Rituals, Ruins, Reckoning and the Roots of Terror: Unearthing the Magic and Madness of Folk Horror.

We don’t go back, because if we go back, we enter a realm of superstition and madness! -Adam Scovell.

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” – Søren Kierkegaard

Dream the myth onward and give it modern dress -Jung

As Helena P. Blavatsky suggested —No myth is wholesale fable; even fanciful fables hold a grain of truth.

Horror is a disruption of the way you think things should go- horror begins when the world stops behaving the way we believe it should. When the familiar world breaks its contract with us – when people, places, patterns, and events no longer appear to be as they seem. – jo gabriel

INTO THE DARK AND DREADFUL WOODS—Where Folklore Turns Ferally: A Journey Through Folk Horror -From Ancient Ritual to Modern Nightmare

Watching Kier-La Janisse’s Woodlands Dark and Days Bewitched: A History of Folk Horror (2021) cracked something open in me, a mix of awe and recognition. Janisse’s monumental exploration of folk horror doesn’t just teach you about a cinematic mode, which the term may be more apt than calling folk horror a subgenre; it feels like wandering through a haunted library of collective memory, where every story whispers about what we’ve buried and what refuses to stay down. Folk horror is all about that unsettling tension between the old ways and the modern mind, the rural against the urban, nature against reason, the living against what still stirs beneath the soil, dripped like midnight sap from the bones of the land or old wounds that still bleed.

In the play Penda’s Fen (1974), writer David Rudkin gives folk horror one of its most searching principles when the visionary King Penda calls for “our sacred demon of ungovernableness.” His blessing that Stephen become “dark, true, impure and dissonant” rejects the fantasy of a pure, obedient, respectable England, asking instead that he recognize the repressed forces beneath it—sexuality, pagan memory, violence, desire, doubt, and historical conflict, rather than deny it. It applies to folk horror by using England’s buried pagan past and haunted landscape to expose and reject the false purity and conformity of modern authority.

Hauntology names this unsettling sense and sets an atmosphere around the past’s ghostly persistence: the present has failed to detach itself cleanly from the past, the past survives, and something buried continues to exert pressure on contemporary life.

Modern classic …Midsommar. Photograph: A24/Allstar

Coined by Jacques Derrida in Specters of Marx and later developed in cultural criticism by writers including Mark Fisher, the term ‘hauntology describes not simply ‘ghosts’ but the disturbing persistence of what should have disappeared; what lingers after it should be gone—abandoned beliefs, the repressed, colonial violence, unresolved and buried histories, discarded customs, vanished or lost communities, obsolete forms of culture, and even futures that were promised but never arrived. Its question is quieter, though no less unsettling: why does this past still have such power over the present? It’s not necessarily about literal ghosts; it describes the eerie feeling that time has failed to move cleanly forward.

It may include explicitly – witches, cults, sacrifice, supernatural forces, or even a sacrificial god or deities whose authority persists beneath the surface of modern life.

It may have no monster at all; the dread can arise from memory, nostalgia, loss, or temporal dislocation (for example, in Picnic at Hanging Rock 1975)  —where the past never quite stays in the past, and the present begins to feel shaped by something older, stranger, and unresolved -the past, present, and future no longer feel separate, orderly, or stable, as if they have begun to bleed into one another and time feels displaced, repetitive, haunted, or out of joint.

Nigel Kneale, The Stone Tape, BBC, aired 1972

It asks: What ancient force survives here? It asks: Why does this past feel unfinished—and why is it still affecting us? Hauntology gives the folk-horror mode or subgenre a useful language for its particular sense of time- the time that has not passed; it describes the sensation: not simply the survival of old beliefs or rituals, but the uneasy feeling that the past has never properly left.

Peter Weir’s Picnic at Hanging Rock 1975: Temporal dislocation through colonial order meeting an ancient landscape.

In folk horror, the present is “haunted”: a remnant, an afterimage, clings to a field, a village rite, a standing stone, an old song, a ruined church, a bonfire, a May Day procession, a black goat, a strange local custom, a deceptively festive gathering, a tenement hallway, a suburban home, or even a mirror, a forgotten recording, or an old book found in the cellar, making the familiar feel as though it remembers something we do not. These places and objects carry meanings that precede and exceed the outsider who encounters them.

In his 2017 book Folk Horror: Hours Dreadful and Things Strange, Scovell describes a “folk horror chain” built from four connected elements: landscape, isolation, a skewed belief system, and a final “happening” or summoning.

Sam Raimi’s film The Evil Dead 1981 does not follow this pattern in the most traditional way; there is no insular village or community ritual at its center, but it does bend the formula into something leaner, meaner, and considerably bloodier. The remote woods create the landscape; the collapsed bridge turns that setting into a trap; and the skin-bound Book of the Dead and its recorded incantations preserve a buried belief system that the visitors/outsiders unknowingly bring back to life. When they play the tape, the film reaches Scovell’s final link: a supernatural happening that overtakes the cabin, the forest, and eventually the bodies of the people inside it.

Scovell describes landscape as something that isolates characters from the ordinary social world, producing more of a hidden logic at odds with the familiar order of things, and draws them into older, stranger beliefs that end in violence or a supernatural event. That ‘folk horror chain’ fits neatly with Raimi’s The Evil Dead 1981: the remote cabin, hostile woods, ancient text, and the demonic possession it unleashes.

The Evil Dead 1981 cabin: At the edge of an ancient wooded evil, the cabin offers no true refuge; it is the confined threshold where the outside force enters, isolates, and consumes the people inside, and there’s no way back.

The terror lies not only in the possibility that an ancient force has survived, but in the realization that the past remains unfinished: it is still shaping bodies, beliefs, social relationships, and ideas of belonging. And when it makes familiar spaces seem to remember what its characters cannot yet know, it is too late to escape the story those spaces have been keeping alive.

Folk horror returns us to this unruly underside of national identity: a hauntological landscape in which the older world beneath the modern one is never wholly dead, its songs, customs, a legacy of violence, and forbidden desires still murmuring through all these traces and places.

Alan Clarke’s 1974 television film, Penda’s Fen

Penda’s Fen (broadcast in 1974, written by David Rudkin and directed by Alan Clarke) may not be the first film people reach for when they talk about folk horror, but I think it absolutely belongs in the conversation. It has none of the genre’s more familiar machinery: no isolated village turning on a stranger, no masked procession, no final sacrifice staged around a bonfire. What it does have is the familiar folk horror pull of an old landscape and the uneasy feeling that the version of England Stephen has been taught to love is only part of the story.

The past in Penda’s Fen is not some neat evil that can be uncovered and defeated. It keeps breaking through in the hills, in pre-Christian history, in Stephen’s sexuality, religious doubt, national identity that culture prefers to keep out of sight, and in the questions he begins to ask about faith and belonging. That is why the play feels so important to folk horror. It’s not a simple conflict between good and evil. It is not really about a community keeping an old ritual alive; it is about the things a nation tries to tidy away. It works toward the collapse of purity, desire, nationalism, enforced masculinity, religious conformity, contradiction, violence, and doubt, all coming back into view. The BFI places it alongside the folk-horror and folkloric television work that emerged in the late 1960s and 1970s, but what stays with me is how it turns the English pre-Christian past and its landscape into a challenge to the clean, proper version of Englishness Stephen has inherited.

Together, all these things make the familiar uncanny. We often register its persistence through ritual, that ‘landscape’, symbology, and collective memories that linger like ghosts within the present, making familiar places feel charged with that particular reckoning still undone and often an unspeakable legacy.

It all becomes unsettling because it appears to carry an unfinished history into the present. The mode—or subgenre, if that term feels more accurate when you say it- asks not only what ancient force survives, but why that past continues to structure contemporary life. The effect is often this: you look at something ordinary and, all of a sudden, you do not recognize it.

Folk horror is not concerned only with surface scares or ancient rituals. It is interested in the way isolated communities are shaped by inherited customs, collective fears, and sacred prohibitions that can seem irrational from the outside but carry real force within the group.

