WARNING - REVIEW CONTAINS MAJOR SPOILERS: ONLY READ IF YOU'VE SEEN THE FILM
The British video release of Freaks took the bold and some might say unusual step of not only having a shot of its twist ending on the front cover, but also blurb on the back that tells you the entire story. As marketing strategies go it's no work of genius, though its proud claim "Banned in the U.K. for 30 years" does better to increase its appeal.
However, all the notoriety and controversy heaped on this one seems to be based on the fact that it's such a bland, mainstream affair. For if this was a cult work of a real maverick then its questionable morality would be more acceptable. The fact that Freaks turns out to be a rather vapid, crowd-pleasing piece makes its subject matter all the more disturbing.
In particular, Rosco Ates a man with a "comedy" stutter is both dubious material in itself, but also raises questions about how the people with real ailments are used. Most of the abnormality-related dialogue is overwhelmingly unsubtle "they don't realise I'm a man with the same feelings they have" and, like the opening 400+ word essay, the "sympathy or spectacle?" debate is constantly thrown up over the makers' intentions. The whole work condemns the exploitation of such people but by its very nature exploits them in turn.
The "freaks" of the circus, while fundamentally treated the same by the majority of "normal" co-workers, are nevertheless patronised by them. Violet and Daisy, the Siamese twins, in particular are subjected to rat lab treatment, men pinching one's arm so the other can sense it. Later, when one is kissed, the other sighs in pleasure. "It's gonna have a beard!" yelps Wallace Ford as the bearded lady gives birth to a girl. While voyeuristic tendencies are indulged when nearly a minute of screentime is given over to an armless woman drinking with her feet, and "Rardion the Living Torso" lighting a cigarette.
Tod Browning is no great artist heresy, perhaps, but true all the same and while you have to admire the performers, using real-life people with deformities mean that the acting credentials are highly ropy. Daisy Earles, especially, says her lines like she's reading them from the script. The constant staccato delivery of all concerned can also be grating, as can the piercing mid-western accents and would-be funny comic setpieces. Rather than the product of gothic expressionism, this film is pure Vaudeville, and all the more irritating for it.
Among its plus points Freaks can count its own uniqueness, as well as two genuinely well mounted scenes. One is the attack on Cleo under the cover of darkness, the other the poignant wedding feast. In fact, the break in continuous film that occurs with The Wedding Feast caption is an apt marker, for what follows is vastly superior to that what comes before. Indeed, the last twenty minutes take on a sinister turn, perhaps heightened by following such a moronic beginning.
However, for a supposed horror Cleo's final emergence as a half-human chicken is more comic than frightening, and throws up an objectionable moral of the tale. What is the picture saying? That if you upset people with deformities watch out or they might cut your face and sew feathers on your body? The final score then: exploitation 1, freaks 0.
The British video release of Freaks took the bold and some might say unusual step of not only having a shot of its twist ending on the front cover, but also blurb on the back that tells you the entire story. As marketing strategies go it's no work of genius, though its proud claim "Banned in the U.K. for 30 years" does better to increase its appeal.
However, all the notoriety and controversy heaped on this one seems to be based on the fact that it's such a bland, mainstream affair. For if this was a cult work of a real maverick then its questionable morality would be more acceptable. The fact that Freaks turns out to be a rather vapid, crowd-pleasing piece makes its subject matter all the more disturbing.
In particular, Rosco Ates a man with a "comedy" stutter is both dubious material in itself, but also raises questions about how the people with real ailments are used. Most of the abnormality-related dialogue is overwhelmingly unsubtle "they don't realise I'm a man with the same feelings they have" and, like the opening 400+ word essay, the "sympathy or spectacle?" debate is constantly thrown up over the makers' intentions. The whole work condemns the exploitation of such people but by its very nature exploits them in turn.
The "freaks" of the circus, while fundamentally treated the same by the majority of "normal" co-workers, are nevertheless patronised by them. Violet and Daisy, the Siamese twins, in particular are subjected to rat lab treatment, men pinching one's arm so the other can sense it. Later, when one is kissed, the other sighs in pleasure. "It's gonna have a beard!" yelps Wallace Ford as the bearded lady gives birth to a girl. While voyeuristic tendencies are indulged when nearly a minute of screentime is given over to an armless woman drinking with her feet, and "Rardion the Living Torso" lighting a cigarette.
Tod Browning is no great artist heresy, perhaps, but true all the same and while you have to admire the performers, using real-life people with deformities mean that the acting credentials are highly ropy. Daisy Earles, especially, says her lines like she's reading them from the script. The constant staccato delivery of all concerned can also be grating, as can the piercing mid-western accents and would-be funny comic setpieces. Rather than the product of gothic expressionism, this film is pure Vaudeville, and all the more irritating for it.
Among its plus points Freaks can count its own uniqueness, as well as two genuinely well mounted scenes. One is the attack on Cleo under the cover of darkness, the other the poignant wedding feast. In fact, the break in continuous film that occurs with The Wedding Feast caption is an apt marker, for what follows is vastly superior to that what comes before. Indeed, the last twenty minutes take on a sinister turn, perhaps heightened by following such a moronic beginning.
However, for a supposed horror Cleo's final emergence as a half-human chicken is more comic than frightening, and throws up an objectionable moral of the tale. What is the picture saying? That if you upset people with deformities watch out or they might cut your face and sew feathers on your body? The final score then: exploitation 1, freaks 0.