge a good idea. The cleverly structured story opens with the destructive fallout of the savants’ experimenting and over-enthusiastic attempts to prove their formula a success, but just what transpired is only slowly clarified, that Lund and Jacobs were so eager to prove the serum worked despite its instability they injected themselves and fell victim to the artificially induced acromegalia. Lund’s rampage in the laboratory reflects both the serum’s corrosive impact but also an expression of enraged frustration, resulting him in sentencing his colleague Deemer to a slow and awful death like his own. Much as the giant monster allowed filmmakers to tackle the subject of the atomic bomb without seeming to, the motif of bodily poisoning and degeneration here touches on the consequences of nuclear fallout, the signature of the age written in distorted and misshapen bodies.

Tarantula gains much from Carroll’s performance, his low-key air of calm ideal for playing a scientist compelled by intellectual curiosity rather than emotional display, an essentially decent but fatefully tunnel-visioned genius, and one who slowly starts to disintegrate in mind and body as Lund’s dose starts to take hold. The presence of a respected character actor like Carroll said something about the lifting horizons and respectability of ’50 sci-fi cinema, approaching the movement’s highpoints in production terms with This Island Earth (1955) and Forbidden Planet (1956), and was paid tribute in turn via the mischievous wordplay of genre film lampoon-cum-lampoon The Rocky Horror Picture Show twenty years later. Agar, not an actor I’m fond of at the best of times, is nonetheless solid as Matt, who has an engaging character arc as the local lad of modest talent who, a little like Putnam, is faced with incredulity, in his case when he insists that Jacobs couldn’t have developed acromegalia so quickly, but finds it was certainly the cause of death when he performs an autopsy after at last gaining Deemers’ permission. Local sheriff Jack Andrews (Nestor Paiva), Matt’s friend but also sceptical about his talent weighed against Deemer’s opinion, teases him mercilessly about the wrong call, but as Matt digs he begins to piece together the picture of what happened at the laboratory.

A chunk of Tarantula’s first half is given over to romantic business as Matt and Steve flirt up a storm, in the kinds of scenes genre fans likely groan over a bit then and now, even if it is solid character business that’s properly connected with the plot. Tarantula can’t entirely escape the usual awkwardness sci-fi movies of the period often wielded in trying to deal with the idea of a female scientist, with even Deemer taken aback by getting a research assistant who looks like a Playboy model (as Corday would become in 1958): “I didn’t expect someone who looked like you…I’m sorry my dear, that was supposed to be a compliment.” It benefits, however, from Arnold’s relative matter-of-factness on the issue – when Matt makes a quip about giving women the vote leading to “lady scientists,” he pitches it as an inside gag between them, and she quickly proves her abilities in helping Deemer rebuild the lab and prepare the serum. Nor does she collapse into a screaming damsel in the climactic scenes, as she recognises the spider has discovered the road will lead it to more food – that is, Desert Rock. Her masculine nickname nudges the spectacle in the ribs a little even as Steve is presented as all woman, down to her improbably chic wardrobe. Whilst all of the tarantula’s victims are male, the film builds to a phobic crescendo inhabiting a realm of fervent psychological symbolism when the by-now monumental tarantula crawls towards Deemer’s house on the search for morsel and sets its eyes on Steve within, the monstrous form without the ultimate depiction of the septic id envisioning itself, drooling literally over the female body within.

Corday, a model, dancer, singer and actress, was a minor starlet around Hollywood for a few years, was given her first starring role by Arnold for the Western The Man From Bitter Spring (1955), and with Tarantula was making the first of the three monster movies for which she’s mostly remembered today (along with The Giant Claw, 1957, and The Black Scorpion, 1957). Whilst her movie career waned soon after, she remains one of the more interesting starlets to feature in the era’s genre cinema, displaying a confident poise and edge of humour that largely remained untapped. She’s just about the only good thing about The Giant Claw, for instance, playing the sceptical, sarcastic love interest, and anyone who can look as keen as she does whilst being romanced by John Agar deserves an Oscar. Years later, after being out of movies for a couple of decades, she was given some small parts in movies by her friend Clint Eastwood, who appears at the end of Tarantula in a small but vital early part of his own, after having appeared in Revenge of the Creature for Arnold. There’s a hint of an in-joke to Arnold casting Paiva, who had been the boisterous and hardy Brazilian riverboat captain Lucas in The Creature From The Black Lagoon and usually played Latin caricatures, as an all-American sheriff. Brief but surprisingly good comic relief comes Hank Patterson as Josh, the bashful but stickybeaked desk clerk in the hotel where Matt also has his practice, who likes to listen in on Matt’s phone calls and tries flirting unsuccessfully with Steve.

The monster movie portion of Tarantula doesn’t really get going until the second half, apart from brief shots privileged to the audience of the growing spider stalking across the long, straight highway that links Desert Rock with Deemer’s house, and Arnold sets himself the challenge of abandoning the noirish lilt he gave to the desert scenes in It Came From Outer Space and instead evoking menace in the locale at its most glaringly sunlit. When Matt and Steve stop for a cigarette break by an awesome outcropping of stone (Dead Man’s Point again), they scan the horizon like their precursors in It Came From Outer Space and meditate on the desert’s strange power, as Matt comments, “Everything that ever walked or crawled on the face of the Earth – swum the depths of the ocean – soared through the skies left its imprint here.” Steve notes it was once a sea floor, and Matt comments they can still find seashells here, and looks from the air like “something from another life…serene, quiet, yet strangely evil, as if it were hiding its secret from man.” This proves literal, as something starts an avalanche of rock from the peak of the outcrop, and when Matt and Steve drive off the legs of the tarantula stir behind the formation. Of course any tarantula growing over a certain size would soon collapse for the weight of its own exoskeleton and suffocate for lack of lungs, but let’s not worry about that.

What is important is Arnold’s depicting of the tarantula on the loose – attacking a ranch, grabbing a cattle truck and hurling it off the road, and chasing down a pair of itinerant labourers camping out. Arnold conjures flickers of nightmarish dread with his images of the colossal spider stalking across landscapes, barging its way through power lines as the currents spark and arc, and falling on dwarfed and hapless human victims. Clifford Stine’s special effects rely on a photographically enlarged tarantula for the most part, and whilst it’s a pity the film didn’t have Willis O’Brien or Ray Harryhausen on hand, and there are occasional superimposition problems, the effects are sufficient and effective in large part because of their simplicity. One particularly potent shot offers the two labourers drinking coffee around their campfire and sharing a joke, whilst the tarantula ponderously crawls over the ridge above them and down towards them with quiet, remorseless focus, until the two men notice it too late. Arnold uses high crane shots to mimic the viewpoint of the tarantula looming over and pouncing on its screaming prey. The tarantula leaves only the bones of its food and large pools of venom for the investigators to puzzle over: Matt, analysing and realising what the venom is, soon tries to bring in outside help, but events begin to outpace him, as Deemer in his deranged state tries to stop Steve talking to Matt on the phone.

Along the way Tarantula squeezes in some off-hand commentary on the responsibility of different forms of authority in crises in addition to the central theme of Deemer’s experiment-gone-wrong, and continuing on from It Came From Outer Space’s portrait of hysterical authority versus wise restraint, here finally more idealised as the threat is hostile and deadly. Surveying the perplexing and mysterious signs left by the tarantula’s attack on the cattle truck, Matt encourages local journalist Joe Burch (Ross Elliott) to simply describe it as a road accident, in case too many vague and alarming details spark a panic. Matt’s methodical approach is meanwhile valorised – he is after all the hero, but then that’s also why he’s the hero – as he refuses to be fobbed off with vague explanations and the intimidating impact of professional stature.

When Matt rushes to the ranch house, he finds the contrite Deemer ready to explain all that’s transpired, and mourning the marvellous results of his experiments lost in the fire. Steve thinks his story is the product of his unbalanced mind, but Matt begins to fit the pieces together. He flies to Phoenix to consult with biologist Prof. Townsend, who backs up his analysis of the venom. Here we get shoehorned in one of those informative little educational movies within a movie detailing the characteristics of a real tarantula: Townsend comments as they watch the film that the tarantula “doesn’t know the meaning of fear,” and foreshadows the climax of the film as he explains the tarantula’s great enemy is a species of wasp, a flying foe. Meanwhile back at the ranch (ha), as Deemer languishes in bed, increasingly disfigured by his advancing disease, and Steve prepares to sleep, the tarantula approaches and attacks the house, and begins crushing the building as it scrambles to get at the morsels within. Deemer is consumed by his own creation, whilst Matt turns up in time to whisk Steve off along the highway with the monster in pursuit.

The main problem with Tarantula as a monster movie is that can’t sustain its action as well as Arnold managed with The Creature From The Black Lagoon, which, one it dispensed with mystery and set-up, was sustained by the relentless attacks of its human-sized antagonist. Tarantula also suffers a little from a rather jerky pace, essentially compressing the inevitable battle to hold the spider at bay into the last ten minutes. Arnold still infuses the inevitable moment of confrontation with the primal horror stalking down the highway for the chieftains of Desert Rock with notes of deadpan humour as well as suspense – the Sheriff’s exclamation of “Jumpin’ Jupiter!” when he spots the tarantula, is one of many moments Arnold seems to be inviting the audience to fill in less censor-friendly comments. The town paltry ranks of official guardians snap into action with Matt helping, as they raid all the supplies of dynamite in Desert Rock and plant it on the highway, blowing it up when the tarantula marches over it, but barely singing a hair on his legs.

Finally, as the tarantula nears Desert Rock, a flight of air force jets ride in like the cavalry. This provides a reminder that all monster movies are made to some extent or other in the mould of King Kong (1933). The jets fire rockets at the spider, but fail to do much damage; it’s only when they hit it with napalm that the spider is consumed in a great writhing fireball, halted right at the fringe of the town. As a climax this is both spectacular, and represents a flourish of personal satisfaction for the former pilot Arnold, but also a rather terse and practical one, as the film immediately fades out on the sight of the tarantula burning. Notably, the young Eastwood plays the commander of the attacking planes, but his face is obscured by his flight mask; there is no real hero here, the actual job of bringing down the monster an impersonal business performed by professionals wielding hard military force. For that it feels peculiarly realistic and indeed anticlimactic compared to the many variations on the Aliens (1986) get-away-from-her-you-bitch ending where lone plucky protagonists have to face down monstrous adversaries in more recent monster movies. Still, it has dimensions that echo beyond its immediate purpose – the use of napalm as emblem of the American military’s prowess would take on a rather less heroic meaning a decade or so later.

A vast number of sci-fi and monster movie directors have painstakingly recreated Arnold’s juxtapositions of mood and setting – Spielberg on Jaws (1975) and Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977), John Carpenter with Halloween (1978) and The Fog (1979), Lewis Teague’s Alligator (1980), Frank Marshall’s Arachnophobia (1990), Ron Underwood’s Tremors (1990), Roland Emmerich’s Independence Day (1996), J.J. Abrams’ Super 8 (2011) and Jordan Peele’s Nope (2022) – all owe a great deal to the Arnold aesthetic. Whilst the surrealism-tinged styles of David Lynch and David Cronenberg in part represented a critique of the imprint of Arnold and other ‘50s sci-fi and Horror cinema, nonetheless both ran with elements of his films – the subplot of Tarantula involving the rapid physical degeneration of characters brought about by scientific experimentation invokes an early variation on Cronenberg’s body horror, whilst The Incredible Shrinking Man’s portrait of everyday suburbia turning threatening and relentless emasculation anticipates elements of both directors. One of the sore lacks of many contemporary directors venturing into this tradition is an ability to establish baseline normality before introducing the unreal – something Arnold made look easy. Perhaps the audience was pushed out of the normal so many times we couldn’t find our way back.

Standard
1930s, Auteurs, Comedy, Horror/Eerie

The Old Dark House (1932)

.

Director: James Whale
Screenwriters: Benn W. Levy, R. C. Sherriff (uncredited)

By Roderick Heath

The Horror genre was given form and definition in the silent film era. A handful of great filmmakers, starting with the likes of F.W. Murnau, Paul Leni, and Tod Browning, did much of their best work in the style and plainly had an affinity for it, and their classic stand with a raft of powerful and important works by filmmakers who made brief visits to the genre, including Fritz Lang, Victor Sjöstrom, and Rex Ingram. Most of that vital Horror cinema was made in Europe, whereas in Hollywood, apart from Browning’s films and starring vehicles for Lon Chaney, Horror films tended to be tinged with comedy and lampooning, expressing a breezily dismissive contempt for spooky shenanigans in the optimistic mood of the Jazz Age: funny tales debunking supernatural menace, like the much-filmed theatrical hits The Cat and the Canary and The Ghost Breakers, were all the rage. But as the genre emerged into the sound era, coinciding with the dark pall of the descending Depression, Browning’s Dracula (1931) suddenly made it a big box office genre for Hollywood. With due speed Carl Laemmle’s Universal Pictures produced a follow-up in the form of an adaptation of Mary Shelley’s storied prototype for much fantastical literature and filmmaking, Frankenstein. The director hired for that film was the English stage maestro turned film director James Whale, and Whale, at least for the next thirty years or so, perhaps did more to codify Horror as a genre than any other director. The irony there was he wasn’t particularly fond of being associated with it, and much of his impact came in the way he tangled with its already enshrined clichés to create new ones.