The films considered here in this essay demonstrate that this haunting need not be limited to an explicitly ancient or pagan past. The Wicker Man 1973 locates it in a revived agrarian religion whose rituals transform Summerisle into a sealed world of sacrificial continuity; Midsommar 2019 reconfigures that model through a contemporary commune that turns grief and emotional belonging into instruments of ritual seduction, initiation, conversion, and control; and Get Out 2017 relocates folk-horror logic to privileged, suspiciously ‘liberal’ America, where racial history persists through the seemingly polite face of doctors, hypnosis, and surgical ‘innovation’, fetishization, ownership, co-optation, and consumption. Together, the films suggest that folk horror’s most enduring specter is not paganism itself, but the recurring ability of communities to disguise violence as tradition, renewal, care, or progress.

In the evolution of Folk Horror in cinema, Chad Crawford Kinkle’s Jug Face (2013) would return to sacrificial logic, depicting an isolated community whose promise of protection depends on surrendering its own people to a sacred pit. Set in an isolated Southern backwoods community in the modern era, Jug Face presents a sacrificial order that has survived alongside the outside world rather than belonging to a safely distant past.

Its deepest horror lies not simply in the power beneath the ground, or ‘the pit,’ but in a social order that has made killing a neighbor an obligation to everyone else. The supernatural threat is real, but the social horror is the conversion of that threat into communal law: someone must die so that everyone else can continue calling the practice protection. It’s a necessary price of collective security.

Folk horror is often about the gulf between what seems familiar and what lies beneath it, between what is imagined and what is real. It does not simply frighten us with phantasms, specters, apparitions, wraiths, curses, or supernatural happenings, nor does it only live or seep in through the soil, the trees, and the old superstitions that cling stubbornly to remote villages.

Some folk-horror stories still unfold in isolated places, where the outside world feels like a distant rumor and local customs carry their own threatening logic, twisted codes, whether pagan rites, occult whispers, or time-worn rituals that blur belief into menace. But the genre can also thrive in modern spaces: suburban homes, institutions, affluent estates, housing blocks, and close-knit communities that make exclusion or cruelty seem natural.

Its visual set pieces do more than decorate those worlds; they make their hidden beliefs visible -physically. A standing stone, a harvest ceremony, a bonfire, a ruined church, or a lone figure in an open field can signal that we have crossed into a place governed by older rules. The landscape is never merely background. It holds a community’s memory and the rituals it has learned to protect or conceal.

In folk horror, the most striking ritual tableaux don’t simply lend a place its uncanny look; they give its beliefs a body, something the characters can gather around, enter, or be offered up to. They show us how belief has been built into ordinary life: where people gather, what they keep, which places they avoid, and what they’re prepared to do when a ritual calls for it. A standing stone or a bonfire matters less as an eerie image on its own than as a clue to the rules everyone seems to know except the newcomer or outsider. The setting begins to feel uneasy because it isn’t just holding a secret; people have arranged their lives around it

What makes folk horror unsettling is not always the supernatural. It is the moment an outsider discovers that a place, a family, or a community is governed by rules they do not understand and cannot easily escape. The collision of rigid, archaic worldviews with the modern, or with the outsider, reveals or exposes that fear is often brewed as much from conviction as from curses. Folk horror may be spun from cultural anxiety, or begin in the wild, dark heart of nature, amid secret ceremonies and shadowed glances, where dread gathers and grows, but it does not end there: its real power lies in the way those forces enter the mind, into an inner world of fear, unsettling memory, identity, desire, coercion and the very sense of what is real.

Rather than treating the past as a fixed pagan relic, the old rites may remain, but so can newer forms of power: class, gender, reproductive control, environmental damage, religious institutions, radicalized histories, medicine, wealth, racial appropriation, therapy, social conformity, gentrification, or the seductive promise of belonging. Now, folk horror is less about the past returning unchanged than about the past’s habits of fear and control finding new places to live.

Here, the forest becomes psychological as well as physical. The forest stops being just a place and becomes something inside us, too. A crowded street can make you feel as alone and as isolating as a moor; a suburban home can preserve and hold onto its own rites of silence, obedience, reverence, and sacrifice. Folk horror does not vanish when it leaves the village; it changes shape.

The folk tradition evolves and adapts rather than disappears—its gods, monsters, and ceremonies come back through the fears of modern life; they re-emerge through the anxieties of the world we live in now. What used to wait beyond the village boundary might now be waiting behind the front door, at the end of the block, or within us – the feeling that, no matter how modern we become, the past never entirely lets us go, and the old beliefs, even with all that progress, have never fully driven the past away.

In film, story often follows what can be most powerfully seen. Every aesthetic choice should lead the way: how a ritual fire burns, how a village appears through mist, how a face is held in silence; it all turns the act of retelling folklore into something visual, sensorial, newly felt and irrevocably transformed: a descent into the tangled roots of fear, culture, and landscape. Cinema does not simply illustrate old stories; it gives them new bodies, new spaces, and new ways of haunting the present. In this sense, the film itself can become folklore, or folk horror: a cinematic mode that thrives in the space between cultural dreaming and psychological unease.

The Babadook 2014 – starring Essie Davis and Samuel Vanek.

At that point, folk horror is no longer just about an isolated setting. The place begins to work on the people inside it—shaping their fears, decisions, memories, and sense of what is real.

If there is a more academic word for that, it is psychogeographic: horror in which the landscape gets inside the mind. Psychogeography is a useful way of describing how a place can get under people’s skin—how a setting affects what they feel and believe. Its landscapes are never passive backdrops, but psychologically charged spaces that influence what characters see, remember, and fear. In folk horror, it makes places feel active rather than atmospheric scenery. A forest, coastline, village, or ruined estate does not simply sit behind the action; it presses on the characters, making them feel isolated and cut off, watched, unsettled, disoriented, or pulled toward a past they do not fully understand. It can hold traces of earlier violence or faith. The land itself can be a psychologically charged “character” that shapes how people perceive the world, confront trauma, and reckon with history.

In this sense, folk horror turns a place into a kind of memory, one that its characters may not fully understand until it begins to shape their choices for them.

Cinema does not merely borrow folklore; it makes folklore visual; landscapes actively rearrange people’s sense of reality; isolation hardens belief; and the genre’s echoes of old fears can move from woods and villages into cities and suburbs.

Swamps and marshlands show up in several folk-horror or folk-horror-adjacent films, especially in Southern Gothic and regional American horror. They work well because they are naturally liminal spaces: neither firm land nor open water, difficult to map, full of decay, and easily imagined as holding old secrets. In these landscapes, old traditions, communal memory, profane rhythms, and buried violence seem to cling to the mud and water, along with the primal fears and desires those earlier worlds have left behind.

As in the Arkansas landscape of The Legend of Boggy Creek 1972 and the Louisiana folk-horror/Southern Gothic tradition of films like The Skeleton Key 2005 and Eve’s Bayou 1997, the latter is more Southern Gothic drama than outright horror, but its folk practices, visions, family secrets, and swamp atmosphere make it very useful for an essay about folklore and haunted regional memory.

Written and directed by Kasi Lemmons, Eve’s Bayou 1997) stars Journee Smollett and Diahann Carroll.

Communities rooted in these places build their own rules around that history: sacred prohibitions, shared rituals, collective anxieties, and sometimes a kind of group hysteria that can make cruelty feel necessary or even holy. In that kind of world, the past is not simply remembered; it becomes a living pressure, deciding what must be feared, what must be protected, and who belongs and who can be sacrificed for the community to endure.

Adam Scovell’s “folk horror chain” gives this pattern a useful structure. Landscape creates the conditions in which isolation deepens; isolation lets unusual belief systems take hold and harden; and those beliefs eventually lead to a final ritual, an act of violence, or a supernatural “happening” that feels both shocking and, by that point, disturbingly inevitable.

The Wicker Man 1973 makes that final “happening” visible not as a private act, but as communal performance. When you think of The Wicker Man, you hear the island’s songs, watch the maypole dance, the animal-masked procession, and the final wicker effigy create a bright, communal spectacle that becomes steadily more disturbing because everyone seems to understand the ritual except the outsider. By the time the wicker effigy burns against the open sky, the film has transformed familiar images of rural festivity into the visible machinery of communal sacrifice.

