In 2020 during the pandemic, Rodney introduced Samantha to Gilbert Gottfried's Amazing Colossal Podcast, which became a source of companionship and comfort. Gilbert often spoke of his appearance with Robert Osbourne on TCM and the films he chose to run. This month we honor Gilbert's and his co-host Frank Santopadre's birthday month by reviewing those titles.
RODNEY BOWCOCK: Here’s one that requires no introduction and could easily have fit into our January theme of true classics that we haven’t seen before. I did see this one, but it was so long ago that I inexplicably had little to no memory of it. After revisiting it, I can’t really understand how that could be the case.
SAMANTHA GLASSER: I had seen it once too, more than a decade ago, so I was due for a rewatch.
RB: The film takes us deep into the world of the circus and the early 20th century sideshow workers that populate it. We quickly are introduced to Hans and Frieda, two engaged dwarves. Hans is smitten with a trapeze artist named Cleopatra, much to the dismay of Frieda. What everyone knows except Hans is that Cleopatra is stringing him along, mocking him and eventually marrying him once she learned that he is in line for a large inheritance. Along with Hercules, a strong man, Cleopatra plots to murder Hans after she marries him. Hans recognizes her plot and how she is humiliating him and hatches his own plot to confront her. As this happens, the circus wagon Hans is traveling in overturns in a storm. This gives both Cleopatra and Hercules a chance to escape, but they are both captured and injured by the rest of the sideshow workers that are infuriated over the plot to kill their friend.
SG: At the time this film was made, the circus was a very popular attraction. Kids couldn't wait for the circus to come to town, and when it did, they would parade with the animals down a major street to advertise their upcoming shows. I remember feeling sad in 2016 when the Ringling Brothers stopped doing an elephant parade down High Street. My brain knows those animals were being mistreated, but the emotional kid in me wanted to witness such a spectacular thing. The circus of today pales in comparison to that of yesteryear with few, if any, animals, minimal presence of clowns, and no sideshow freak attractions, for obvious reasons. Watching a movie like this can transport us back in time to experience an important part of culture, warts and all.
RB: The film was based on a short story called Spurs written by Tod Robbins. MGM purchased the rights at the insistence of Tod Browning for $8,000 as a film version had been suggested by Harry Earles, the dwarf who eventually would portray Hans in the film. Due to the success of Dracula, MGM eventually agreed to allow Browning to direct the film which he had been privately developing from as early as 1927. Throughout production, MGM would bring in a host of uncredited writers to punch up the script, including a comedy writer, Al Boasberg, who would later work with The Marx Brothers and around this time was helping a young vaudeville comedian, Jack Benny, to develop his persona.
SG: Harry Earles is basically the star of the film, with Olga Baclanova. He is very good in a role that allows him to play lovesickness, betrayal and heartbreak, and vengeance. His sister Daisy plays his fiancee, an odd but not unusual arrangement considering the few opportunities for little people to act in the movies. They were two of eight children, half of which were dwarves. I appreciated that she wore beautiful, stylish clothes in the film and not rags or children's clothes to emphasize her small size. At first, her line readings seem stiff and controlled. She has a tiny voice with an accent, and she speaks slowly and with emphasis on diction. But as the story moves along, her performance becomes quite good and emotionally affects the audience. Without her character, the movie would feel much darker. She brings heart to the film.
Wallace Ford as Phroso the clown and Leila Hyams as Venus his love interest add some traditional heart, but their storyline is completely forgettable and mainly serves to show that not all "big people" are unkind to the freaks.
RB: Initially, Victor McLaglen, Myrna Loy and Jean Harlow were considered for roles in the film, but Irving Thalberg decided that it would be best not to cast any of the studio’s major stars in the film. There is some evidence that Loy had actually been offered the role, but balked at appearing in a film that was intended to be the answer to Frankenstein. It’s difficult to imagine her starring in a film as gruesome as this. Instead, she was placed in a supporting role in the 1932 MGM film Emma, which was wildly successful. Freaks, on the other hand, was not.
SG: At the time, she was still weltering in minor parts, often playing vamps and women of different ethnicities; her performance in The Mask of Fu Manchu was yet to come. We tend to think of her playing genteel society women, but that came later.
RB: Due to the sheer nature of the film, production was troubled and ballooned over the budget. MGM segregated many of the cast members of the film to a separate cafeteria due to the cruel reaction of people working on other films at the time. As the film went into previews, there was a revolt among audiences. One woman actually sued MGM claiming that the film had caused her to suffer a miscarriage. Irving Thalberg took a pair of scissors to the film, cutting much of the climax, which by all accounts was quite gruesome, showing Cleopatra being tortured and mauled in various ways. Hercules was castrated in the original cut of the film as well. The controversy continued even after the cuts, which equaled about 25 minutes run time were excised. The film was banned in many cities and added fuel to the furor that led to the enforcement of the production code.
SG: Motion Picture magazine's reviewer said, "Only people with exceptionally strong constitutions can sit through it. Frankenstein is a bed-time story by comparison." Elizabeth Connor of San Diego, California wrote to Photoplay and said, "I certainly think that whoever directed it should be ashamed to have put his name to it. I didn't mind its gruesomeness so much, but it's cheap vulgarity is something that left a bad taste in my mouth." Although that might not have flown in 1932, scenes like that would delight modern audiences, especially pre-code fans who marvel at the fact that they had things like sex back then. Imagine.
RB: Reviews were generally negative at the time, feeling that the people with their deformities were too awful to be seen on the screen. Only a few noted that these were among the same people that were displayed for entertainment purposes at most circuses that traveled throughout the country, and that was deemed just fine at the time.
Of course, upon modern retrospective, there has been volumes written about the sympathies that we are made to feel for the "freaks" and the way that they are exploited among the “normal” people. Some have noted a potential parallel to the classism that existed during the years of the depression; the ‘haves and have-nots’ if you will.
SG: The first time I saw this movie, I really felt for Hans and Frieda, but I was turned off by the violence. This time, I was cheering when Hans confronts Cleopatra in the wagon and his friends menacingly and slowly draw their weapons around her. Browning absolutely makes us empathize with the freaks. When they start chanting at the wedding, "Gooble gobble, one of us!" it is supposed to be an honor, and when the drink gets thrown into Angelo Rossitto's face, there is no coming back. I often quote that line.
I wondered about the lives of these performers outside of this film. I knew about Violet and Daisy Hilton because I saw the documentary Bound By Flesh. Bill Griffith wrote a graphic novel about Schlitzie which I'd like to read. It surprised me to discover that the man with no limbs, Prince Randian, had five children. Johnny Eck seemed to most enjoy his time making this movie, sometimes sitting next to Browning while he directed scenes, often wearing sunglasses. Of course, many of these people suffered abuse at some point in their lives, so research their backgrounds at your own risk.
RB: I found myself drawn to the world that the sideshow performers inhabit, along with the camaraderie and loyalty that they felt toward each other. At the same time, I was repulsed by the way that they were exploited and treated, both by others in the film and by knowing their treatment among some on the MGM set. It’s a powerful film that still embodies the vision of Tod Browning, but it is also a very difficult watch. Four stars, certainly. But also a film that I don’t particularly wish to rewatch any time soon, if ever.
SG: I was surprised how much I enjoyed this second pass. This is a powerful classic that will linger long in the minds of those who watch it. Four stars.
Comments