Whale was a working class boy from Dudley, Worcestershire, deep in the “Black Country” of coal mining regional England. Forced to stop going to school because of his family’s lack of money and not strong enough to become a miner, Whale found work as a cobbler and also, with his emerging artistic talents, earned extra money painting signs and advertisements for local businesses, and used the cash he earned that way to pay for lessons at a local art school. Volunteering for service in World War I, Whale gained a commission as a second lieutenant and served in the trenches until he was captured by the Germans in 1917. Waiting out the war in a POW camp, Whale became heavily involved in staging theatre with his fellow prisoners, and found his great passion. After the war’s end he spent a brief stint as a cartoonist but soon found work in the theatre in multiple guises including as an actor, stage manager, and finally director. Like Murnau, Whale was homosexual and didn’t care much who knew it, and whilst he was briefly engaged to a woman in the early 1920s, Whale’s boldness in that regard is sometimes presumed to have ultimately foiled his career, although for the time being it seemed nothing could hold him back.

Whale’s big break came when he was hired to direct R.C. Sheriff’s play Journey’s End for a theatre group that specialised in staging new works for private audiences. Journey’s End explored the fatalistic mood of the men fighting in the trenches, in a drama that touched upon questions of the worth of hero worship as a potentially beneficial example but also one that could both lure people into a deadly situation. Whale’s personal investment in the material as a former soldier was plain enough, and the material proved to have the same appeal to a vast number of people. Whale initially talked an unknown young actor named Laurence Olivier into playing the lead role of Stanhope, but he was replaced by Colin Clive when, encouraged by the impact the lay had for its private audience, Whale took it to the West End. The play became an instant smash hit on both sides of the Atlantic, at a time when the war, which people had been trying so vigorously to forget, suddenly became a matter of interest again. This gave Whale a shot at Hollywood, as the burgeoning age of Talkies saw the film industry desperate for directors who knew how to handle dialogue: as a “dialogue director” Whale made The Love Doctor (1929) and worked on Howard Hughes’ Hell’s Angels (1930). He debuted as fully credited director when he helmed the movie adaptation of Journey’s End. After following that up with the popular romantic melodrama Waterloo Road (1931), Whale was assigned to Frankenstein.

With Frankenstein, Whale inadvertently made his name permanently associated with Horror movies. By some accounts Whale wasn’t terribly thrilled by that, but he did nonetheless become a singularly important influence on the way Horror evolved in the sound era and as a fully-fledged movie genre. Most obviously, the film’s depiction of Frankenstein’s Monster created a perpetual pop culture image, thanks to the confluence of makeup artist Jack Pierce’s iconic look for the monster, actor Boris Karloff’s performance, and Whale’s conceptual take on the creature’s existence and symbolic import for the audience. More subtle, but perhaps more important, was the way Whale helped Horror as an aesthetic adapt to the more intense gaze of the 24-frame-a-second era and the attendant vividness of sound. Robert Wiene’s The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1919) carefully negotiated frames of the dreamlike and the psychological, birthing the stylised, purposefully unrealistic approach of the endlessly influential Expressionist style, and that remained for a long time the predominant influence on the genre, although some of Browning’s works like The Unholy Three (1925) and The Unknown (1926) tended more to posit morbid and perverse psychology in otherwise realistic settings.

One key to Whale’s vitality lay in his florid ease in moving between tones and artistic postures, the way he fused stylisation and realism, theatricality and cinema. He made Frankenstein’s looming, Expressionist-influenced but three-dimensional sets, coexist with location photography and knead them all into a peculiar kind of whole, just as he was later to become known for easily pivoting between humour and straight-faced thrills. The poetic-metaphorical airiness and pathos of Mary Shelley’s twisted but articulate creation was swapped out for something more concrete, more essential. The desperate, mute Monster came more fully and coherently the image of just about anything rendered Other in a social context. He embodied poles of attitude, at once childlike and brutish, victim and cold avenger, misshapen and powerful, and his eventual end in a burning windmill evoked at once righteous action by a community and the spectre of mob rule, the punishment of the transgressor blurring with the cleaning of the hive of deviance.

Whale’s four fantastical films, Frankenstein, The Old Dark House, The Invisible Man (1933), and Bride of Frankenstein (1935), present perhaps the greatest directorial body of work in the genre, rivalled only by the likes of Terence Fisher and Mario Bava in the 1960s and George Romero in the 1970s. But they’re defined in part by the way Whale’s tension with the genre manifested. Whale’s dark, sometimes overtly strange and camp sense of humour, mostly held in check on Frankenstein, came seething out with the next three, all of which were big popular successes: Whale’s unease with being pigeonholed as a maker of scary movies again connected with the audience’s simultaneous ardour and scepticism for such fare. The Old Dark House, which was for a long time lost only to be rediscovered by Horror director and Whale acolyte Curtis Harrington, was based on the novel Benighted by J.B. Priestley, whose second work it was. Priestley, who would later become extremely popular and regarded in Britain, commented sardonically after the book’s release that the American publishers retitled it The Old Dark House in a determined effort to turn a profit, and it worked. The title was kept for the film, and it served to felicitously announce Whale’s mordant blend of attitudes, summoning up both an essentialist evocation of a classic genre trope reaching back to the Gothic Romances of Hugh Walpole and Mrs Radcliffe, and also its puckish deflation, close in spirit to the debunking comedies of the ‘20s.

What Whale managed however was more sophisticated, and it laid down the blueprint he’d follow for The Invisible Man and Bride of Frankenstein, provoking with a gleeful humour and semi-satiric slant, whilst steadily invoking the absurdity its characters face and sometimes embody, setting the scene for when the truly strange and disturbing busts out. Priestley’s novel hinged on a similar conceit to his later, perhaps best-known work in its own right, the play An Inspector Calls, in conjuring the house filled with eccentrics loaded down with their own private and shared transgressions. Whale merrily grasps onto The Old Dark House’s edition, the family Femm, comprising most immediately the spindly Horace Femm (Ernest Thesiger), his sister Rebecca (Eva Moore), their 103-year-old father Sir Roderick (Elspeth Dudgeon), and the mysterious sibling who resides in a room on the top floor. The Femms are the perverse and degenerating end of an ancient line, their house a looming pile of stonework that contains the ages of English society. Into their strange little world stumbles a gaggle of visitors representing modernity, desperately seeking shelter from the storm. The bickering young married couple  Philip (Raymond Massey) and Margeret Waverton (Gloria Stuart), and their tagalong pal, Roger Penderel (Melvyn Douglas). The Manchester magnate Sir William Porterhouse (Charles Laughton) and his dancer date Gladys DuCane (Lilian Bond).

The opening scenes present a classic story set-up as the Wavertons and Penderel travel in Philip’s chugging motor car through a buffeting rainstorm, banks of earth collapsing in their wake and tyres grinding desperately at the muddy ruts of the road. A classic Horror movie opening, reaching back to days of travelling coaches and forward to kids in Volkswagen vans in the genre, but contrasted with the rude liveliness of the characters who refuse to acknowledge they’re in a Horror tale. The Wavertons, plainly out on what was supposed to be a romantic honeymoon, locked together instead Philip unleashes epic, vicious sarcasm: “I’ve never been in a better temper in my life. I love driving a hundred miles through the dark practically without headlights. I love the trickle of ice-cold water pouring down my neck. This is one of the happiest moments of my life!” Penderel’s cheeriness, project from the backseat, is counterpoint and further goad to Whale’s portrayal of marital bother raised to epic pitch by the situation. “Perhaps you’d like me to drive for a bit,” Margaret suggests: “Yes, I was expecting that!” Philip retorts before continuing to try to get traction , and Penderel roars out a version of “Singin’ In The Rain.”

The frayed-nerved comedy here is both funny and mortifying in portraying a familiar kind of hell. The Wavertons and their tagalong friend are trying to drive out of the Welsh hills down to Shrewsbury, but the ferocious storm that’s descended is causing landslides and flooding, and they look for the closest convenient shelter. Margaret spots lights and encourages Philip to make for them, but when he catches sight of the craggy, crooked, ancient manse of the Femms her husband comments, “It’s probably wisest to push on.” But the as the storm seems to have cut off the roads all around they’re left with no recourse. Whale interpolates an ingenious model shot recreating the driver’s viewpoint in pulling into the muddy and desolate yard of the old dark house. Out the hapless travellers jump from the car and bang on the front door, and Penderel for a moment takes excited refuge in the notion the people in the house are all dead, “all stretched out with the lights quietly burning about them,” writing his own draft Horror tale whilst waiting for a response within, and in a moment he seems to just about get his wish as a hatch in the door swing open, revealing the gnarled, hirsute face of Morgan (Karloff), the Femm’s servant/warden, who responds to Penderel’s request for shelter with an incomprehensible, guttural mutter. “Even Welsh ought not to sound like that,” Penderel comments.

Granted entry by the grunting, damaged manservant, the trio are soon confronted by Horace, descending the wooden staircase like someone gene-spliced man, praying mantis, horse, and living skeleton. After sniffing his way through introductions and angular politeness, Horace escorts his guests over the blazing fireplace, and picks up a bundle of flowers, which, he tells them, his sister was about to arrange, before tossing the blooms on the fire. And Horace is the closest thing to a fully functioning human in the house, compared to the mute Morgan and his largely deaf sister, at least on the level of faculties, although he completely lacks a spine, in the metaphorical sense. Thesiger was destined to gain an odd kind of immortality specifically from his collaborations with Whale here and on Bride of Frankenstein, which might have surprised him, given he was a respected and experienced stage actor who had played roles for George Bernard Shaw and Noel Coward, and he kept acting in films into his eighties. A wounded veteran of the trenches, Thesiger was as blue-blooded as they come, related to the explorer Wilfred Thesiger and nephew of Lord Chelmsford, leader of the infamous military expedition against the Zulus – the battles of Isandhlwana and Rorke’s Drift went down a week after Ernest’s birth. Which sounds just like the kind of character he usually played. Looking much older than his 53 years, Thesiger presented Whale with his ideal interlocutor in portraying a simultaneously scornful and joyous caricature of the British aristocracy, devolved and waspish, wasted but invested with a deceptive strength, charged with disdain but at the mercy of its servile class, represented by Morgan, who meanwhile is sliding towards Morlock-like barbarity.

Another contrast is provided by Rebecca, whose piousness is chiefly a vehicle for expressing unvarnished contempt, and the way she offsets her brother’s atheistic and pagan mores. Moore’s performance anticipates Una O’Connor’s wild and flailing brand of absurdism for Whale, but with a different physical presence, as rotund and porcine as Horace is thin and equine, bearing a strong resemblance to the portrait of Queen Victoria she keeps on her bedroom wall. When Margaret asks Rebecca to show her a place where she can change from her wet clothes, Rebecca takes her to her own bedroom which, she explains, once belonged to her beautiful sister Rachel, who died after breaking her back in a riding accident aged 20: “A wicked one – handsome and wild as a hawk,” she cries, and eagerly looks over Margaret’s young, pretty form and anticipates its inevitable decay. Rebecca lustily regales her guest with Rachel’s agonised end and how she ignored Rebecca’s entreaties to turn to God. Rebecca’s bedroom is separated from the main hall by a gloriously decrepit corridor with a billowing white curtain at an open window and rain splashing on the stonework floor. Rachel’s old room proves a refuge of gentility save for the warped overlooking mirror.

Rebecca monologues about Rachel to the increasingly agitated Margaret whilst conjuring charged impressions of feminine beauty in her obsessive noting of red lips, long straight legs, and white bodies. Morgan’s knock at the door gives the lurking manservant a chance to ogle Margaret in her underwear, whilst Rebecca herself, for all her deploring, seems to be hiding a fascination for Margaret, thrusting her splayed hand upon Margaret’s chest. After Rebecca leaves Margaret can’t shake off her mocking words, as if she’s still in the room. Whale offers one of his most striking and peculiar cinematic phrases here, as he cuts jaggedly between shots from different angles of Rebecca’s face, reflected in the warped mirror and lit by guttering candles, all her savage perversity and mocking delight in mutability emerging as an array of perverted Gothic images. Margaret’s own face, as she tries to put on earrings, is also warped into strange and alien form by the mirror, as if she’s being claimed by Rebecca’s curse of the flesh. Margaret freaks out and, after opening to window but failing to push it close again for the powerful wind, she flees the bedroom and returns to the others in the hall. The punch-line for this is that she returns to the hall and looks every inch the resplendent lady about to dine in the finest restaurant.

This gaudy, layered, hysteria-laden scene is a perfect miniature representation of Whale’s jaggedly original approach to filmmaking and capacity to create a vivid, near-surreal context for his dark fantasies, turning what would have been a very minor episode in the movie into a vignette charged with undercurrents of sexuality and boding violence. The urge to transgression and its eternal partner, ironclad moralism, are in the mix, nodding to the distorted effects of what would soon be called “decadent art,” and winding up to a peak of delirium evinced by Margaret’s panic and despair. Whale’s camerawork is actually, generally more restrained in The Old Dark House than in his other films, like the long, devastating tracking shot of the father carrying his drowned daughter in Frankenstein, and his shots passing carelessly through and over walls in The Invisible Man and Bride of Frankenstein, as Whale readily showed off the roots of his visual imagination in the theatrical zone, but was able to leave behind any hint of the stagy, instead delighting in the way his camera could capture space and people within it. Instead, The Old Dark House shows more delight in his shot composition and cutting.