Consider The Blood on Satan’s Claw 1971, where empty fields, tangled woods, and the discovery of something unnatural in the earth turn the countryside itself into the source of something dark closing in, something evil. These films use pageantry and place to let dread build in plain sight, long before the horror is fully revealed.

The genre’s migration is not simply a matter of replacing the countryside with the city; folk horror does not remain safely buried in the soil or confined to one kind of landscape; it follows the road outward: moving into urban and suburban spaces, those forces do not disappear; they lose their most recognizable signs. Each setting gives the genre a different pressure point.

Folklore may no longer announce itself through a village elder or a stone circle. Instead, it is carried through private rituals, neighborhood codes, inherited prejudices, and institutions whose authority and quiet violence make their beliefs seem ordinary. From the isolated hamlet to the industrial town, from the country house to the suburban cul-de-sac, from the ancient grove to the apartment block and neon-lit street. The old world is not erased by modernity; so much as bury it beneath concrete, traffic, modern routines, and the ordinary spaces of everyday life.

Candyman 1992 starring Kasi Lemmons and Virginia Madsen.

What changes is not the genre’s underlying fear, but its setting and how it evolves as a form of power. In contemporary folk horror, the old rite is often no longer a public ceremony performed in a field. The old ways do not survive merely as relics; they reappear as patterns of coercion and control, producing an altered moral order in which exploitation can seem normal, necessary, or even benevolent. The final violent or uncanny revelation or eruption does not create that order so much as reveal it. Folk horror makes people confront a local order. Whether characters are outsiders, insiders, estranged from their own community – whose logic is difficult to understand, challenge, or escape- drawn in, shut out, or simply trapped, the horror begins when the rules of the world around them can no longer be trusted.

Cinema gives folklore a visual, repeatable body: the burning wicker effigy, the masked procession, the slow turning of the soil that reveals old bones, or a fleeting shadow passing across a face at the moment fear and recognition collide.

These images are not illustrations of folklore so much as its afterlife: they give old fears a body, a rhythm, and a way of returning. They preserve and remake the fears, desires, and inherited memories that folklore carries. —an art form able to give old anxieties a body, a sound, and a sequence of images that we carry with us.

Folklore thrives on memory, and cinema is memory made stone. A local myth may once have warned people against wandering too far into the woods after dark; the folk horror film lets us see what happens when you do.

In folk horror, terror is never abstract; it is made local. It grows from a particular place: where the environment is made tangible through its streets or open land, the habits people live by, the history they would rather leave buried, and the strange feeling that one corner of the world is holding onto something. Those details carry on.

In its later forms, as folk horror moves beyond its classic British landscapes, it does not abandon the force of place; it redistributes it, appearing wherever a place can hold its own habits, pressures, and buried logic, each giving folklore a different way to surface. The genre becomes a language of dread that can travel far beyond its point of origin.

In muddy, strangling woods and sacrificial pits, schools, academies, and other enclosed institutions, those swamps and bayous, juke joints, housing projects, and suburbs. Filmmakers working with both expansive visions and stripped-down means turn local material into a more widely felt unease, allowing each setting to shape the particular form that dread takes.

Forests, villages, standing stones, and fields lead naturally toward The Wicker Man, The Blood on Satan’s Claw, and A Field in England. Along the coast, Whistle and I’ll Come to You, Night Tide, Messiah of Evil, and The Lighthouse turn the shoreline—its distancing vantage point opening onto vast exposure—into a threshold between isolation and the unknown.

Swamps and marshlands bring folk horror as well as the Southern Gothic territory in works such as Strangler of the Swamp 1946, The Legend of Boggy Creek 1972, and The Skeleton Key, released in 2005, set in the Louisiana bayou country, where regional history, spiritual unease, and local belief seep into the landscape.

The ruined estate in Eye of the Devil 1966 redirects that unease toward inherited privilege, secrecy, and decay. In urban and suburban works—including Get Out 2017, Bernard Rose’s 1992 Candyman, Nia DaCosta’s 2021 sequel Candyman, and Luca Guadagnino’s 2018 Suspiria—the cul-de-sac, apartment block, and neon-lit city street become new sites of enclosure, ritual, and collective fear, with their connection to Cabrini-Green, gentrification, racialized urban history, and the past imposing on the present. In Suspiria, the dance academy stands in the shadow of the Berlin Wall, its private rites unfolding in a city already divided against itself.

What changes is not the genre’s underlying fear, but how it evolves as a form of power. In contemporary folk horror, the old rite is often no longer a public ceremony performed in a field. The old ways do not survive merely as relics; they reappear as patterns of control, producing altered moral orders in which exploitation can seem normal, necessary, or even benevolent. The final violent or uncanny event does not create that order so much as reveal it.

Folk horror keeps finding new life through filmmakers with grand visions and bare-bones inventiveness alike—artists who can take one local story, one half-remembered warning, a story told in one town, or in one family or one patch of ground with a bad reputation and widen its reach without emptying it of place. What begins as someone else’s superstition becomes a universal unease and fascination: not because the story loses its specificity, but because its particular fears expose the structures, impulses, and vulnerabilities that travel with us.

The demon mask from Onibaba 1964.

Visual shorthand gives folk horror much of its power. The films are shaped by the logic of a nightmare; images that communicate a whole history or feeling before the film has to explain it. Folk horror will show us something slightly off—a room arranged too carefully, a recurring symbol, or a face held too long in silence – and we instinctively understand that there is a rule at work we have not been told. It can suggest an entire history of belief and threat without the film ever spelling it out.

That is where the logic of a nightmare comes in. Dreams do not always give us a clear cause and effect; they make us feel that something is wrong first, then leave us trying to catch up. In A Field in England 2013, a group of deserters crosses a mushroom or fairy ring, and the ordinary landscape begins to feel trapped, unstable, and hostile. The field does not need to announce what it is doing: the film’s stark black-and-white imagery, repetition, and disorientation make the land feel like an inescapable state of mind.

A Field in England does use black-and-white cinematography, repetition, hallucinogenic mushrooms, and deliberately disorienting editing/structure to make the field feel psychologically inescapable.

Folk horror is not one fixed thing: it can be a pagan sacrifice, a witch hunt, a curse in the soil, or a community whose traditions have become a little too sacred to question.

Films like Häxan (1922), Witchfinder General (1968), The Blood on Satan’s Claw (1971), The Devils (1971), The Witch (2015), and Midsommar 2019 all arrive at that dread from different directions, but each leaves its characters at the mercy of an older belief system—or the people determined to enforce it.

In films like The Wicker Man (1973) and Candyman (1992), folklore does not just warn; it immortalizes, giving dread shape, sound, and color. The vegetation, the costumes, the procession, the rituals, the graffiti-covered walls, and vivid urban decay- all the visual textures- become folklore’s new language.

Tony Todd: “They will say I have shed innocent blood,” a voice rises from the thick, golden murmur of the bees’ music, “What’s blood for, if not for shedding?”

By showing rather than telling, these films conjure myths that feel tangible, offering us a way to see the intangible and to carry it forward in our imagination. Folk horror is global and adaptable. But Cinema doesn’t just adapt folklore; it mutates it. Once a tale is filtered through the camera’s eye, edited for rhythm and beauty and dread, it becomes a new myth altogether, one that now belongs as much to cinema as it once did to oral tradition. Once a director builds the world of a folk tale on screen, it leaves the folkloric cycle and enters another form of storytelling. The camera doesn’t just record the myth; it creates its next life.

The common perception that folk horror originated solely in a British frame stems mainly from the prominence of what scholars call the “Unholy Trinity” of British folk horror films—Witchfinder General 1968, The Blood on Satan’s Claw 1971, and The Wicker Man 1973, which so vividly defined the genre in the late 1960s and early 1970s. These works first crystallized the genre’s mood of pastoral dread and moral decay. Whether it’s the sacrificial ecstasy of The Wicker Man or the earthy corruption of The Blood on Satan’s Claw, Piers Haggard’s film links folk horror’s key images to the social frictions of their times: Or the quiet despair of Witchfinder General, which captures, too realistically, Vincent Price’s calculating and sadistic portrayal of Matthew Hopkins. These films feel like glimpses into dispatches from the hidden corners of our collective imagination and the pagan revivalism of the 1970s.

