The Big Picture
- Tod Browning's Freaks is a unique and complex horror that includes real people with deformities as characters, which was seen as controversial at the time of its release.
- The film was met with mixed reactions, with some praising its compassion and moral significance, while others found it unsettling and repulsive.
- Despite its initial failure, Freaks has gained a cult following over time and is recognized for its representation of disabled individuals, although it remains a divisive and impactful horror film.
Tod Browning's Freaks is one of the most interesting films in Hollywood history, and easily one of its most divisive. The 1932 film, based on the 1926 short story Spurs by Tod Robbins, is, at its most basic, a horror film, but one that is far deeper and more complex than most, almost defying explanation. Having been made in the days before the Draconian Hays Code, Freaks takes full advantage of the freedom filmmakers had at that time, utilizing horror elements that wouldn't be seen again for years. Its use of real people with deformities as the titular "freaks" was just one of the aspects of the film that proved unsettling for early viewers and one of its most controversial both on and off-screen. Unsettling, grotesque, repulsive, or touching, compassionate, morally significant? They are all terms that have been applied to Freaks at some point in time, they are all terms that stand in direct contrast with one another, and not one of them is wrong.
What Is 'Freaks' About?
After learning that Hans (Harry Earles), a little person in a carnival sideshow, has inherited a large fortune, Cleopatra (Olga Baclanova), a trapeze artist both beautiful and manipulative, seduces him, conspiring to kill him once they are married, with the help of the circus strongman Hercules (Henry Victor). At the wedding, Cleopatra begins poisoning Hans' wine, but after having too many drinks, she inadvertently reveals that she is having an affair with Hercules. The others, unaware of what has transpired, hold an initiation ceremony, accepting the "normal" Cleopatra into their family by passing around a cup while chanting, "We accept her, one of us. We accept her, one of us. Gooble-gobble, gooble-gobble." Cleopatra gives the illusion that she is enjoying the ceremony, but when Hercules jokes that the sideshow performers plan on turning her into one of them, she drops the facade. She cruelly mocks them, drives them away, and then berates Hans before humiliating him by placing him on her shoulders, like one would a child.
Humiliated and angered at having been used by Cleopatra, Hans rejects her empty attempts at apologizing. But when the poison Hans had been given causes him to fall ill, he becomes bedridden, but not dead, and certainly not without his wits about him. He turns the tables on Cleopatra, making an empty apology of his own to her and pretending to take the medicine — more poison — that she is giving him. Secretly, he and the other entertainers plot their revenge on Cleopatra and Hercules. Soon, Hans and three of the entertainers confront Cleopatra, pursuing her as she flees into the forest.
Meanwhile, Hercules' attempt to kill Venus, (Leila Hyams) the seal trainer who discovered the plot, is thwarted by her boyfriend Phroso the clown (Wallace Ford) and the remaining performers, injuring the strongman and chasing him into the forest. It's soon revealed what happened to Cleopatra after having been caught by the performers, and it isn't pretty. She is now on display in the carnival sideshow herself, having been transformed into a hideous "human duck" by having her tongue removed, one eye gouged out, her legs cut off, her hands deformed into resembling duck feet, and her torso permanently tarred and feathered (Hercules is also seen singing falsetto after having been castrated in the original cut (pun brilliant but not intended), but the scene is now lost after having been removed by MGM).
Why Was 'Freaks' Banned?
Browning was no stranger to the world of circuses and carnivals, having been employed as a performer himself after running away from home at 16, so had no problem casting and working with real-life sideshow performers, including Peter Robinson ("The Human Skeleton"), conjoined twins Daisy and Violet Hilton, famed microcephalic performer Schlitzie, and Harry Earles, who had worked with Browning before in 1925's The Unholy Three. Others, however, did have a problem, even going so far as to segregate the performers during filming and forcing them to eat in a separate cafeteria so that, as told by story editor Samuel Marx, "people could get to eat in the commissary without throwing up."
Even before its release, Freaks proved problematic. Test screenings were a disaster, with art director Merrill Pye recalling, "Halfway through the preview, a lot of people got up and ran out. They didn't walk out. They ran out." Worse, one audience member tried to sue MGM, claiming the movie had caused her to have a miscarriage. As a result, MGM cut nearly 30 minutes from the film, with an ending where Hans is shown reconciling with Frieda (Daisy Earles), his beau before Cleopatra. The efforts were for naught, with the film being largely derided by critics, and the box-office returns practically non-existent. Yet there were many critics that praised the film (or weren't overwhelmingly negative, at least), like John Mosher of The New Yorker, who said "'Freaks' is a little gem; there can be no doubt about that. It stands in a class by itself, and probably won't be forgotten in a hurry by those who see it." Nevertheless, popular opinion didn't favor the film, with one of the more extreme reactions to the film being a 30-year ban in Britain.
'Freaks' Has Benefited From Time, But Is Still Divisive
Browning's career was over, for all intents and purposes, directing only four more films after Freaks. The film, however, was far from it. Freaks would resurface in the '60s and '70s as a midnight-show cult film, and as the depiction of people with disabilities in media came under scrutiny, it would be heralded as one of the bright spots for disabled representation. Freaks depicted a wide range of the disabled doing normal, day-to-day things, coming together as a community where an action against one is an action against them all. Browning weaved a film that was compassionate towards the performers and exposed the "normals" as the ones who are morally bankrupt.
Even though Freaks has enjoyed redemption since its release, it will always remain divisive. There are those who call the film compassionate towards the "freaks," and there are those who disagree. Besides, how one perceives how the "freaks" are depicted in the film leans towards irrelevancy in that it is still a horror film and a highly effective one at that, and horror is a genre that is divisive by its very nature. What can be agreed upon, though, is just how impactful Freaks has been on pop culture, whether in a respectful homage like "Freaks, No Geeks" from The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror XXIV or in a show like American Horror Story: Freak Show that, arguably, skews the legacy of the film in order to make it more contentious. So, which side do you fall on? Make up your own opinion by watching the 1932 classic... but don't say you haven't been warned.
ncG1vNJzZmibn6G5qrDEq2Wcp51ks7OxwKSqZqWfq7ameZByamtn