The dinner sequence that follows is another brilliant set-piece, albeit a more subtle one, where that delight is fully in evidence. The characters settle around the Femms’ dining table and try to enjoy a meal together, the flicker from the fire casting their shadows on the wall and the hulking, glowering Morgan playing waiter. Margaret, with a scowl, gets Philip to sit between her and Rebecca, who scoffs down pickled onions with righteous appetite. Meanwhile Horace brandishes carving utensils like small weapons of war, and when Rebecca chides him for not saying grace, retorts, “Oh, I had forgotten my sister’s strange tribal habits – the beef will seem less tough when she as invoked a blessing upon it,” and his initially playful sarcasm quickly spirals into a dark and spiteful meditation on the many blessings the family hasn’t received over the years. Rebecca’s hearty Christian appetite is balanced by Horace’s modest delight in gin – “I like gin.” He keeps trying to foist gnarled and soggy boiled potatoes on his dinner guests, each proffered with the inimitable Thesiger voice prompting, “Have a po-ta-to.” “Thank you, I should love a potato,” the practical Penderel answers, whilst Philip picks the eyes out of his. The electric light flickers and nearly dies, as Horace explains the house’s generator isn’t reliable. Finally, the agonised ritual of the dinner is interrupted by another knock at the door, which proves to be Sir William and Gladys, also seeking refuge.

Priestley’s design in the book emerges in the film as the characters represent different aspects of British society and history, and what’s particularly important here is the way Whale tweaks the material into offering the cast of characters as a succession of self-portraits – world war veteran, angry pleb on the rise, biting camp aesthete and wicked sceptic. The Old Dark House itself represents the closest Whale ever came to unifying the two artistic postures he was well-known for – the portrayer of Great War angst and the maker of Gothic fantasias, finding a dramatic landscape where those two things could coexist and feed each-other. They also converge on Penderel, a survivor of the trenches who readily acknowledges that he exemplifies a type, rattling off evocative self-descriptions that have become close to parodic clichés for him: “War Generation, slightly soiled – a study in the bittersweet – the man with the twisted smile – and this Mr Femm is exceedingly good gin.” Where the Wavertons are a sturdy middle-class couple, inheritors of the future, Penderel is a perpetual misfit and ironic party animal, seeing ridiculousness in everything. At least until he claps eyes on Gladys, who swiftly shifts the weights on the Eros-Thanatos scale in Penderel.

Sir William represents another corner of interwar British society, a self-made, nouveau riche businessman with a strong Yorkshire accent and a surface attitude of bonhomie. That barely conceals a seething motive in his working class roots and a telling lack of any sense of noblesse oblige. He’s easily drawn in the course of chatting with the other guests after dinner into recounting his tragic past, how his wife died, he believes, from heartache after being cold-shouldered by snooty society wives when Sir William first began to rise helped, convincing her she was holding them back. Sir William avenged her by breaking and bankrupting the husbands of those women, and yet remains a figure of pathos: now he’s got a fortune and a knighthood and no human connection, except for playing sexless sugar daddy to Gladys. Sir William’s narrative is coherent as both a depiction of Whale’s experience of class anger, and it can also be argued a coded metaphor for the agonies of coming out in Whale’s time, in registering a specifically intimate and human cost to social prejudice. Sir William and Penderel butt heads at first, with Sir William assuming the urbane Penderel looks down his nose at him for being such a go-get-‘em operator, and Penderel telling the magnate off for speaking disrespectfully to Glady when he outs her – that is, tells everyone her real last name, which is Perkins. “I envy you, I admire you,” Penderel tells Sir William, in comparison to his own unmoored and lethargic state, to the magnate’s retort, “Oh yes, you envy me, but you don’t admire me.”

Meanwhile the Femms represent a particularly eccentric and ingenious collective twist on an essential motif of Gothic fiction, the aristocratic clan cut off from the tides of modern life and subsisting on decaying pretensions and trapped within a house that once expressed their exceptionalism but now only exhibits their decay. Nonetheless, as Rebecca triumphantly tells her brother as he frets over the fear that the rains could bust a nearby dam and wash the house away, Femm Manor is built on solid rock – the roots of the Femms are planted so deep in the soil of the country they can’t be dug out even if they wish it. Rebecca and Horace have divergent expressions of their intense neurosis in embodying a disparity of godless sensualism and religiose intensity, but both are the same degree of crazy. The ancient Sir Roderick, when the Wavertons seek him out, is found ensconced in his bedroom which looks fit for Tudor monarch and barely altered since that epoch, whilst Rebecca’s bedroom is candlelit – “I’ll have none of this electric light!” she declares – and festooned with musty Victoriana. We never see Horace’s room, but the mind boggles. And at the top of the house, the locked door, hiding the last Femm, Saul, a brooding, superficially ingratiating pyromaniac. The flood below, madness and fire above, and points on the compass in between.

The great storm that falls upon the Shropshire Hills doesn’t just sever the Femms and their interlopers from the outside world but also cordons them within the subliminal space made solid. But the motif of the house as an encompassing expression of such ingrained neurosis and entrapping identity also feeds into the subtler dynamic that fees both humour and horror. Whale suggests there are few more disquieting and disturbing things than being obliged to have a meal with strangers, enabled by strained manners and a grotesque conventional politeness that ignores for a set period of time the strangeness that occurs off in the margins, like Margaret’s encounter with Rebecca. Indeed, this is essentially Whale’s entire thesis about social life, a constant game of facades and unveilings, and fusing a particular brand of comedy of manners with its darker doppelganger in Horror, which is a genre precisely preoccupied with the breakdown of civilised pretences and engagement with the primal. It keeps in mind the impression I’ve often had that something like Howard’s End or The Age of Innocence contains more real and discomforting violence than any number of slasher movies.

Karloff’s presence in the film sees Whale again with the actor he boosted from character actor to a peculiar brand of stardom, in a role that partly burlesques the characterisation of the Frankenstein’s Monster. Morgan is another shambling, towering, unspeaking creature, but one that’s been semi-domesticated: the Femms need him to keep food on their table and keep the electric light working. He’s an upper class idea of the lower class taken to an extreme, useful as a mass of obedient muscle until he gets liquored up and becomes insensately dangerous, casting a lascivious eye on Margaret. But Morgan has another function, as Saul’s warden, a bulwark of violence required to keep a less immediately intimidating but even more dangerous force in check. At one point, as Gladys follows Penderel out into the storm, she looks in through the barred kitchen window and sees Morgan, now thoroughly soused: the servant lurches to the window and punches his hand through the glass in a perfunctory attempt to grab one of the tempting morsels about him. It’s not a part that requires much of Karloff, in the first of his major post-Frankenstein genre roles when he’d soon be appearing in the likes of The Mummy (1932) and The Mask of Fu Manchu (1932) which let him unleash his voice. But it does gain everything from his presence regardless, as Karloff wrings pathos from Morgan’s attempts to speak which inevitably fail and instead expression comes through physical chaos as he drinks.

After her squall of hysteria in Rebecca’s room Margaret quickly becomes the most sanguine person in the house, calmly and coolly shepherding the conversation as the various camps in the house try to communicate. Meanwhile Penderel and Gladys’ crackle of attraction combusts when the two venture out to the Wavertons’ car, stashed to wait out the storm in the barn, to fetch a bottle of whiskey Penderel left there. They quickly fall in love and taking refuge in the back seat of the car, with all that implies thoroughly implied. Priestley intended his novel as a tragic character study of Penderel masquerading as a thriller, although quite a few critics over the years have said the book didn’t really achieve that. Nonetheless Penderel emerges as the closest thing the film has to a central character and hero as he shifts from alcoholic gadabout to a man in love and has to quickly improvise in fending off danger. Douglas, honing his suave and worldly persona, is quite excellent in the role. Indeed, one arresting element of The Old Dark House is the quality of its cast, packed as it is with heavyweight actors on the cusp of major stardom, in Karloff, Douglas, Laughton, and Massey. Stuart on the other hand, after also appearing in The Invisible Man for Whale, never really gained star traction but, in one of those marvels of Hollywood fate, would record a commentary track for this film’s laserdisc release sixty years later which would bring her to James Cameron’s attention and help win her role in Titanic (1997).

And yet it’s Thesiger who owns the film, walking the finest line between creepiness and ridiculousness, seeming to most immediately embody the perversity of the Femms but also the most timorous in the face of it. When the necessity arises to fetch a large kerosene lamp from the top floor landing when the lights fail and Rebecca gloatingly prods him to help Philip bring it down, Horace keeps anxiously trying to avoid the errand, and when they hear peculiar laughter echoing down from above, Horace finally flees to his bedroom, leaving Philip to fetch the lamp alone. Philip takes up the lamp but notices the telling signs there, the padlocked door, the remains of a meal on a plate on the table with the lamp, whilst wind whistles in the crannies high in the roof. Meanwhile, down below, Margaret, in an interlude of playfulness, starts making shadow animals on the wall in the firelight, her silhouette and her gestures thrown against the wall of the dining room, only for Rebecca’s silhouette to lurch into view as she repeats the some gesture of touching Margaret’s chest, sending Margaret into a panicky flurry again. As she opens the front door and shouts into the night, begging Penderel to come back, a hand reaches behind and over her head to grasp the door and slam it shut. An iconic Horror image, this time arriving without a mocking codicil. The hand belongs to the soused and randy Morgan, who chases Margaret around the dining room, upturning the dining table in a gesture of pointed symbolism. Philip returns from aloft, and seeing what’s happening, does battle with Morgan, until he wallops him with the lamp, causing Morgan to plunge down the stairs, knocked unconscious. Later, when he awakens, Morgan gains his revenge by heading upstairs and releasing Saul.

These scenes illustrate Whale’s unique skill in mediating tone shifts, as menace emerges from the comic and absurd, and moments of playfulness segue into an eruption of actual danger. The fact that The Old Dark House was missing for a long time prevented it from becoming as much of an immediate influence as Whale’s other films, and the legendary schlock artiste William Castle was able to get away with directing a wayward remake in 1963. Whale likely had seen Paul Leni’s stylish film version of The Cat and the Canary (1927), replete as it with brilliant cinema, and some of Whale’s imagery echoes it. But Leni’s film has rather less sophisticated comedy than The Old Dark House, which is far more exactly aimed at the nexus of social anxiety and psychological angst in tapping both horror and humour. Whale would become bolder and stranger in his blendings with The Invisible Man and Bride of Frankenstein – the catatonic-seeming Mr Plod policemen in the former and the shrieking, inflated melodrama cues in the latter. The Old Dark House therefore stands as an essential ancestor for just about all comedy-horror crossbreeds, and what most of the best of such films wisely follow Whale in doing was in infiltrating comedy via the characters and playing core genre elements essentially straight, a presumption that’s essential to the success of, say, Ivan Reitman’s Ghostbusters (1984) or Wes Craven’s Scream (1996). Indeed, Craven, with his penchant for inserting a brand of anarchic, cartoonish humour into his Horror films, in many ways came closest of subsequent Horror auteurs to building upon Whale’s sensibility. On the other hand, the film was also a direct influence on the far more indiscriminately lampooning attitude of The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975).

Moreover, Whale picks out a thread here that was to prove important in terms of where Horror cinema was headed, in general. Whilst The Old Dark House makes sport of the trappings of gothic horror, the real source of horror then moves away from the supernatural, conveying metaphor and oneiric imagery, and emerges as human and immediate, and embodied by different forms – the hulking brutishness of Morgan and the impishly homicidal Saul. The essence of the drama becomes this imminent physical danger. Mad killers on the loose were already a well-lodged genre convention, but there’s something that feels particularly pertinent in the way Whale plays one genre frame against the other. In short, Whale grasped where the Horror movie was going, although it would take another few decades to get there. What Alfred Hitchcock would do to the genre with Psycho (1960), with its own old dark house and lurking, devolved murderer, is essentially a reiteration of this intelligible shift in focus and meaning. One can look on past that to The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974), which is built of the same basic ideas as The Old Dark House – the searching, displaced travellers, the degenerated family, the crumbling old house, the hulking, monstrous force of threat, the preoccupation with perverse social ritual, only by that time monochrome gothic has been replaced by the spacy, sunstruck American brand.

The Wavertons, trying to understand the enigmatic threat lurking in the Femm house, venture upstairs together and enter Sir Roderick’s room, where the find the ancient knight lying in his bed. Whale has Sir Roderick played by the actress Elspeth Dudgeon (credited for the film as John), covered in aging makeup and a false beard. This conceit has a sly brilliance to it, recognising the quality of androgyny that very old age confers, and feeding Whale’s underground river of destabilisation, the one remnant of the Femms of old now happy in his prostrate, post-gender state, calmly awaiting mortality’s edge: “When you’re as old as I am, at any minute you might just die,” he comments, and gives a chuckle. “Madness came,” he says of his family, “We have all been touched with it a little you see, except for me – at least I – I don’t think I am.” Sir Roderick warns the Wavertons about Saul and the possibility of Morgan unleashing him, before falling asleep. Philip dashes out to see if Morgan is still unconscious, only to find he’s arisen, and Horace pokes his head out of his bedroom door to tell him he heard Morgan going upstairs, and instructs with punitive directness, “Wait for him downstairs and kill him,” before hiding again.

Whale’s peeling of this particular onion reaches sees inevitable combustion as a single hand appearing on the staircase railing announces Saul’s lurking presence, and Morgan lurches into sight with the sickly smile of a man with a trump, before trying to launch at Margaret again. It takes the combined efforts of Penderal, Philip, and Sir William to wrestle Morgan into the kitchen and lock him in there, and Penderal dashes back to Margaret and Gladys and gets them to hide in a closet whilst he sets about distracting Saul. Saul, when he finally shows his face, proves disarmingly innocent and scared-looking, like an anthropomorphic hamster. He descends to Penderel, begging him to prevent his relatives locking him away again. Saul claims to not be mad, but has instead been imprisoned to keep secret the fact Horace and Rebecca killed Rachel, and often beaten by Morgan. Penderel is initially credulous of Saul’s claims, but Saul quickly begins to reveal his madness, picking up the carving knife from dinner and insisting on recounting the biblical tale of Saul and David.