It is important to recognize that focusing solely on folk horror rooted in British genre cinema would miss the rich, parallel traditions flourishing across the world. Filmmakers worldwide have tapped into their own myths, rituals, psychological undercurrents, mental reverberations, and landscapes to tell stories that are just as haunting and culturally resonant.

When you look beyond the British frame, folk horror reveals itself not as a neat, localized genre but as a sprawling global conversation about fear, folklore, and our deep connection to the land and the past. These films all circle something timeless and refuse to freeze folk horror in one particular world. Familiar tropes of isolated communities and archaic societal rules—hallmarks of classic British folk horror—are reworked to explore contemporary themes of sexuality, faith, and oppression, drawing from a deep and varied well of culture and myth that reaches far beyond its British roots.

Folk horror isn’t confined to a single place or tradition; it’s a pervasive, universal phenomenon that manifests across cultures and centuries, reflected in the diverse visions of filmmakers from Czech forest legends to Russian superstitions, Mexican archetypes, and Italian Catholicism’s collision with superstition. These films don’t just evoke fear; they invite us to confront the shadows cast by history, myth, and identity, crafting stories that feel both timeless and intensely personal, a cinematic reflection of a culture wrestling with its own folklore and collective memory.

Valerie and Her Week of Wonders 1970.

There are Australian haunting folk tales like Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975), directed by Peter Weir. While generally regarded as an Australian Gothic or mystery-fantasy film, it also fits comfortably within the folk-horror sensibility. It doesn’t overtly feature the supernatural, but it does embody the atmosphere and themes that define folk horror—mystic landscapes, colonial unease, and the uncanny merging of nature and psyche.

Lokis. Rokopis profesora Wittembacha or Lokis: A Manuscript of Professor Wittembach, Janusz Majewski’s Polish folk-horror film set in nineteenth-century Lithuania, is an eerie atmospheric classic that draws on local folklore surrounding Count Micha Szemioth, whom villagers suspect was born after his mother, a noblewoman, was attacked—and perhaps impregnated—by a bear.

Classic Japanese folk horror often centers on themes of women’s revenge, weaving haunting narratives where wronged female spirits or witches, like those in Kuroneko 1968, Onibaba 1964, and Kwaidan 1964, embody both sorrow and vengeance, reflecting deep cultural beliefs about injustice, the supernatural, and the enduring power of the feminine in folklore and cinema.

A major strand of classic Japanese ghost and folk-horror cinema often centers on or returns to the wronged woman whose suffering takes supernatural form. In films such as Kuroneko, Onibaba, and Masaki Kobayashi’s Kwaidan, female figures are bound to folk belief, desire, violence, grief, and retribution—though each film approaches those concerns differently. The vengeful female spirit, or onryo, is an especially enduring presence in Japanese horror, linking supernatural terror to women’s suffering and social injustice. Kuroneko clearly involves murdered women returning as avenging demon cats, and female onryo are a major recurring figure. But Onibaba is not chiefly a story of a vengeful female spirit, while Kwaidan is an anthology with several kinds of supernatural tales, not exclusively women’s revenge.

Czech folk horror films, with their blend of raw naturalism and deep roots in Slavic paganism and local superstition, explore themes of human vulnerability against nature’s mystique, the haunting pull of ancient rituals, and the fragile boundary between societal order and primal chaos. They showcase the distinct voice of Czech filmmakers during a politically turbulent era, but also contribute richly to the broader European folk horror. Films like Valerie and Her Week of Wonders (1970), a surreal, fairy-tale-like horror film, conjure puberty, sexuality, and witchcraft with a dreamlike aesthetic.

Jaromil Jireš’s Valerie and Her Week of Wonders (1970), a late Czechoslovak New Wave work, filters fairy-tale forms, local folklore, Catholic imagery, and what Criterion calls a “pagan lyricism” through surrealism. Its dreamlike world of eroticism, religious anxiety, and predatory authority explores Valerie’s sexual awakening and entrance into womanhood, blurring the boundary between childhood fantasy and adult menace.

Drawing on the Czech fairy-tale tradition, the film combines witchcraft, vampiric lore, a sinister priest, and a pagan-inflected coming-of-age symbolism; Valerie’s magical pearl earrings—emblems of femininity read by Criterion as flower-shaped emblems of femininity- repeatedly shield her from harm.

Czech and Czechoslovak folk-horror-adjacent cinema is not a defined genre, but films working in this register can reflect the political repression and cultural uncertainty that followed the Prague Spring. The broader Czechoslovak New Wave had flourished during the 1960s before the Soviet-led invasion of August 1968 ended the liberalizing period and ushered in “normalization.” Valerie was made and released during that early period.

In this context, Jireš uses the familiar fairy-tale form to create a relatively acceptable cultural surface for a surreal, erotic, Gothic encounter with folklore, while also offering an unsettling critique of authority and social norms under the fairy tale’s protective guise. This allowed him to approach sexuality, religion, and predatory and coercive power through cinematic fantasy: fairy tales could appear politically harmless to censors, even as Jireš lets darker pressures take shape around sexual coming of age, religious authority, and social power. The pohádka tradition was widely regarded as culturally safe and politically inoffensive under the Communist regime.

That framing does not mean the film escaped censorship altogether, nor did it evade official disapproval; after its October 1970 premiere, a review in the Communist Party newspaper Rudé právo condemned it as excessively arty, and Barrandov executives later prevented it from representing Czechoslovakia at the 1971 Sydney Film Festival.

Although Swedish director Ingmar Bergman’s The Seventh Seal (1957) is not usually classified as a conventional horror film, it can be understood as an important precursor to folk horror, with its existential dread laying the groundwork, along with its influential aesthetic.

Set in bleak, rural, plague-ravaged medieval Sweden, the film combines a harsh rural landscape with religious terror, superstition, witch-hunting, and the heavy literal presence of Death. Its unforgettable witch-burning sequence especially exposes how fear of disease and mortality can produce scapegoating and humanity’s instinct for collective violence. Bergman’s world moves uneasily between physical reality and bleak nightmare: the plague, penitential processions, belief in the Devil, and Death’s ominous figure all make the landscape feel spiritually as well as physically hostile. The film therefore anticipates later folk horror’s interest in folklore, ritual, fear, and communities attempting to make sense of catastrophe through belief.

The BFI has identified The Seventh Seal as part of Bergman’s influential contribution to folk-horror aesthetics, alongside The Virgin Spring (1960). Adam Scovell noted that Bergman nailed certain folk-horror elements long before the genre took off. The film’s “boundary […] ever shifting within his self-created hinterland, shrouded in twilight, with fear and fantasy in constant collision” describes Bergman’s world, where reality and nightmare blur, especially with the creeping plague, the ominous Grim Reaper, and medieval fears, which resonates strongly with folk horror’s dark heart.

The Literary Shadows Behind Folk Horror

Folk horror in literature and fiction forges new paths through the foundational landscapes of old legends, reinterpreting their timeless themes. They construct entirely new stories that resonate with the enduring echoes of ancient myths. Folk horror films adapted from these stories take those ancient, shadowy fears and spin them into brand-new tales that still hum with the power of something primal and timeless. Think about Bram Stoker’s Dracula, published in 1897 and adapted to the screen in 1931 by Tod Browning, starring the gravely debonair Bela Lugosi; it didn’t just repackage the vampire myth; it drenched it in Victorian dread and Gothic mystique, creating a story that feels at once classic and electrifyingly fresh. Then there’s Nosferatu, the silent film directed by F.W. Murnau, which was released in 1922.

Max Schreck’s performance as Count Orlok in Nosferatu (1922) is captivating and otherworldly. He embodies an eerie, unsettling presence that became iconic for silent horror cinema; his energy on screen is distinctively grotesque and mesmerizing, and his stiff, unnatural movements and uncanny vibe make him feel like a creeping shadow come to life.

