Words can't describe this film. The Guardian put it well though - "undoubtedly before its time and no one has equalled it." Freaks is very old, and that's been vital to its longevity. It works as a product of age, despite being a critical and commercial flop. Still, In 1932, Hollywood had no official ratings board to answer to, so the major players could produce 'prestige pictures' for one crowd and sleaze-riddled tabloid fare for another. In the case of Freaks, this film wants to cater to both crowds. The Onion wrote a great piece on it here, saying that the so-called Freaks' "matter-of-fact presence before the camera is what gives the film its elemental power" but of course, then there's the rather icky fact that the film's called, well, Freaks.
Thus, this is the first film in the 'Fest where the one-word title itself reveals a lot about the movie's intentions. It'll build up empathy from its audience, then pull the rug out from under you, revealing that people of all sizes can be, well, freaks. Its lurid, sordid, and exploitative; but it's also filled with empathy and a matter-of-factness that's unlikely to ever be paralleled. You can choose to be affronted, or you can excuse its behaviour because things were different back then. Because this film doesn't really have a trailer that I can link to, you can go watch this clip instead: http://youtu.be/pv93FCi4daA
No comments:
Post a Comment