Penderel instead begins stringing him out by affecting interest in a story he wants to tell, and the two settle at the dinner table: the earlier, strained dinner conversation gives way to more of the same tense, dissembling playacting, but this time the game is immediate, desperate, the barrier between civility and lunacy only as thick as Penderel’s improvisation. Penderel then is a solider once more, albeit this time actually fighting for something – trying to keep the madman away from Margaret and Gladys. When finally Saul explodes it comes with astonishing ferocity, hurling the knife at Penderel and then bashing him with a chair, before dashing up the stairs and setting fire to a curtain in cackling delight. Penderel, despite having a broken arm, ascends to fight the loony again, and this time Saul tries to rip Penderel’s throat out with his teeth, only for them both to fall over the balcony to the floor below. The movie softened the novel’s ending slightly, as Penderel dies in the fall in the book: after test audience didn’t like this, the ending was reshot, it does feel more in keeping with the movie’s totality.

As if by compensation for the loss of one tragedy, Whale inserted another. Morgan breaks out into the dining room again, ready to resume chasing Margaret, only for her to get him to look to the fallen Penderel and Saul: Morgan, utterly heartbroken by the death of his charge, cradling Saul’s body, weeps over his fractured body and carries it back up to his room. This crowning vignette resonates on several levels, most obviously in anticipating the encounter of the Monster and the Blind Hermit in Bride of Frankenstein in its depiction of the symbiosis of the misshapen, as well as sneaking in a moment of undisguised love between men, and echoing the fraternal grief of the war veterans, which needed some echo, some acknowledgement, to pass before the night of the storm can end. Penderel’s proposal of marriage to Gladys, which she accepts by giving him a passionate kiss as she too cradles her injured lover, suggests a spiritual economy of love at work: something can’t die without something being born. The morning comes, finally, the sun shining and beginning to dry the ocean of mud without, Horace emerging to politely wave the Wavertons away as they head off to fetch help, whilst Gladys cradles her wounded gallant, and Rebecca scoffs at the lot of these bent, buckled, bruised, but still upright humans.

Standard
1990s, Action-Adventure, Comedy, Horror/Eerie

Sleepy Hollow (1999)

.

Director: Tim Burton
Screenwriters: Andrew Kevin Walker, Kevin Yagher

By Roderick Heath

Alongside his own ‘Rip Van Winkle,’ Washington Irving’s story ‘The Legend of Sleepy Hollow’ is probably the best-known work of American literature from before the time of Poe and James Fenimore Cooper. Born in New York in the early years of the republic, Irving, after struggling as a merchant, found success in his twenties as a writer, journalist, and editor, and later pursued a career as a diplomat, serving for a time as ambassador to Spain. Amongst Irving’s random, still-resonating achievements ranked coining the phrase “the almighty dollar” and the nickname “Gotham” for New York, publishing the Francis Scott Key poem that became ‘The Star-Spangled Banner,’ popularising the false notion medieval Europeans thought the world was flat before Columbus, and having one of his pen names inspire the name of the New York Knicks. The roots of Irving’s most famous labours went back to his teenaged years, when a yellow fever epidemic caused his parents to send him to live with a friend in upstate New York. During that sojourn Irving first encountered Sleepy Hollow, a small town founded by Dutch settlers. His two most famous stories were both first published in a collection entitled The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent. Irving connected several elements of local lore for ‘The Legend of Sleepy Hollow,’ including the history of the locale during the Revolutionary War, as he created the story of the timorous schoolmaster Ichabod Crane. Crane moves to Sleepy Hollow and becomes involved with a local girl, only to encounter the ghost of a Hessian mercenary soldier decapitated in battle but still terrorising the local byways.

Tim Burton, born in Burbank, California in 1958, is another curious American artist of the fanciful and student of the arcane and eerie. Burton started making short films with an 18mm camera as a child, displayed aptitude as an artist, and studied animation after leaving school. For a time he worked at Disney Studios in various artistic capacities and making short films on the side. One of these was the six-minute stop-motion animation Vincent (1983), depicting a young boy who fantasizes about being his hero Vincent Price, winning Burton his first burst of attention. Shortly after, he made a live-action version of Hansel and Gretel with a Japonaise style, sporting a kung fu fight between the titular duo and the witch, an early example of Burton’s habit of mischievously remixing various genres: that work screened once on the Disney Channel and was barely sighted again. Then he made Frankenweenie (1984), another stop-motion work about a junior mad scientist who revives his dog, killed by being run over by a car. Disney fired Burton for wasting company resources on something too scary for kids, but screenings of the short attracted the attention of comedian Paul Rubens, who, looking to play his popular comedy character Pee-wee Herman in a movie, hired Burton to direct Pee-wee’s Big Adventure (1985). It was a hit, and Burton scarcely looked back.

Burton’s initial success was rooted in a projection of a singular identity. He was a director capable of balancing commercial imperatives with a strong personal inflection sourced in a passion for retro 1950s and ‘60s kitsch culture, old horror movies and other disreputable genres, eccentric and often mean humour, and stories sporting losers, freaks, and outsiders recast as heroes. He connected with a hip young audience somewhat starved for flavour in the oh-so-slick ‘80s mainstream movie culture and gained cultish fervour with the next three films he made – Beetlejuice (1987), Batman (1989), and Edward Scissorhands (1990). Burton was the most mainstream-acceptable, at least at first, of a generation of director sharing similar touchstones and a similarly unstable sense of genre, delighting in blending provocation with playfulness, also including Sam Raimi, Stuart Gordon, and Peter Jackson. The rest of his career has however proven patchy. His follow-up to the hugely successful, high-style take on Batman, Batman Returns (1992), despite some potent elements, was more divisive and less successful. His best film to date, the tragicomic biopic Ed Wood (1994), and its follow-up, the gleefully sick comic alien invasion movie Mars Attacks (1996), were both box office disappointments, and his career was hampered by being drawn into an ill-fated attempt to make a Superman movie starring Nicholas Cage. Later, as his career moved into the 2000s and 2010s, Burton became more assured as a box office hand with a string of reboots, remakes, and would-be franchise-starters given a light gloss of the patented Burton black nail-polish touch, but he paid a price for this, as his movies were now often met with blank critical and former fan hostility. Sometimes the dismissal has been deserved, sometimes not.

Whilst a great number of Burton’s films interpolate imagery and ideas harvested from Horror cinema – Batman applied lashings of Expressionist paint to the superhero film and did the same with Edward Scissorhands to a blend of romantic fairy-tale and John Waters-esque suburban satire – few of his movies have actually, properly belong to the genre. Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007) did, but with the conceit of being a musical too, whilst Beetlejuice and Dark Shadows (2012) crossbred Horror with roguish comedy. Sleepy Hollow, released in 1999, is the closest he’s come to date to make a straight-up Horror film, and even it’s as much camp parody and action film as Horror. It is nonetheless one of Burton’s best films – indeed the one I enjoy most purely of his work save Ed Wood – and a last hurrah in paying tribute to the old-fashioned gothic horror style. The film, written by Andrew Kevin Walker who had a major success writing David Fincher’s 1996 hit Se7en with its adolescent grunge moralism, was originally slated to be a low-budget potboiler to be directed by makeup effects artist Kevin Yagher, who finished up serving in that capacity as well as co-producing when Burton came on board, whilst Francis Ford Coppola was loosely involved in the same capacity. Burton set about transforming the inherited project into a wildly stylish tribute to old Hammer and Universal Horror movies and Mario Bava films, shooting it in England and mostly on sets.

Irving’s story had been filmed many times before, most memorably as a portion of the 1949 animated Disney film The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad (where it was partnered with an episode taken from The Wind and the Willows). ‘The Legend of Sleepy Hollow’ chapter exemplified the old Disney’s brilliance at animation and willingness to conjure ghoulish imagery for a young audience. Burton inserts some visual references to the Disney take into his, including the famous climactic image of the headless horseman hurling a hollow jack o’lantern at Ichabod, blazing maw and eyes looming at the camera. Burton’s Sleepy Hollow nonetheless goes off on a tangent from straightforward adaptation, taking the basics of the Irving style whilst crossbreeding them with aspects of the nascent steampunk branch of fantastical fiction, fascinated by anachronistic but theoretically possible anticipations of modern technology and social attitudes in period settings, and detective story. Ichabod is portrayed as not a teacher but a policeman interested in sifting clues and deduction at a time when maintaining law and order was a very simple, brutal affair, and he’s flung into the mystery of headless horseman’s murderous maraudings.

The film’s pre-title sequences open on wealthy Sleepy Hollow landowner Peter Van Garrett (Martin Landau), after busily preparing and sealing a legal document, setting out in a coach driven by his son Dirk (Robert Sella) from his house to town. As they pass through his fields filled with growing corn and overlooked by a creepy scarecrow with a jack o’lantern head, Peter overhears the neigh of a horse and the ring of a steel blade, and looks out to see his son has been decapitated. Leaping from the coach, Peter retreats into the corn, only to be chased down by an unseen assailant and likewise left headless. Meanwhile in Manhattan, Ichabod (Johnny Depp), a constable with the New York Police, fishes a corpse out of the Hudson River, but his desire to make a pathology examination to determine the cause of death is foiled by a dismissive High Constable (Alun Armstrong). When he protests to a presiding judge (Christopher Lee), the judge, irritated by Ichabod’s radicalism, challenges him to accept the assignment of travelling to Sleepy Hollow and investigate the murders of the two Van Garretts and another local, the Widow Winship. Ichabod accepts, and travels north, finding lodging with another major local landowner, Baltus Van Tassel (Michael Gambon), with his comely new wife Mary (Miranda Richardson) and grown-up daughter Katrina (Christina Ricci) from his previous marriage.

The core joke of Sleepy Hollow is that whilst its version of Ichabod Crane now occupies the role of man of action and incisive intellectual vision, equal prototype for Sherlock Holmes, Van Helsing, and Dirty Harry and conflating two centuries of pulp fiction heroes, he’s actually, essentially the same timorous, incongruous figure Irving created. Burton wields the disparity to mock a familiar kind of genre hero whilst also presenting the story of how Ichabod grows into the role, at least as far as he can. Upon arrival in Sleepy Hollow, Ichabod cringes before gruesome sights, gulps when people warn him about the horseman, is bullied by local jock Brom (Casper Van Dien), and leaps up on a chair when he spies a spider crawling across his room’s floor. He bears mysterious scars on his hands that bespeak a hidden trauma in his past motivating his determination, against all his physical and emotional reflexes, to take on evil and prove a force for rational good, and so attacks the problems before him with all the fortitude and purpose he can muster. His attempts to wield his hand-crafted medical tools in his investigations invariably result in aniety and revulsion from onlookers and a lot of mess. His methods, including play-acting the role of the killer’s giant horse as he inspects the ground around a victim’s corpse and notes the meaning of the hoof-prints, generally make him look rather barmy to the bewildered and frightened locals. The Sleepy Hollow denizens keep telling Ichabod about the horseman, but Ichabod as a rationalist refuses to believe this, until he’s presented with the terrifying sight the black-clad rider in full murderous charge.

In similar fashion, Sleepy Hollow enlarges upon aspects of the Irving story to weave an involved plot and make thematic capital out of the idea of the ghosts of the Revolutionary War and the colonial age not yet at rest. Baltus narrates the tale of the horseman to Ichabod, whereupon Burton interpolates a marvellous flashback that evokes the theatrical artificiality of early cinema, with jostling muskets and bayonets of clashing armies in the foreground and the mounted Hessian lurking beyond against an expressionistically stylised set full of sturm-und-drung. The Hessian is glimpsed, played by a wittily cast (and unbilled) Christopher Walken without dialogue, as a ferocious warrior who’s filed his teeth into monstrous fangs: even before he’s killed and resurrected, the Hessian’s desire is to become a perfect beast of war. Burton segues from this stylised hellishness to a scene of hallucinatory beauty infiltrated by a diseased presence: the Hessian is chased into snowy woods by Continental soldiers, where he encounters two children, blonde sisters, one of who gives away his position. The Hessian fights with all his ferocity and kills many foes, but is finally skewered, beheaded, and his corpse dumped in a grave.

Burton, through his streamlined flow of gorgeous imagery, reaches here through a recreation of a highly stylised silent film aesthetic which itself was drawn from stage performance and shadow puppet theatre, before conjuring the ironic fairy-tale setting as backdrop to the Hessian’s defeat. Later in the film Burton notes a young boy fascinated by the flitting images of witches and ghouls cast out by his magic lantern. This brief vignette nonetheless allows Burton to note the grand tradition of entertainment by frightful frisson and invocation of the uncanny that reaches back far beyond the age of cinema, and the film’s entire form manages to encapsulate an animated history of that tradition without sacrificing narrative flow and coherence. A bauble Ichabod inherited from his mother, which he shows to Katrina, creates an optical illusion of a bird alternating between being caged and freed: Katrina amusedly calls it magic whilst Ichabod insists it’s science, and of course it’s also the distant prototype for cinema itself, the combination of both.