Nosferatu was actually an unauthorized adaptation of Stoker’s Dracula, with altered names and some plot changes to avoid copyright infringement, but it was heavily inspired by the novel’s vampire mythos, haunting us with eerie visuals that twist folklore into something uniquely chilling.

To me, folk horror stays alive through adaptation: each return from novel or short story to the screen is a magical mix that lets old worlds meet new nightmares and pulls us in like a flame that draws a moth through the darkness.

Werner Herzog’s Nosferatu the Vampyre (1979) turns the tale into a solemn, plague-haunted folk nightmare, with Klaus Kinski’s Count Dracula emerging from the Carpathian landscape like an ancient contagion rather than a conventional gothic seducer. Isabelle Adjani brings an eerie stillness to Lucy Harker, Bruno Ganz plays the doomed Jonathan, and Roland Topor supplies a feverish Renfield; Herzog’s measured pacing, misty mountain passages, and swarms of rats make the vampire feel inseparable from old-world superstition, disease, and the land itself.

Robert Eggers’s Nosferatu (2024) goes a bit deeper into the folklore: Bill Skarsgård’s Count Orlok is conceived not as a polished aristocrat but as a decaying, and I do mean rotting, corpse-like Transylvanian folk vampire, while Lily-Rose Depp’s haunted Ellen and Nicholas Hoult’s Thomas Hutter stand at the center of the film’s erotic dread and spiritual ruin. Visually, Eggers creates a dense, candlelit world of curses, rural ritual, pestilence, and old beliefs that refuse to yield to modern reason. He has said his approach drew on historical accounts of the “folk vampire,” imagining what a dead Transylvanian nobleman might have looked like within that belief tradition.

Folk horror has a much broader literary family tree than vampire fiction. Its sources include ghost stories, weird fiction, witch-trial accounts, fairy tales, pagan-revival literature, and novels where rural places preserve beliefs the modern world assumes have disappeared. M. R. James, Arthur Machen, Algernon Blackwood, and Alan Garner are especially useful writers.

Long before folk horror became a film label, H. P. Lovecraft was turning rural New England into a landscape of inherited fear. In The Dunwich Horror, an isolated village, a disgraced family, forbidden ritual knowledge, and local stories about whippoorwills —Dunwich residents fear “the numerous whippoorwills” and believe those birds are psychopomps—beings that wait for the souls of dying people- as they gather, making the countryside feel less pastoral than watchful. The horror comes not only from an ancient creature Wilbur summons, but from the suspicion that the land has been keeping an older faith alive beneath the surface of ordinary life.

H. P. Lovecraft is especially interesting in the American literary route into folk horror rather than only a British Gothic one. He is not folk horror in every story, though; Lovecraft is usually classified as cosmic horror because his central fear is humanity’s insignificance before ancient, unknowable forces. But stories such as “The Dunwich Horror” (1928), “The Color Out of Space” (1927), “The Shadow over Innsmouth” (1936), and “The Festival” (1925) often work like folk horror: they place forbidden practices, local legends, inherited corruption, rural or coastal isolation, and ancient entities inside distinctly regional New England settings. Lovecraft’s fictional “country”—Arkham, Dunwich, Innsmouth, and Kingsport—draws on New England geography, Puritan history, witchcraft lore, decaying seaports, and invented local tradition.

The Shadow Over Innsmouth draws on the idea of a closed community. Its decaying Massachusetts port is effectively a sealed local world: outsiders are watched, local history is hidden, and the town’s religious or cultural life is organized around an ancient pact with inhuman sea beings. The narrator arrives as an outsider looking for local color and history, then discovers that the community’s survival depends on a hereditary arrangement that has literally transformed its people. The outsider arrives, the town withholds something, and inherited tradition becomes a living, dangerous social order. Lovecraft’s invented New England settings draw heavily on regional history and folklore, though they are also shaped by his racist and xenophobic worldview—a context worth acknowledging if I were to discuss him at length.

Lovecraft’s Innsmouth is a folk-horror town before folk horror had a name: a decaying coastal community held together by secrecy, inheritance, and an old bargain that outsiders are not meant to see.

M. R. James is probably one of the strongest and cleanest examples—not Lovecraft. His stories regularly use a structure that folk horror loves: Cursed Texts, Buried Relics, and Closed Communities. A rational, often educated outsider enters an old or isolated place. They treat local history as an object to be collected, translated, excavated, or explained. They find a relic: a whistle, crown, manuscript, carving, or burial site. The relic connects them to an older force that does not want to be rationally explained. The surrounding landscape becomes hostile, secretive, or spiritually charged.

Folk horror’s literary history is not only a history of vampires and Gothic castles. In M. R. James’s ghost stories, a rational visitor discovers that an old object or forgotten site still carries a force modern knowledge cannot contain. Television adaptations such as Whistle and I’ll Come to You and A Warning to the Curious turned James’s coastal ruins, buried relics, and uneasy scholars into some of the form’s clearest early screen images.

For example, in James’s Oh, Whistle and I’ll Come to You, My Lad, Professor Parkins finds a whistle near a supposed Knights Templar burial ground on the coast. He ignores the Latin warning engraved on it, blows it, and summons a spectral presence that follows him from the beach to his hotel. Jonathan Miller’s 1968 television adaptation makes the East Anglian coast integral to the fear: wind, sand, empty rooms, and the sense that the landscape has recorded something the visitor cannot read. M. R. James helped establish one of folk horror’s central plots: the modern investigator who mistakes the past for an object of study, only to discover that the past is still alive.

Before folk horror became associated with pagan villages and rural ritual, M. R. James’s “Casting the Runes” established one of its most enduring fears: that beneath the surface of modern, rational life, ancient knowledge can still be used to curse, pursue, and destroy—an idea powerfully brought to the screen in Jacques Tourneur’s Curse of the Demon (1957).

Meanwhile, The Wicker Man, loosely inspired by David Pinner’s Ritual, transformed the novel’s crucial narrative structure- an outsider entering a self-contained community whose traditions are not quaint survivals, but instruments of vitality and fertility. A remote community whose traditions conceal coercion and sacrifice—into the defining dramatic arrangement of 1970s British folk horror: a confrontation between modern rational authority and an older communal order organized around power, regeneration, and continuance.

This genre doesn’t merely project pagan rituals or old superstitions; it’s really about untying the knots made out of the tangled relationships between people, places, and memories- a living archive holding onto stories and revealing how tradition and inherited belief can speak of histories of oppression, inheritance, and those deep, often unsettling, connections that shape who we are.

Folk horror can be seen as a living cultural organism, sometimes forged by the colonial imagination, of resistance, reflecting how cultures hold onto their identities through stories of survival and rebellion, and is haunted by its byproducts.

From Kwaidan 1964

That’s what I want to celebrate this Halloween, not just the jump scares or nostalgia, but that magnetic pull that folk horror exerts on the soul. Its images of fog-drenched moors, whispered incantations, and half-forgotten villages remind us that horror isn’t always about monsters; it’s about memory, about roots. So, with some trailers —tiny cinematic offerings-and some visual cues, I want to invite everyone to peer into that same earthy darkness, to feel the chill where myth and history meet.

After all, as Woodlands Dark so beautifully reminds us, the scariest stories often grow right out of our own backyard. Like a curious archaeologist uncovering bones of old fears, brushing off the dirt to show how our favorite scary stories are like roots in the same soil as our myths and origins.

As Halloween approaches, I keep thinking: what better theme to honor than this eerie conversation between land, legend, and fear? It’s made me want to turn my October into a lantern-lit path through the strange countryside, and a familiar suburb or city made strange and unsettled by dread that can be found in folk horror, where I can share those glimpses through the tease of trailers- as if fairy-light snippets, moments that lure us off the main road and into the thicket, caught in the breath between dusk and dawn.