Meanwhile the casting makes immediate connections with the movie tradition Burton’s having a ball recreating, first and foremost with Lee’s early cameo (commencing his late career revival extended by The Lord of the Rings films and George Lucas’ Star Wars prequels, as well as Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, 2005, all of which would help to make Lee technically the top box office star of 2006) and his Dracula (1958) costar Michael Gough, who Burton brought into the blockbuster age by casting him as Alfred in Batman, playing Sleepy Hollow notary Hardenbrook. The rest of the coterie of noble gentlemen comprising Sleepy Hollow’s powers-that-be are filled out by a notable gang of character actors, including Gambon, Richard Griffiths as the town’s frightened and boozy Magistrate, Samuel Philipse, Ian McDiarmid as local doctor Thomas Lancaster, and Jeffrey Jones as Paster Steenwyck. This collective of familiar faces lets Burton nudge whodunit territory, as the question of who resurrected the Hessian and has now unleashed him on seemingly random residents of the town becomes Ichabod’s preoccupying quandary. And also in pure whodunit territory is the solution to that as the one notable person who seems to hover on the fringes.

Ichabod arrives at the Van Tassel manse as Baltus is throwing as Ichabod arrives, and strangeness is already lurking the shadows, as Ichabod glimpses a silhouetted couple snogging on the porch. Inside the house, Ichabod first encounters Katrina as she plays blind-man’s-bluff and catches Ichabod as he tries to pass by, giving him a kiss “on account” much to the chagrin of her suitor Brom. “Young man you are welcome,” Baltus says to Ichabod as he plays the happy host, “Even if you are selling something.” Ichabod reveals his purpose, casting a pall over proceedings, and the village gentlemen try to explain the situation to the policeman. When he’s installed in an attic room, serving girl Sarah (Jessica Oyelowo) tells Ichabod “Thank god you’ve come!”, to his swivel-eyed disquiet, and within a short time a former servant of Van Garrett, Jonathan Masbath (Mark Spalding), is killed by the horseman whilst on guard duty awaiting its appearance. On a tip from Philipse, Ichabod soon exhumes the other victims of the horseman and finds, to his revulsion, that the killer not only beheaded the Widow Winship but also her unborn child inside her womb with a deft sword thrust.

One night as he walks through the village, Ichabod is terrorised by what seems to be the horseman, carrying a jack o’lantern, only to be hit by it and knocked silly whilst the rider is revealed to be Brom, playing a prank with some hastily contrived disguise. This vignette, as well as sporting nods to the Disney version, refers back to the Irving story, which left events purposefully vague, so that Ichabod might well have been scared off by Brom in the horseman’s guise rather than killed by the ghoul. When Ichabod confronts Philipse as he’s trying to flee town, the horseman rides out of the fog and beheads the Magistrate, but leaves Ichabod alone to faint away in fright. After battling through his shock, Ichabod finds himself taking in Masbath’s son (Mark Pickering) as a servant, and the two venture into the reputedly haunted western woods where the Hessian was buried. Along the way, they spy someone following them, which proves to be Katrina, valiantly determined to stick with them. They also encounter a witch who keeps her face hidden by a veil, who summons a demonic entity to possess her and give Ichabod some pointers of where to seek out the Hessian’s grave, at what she calls “the Tree of the Dead.”

After departing hastily, Ichabod and his two companions soon locate the grave under its unmistakeable marker, a black, gnarled tree that sprang up and died since the Hessian’s burial and still has his sword wedged in its roots, which also conceal a portal stuffed with the severed heads of the horseman’s victims and concealing a portal to Hell. As Ichabod digs up the Hessian’s skeleton he finds its skull is missing. The supernatural entity itself bursts from the heart of the tree and pounds off through the forest in search of another victim, with Ichabod giving chase. The Hessian’s next target proves to be a midwife, Beth Killian (Claire Skinner) and her husband (Steven Waddington): the horseman bursts into their house and swiftly slays both. Burton, never averse to risking some real darkness even in his playful films, provides a brief, black-hearted send-up of the climax of Aliens (1986) as the Skinners’ young son Thomas (Sean Stephens) tries to elude the horseman by crawling about under the floorboards, only for the ghoul to smash through the floorboards and claim the lad’s head for his bag of trophies. Ichabod arrives just as Brom confronts the Hessian, and the two men try to bring him down, but the headless monster soon cuts Brom in half and leaves Ichabod with a sword wound, instantly cauterised by the blade’s devilish heat.

All of this unfolds in Burton’s updated version of the kinds of gnarled, fogbound, permanently autumnal rural landscapes seen in the old Universal Horror films like Bride of Frankenstein (1935) and The Wolf Man (1941), and similarly creating the oppressive atmosphere by shooting on cleverly dressed sets. The attempt to recreate the old soundstage Horror style had been presaged by Neil Jordan’s The Company of Wolves (1984) and Coppola’s Bram Stoker’s Dracula (1992), but where those directors approached the aesthetic with a kind of art installation-like self-consciousness, Burton entirely enters into the logic of the world he conjures. Burton’s nods to classic Horror history are plentiful and mostly cleverly kneaded into the story. The windmill that provides the setting for part of the climax is based on the one seen at the end of The Brides of Dracula (1960). The scene in which young Ichabod discovers his mother locked in an iron maiden ticks off both Roger Corman’s Pit and the Pendulum (1961), Bava’s La Maschera del Demonio (1960), and Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining (1980), as the mother’s eyes stare out of the steel prison before her hole-ridden face is unleashed in a flood of gore. Burton and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki first considered making Sleepy Hollow in black-and-white, before adopting a compelling visual texture, largely desaturated and rendered in shades of grey, save for careful deployments of colour, where the black thatch of Ichabod’s hair swallows light whilst the blonde tresses of Katrina seem to exude it.

Sleepy Hollow came out at a time when CGI was making movie special effects increasingly sophisticated and the magic lantern show all the more seamless. Burton was able to portray the headless horseman (with stuntman Ray Park playing the headless Hessian) without the kind of awkward costuming effects used in something like The Mysterious Doctor (1943) with its headless ghost, or the infamous ‘Chopper’ episode of Kolchak: The Night Stalker with its poorly realised variation on the horseman as a headless motorcyclist. He was also able to juice up the various beheadings with flourishes largely impossible prior to the CGI era, like one head getting hacked off and spinning about like a top on the severed neck. The felicity of this is debatable. The more cartoonish effects, particularly those used in Ichabod’s encounter with the witch feels like they came out of a different movie, giving the slight impression Burton was anxious about selling a neo-gothic horror movie to a mass audience without the crutch of absurd-flecked spectacle. But the special effects are also used to real effect at points too. When the Hessian comes to claim the elder Masbath, tendrils of drifting mist seem to reach out and extinguish burning torches. In the climax, the horseman, restoring his reclaimed skull, regrows all the flesh on his head.

Sleepy Hollow exhibits much of Burton’s imaginative genius, and also some of his niggling faults, if here kept in proportion. His tendency to take the edge off his gore effects by emphasising black comedy messiness to them, with Ichabod constantly getting spurting bodily fluids over himself, cuts against the grain of the fetishised majesty of the old-school genre trappings and the essential seriousness of the story: the character comedy based in Ichabod’s anxious heroism works far better. Burton seems here to have been trying to live up to the example of some of his generational fellows who came out of their own, hand-crafted cinema and wielded a harder edge to their deliriously funny, transgressive use of gore. On the other hand, Burton’s indulgence in this regard is arguably authentic in exemplifying the tradition of the Grand Guignol approach to Horror, specialising in both provoking and delighting an audience with spectacles of absurd bloodshed. Burton’s occasional problems with tone, a tendency that helped and harmed his Batman films with their sharp swerves from comic jauntiness to sleazy violence, also manifests at points.

The film never affects to be an authentic period piece, but rather a wry meditation on the emergence of modernity’s earliest glimmers from the pall of history, with both the wielders of religious authority and black magicians indicted as two sides of the same coin. The New York constabulary is seen showing off medieval torture machines even as Ichabod is trying to invent pathology and detective method at least seventy years early. “The millennium is almost upon us!” Ichabod declares to the judge early in the film, trying to inject future-shock promise into a moment still slithering out of medievalism. This connects with Burton’s recurring flourishes regarding the roots of cinema. This in turn feeds into Burton’s semi-sarcastic exploration of the familiar genre tension between rationalism and superstition, which he couches in terms of his established interest in damaged heroes. Burton’s emphasis on the formative backstory and resulting psychological dance of gallantry and derangement in the hero of Batman did much to define the obsession with such things in contemporary storytelling: heroes without backstories to overcomes in their character arcs are compulsory now where they were essentially pretexts in classic genre literature. Here, Ichabod experiences dreamily-styled flashbacks, all provoked by moments of shock and wounding as his travails in Sleepy Hollow forcing him to reckon with his past. It slowly emerges that his father, Lord Crane (Peter Guinness), had his mother (Lisa Marie) tortured and killed for practicing her own brand of white magic.

Burton saves particularly vivid stylisation for these fragmentary visions which contains hues of colour bled out of the rest of the film, portraying glimmering fairy-tale wonder giving way to awful nightmarish menace as the story unfolds, and childhood perspective gives way to adult, a state Burton essentially regards as less the achievement of maturity than the result of constant, scar-forming wounding. This idea is made literal as the scars on Ichabod’s hands came from gripping spiked torture implements in his shock at finding his mother locked in the iron maiden. Ichabod’s attempts to stand for reason and justice are rooted in his “bible-black tyrant” of a father’s killing of his “child of nature” mother, grievous patriarchy exterminating magical maternalism. A pattern Ichabod can’t help falling into again when his logic and the nature of appearances leads him to misunderstand Katrina’s attempts to protect him with her own white magic.

Katrina’s stoked memories of childhood are happier than Ichabod’s, recalling spending an idyllic time with her parents when they were poor tenants on Van Garrett land. Katrina takes Ichabod to the ruins of the cottage where they lived and points out to Ichabod an archer carved into the fireplace, an emblem that proves to have crucial meaning in the mystery of the horseman. Meanwhile Ichabod’s investigations uncover varying levels of greed, lust, cowardice, double-dealing, and manipulation convulsing through the Sleepy Hollow denizens, as when he follows Mary out into the woods when he sees her acting furtively, and beholds the spectacle of her screwing Steenwyck on a bed of clammy autumn leaves, slicing her hand open with a dagger and rubbing her blood on his back in a sex magick rite. Notary Hardenbrook quite literally hides in the closet to avoid being interviewed by Ichabod, and the detective finds him in possession of Van Garrett’s legal documents, which he claims and finds to be a will. During a brainstorming session in his room, Ichabod scribbles down random notes on paper without noticing they accrue to say, quite accurately, “the secret conspiracy point to Baltus,” as indeed all the horseman’s killings seem to have left Baltus as heir to the Van Garrett estate. Ichabod’s digging soon causes a rift between him and Katrina, who warns Ichabod her father isn’t that kind of man.

The unfolding mystery finally combusts when Baltus sees the horseman advancing on Mary as she collects ingredients for herbal medicine, and, assuming the ghoul kills her, flees to the town just as the denizens are collecting in the church. Chaos ensues in a brilliantly choreographed and filmed sequence, as the besieged villagers try to fend off the Hessian as he rides around the church, held out of consecrated ground but looking for some means to nab his prey Baltus. Meanwhile Steenwyck beats Lancaster to death when the doctor tries to warn Baltus he’s been the victim of a conspiracy, and Baltus shoots Steenwyck. Katrina urgently draws a talismanic symbol on the church floor with a piece of chalk. Finally the cunning Hessian makes a lance with a fencepost, ties a rope to it, and spears Baltus through the window, pulling him out of the church and across the grass to the fence line so the ghoul can claim his head. Katrina faints, and, in a glorious high tracking shot, Burton surveys the scene of sprawled bodies and the taunting emblem of Katrina’s magic, which seems to all to have been the invocation whipping up the horseman. Only later, as he prepares to depart Sleepy Hollow in sullen defeat and disillusion, determined to protect Katrina but also convinced she was his puppeteer, does Ichabod, twirling the bird bauble, realise he’s fallen prey to a game of illusions. Quickly enough he realises that the apparently killed Mary is the real puppeteer, having slain the servant Sarah and substituted her body for her own. Meanwhile Mary has appeared to Katrina, knocked her out, and spirited her to the windmill she uses as a base for her witchcraft.

Richardson’s fabulous performance, once properly unleashed, expertly juggles the diverging urges between camp melodrama and hard urgency manifest throughout the film, as Mary explains her plot with relish to Katrina, who is the last person standing between her and ownership of Sleepy Hollow. Her motive was vengeance for her family’s eviction from the cottage, which her father built, the archer symbol in the fireplace a reference to their family name of Archer. She and her twin sister were the two girls who encountered the Hessian, and Mary the one who brought about his death, and whilst the sister became the hermitic witch of the forest, Mary set about mastering black magic to resurrect the horseman and use him n her plot to kill off all potential alternative heirs to the Van Garrett and Van Tassel estates. Mary’s triumphal monologue succeeds in unifying the conventions of the whodunit, with the whys and hows of Mary’s campaign illustrated in a cascade of flashbacks and glimpsed vignettes, including of her murdering her sister and seducing Steenwyck, and a raft of bloody, bizarre business befitting a Horror movie. Mary’s revelations present her as a companion and counterpoint to Ichabod as another survivor of traumatic formative experiences driven to wage a private war with the world, but her informed by class rage and a psychopathic streak all her own – she’s established as already a bit of bitch when she betrays the Hessian – and evil, murderous rather than protective and empowering ends in mind. Burton would repeat the motif of the witchy avenger of social wrongs wielding sympathetic motives but ugly and egocentric method in Dark Shadows.