If you’re ready to dive into the shadowy and mysterious world of folk horror films, here’s a carefully curated list of must-watch titles to get you started—because exploring folk horror is like opening a cinematic treasure chest full of ancient rituals, eerie landscapes, and chilling tales that will leave you both mesmerized and a little bit uneasy. Whether you’re a seasoned fan or just curious, these films offer a perfect window into the mode or subgenre’s haunting magic and rich storytelling tradition.

 

Continue reading “Rituals, Ruins, Reckoning and the Roots of Terror: Unearthing the Magic and Madness of Folk Horror.” →

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #83 I Walked with a Zombie 1943 & Isle of the Dead 1945

A Symphony of Dark Patches- The Val Lewton Legacy 1943

I WALKED WITH A ZOMBIE 1943 

As I embark on the modest yet ambitious “150 Days of Classic Horror” project, I aim to delve more deeply into the remaining Val Lewton films that have yet to be explored in my work – Bedlam, Cat People, The Body Snatcher, and Isle of the Dead. I’m drawn to the shadows and subtleties that have made his work a touchstone for generations of cinephiles and scholars alike. To cover these films extensively isn’t just an academic exercise—it’s an act of cinematic devotion, a way of tracing the delicate threads Lewton wove between fear and beauty, suggestion and revelation. His films are not simply stories; they are poems in motion, each frame layered with meaning, mood, and unspoken longing. In the more extensive continuing series, (refer to the link above where I cover I Walked with a Zombie, The Ghost Ship, The Seventh Victim and The Leopard Man) I want to move beyond the surface chills and explore the artistry of Lewton and his collaborators: the directors who shaped the atmosphere, the actors who breathed life into haunted characters, the cinematographers who painted with shadow, and the composers who underscored every heartbeat of dread. These films deserve a careful, thoughtful analysis, for they are not only milestones in horror but also windows into the anxieties and desires of their era. To understand them fully is to appreciate the power of cinema to unsettle, to enchant, and to reflect the world’s complexities back at us through a glass darkly.

Val Lewton’s I Walked with a Zombie: A Hypnotic Dance Between Colonial Shadows and Gothic Desire

In 1943, Val Lewton—Hollywood’s poet of the unspeakable—crafted I Walked with a Zombie, a film that transcends its B-movie trappings to become a haunting meditation on colonialism, cultural dislocation, and the fragility of reason. Directed by Jacques Tourneur, whose collaborations with Lewton (Cat People, The Leopard Man) redefined horror as a genre of psychological suggestion, the film transforms Inez Wallace’s pulpy article about Haitian “zombies” into a dreamlike trance of repressed desires and historical guilt. With its chiaroscuro cinematography, Roy Webb’s primal score, and a narrative steeped in the legacy of slavery, I Walked with a Zombie is less a horror film than a séance, summoning the ghosts of a past that refuses to stay buried.

The story unfolds through the eyes of Betsy Connell (Frances Dee), a Canadian nurse whose wide-eyed idealism masks a quiet determination. Hired to care for Jessica Holland (Christine Gordon), the catatonic wife of sugar plantation owner Paul Holland (Tom Conway), Betsy arrives on the Caribbean island of Saint Sebastian—a name heavy with martyrdom—to find a world where the line between science and superstition blurs like sweat on skin. Jessica, once Paul’s vibrant bride, now sits motionless in a tower, her condition unexplained by Western medicine. “There’s no death here,” Paul tells Betsy, his voice dripping with colonial fatalism. “Only life that shouldn’t be lived.” The plantation, a relic of the Dutch slave trade, is haunted by the specter of Ti-Misery, a statue of Saint Sebastian repurposed as the figurehead of a slave ship, its arrow-pierced body a silent witness to centuries of exploitation.

Tourneur and cinematographer J. Roy Hunt cloak the island in shadows that seem to breathe. The sugarcane fields, shot in ethereal moonlight, sway like a chorus of restless spirits, while the houmfort (Vodou temple – meaning “abode of spirits” In Haitian Vodou, the hounfour is the sacred space where rituals, ceremonies, and veneration of the spirits (lwa) take place, pulsing with the rhythm of drums that echo the island’s fractured heartbeat. In the film’s most iconic sequence, Betsy leads Jessica through these fields at night, past animal skulls and hanging hides, to seek “better doctors” at the houmfort.

The walk is a descent into the subconscious: the camera glides alongside them, the wind whispering through cane stalks as Darby Jones’ Carrefour—a towering, silent guardian with eyes like polished obsidian—emerges from the darkness. His presence, neither fully human nor wholly supernatural, embodies the film’s central tension: the white characters’ fear of the “primitive” and the Black community’s resilience in preserving their traditions under colonial rule.

In the garden of the Holland estate stands Ti-Misery, the sorrowful figurehead salvaged from a slave ship, arrows bristling from its wooden flesh. It is both relic and warning, a mute witness to centuries of suffering. The moonlight glances off its face, catching the anguish carved there, and the air around it seems to shimmer with the weight of unspoken history. This is the island’s true heart: a place where beauty and pain are forever entwined, and every shadow is thick with memory.

There is the unforgettable midnight procession through the sugarcane fields, where Betsy, in her pale nurse’s dress, leads the somnambulistic Jessica on a pilgrimage for hope. The moonlight weaves silver threads through the whispering cane, and the air is thick with the pulse of distant drums and the hush of the wind—a world suspended between waking and dream Animal skulls and ritual talismans hang like omens in their path, and then, from the shadows, Carrefour appears: an imposing watchman, his eyes wide and unblinking, as if he is both gatekeeper and ghost. The very earth seems to hold its breath as the women pass, the scene unfolding with the logic of a half-remembered nightmare, each footfall a step deeper into the island’s mysteries.

At the houmfort, Betsy witnesses a Vodou ceremony that Tourneur films with a documentarian’s curiosity and a surrealist’s eye. The Vodou ceremony unfolds in a fever of rhythm and color. The dancers move in trance-like unison, their bodies answering the call of the drums, while the congregation’s voices rise and fall like a tide.

While the houngan (priest) slashes Jessica’s arm with a saber, when she fails to bleed, the crowd gasps: “Zombie!” This moment crystallizes the film’s critique of the colonial gaze. Jessica’s condition—a product of Mrs. Rand’s (Edith Barrett) desperate invocation of Vodou to stop her from destroying the family—becomes a metaphor for the zombification of Black bodies under slavery. The film doesn’t romanticize Vodou; instead, it frames it as a lived resistance, a language of power that the Hollands dismiss as “superstition” even as it dismantles their illusions of control.

The camera lingers on faces caught between ecstasy and terror, and when Jessica’s bloodless arm is revealed, the word “zombie” ripples through the crowd like a chill wind. The ceremony is both spectacle and sacrament, its power undeniable, its meaning layered with centuries of resistance and longing.

Elsewhere, the restaurant scene becomes a stage for another kind of ritual: Sir Lancelot’s calypso song, with its sly lyrics, exposes the Holland family’s secrets to the island’s gaze. The music is gentle, almost mocking, and the words cut deeper than any knife, turning private shame into public lament. The Holland brothers’ faces flicker with anger and humiliation, and the air is charged with the knowledge that nothing can remain hidden for long.

Finally, the torchlit climax by the sea: Paul’s half-brother Wesley, driven by guilt and grief, carries Jessica’s unresisting body toward the surf, the flames of the villagers’ torches flickering in the night. Carrefour follows, implacable as fate, and the waves close over the doomed lovers. The scene is at once an exorcism and a requiem, the island reclaiming its dead, and the past refusing to be laid to rest.

Each of these moments is woven from shadow and suggestion, from the poetry of what is seen and what is only felt. Lewton and Tourneur conjure a world where every breeze and every silence carries meaning, and where the boundaries between the living and the dead, the beautiful and the damned, are as thin and fragile as moonlight on water.

The performances are studies in restraint. Frances Dee’s Betsy oscillates between Florence Nightingale resolve and trembling vulnerability, her crisp nurse’s uniform a stark contrast to the island’s humid sensuality. Tom Conway, Lewton’s recurring leading man, plays Paul with a weary magnetism, his colonial guilt masked by a sardonic wit. Yet it’s Darby Jones’ Carrefour—wordless, spectral, and endlessly imitated—who lingers in the memory, a monument to the film’s unspoken subtext: the Black body as both feared and fetishized.

Roy Webb’s score is a character in itself, weaving calypso melodies (courtesy of Sir Lancelot’s haunting vocals) with dissonant strings that mirror Betsy’s unraveling sense of security. The film charts her psychological journey from confident professionalism to a state of deep uncertainty and emotional vulnerability. At the outset, Betsy arrives on Saint Sebastian with a sense of purpose and optimism, but as she becomes enmeshed in the island’s mysteries and the Holland family’s tragic history, her rational worldview is steadily eroded. The failure of conventional medicine to cure Jessica and Betsy’s subsequent decision to seek help from the Vodou houmfort marks a pivotal moment where her “professional carapace is shattered, and she enters a liminal state”. She is shaken by the island’s atmosphere, the eerie rituals, and the supernatural possibilities that challenge her belief in science and order.

The music peaks in the climax, as Wesley Rand (James Ellison), Jessica’s tormented brother-in-law, carries her body into the sea, pursued by Carrefour. Their deaths, framed against Ti-Misery’s arrow-riddled form, offer no catharsis—only the grim acknowledgment that the sins of the past are as inescapable as the tide.

Lewton and screenwriters Curt Siodmak and Ardel Wray infuse Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre with a postcolonial ache. The mansion’s secrets—a madwoman in the attic, a brooding patriarch—are reframed through the lens of racial and cultural collision. When Mrs. Rand confesses to using Vodou to “kill” Jessica, she embodies the film’s central irony: the colonizer’s reliance on the very traditions they despise.

I Walked with a Zombie was dismissed by some critics as schlock, but its legacy lies in its audacity. Lewton, working under RKO’s constraints, turned a sensational title into a poem of light and shadow, where horror emerges not from monsters, but from the rot festering beneath imperialist façades. In an era when Hollywood reduced Black cultures to exotic backdrop, the film grants them a gravity that still feels radical. Tourneur’s camera doesn’t exploit; it observes, finding in the houmfort’s flames and the cane fields’ whispers a truth more unsettling than any zombie: that the real horror is the silence of history, and the stories we refuse to hear.

ISLE OF THE DEAD 1945

Whispers Among the Cypress: Shadows and Superstition on the Isle of the Dead

In the haunted hush of Isle of the Dead (1945), Val Lewton’s gift for conjuring dread from the unseen and the unspoken reaches its most elegiac form. Directed by Mark Robson, who had apprenticed under Robert Wise and Jacques Tourneur within the Lewton unit, the film unfolds like a fevered meditation on mortality, superstition, and the thin, trembling veil between reason and terror. Lewton, ever the poet of shadows, draws from an Arnold Böcklin painting for his title and from the horrors of war and plague for his atmosphere, creating a work that is as much a lament as it is a ghost story.

The film is set during the Balkan Wars of 1912, on a desolate Greek island whose marble tombs and cypress silhouettes seem carved from the very marrow of myth. General Nikolas Pherides, played by Boris Karloff with a stony, haunted gravity, arrives with American war correspondent Oliver Davis (Marc Cramer) to visit the grave of his long-dead wife. The island is already a place of the dead, but soon becomes a prison for the living as a mysterious plague—called septicemic fever—descends upon the small group sheltering in the villa of Swiss archaeologist Dr. Albrecht (Jason Robards Sr.).

Boris Karloff moves through Isle of the Dead like a figure carved from ancient stone, his presence both commanding and mournful, as if he carries the weight of centuries within his bearing. As General Pherides, Karloff’s every gesture is measured, his voice a low, deliberate rumble that seems to echo from the crypts themselves. There is a haunted dignity in the way he surveys the island’s marble tombs, a man who has seen too much death to believe in easy comfort, yet who clings to order with a desperate, almost childlike tenacity. His eyes, at once cold and searching, betray the slow unraveling of certainty as superstition seeps into the cracks of his rational mind. In moments of doubt and fear, Karloff’s face becomes a landscape of sorrow and suspicion, the stern lines softening into something achingly human. When he succumbs at last to the very terror he sought to banish, it is with a tragic grandeur that lingers long after the final frame—a performance that feels less like acting than like an invocation, calling forth the restless spirits of both the living and the dead. This is where Boris Karloff’s true mastery lies—summoning a quiet ache from deep within, he delivers a performance so nuanced it shimmers at the threshold between reason and terror, inhabiting a narrative that trembles with both intellect and dread.

Lewton and Robson paint the island not just as a setting, but as a state of mind: the air is thick with the scent of cypress and decay, the moonlight is cold and pitiless, and the marble mausoleums cast shadows that seem to move of their own accord. The cinematography by Jack MacKenzie is a study in chiaroscuro, each frame sculpted from darkness and uncertain light. The camera lingers on the faces of the trapped guests as fear and suspicion take root; the villa becomes a crucible where rationality and superstition are forced into collision.

As the fever claims its victims, the group fractures along lines of belief and doubt. Dr. Drossos, the Greek military doctor, insists on quarantine, while Pherides, a man of rigid discipline and secular faith, finds himself increasingly drawn to the island’s folklore, particularly the legend of the vorvolaka, a vampiric spirit said to rise from the grave and spread pestilence. The superstitious housekeeper, Madame Kyra (Helen Thimig), fans these fears, her whispered warnings and furtive glances fueling the sense of encroaching doom. The American, Davis, clings to his journalistic detachment, but even he is not immune to the island’s spell.

At the heart of the film is Thea (Ellen Drew), the young Greek woman whom Madame Kyra accuses of being a vorvolaka.

Ellen Drew, who brings a heavenly vulnerability to her role as Thea in Isle of the Dead, was a versatile actress whose career spanned both film and television. Among her other notable roles are Betty Casey in Preston Sturges’ Christmas in July (1940), Huguette in If I Were King (1938), and Sofia de Peralta in The Baron of Arizona (1950) alongside Vincent Price. She also starred opposite Bing Crosby in Sing You Sinners (1938), George Raft in The Lady’s from Kentucky (1939), and Dick Powell in Johnny O’Clock (1947). Drew’s beauty was the kind that seemed to catch and hold the light—a delicate, sculpted face framed by soft waves, her eyes deep and expressive, with both longing and resolve. On screen, she radiated an ethereal grace, a gentle yet magnetic presence.

Thea’s luminous innocence and quiet strength stand in stark contrast to the mounting hysteria around her. Drew’s performance is all trembling vulnerability and quiet dignity, her wide eyes reflecting both terror and compassion. As the deaths mount and the survivors grow ever more desperate, Thea becomes both scapegoat and symbol, a living vessel for the group’s collective dread.

Karloff’s Pherides is a portrait of authority undone by the very forces he seeks to control. His transformation from stern rationalist to a man possessed by fear is rendered with tragic inevitability. The moment when he, convinced of Thea’s supernatural guilt, stalks her through the crypts with a lantern, his face gaunt and wild-eyed, is one of Lewton’s most chilling set pieces. The crypt itself is a masterpiece of set design and lighting: marble slabs gleam in the darkness, and the air is thick with the silence of centuries.

The suspense is almost unbearable until Mrs. Mary St. Aubyn, who suffers from catalepsy, is mistakenly thought dead, entombed alive by Pherides’ paranoia, claws her way out of her marble prison, awakens, her white dress torn and her eyes wide with terror, a living ghost staggering into the moonlight, and escapes the tomb in terror, her ordeal culminating in violence and tragedy.

The supporting cast is a gallery of haunted souls: Jason Robards Sr. as Dr. Albrecht, the humane skeptic; Katherine Emery (who navigated the sinister hedge labyrinth of Craven Castle only to discover the Scottish amphibious noble in The Maze, 1953) as Mrs. St. Aubyn, whose own brush with premature burial years before has left her fragile and haunted; and Skelton Knaggs as the consumptive Andrew Robbins, whose death is marked by a wind that rattles the shutters and a silence that presses on the heart. Each character is drawn with the economy and empathy that mark Lewton’s best work, their fates entwined with the island’s inexorable pull.