Depp has lost a lot of paint in the past few years after being accused of abusiveness in his personal life, legal wrangles, and too many goddamned Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Nonetheless it must be said that Sleepy Hollow was a fitting cap for the period he spent through most of the 1990s as the most interesting and adventurous leading man in Hollywood, and when his and Burton’s regular collaborations were still events. In Sleepy Hollow he gives one of the best lead performances in a Horror movie, dynamic in sustaining both the comic and serious aspects to his characterisation. His Ichabod, wielding a deft English accent, is reminiscent after a fashion of Christopher Reeve’s similarly good bipolar performance in Superman (1978), the would-be man of reason and boldness suffering as his whole body tenses up, nostrils thinning to tight slits and mouth twisting glumly, as he is faced with sights gruesome and fantastical. He strikes a Peter Sellers-esque figure as Ichabod constantly suggests his wits aren’t quite as keen as he fancies them. Nonetheless Ichabod fights through all his anxieties and limitations and evolves into a classical swashbuckling hero, even if he does still hide behind his girlfriend and faint dead away at the drama’s end. Ricci was just trying to break her way out of her child star mode with his first adult lead, and she’s a bit awkward in the role, particularly as Burton cast her as a complete inversion of her name-making role as the mordant Wednesday in Barry Sonnenfeld’s Burton-derivative The Addams Family films. That said, with her huge eyes contrasting her new blonde locks, Ricci undoubtedly seems perfectly at home in Burton’s world, and presents an interesting blend of innocent romanticism and nascent canniness reminiscent of Sarah Jessica Parker’s role as a swiftly evolving, era-conflating emblem in Ed Wood.

After his relatively lackadaisical action scenes in the Batman films, the action staging in Sleepy Horror represented a leap in craft and ingenuity for Burton – the mid-film fight with the Hessian and the climactic battles are some of the best-crafted scenes of their kind of the last few decades, kinetic whilst completely coherent. The climax commences with Ichabod and the horseman converging on the windmill, where Young Masbath manages to knock Mary out, and Ichabod, Katrina, and the boy try to elude by climbing up through the mill and returning to the ground by riding its sails, whilst Ichabod sets fire to the structure, which explodes as the wafting flour ignites. “Is he dead?” Young Masbath questions as the trio gaze back on the fiery ruin. “That’s the problem – he was dead to begin with,” Ichabod admits, and when the horseman emerges unharmed they flee in Ichabod’s carriage, chased through the haunted forest by the Hessian. This sequence, with its canted camera angles and looming, fearsome imagery, is a particularly triumph for Lubezki, and the highpoint of action staging in Burton’s career, working in elements of wild slapstick amidst the wild, careening struggle as Ichabod tries to keep the horseman at bay long enough to give Katrina and the boy a chance to escape, before the carriage crashes close to the Tree of the Dead.

The idea of blending horror and action is much more familiar now, and whilst Sleepy Hollow didn’t spark a new craze for gothic horror revivalism, it did, along with Jackson’s The Frighteners (1997) and Stephen Sommers’ The Mummy (1999), give directors licence to mate action and horror in interesting and often popular ways: Paul W.S. Anderson’s Resident Evil (2002) and sequels, Neil Marshall’s Dog Soldiers (2002) and The Descent (2006), Zack Snyder’s remake of Dawn of the Dead (2004), Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later (2005), and Marc Forster’s World War Z (2013) all arguably owe something to Burton’s example as they strove to render once fairly benign manifestations of horror tropes into newly fast, ferocious, and spectacle-friendly creations. The French director Christoph Gans was bolder in building on Burton’s example with his marvellous Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001) and Beauty and the Beast (2014), likewise blending lush genre imagery with aspects of swashbuckling and even kung fu. It also kicked off a simmering penchant for movies reconfiguring familiar public domain stories into odd generic blends, manifest in fare like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2010) and Pride + Prejudice + Zombies (2016). A less than beneficial influence sometimes then perhaps, although I like both those movies.

The actual climactic confrontation is nonetheless close to perfect. After barely surviving the chase, the three heroes are confronted by Mary, who catches up on horseback, and the horseman by the Tree of the Dead. Before the Hessian can behead Katrina at Mary’s command, Ichabod tosses the Hessian his skull. Regaining his complete form and his hellish will, the Horseman picks up Mary and gives her a rather intense kiss – he eats her tongue out of her mouth, and rides with her bloody-mawed into the portal to hell under the tree. Magnificently ghoulish stuff, with a charge of perverse sexuality married to intimate nastiness, redolent of the kind of folkloric horror Burton and Irving reference. Mary’s hand is left protruding from the roots, beckoning in a last gesture of taunting humour, a sight that finally causes Ichabod to black out. Still, a little while later he with new bride Katrina and Young Masbath as servant travel back to New York, where Ichabod pre-writes Leonard Bernstein (“The Bronx is up, the Battery’s down, and home is this way!”) and escorts his new family through the newly cleansed, forward-looking Manhattan streets, all cosmic forces in new if only momentary harmony – man and woman, magic and science, past and future. Whilst it is uneven, it’s precisely for its bold and vigorous juggling act with both the imagery and the ideas of the genre that help Sleepy Hollow remain a rare achievement in modern Horror cinema.

Standard
1970s, Auteurs, Horror/Eerie, Scifi

Shivers (1975) / The Brood (1979)

.

Alternate titles for Shivers: They Came From Within ; The Parasite Murders ; Frissons

Director / Screenwriter: David Cronenberg

By Roderick Heath

Many directors have made great Horror movies. Some defined and redefined the genre. But few have become unshakeably associated with a specific wing of the genre that they largely invented, as David Cronenberg is with “body horror.” Cronenberg, born in Toronto in 1943, grew up a voracious consumer of EC Horror comic books, science fiction story magazines, and Western, pirate, and Disney animated movies, whilst his father tried to get him interested in art-house cinema, a seed that took a little longer to germinate. A writer from a young age, he started studying botany and biology at college but switched to English, and became interested in filmmaking after watching a short film made by a classmate. After making a pair of shorts of his own, he cofounded a filmmaking co-op with future collaborator and notable director in his own right, Ivan Reitman. Cronenberg made two more, increasingly ambitious short films after graduating, both of them hinging on common sci-fi concepts but given cruel and disturbing twists that took seriously the human meaning of their ideas. The first, 1969’s black-and-white Stereo, evinced an interest in the concept of telepathy Cronenberg would revisit for his breakout hit Scanners (1981). 1970’s colour film Crimes of the Future depicted a future where adult human women have died out, and men are increasingly driven to acts of paedophilia or else are to suicidal ends: Cronenberg would notably recycle the title for his most recent film of 2022.

Crimes of the Future established important elements of Cronenberg’s artistic vocabulary, particularly his fascination for modernist architecture and unease with its implied aesthetic and social meaning, and willingness to tackle themes few other directors would touch with a ten-foot pole. Both Cronenberg and Reitman would benefit from the increased Canadian government support for filmmaking and a resulting national cinema resurgence, exemplified at first by the likes of Donald Shebib’s soberly realistic buddy movie Goin’ Down The Road (1970) and Ted Kotcheff’s The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz (1974), but soon sparking a surge of Horror movies, including Bob Clark’s Deathdream (1973) and Black Christmas (1974) and Reitman’s Cannibal Girls (1973), a trend that would soon make Canadian cinema strongly associated with low-budget but cultishly beloved slasher movies. Cronenberg decided to get in on the act, but in a manner that would immediately establish his unique ability to play the exploitation movie game on his own terms. After several years directing TV episodes and telemovies, and some theatrical work, including writing a musical show for the popular magician Doug Henning (with music by Cronenberg’s future constant collaborator Howard Shore), Cronenberg wrote a script called Orgy of the Blood Parasites, which he then filmed in 15 days on a budget of $179,000, some of it sourced from the national film fund. Upon release the film did reasonable business, but it was soon also targeted by conservative politicians as a grotesque example of what taxpayer money was being spent on. A few decades later Cronenberg was awarded the highest Canadian honour. The wheel spins.

Cronenberg followed Shivers with a number of increasingly professional and heedlessly adventurous movies, mostly blending aspects of Horror and sci-fi – 1977’s Rabid, essentially a retread of Shivers if slicker and tighter, 1979’s The Brood, 1981’s Scanners, and 1983’s Videodrome, with a notable discursion for Fast Company (1979), a film about young racing freaks. Cronenberg’s steadily mounting reputation eventually saw him gain Hollywood backing (even as he remained a firmly Canada-based filmmaker) for the Stephen King adaptation The Dead Zone (1984), a remake of the ‘50s sci-fi film The Fly (1986), and the psychological horror-thriller Dead Ringers (1988), works that cemented his fame and for many represent his major achievements. Cronenberg then began stepping away from straight genre films, whilst not abandoning his signature aesthetics and provocations. As hot and cold as I tend to blow on much of Cronenberg’s later oeuvre, his early work remains uniquely potent. Not just for the authorial stamp he managed to apply on stringent budgets, coolly energetic and charged with unique personality whilst free of the mannered style he would later develop, but for the way he smartly blended the familiar structures and codes of standard genre storylines and used them, not unlike his perversely transforming characters, as vessels for his concerns, his preoccupation with the body, disease, transformation, and abnormality fuelled by his strictly atheistic artistic and philosophical viewpoints.

The American alternate title of Shivers, They Came From Within, is often noted by genre critics and historians as particularly cogent when it comes to analysing just what Cronenberg did with his work. Where the titles of the 1950s films like It Came From Outer Space (1953) and Them! (1954) encapsulated the era’s anxieties, aimed towards the alien, the unknown, the pitiless other, Cronenberg explicitly recast the equation as the real source of threat and fear as sourced within ourselves, minds and bodies. Rather than seeing the post-World War II landscape of clean-lined modernist buildings and accompanying promises of physical and mental purity purveyed in modern consumerist culture and its wares, Cronenberg saw lurking neurosis blooming, alienation and divorcement, engendering a state of anxiety all the more insidious because it seems to have no cause. If classical Gothic horror as defined by artists like Mary Shelley and Edgar Allan Poe provided a psychological landscape rooted in impressions of a decayed and diseased hangover of the past and bygone worldviews and powers, Cronenberg went to the opposite extreme, identifying the percolating fear that even in the most seemingly sterile and ahistorical of surrounds disease and decay still await, the illusion of stability just that. The body, increasingly the object of commoditised perfection in advertising, pop culture, and pornography in the mass media, post-Sexual Revolution age, visions of fit, trim, desirable beauty replete on television and in magazines, was still prey to the same forces as ever, but such forces had now taken on the aspect of a form of heresy to the modern religion. On the other hand, looking a little more deeply, one sees that Cronenberg’s key preoccupations are actually very old, indeed profoundly embedded in a medievalist worldview, where sex and death are perfectly linked, and their umbilicus is the welfare of body.

Cronenberg wasn’t the first to dabble with such themes, even if he was the first to definitively unify them. Cronenbergian ideas are apparent in ancestors like I Married A Monster From Outer Space (1958) with its specific take on fear of alien infiltration as invested with erotic and maternal anxiety. Roger Corman, with his 1963 H.P. Lovecraft adaptation The Haunted Palace, placed proto-Cronenbergian horror, manifest in imagery of alien impregnation and hordes of misshapen human by-products, wrapped within the more familiar, old-fashioned Gothic style. Shivers bore incidental but important resemblance to J.G. Ballard’s novel High-Rise, published the same year as Shivers’ release, as Ballard’s novel took up the same idea of a shiny new residential building swiftly degenerating into lawless barbarism. The early scenes of Shivers display how well Cronenberg understood his assignment as a new player in the ‘70s exploitation movie game, but also clearly convey his ability to spike the brew with unique ingredients. The film opens with slide show advertising a swanky new apartment building development, Starliner Towers, built on an island in the St Lawrence River just outside Montreal. A smooth voice lists the building’s features and services over pictures of the building and its surrounds whilst the opening credits unfurl. Cronenberg’s targeting is immediately precise and deadly, lampooning the language of advertising and the illusions of aspiration it exploits – you too can be a superior human being if you live in our well-decorated sky-riding concrete boxes, with nature kept thoroughly in its place.

Cronenberg immediately and brutally attacks this as he cuts between benign scenes of residents shuffling in and out, like a pair of blonde newlyweds who settle down to sign their lease with the building manager, Merrick (Ronald Mlodzik, who had also appeared in Stereo and Crimes of the Future and is a key performer in Cronenberg’s early work), with a vicious crime: a teenage girl wearing a school uniform, Annabelle Brown (Cathy Graham), tries to hold out a man bashing his way through the door of her apartment. The man, Dr Emil Hobbes (Fred Doederlein), manages to crash through and brutally assaults Annabelle despite her fierce resistance, finally throttling her to death. He lays her corpse on a table and cuts open her abdominal cavity with a scalpel after taping her mouth shut, and pours a bottle of acid into her guts. Hobbes then slices his own throat. This bewildering act of intimate violence seems to pass unnoticed by the rest of the building. Meanwhile, in another apartment, an insurance investigator, Nick Tudor (Allan Kolman, billed as Alan Migicovsky), is suffering from stomach pains, and acts coldly towards his concerned wife Janine (Susan Petrie). When he leaves for work, he first heads to Annabelle’s apartment, making it plain that he’s her lover. Tudor discovers the scene of horror there, and leaves without reporting it. The corpses are instead officially discovered by Dr Roger St. Luc (Paul Hampton), who runs a medical clinic catering to Skyliner residents, as he makes a house call. Roger is interviewed by a homicide detective, Heller (Barry Bolero), but both men are equally baffled by the crime.

Roger, who was taught by Hobbes at medical school, only begins to get an idea of what transpired when he talks to a friend, Rollo Linsky (Joe Silver), who worked with Hobbes. Linsky, looking through Hobbes’ papers, tells Roger the former professor was fired in disgrace after being caught fondling Annabelle during a visit to her girls’ school when she was 12, and then carried on having an affair with her and paying for her apartment at Skyliner. Linsky comments acerbically that, whilst being a pervert and a lousy teacher, Hobbes had unique genius for getting grants, and had a genuinely curious mind. One of his ideas was to breed a species of parasitic organism that could be implanted into human beings and take over the function of diseased organs. Roger and Linsky soon begin to realise that Hobbes had succeeded in creating such an organism and implanted it in Annabelle to test it, only for her to start showing signs of wanton instability, and his murder was an attempt to destroy the parasite before it could be spread. Trouble is, Annabelle has already slept with several men in the building, including Tudor and an older ladies’ man, Brad (actor unidentified), who has seen Roger for a check-up and reported similar abdominal pains to those Tudor is experiencing, and whilst Tudor himself refuses to see a doctor, Janine reports the issue to Roger.

Cronenberg spares time amidst this to note some of the denizens of Skyliner, like Brad chatting up women whilst also giving away his own anxieties as he talks about vitamin therapies in the clinic waiting room, and two old ladies ambling by the tower with unfortunate timing, as Tudor vomits a parasite over his balcony high above, and the bloody, wriggling creature lands on one woman’s plastic umbrella. The doorman (Wally Martin) sits about the lobby reading paperback potboilers and admits to having never drawn the gun he carries, and Merrick tries to deal with all problems with much sanguine salesmanship as he can muster. Roger himself is in a relationship with his nurse, Forsythe (Lynn Lowry). The parasite Tudor vomits up crawls into a sewer and gets back into the building, where some kids glimpse it squirming around, and it later springs upon a woman (Nora Johnson) in the laundry room, burning her face as squirms upon it before slipping into her mouth and taking up residence. This process is repeated in a daisy chain of rapes and flailing couplings, as everyone in the building becomes infected with the parasites, which renders them, after periods of disorientation and sometimes illness, powerfully and even violently aroused, some to the point of mindless compulsion.

The film’s most significant subplot involves Janine and her friend and confidant in the tower, Betts (Barbara Steele), a friendship that shades into a simmering lesbian flirtation. Betts is single and independent and self-possessed whilst Janine languishes in a mordant caricature of a standard heterosexual marriage. One that sees her husband becoming much fonder of the parasitic organism squirming inside his stomach and stimulating his most intensely onanistic desires, talking tenderly to the thing as it pokes at his belly, than he is of his increasingly distraught and frustrated wife. Only when the parasite’s influence grows strong does Tudor suddenly charge up with lust for Janine, who is understandably perturbed and flees their apartment for Betts’s. But Betts herself has already had a close encounter with one of the parasites, which crawls out of her bathtub drain as she’s bathing, and crawls inside her nether regions in a welter of blood and quasi-orgasmic squirming. Later she comes on to Janine in the same suddenly compulsive and urgent way and the two share a deep kiss: Cronenberg zeroes in to note a bulge in Betts’ throat passing on into Janine’s as she’s infected with a parasite, in a gleeful travesty of pornographic intensity.

The look and atmosphere of Shivers does indeed have something of a strong resemblance to ‘70s porn movies with its blatant fill lighting and filming in chintzy-neat environs, and sequences like the early depiction of Annabelle’s murder, where the actress looks obviously too old for her part, do resemble porn set-ups. Cronenberg turns this to his advantage. He manages to skewer both the niceties of genre movie exposition and the mercenary wont of erotica when he portrays Roger being tauntingly distracted by Forsyth as she strips off her nurse uniform as he’s trying to listen to Linsky’s explanation about what Hobbes was up to. The blank, bright look of the film gives it all a clinical severity. Cronenberg uses the building in a fashion reminiscent in a way of the apartments around James Stewart’s abode in Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window (1954): where in Hitchcock’s film the surrounding flats became cinematic projection surfaces for the hero’s various needs and anxieties, Cronenberg fills Skyliner with people whose secret fantasies and hungers soon take them over, spilling out of their little boxes and into public spaces to be enacted. The film was shot in a building designed by the famed modernist architect Mies van der Rohe, giving Cronenberg’s sense of both fetishism and suspicion for such locales a dose of specific grandeur. The cast is mostly made-for-TV anonymous save for Steele, the once-beloved English star of Italian Horror movies, and Lowry, who came to Cronenberg via George Romero’s The Crazies (1973) and Radley Metzger’s Score (1974), whilst Silver’s marvellously air no-nonsense intelligence and deep-voiced presence was carried over to Rabid.

Shivers’ narrative form has some strong resemblance to ‘70s disaster movies, like the Airport films, with their social cross-section characters and interest in evolving personal and sexual mores, forced into a tight space in a crisis situation, bringing out hidden dimensions of character from rank pathos to unexpected heroism. Moreover, the very end of the film strongly, and amusingly, resembles the ritual ending of the TV show The Love Boat, itself a derivation of the Airport template with disaster removed and concentrating instead on fulfilment-seeking Me Decade mores, everyone now installed in seemingly correct partnerings. A more experienced Cronenberg might have developed many of these character vignettes more to wield more concisely developed ironies and to pack more metaphorical and thematic punch, but on the other hand their randomness does befit his insistence on treating the inhabitants of Skyliner more as subjects in a sociological-scientific study. Hobbes’ name echoes back to the philosopher Thomas Hobbes with his famously pessimistic view of humanity and nature, and his design for his parasitical creation, Linksy says when reading Hobbes’ notes to Roger over the phone, provides what might as well be a mission statement for Cronenbergian cinema, “‘Man is an animal that thinks too much – an over-rational animal that’s lost touch with its body and its instincts’…In other words, too much brains and not enough guts.” Linsky again quotes Hobbes in his design for the parasite: “A combination of aphrodisiac and venereal disease that’ll hopefully turn the world into one beautiful, mindless orgy.”

But Shivers could also be, gross and disturbing as it is, the closest thing Cronenberg has made to an out-and-out comedy. The story set-up with all the buttoned-down neighbours becoming increasingly randy and wild is the stuff of farce. Visions like the parasite, after being vomited up, splatting against a biddy’s umbrella, and then leaping out of a washing machine to plant itself on a host’s face, evoke utter absurdity before swivelling hard to the grotesque. Other, sardonic touches like Linsky and Roger squabbling over the lunch they’re munching down in between discussing Hobbes’ gut-infesting creation, have a Hitchcockian flavour. Inherent in Shivers’ thesis is a darkly concerted satire on post-1960s mores, with Cronenberg providing a metaphor for the accruing costs of a rapidly mutating social survey in which everyone has become a kind of free-floating entity seeking out erotic and emotional fulfilment. This implicitly sceptical attitude helped earn Cronenberg the first of many attempts to critique him for a lurking reactionary streak, which would be amplified by elements of his films like the gross portrait of neurotic matriarch in The Brood. Cronenberg’s habitual disinterest in clarifying his thinking on such matters didn’t help. Crucially, Cronenberg’s approach keeps in mind the essential duty of the Horror genre artist, which is to provoke rather than try to mollify the audience’s anxiety, to enter deeply into profoundly uneasy fantasies and psychological zones – one reason why the genre still resist being entirely domesticated despite shifts that have seen a filmmaker like Cronenberg move from the very fringe of culture to its respectable centre. Whilst Cronenberg’s early work gained serious attention in some quarters in its time as well as unease and revulsion in others, it took the age of AIDS to make what he was getting at seem urgent, as sexual activity was suddenly seen as consequential again as it was before the invention of the contraceptive pill, and Cronenberg’s cinema was taken up with particular fervour by queer cineastes as the disease impacted their community, appalled by the strange spectacle of bodies rebelling and collapsing.

Shivers is a messy movie, one that Cronenberg doesn’t seem to have thought through too deeply, instead representing a madcap travelogue through the building blocks of his imaginative concerns, invested with an energy and abandon that sometimes seems more reminiscent of Romero or Ken Russell than his own, later, carefully modulated style. Much of Shivers unfolds in a state of flux without a clear narrative backbone, and an edge of the surreal to some of its vignettes in a story that’s supposed to be at least vaguely couched in rational motivations. Aspects of the story don’t make much sense, like why the parasites are so dangerously corrosive outside the body, and the differing behaviour of the infected, although the latter detail can, arguably, be the product of their different characters: the parasites don’t control them but provoke them to unleash their most deeply egocentric behaviours. That Cronenberg opens the movie bluntly with Hobbes’ crime and death means that the plot is left to be explained by Linsky rather than discovered and enacted. When he would return to a similar kind of maniacal savant figure for the likes of The Brood, The Fly, Dead Ringers, and Cosmopolis (2012), Cronenberg would find rich dramatic value in making them central antiheroes. And yet the messiness nonetheless is a large part of what makes Shivers interesting, particularly as the DNA just about the whole of Cronenberg’s future oeuvre is somewhere in the churn, and indeed its many body horror followers, including Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979) and John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982).

The scenes focusing on the Tudors, with the husband becoming fixated and even charmed by his new, transforming, suddenly bilaterally inhabited body, much to his wife’s flailing despair, before monstrosity consumes him, presents all the essentials of The Fly in miniature. When Linsky comes to the building to see Tudor at Rogers request, he’s attacked by one of the parasites which burns his face, forcing Linsky to try and kill it, whereupon Tudor launches on Linsky and kills him to protect one of his spawn, in a scene of striking, agonised pathos. When Roger finds Linsky dead and Tudor standing over him, the doctor abandons his humanism and guns Tudor down. Roger, having saved Forsythe from being raped by the infected doorman by shooting him dead, finds she’s already been infected, a parasite bobbing gruesomely within her mouth as she experiences a spasm. Before the reveal, Forsythe raves on about a dream she had where a dirty old man explained to her that everything in life experience contains an erotic element – another thesis statement from the director. Cronenberg’s delight in fillips of esoteric detail and weird organisations is also in evidence, as when Linsky notes that Hobbes gained funding from an organisation calling itself the Northern Hemisphere Organ Transplant Society.

Shivers plainly takes a great deal of licence from Romero’s Night of the Living Dead (1968) as it portrays a steady degeneration and collapse of the protagonists before the increasing hordes of the infected, and The Crazies, with its theme of spreading contagion causing aberrant behaviour: Lowry’s presence makes the connection more immediate. Some later scenes of the infected launching on the heroes in narrow corridors and crashing through barricades, as well as the setting and satirical purview, might have planted seeds in Romero’s mind for Dawn of the Dead (1978). Another evident influence is Don Siegel’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), in the general portrait of a relentlessly subsumed populace being made into something other than entirely human, and the revelation of Forsyth’s infection strongly recalls the similar twist in the Siegel film. Steele’s presence meanwhile connects the film to a different tradition, her dark, tantalising features, so perfect for the sensuous witches of Italian Gothic Horror, here embodies a modernised version of the same kind of figure.

As the building’s populace is entirely consumed Roger, the last uninfected men, is forced to abandon Forsythe after initially trying to gag her and carry her out of the building. He scurries around the corridors witnessing increasingly depraved sights, like a man leading twin teenage girls acting like dogs on leashes, and a father who enthusiastically exhibits his daughter’s beauty before grasping her in a passionate embrace. Cronenberg’s perturbing interest in paedophilia as a kind of ultimate marker on the fringe of human behaviour, evinced in Crimes of the Future and likely informed by admiration for Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, recurs here, as when a waiter attacks and infects and mother and prepubescent daughter in an elevator. Later they emerge to assault and infect the doorman, girl clinging close to her rapist-lover-infester who sniffs her hair whilst she consumes his suggestive gift of food, before placing blood-smeared mouth on the guard’s to pass on the parasite – another scene that nods heavily to Night of the Living Dead, when the daughter consumes her father. But Cronenberg’s event horizon of behaviour is a descent into completely wanton and amoral sexual behaviour rather than cannibalism. He defines Hobbes as a pervert for a reason, to make him seem less like a pied piper of sex and more like a pathological case who, unable to stand being written off as a weirdo by society, instead tries to remake society in his own image.

Nonetheless the film’s climax is invested with a sarcastic ring of orgiastic festivity and revolutionary explosion, as Roger is finally driven into the building’s swimming pool where Forsythe, Betts, and Janine bob like sirens given up to the new flesh and awaiting their Odysseus to bring under the spell. Roger is crushed by a mass of converging infected and brought into the fold by Forsythe’s consuming kiss. Cronenberg dissolves to the sight of the building’s denizens driving out in a convoy from the underground car-park, heading out into the world to continue spreading their gospel. Roger and Forsythe are glimpsed as a reborn pair of super-swingers, Roger with cigar jutting from his lips and the orchid-wearing Forsythe lighting it for him, followed out by Janine and Betts and other couples. Cronenberg ends the film with one of their cars cruising on the freeway at night whilst a radio announcer describes an outbreak of violent sexual assaults around the city.

The Brood, Cronenberg’s third feature made four years after Shivers, displays a great leap in control on all levels for the director, from narrative and conceptual emphasis to directorial technique. It marked his first collaboration with Shore, whose eerie, sophisticated scoring makes an immediate mark. The film’s opening is betrays the new, crisp sense of purpose, as Cronenberg opens cold on an intense and confronting depiction of psychiatrist Dr Hal Raglan (Oliver Reed), a psychiatrist who’s created a new field of therapy he dubs “psychoplasmics,” engaged in role-playing therapy with patient Mike Trellan (Gary McKeehan), whose deep neurosis is sourced in anger and shame for his father. Raglan deftly draws out Mike’s hang-ups in playing the part of the father, trying to draw Mike through to a cathartic rupture, climaxing when Mike shows off seething buboes manifesting on his torso, the physical expression of his mental anguish. The session is occurring before an audience of interested colleague, acolytes, and students, at Raglan’s Somafree Clinic. Amongst the onlookers is Frank Carveth (Art Hindle), an architect who looks on with grim fascination whilst others comment with awe that Raglan is a genius. Frank has come to Raglan’s therapeutic retreat to fetch his daughter Candice (Cindy Hinds), who’s been on a visit to her mother Nola (Samantha Eggar). Nola is currently being isolated for intense therapy with Raglan in a cottage separate to the main clinic. She and Frank are separated and estranged because of Nola’s intense, borderline maniacal neuroses. When he gets Candice home, Frank is appalled to find scratches and bruises all over her back, and, assuming Nola made them, looks into preventing Nola reclaiming her, getting Nola’s mother Juliana (Nuala Fitzgerald) to look after her as he goes on the warpath.

The blunt opening on a process of enquiry and revelation echoes on in Cronenberg’s films to the infamous panel demonstration at the start of Scanners that ends with a head exploding, and the lengthy early therapy scenes of A Dangerous Method (2011), a film which returned to Cronenberg’s interest in and scepticism for the world of psychiatry. McKeehan gives a fiendishly convincing performance as the emotionally crucified and desperately needy man-child whose jealousy at being displaced by Nola as the focus of Raglan’s attentions ultimately proves important to the story, whilst Reed instantly emblazons Raglan’s blend of cool professional authority mated to insidious rat cunning when it comes to getting into the heads of his patients. Cronenberg aims acid satire on the New Age therapy craze of the ‘70s as a new form of secular religion, portraying the arrogant Raglan as a kind of cult leader, provoking people in his care to the point of crisis in acts of theatre whilst also rendering himself a messianic figure of epiphany and redemption. “You sound hostile,” he remarks coolly to Frank as he confronts him with righteous wrath.

Cronenberg has been unusually forthcoming about the origins of The Brood, which he wrote in a frenzy of purgative activity, sourced in his bitter divorce and custody battle with his first wife. As this suggests, where Shivers was a communal portrait, The Brood is a tightly focused character and family drama with added elements of surreal grotesquery. The Brood also has a reputation for being perhaps the darkest and most disturbingly violent of his early films: certainly compared to the flashes of black comedy in Shivers or the interludes of action movie-tinged pyrotechnics of Scanners it’s a compressed and ruthless ride, one that enters into a zone of unmediated expression of personal angst that’s rather singular in Cronenberg’s career. As Frank delves deeper into Raglan’s method and plans a lawsuit, he’s thrust into the company of a disaffected former patient, Jan Hartog (Cronenberg regular Robert A. Silverman), who has a growth on his neck which he keeps hidden and a form of cancer both of which he says were caused by psychoplasmic therapy. Meanwhile, as Raglan works on her in their therapy sessions, Nola expresses vehement rage at her mother, who she accuses of beating and mistreating her, and her father who weakly refused to intervene and eventually left. Meanwhile Juliana explains to young Cindy that Nola was often in hospital as a child because she would suffer spontaneous physical injuries: when young Nola was already manifesting the psychoplasmic talent which Raglan prizes as the perfect test case to prove his theories.

Eggar, who had first gained attention in William Wyler’s The Collector (1966) as the victim of an obsessive and destructively controlling young man who kidnaps her, here was cast in something close to the opposite role. Eggar offers an unnervingly convincing performance as the kind of deeply egocentric and self-mesmerising mania who might well be conjuring crimes and abuses from her past to justify more nebulous discontent, and constantly whipping her emotions up with scant justifications, largely at Raglan’s enabling encouragement, as her spectacle of suffering is his bounty of data. What neither of them is entirely aware of is that the physical by-products of these sessions enact her poisonous emotions. Cronenberg doesn’t entirely reveal what’s going on until the climax, when Nora displays for Frank’s horrified edification that through the psychoplasmic process she’s grown a new, exterior womb, and gives birth to drone-like and deformed children who vaguely resemble Candice, and who live in the attic of Nora’s hut. The Brood, as Raglans calls them, are also possessed of malevolent and murderous intelligence, and set out to deliver Nora’s wrath. One of them sneaks into Juliana’s house and beats her to death with a kitchen mallet, Candice glimpsing sight of the bloodied body sprawled on the floor and the diminutive killer, glaring down at her from the staircase.

When Nora’s father Barton (Henry Beckman) comes to Toronto for the funeral, he approaches Raglan to get him to bring Nora out, but is appalled when Raglan refuses to interrupt Nora’s seclusion. Later Barton gets drunk and weepy in Juliana’s house, and Frank goes to pick him up, leaving Candice in the care of her teacher, Ruth Mayer (Susan Hogan), to whom Candice has turned to as a maternal substitute and represents a faint glimmer of romantic interest for Frank. Before Frank can reach him, however, Barton is attacked and killed by the small assassin, which beats him to death with some glass globes. Entering the house, Frank sees and pursues the dwarf, only to corner it in the bathroom where it suddenly curls up and dies. Meanwhile Nora tries to ring Frank at his house, and when Ruth answers the phone, Nora immediately assumes she’s Frank’s lover, and becomes consumed with the conviction she can have perfect family happiness again if only she can get Ruth out of her life.

The Brood could be described as the ultimate cinematic adaptation of Philip Larkin’s famous poem ‘This Be The Verse,’ with its sentiment, “They fuck you, your mum and dad,” as Cronenberg expresses an aching sense of the way cycles of damage repeat in families. Candice (and other children) is repeatedly exposed to the brutalising effects of the chaos enveloping her family, emotional damage made literal by the lurking, murderous homunculi. Nora denies to Raglan that she wants to fashion Candice into another version of her, but by the film’s end has achieved exactly that result. Frank, whilst far more practical and forceful than Barton, who’s reduced to weeping in despair over the failure of his life duties just before he’s murdered, has almost the opposite problem in trying to save his daughter: he has such a vehement, and largely justified, vein of anger that he has trouble keeping on a leash when he requires diplomatic cool. The climax revolves around this very issue, as Frank has to keep Nora mollified long enough to ensure Candice’s rescue from the Brood, but cannot keep his cool when she exposes her most perverse new habits to him, a lapse that has fatal consequences. Meanwhile, when a pathologist examines the corpse of the dead homunculus Frank brings in, he notes that it has no sexual organs, and with symbolic portent comments, “I should think his vision of the world is very distorted. I’m pretty certain he only sees in black-and-white, no colours.” A product of rage that is the embodiment of the lack of nuance.

Cronenberg himself noted that despite its highly original qualities, The Brood was actually the most classically structured of his horror films. That’s easy enough to make out. It sustains a familiar alternation of plot development and suspense sequences punctuated by slasher movie-like killings, and recalls old genre films like The Invisible Ray (1936) in dealing with a victim/villain, newly endowed with supernormal characteristics, using that weird talent to commit a series of killings in revenge for perceived wrongs. Raglan is an wittily updated version of a mad scientist, and his eventual comeuppance recalls the end of Island of Lost Souls (1932). A scene of him creeping tensely through the Brood’s room trying not to disturb them recalls the end of The Birds (1963), and the concept of a shadow school populated by alien children echoes Joseph Losey’s The Damned (1963), which also starred Reed. The gnarled, murderous “children” were plainly inspired by the ending of one of Cronenberg’s favourite films, Nicolas Roeg’s Don’t Look Now (1973). The connection between Nola and the Brood and the idea of psychoplasmics itself is reminiscent of Fred Wilcox’s Forbidden Planet (1956), with its driving concept of mind-projecting alien technology spawning monstrous actualisations of the id that attack and annihilate threats.

Cronenberg nonetheless fuses and compresses his influences and kneads them to serve his personal urges. The concept of people essentially becoming artists who work with a palette of their own flesh is one that bobs up repeatedly in Cronenberg’s oeuvre. This idea is embryonic in Shivers, with Hobbes’ efforts to create the parasite his own attempt to assert the transformative potential of creation over social convention, and is apparent in The Fly, Naked Lunch (1990), eXistenZ (1998) and the latter Crimes of the Future. The warping and transitioning of the flesh becomes another tool of, and also a tool working upon, human action and creation. It’s approached here on a most visceral and perturbing level, of course, with Nora constructing homunculi that paint in shades of red. Nora, as a fierce and vindictive exemplar of the very idea of the monstrous feminine, is contrasted with Ruth, an image of unthreatening femininity, with her pixie hairdo and job teaching young children (although not in any way childlike herself and canny enough to recognise getting involved with Frank at this point in his life isn’t a great idea). She teaches kids in one of those concrete-and-glass institutional structures that anyone who was a kid in the ‘70s or ‘80s will instantly recognise.

After the discovery and examination of the drone homunculus, Frank naturally assumes there’s no further danger, but whilst he chats with one of Candice’s classmates’ mothers outside the school, inside Ruth is confronted by two more of the homunculi, who gained entrance to the class because they dress in bright parkas like the other kids. The homunculi snatch up wooden mallets for the class’s woodblock games, launch on Ruth, and beat her to death before the horror-frozen kids, except for one lad who dashes out for help and fetches Frank. He arrives too late, the homunculi having snatched Candice away and left the empty-eyed Ruth in a pool of blood. This scene, one of the most infamous in his oeuvre and indeed of the genre, highlights Cronenberg’s most viciously unsentimental streak, eliminating all semblance of familiar story and emotional cushioning, and makes the dark unease about what the kids are witnessing all the more disturbingly immediate. He still has an eye for pathos, as Frank drapes a piece of crepe paper with a child’s scrawling upon it over Ruth’s staring eyes. The height of outré in 1979, Ruth’s killing now evokes the more frighteningly immediate spectre of violence in schools.

Cronenberg continues to follow the logic of a certain brand of New Age therapeutic advice, with Nora literalising the act of cutting everyone who interferes with her sense of personal mission (in current parlance they’d be dismissed as toxic). Whilst Nora doesn’t know what her homunculi have done, she experiences the emotional results, reporting to Raglan after Ruth’s death that “I just don’t feel threatened by her anymore.” By this time Frank has learned from Mike and Jan that Raglan has cleared out all the residents at the clinic save Nora, because, having seen the photo of the dead homunculus in the newspaper, Raglan has realised the Brood are dangerous but he still doesn’t want to give up on Nora. Frank, searching for Candice with the police, first checks out the apartment Nora was living in after they broke up, and eventually concludes the homunculi must be taking her all the way to the clinic: Cronenberg offers a glimpse of the three siblings ambling along the highway’s edge amidst the snowy, midwinter Ontario landscape. When Frank arrives and confronts Raglan, the doctor is shocked by the news of Ruth’s death and the probability Candice is now with the Brood, and he sends Frank to talk to Nora, to keep her calm and distracted long enough for him to bring Candice out. Frank confronts Nora and starts promising her the moon, and Nora, as if challenging him, decides to reveal her secret and lifts up her robes to display her growth and external womb, which disgorges one of her new children.

This revelation is Cronenberg’s piece de resistance of gruesome outrageousness, and perhaps the most successful dovetailing of metaphor, plot device, and sheer what-the-absolute-fuck visceral impact in Cronenberg’s cinema, delivered somehow utterly straight-faced but charged with just the faintest lilt of absurdist camp. Still it gets taken a step further, thanks to Eggar’s delighted ferocity in the role, as Nora begins licking the blood and afterbirth off the infant like a mother dog with a pup, a vision curtailed by censors at first. Much like Tudor in Shivers, Nora wields a strange and powerful pride in her body’s new expression. Frank’s disgusted reaction ruptures the illusion, and she becomes worked up, stirring the Brood from their cots and launching upon Raglan as and Candice near the door. Raglan shoots several of the Brood but the rest wrestle him to the floor and thrash, beat, and even bite him to death. The Brood then try to kill Candice, as Nora vows to Frank she’s rather seen their daughter dead than with him: Candice locks herself in the bathroom whilst the Brood claw at the door, ripping a hole through it. Frank finally, with a maniacal glaze, wraps his hands around Nora’s throat and, with her external womb and new homunculus squashed between them, he throttles her to death. The homunculi die with her, allowing Frank to leave with Candice.

Cronenberg’s concluding revelation that the weeping, near-catatonic Candice is displaying signs of having developed her mother’s psychoplasmic talent in compensation for a series of ruinous emotional shocks, presents a bleak signature for the director that’s similar to but also inverts the end of Shivers. Where that film found the blackest of black humour in the failure of the heroes and the prospect of the oncoming liberation and “beautiful, mindless orgy,” The Brood sups arsenic-dark irony as Frank’s efforts to rescue his daughter seem only to have helped perpetuate the cycle of abuse and maladaptation. And yet the ultimate end of this cannot be known: for a parent, every day is a new day of creation. Cronenberg dances close to the edge of the pathological with The Brood, and it earned suspicion from some quarters of expressing seething misogyny. And perhaps it does, but it also weaponises and analyses the impulse, the awe and repulsion inspired by the very idea of the birth process and the mystified realm of motherhood. Like most of Cronenberg’s best cinema, it finds a raw nerve, presses it, and keeps pressing.

Standard