Leigh Harline’s score is a mournful tapestry of strings and woodwinds, weaving Greek motifs with the universal language of unease. The music swells and recedes like the tide, underscoring the film’s rhythms of hope and despair. The script, by Ardel Wray and Josef Mischel, is spare but eloquent, its dialogue laced with philosophical inquiry and fatalistic poetry. “Laws can be wrong and laws can be cruel, and the people who live only by the law are both wrong and cruel.” In Lewton’s world, death is everywhere: in the wind that rattles the olive trees, in the shadows that pool around the crypts, in the fear that turns neighbor against neighbor.

The film’s climax is a symphony of terror and release. Mrs. Mary St. Aubyn is “resurrected” from the crypt, not in a supernatural sense, but because she was mistakenly entombed alive due to a cataleptic trance. Mary St. Aubyn, who suffers from catalepsy (a condition causing death-like trances), is believed to have died during the plague quarantine on the island. Despite her fears of premature burial, the others, except for Thea, think she is dead and entomb her in the family crypt. This act is driven by the mounting panic, superstition, and the threat of plague, with the General and Kyra convinced that supernatural forces (the vorvolaka) are at play.

As the sirocco winds finally arrive, signaling hope for the end of the plague, it is too late for Mary. She awakens in the tomb, driven mad by her ordeal, and escapes. In a state of insanity, she returns to the house, kills Kyra (who had tormented Thea with accusations of being a vorvolaka), and stabs General Pherides (who is already showing signs of the plague) as he attempts to kill Thea. Ultimately, Mary flees and leaps to her death from a cliff. The tomb is both literal and symbolic—a triumph of life over superstition, but also a reminder of how easily fear can turn the living into the dead.

Pherides, consumed by his own demons, succumbs to the plague, his authority and certainty dissolved in the moonlit ruins. The survivors emerge, changed and chastened, as dawn breaks over the cypress groves—a fragile hope trembling on the edge of despair.

Isle of the Dead is filled with atmosphere and suggestion, of the horrors that bloom in silence and shadow. At its heart is Boris Karloff’s intense and beautiful portrayal of a tormented soul whose presence seeps into the film’s meditative power. Through Karloff’s haunting performance, the film becomes not just a visual spectacle but a deeply felt exploration of inner torment, embodying the fragile boundary between reason and superstition, faith and doubt, control and chaos, sanity and madness. It is a meditation on the limits of reason, the persistence of myth, and the ways in which fear can become its own contagion. Lewton, with Robson as his sensitive collaborator, crafts a work of haunted beauty—a requiem for the dead, and a warning to the living. In the end, the isle is not just a place, but a state of being: a liminal space where the living and the dead, the rational and the irrational, are forever entwined in a dance as old as time.

#83 Down, 67 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #68 THE GHOST SHIP 1943 / THE LEOPARD MAN 1943 & THE SEVENTH VICTIM 1943

A Symphony of Dark Patches- The Val Lewton Legacy 1943

SPOILER ALERT!

As I continue my exploration of Val Lewton’s remarkable legacy at The Last Drive In, having already written about The Seventh Victim, Curse of the Cat People, and The Ghost Ship, I’ll be working on an upcoming feature that will delve into four more of his atmospheric and thematically rich works: Cat People 1942, I Walked with a Zombie (1943), Isle of the Dead (1945) and Bedlam (1946).

Each of these films, though distinct in setting and subject, showcases Lewton’s unparalleled ability to fuse horror with social commentary, psychological depth, and a painter’s eye for shadow and suggestion.

Val Lewton’s 1943 RKO horror cycle –The Ghost Ship 1943, The Leopard Man 1943, and The Seventh Victim 1943-stands as a masterclass in psychological terror, moodiness, and narrative innovation, each film distinct yet bound by Lewton’s signature sensibility: an insistence on suggestion over spectacle, the power of the unseen, and a fascination with the darkness lurking in the human soul.

As embodied in these three films, Lewton’s legacy is one of transformation: of B-movie budgets alchemized into works of poetic terror, of genre conventions into vehicles for philosophical inquiry. Working with a repertoire of collaborators-directors, Tourneur and Robson, cinematographer Musuraca, composer Roy Webb, and a recurring troupe of actors, Lewton’s productions are marked by their psychological acuity, visual sophistication, and a willingness to leave horror unresolved, lingering in the shadows and the mind.

Val Lewton’s Shadowed Visions: The Haunting Trilogy of 1943:

In The Ghost Ship, The Leopard Man, and The Seventh Victim, Lewton created not just horror films, but meditations on fear, power, and the mysteries that haunt us all.

Lewton’s 1943 films thrive on paradox-constraint breeding innovation, silence screaming louder than spectacle. His collaborators, writers plumbing Freud and fate, cinematographers sculpting light into emotion, elevating pulp into poetry.

Richard Dix’s Captain Stone, Dennis O’Keefe’s everyman guilt, and Jean Brooks’ ethereal despair are not mere characters but vessels for universal fears. These films, though dismissed in their time, now pulse with relevance, their themes of isolation, authoritarian rot, and existential dread resonating in an age of anxiety. Lewton’s legacy is etched in the shadows he so masterfully conjured, proving that true horror lies not in the monster revealed but in the darkness we carry around with us.

In the dimly lit corridors of 1940s cinema, Val Lewton carved a niche where shadows whispered and the unseen terrorized, crafting this trio of films in 1943 –The Ghost Ship, The Leopard Man, and The Seventh Victim– that redefined horror through psychological nuance and atmospheric mastery. These works, though distinct in narrative, are bound by Lewton’s signature alchemy of suggestion, existential dread, and a profound understanding of human fragility. Each film, a chiaroscuro of fear and introspection, reveals Lewton’s genius for transforming B-movie constraints into meditations on power, alienation, and the darkness within.

THE GHOST SHIP 1943

The Ghost Ship, directed by Mark Robson and shot with spectral elegance by Nicholas Musuraca, is a study in authority gone awry and the terror of isolation at sea. Robson’s direction, while perhaps less flamboyant than Tourneur’s in other Lewton productions, is perfectly attuned to the material’s psychological focus.

The film immerses you in the claustrophobic world of the Altair, a merchant vessel helmed by the enigmatic Captain Will Stone (Richard Dix).

The story follows Tom Merriam (Russell Wade), a young idealistic merchant marine officer who joins the crew of the Altair under the seemingly benevolent command of Captain Stone. From the moment young officer Merriam steps aboard, the film tightens like a noose, blending maritime routine with mounting unease.

At first, Stone appears to be a model of paternal authority, imparting philosophical lessons about leadership and camaraderie at sea, and what begins as mentorship soon devolves into tyrannical paranoia as Merriam begins to suspect Stone is dangerously unhinged.

As the voyage progresses, Merriam witnesses a series of increasingly suspicious and fatal incidents: -an impression confirmed by a series of mysterious deaths that the superstitious crew attributes to a curse.

A crewman’s death during a botched medical emergency, another crushed by an anchor chain after crossing the captain, and the general sense of dread that pervades the ship. He becomes convinced that Stone is not only dangerously obsessed with his own authority but may also be a murderer, using the power of his position to eliminate those who threaten his control.

Stone, initially a paternal figure, reveals a philosophy steeped in authoritarian zeal, justifying control through a warped sense of duty. Nicholas Musuraca’s cinematography- a dance of shadows and stark light- transforms the ship’s hull into a labyrinth of moral decay.

The film’s tension is heightened by the crew’s superstitious belief that the ship is cursed, and by the isolation that renders Merriam’s warnings futile, leaving him to fend for himself with his fear and desperation. His attempts to expose Stone’s madness are met with disbelief and hostility, leaving him increasingly alone and vulnerable.

Robson and Lewton, working with a lean script by Donald Henderson Clarke from a story by Leo Mittler, (and with significant input from Lewton himself), craft a suspense drama where the true horror is psychological: Stone’s descent from idealist to tyrant, his authority morphing into a spiritual and existential threat.

A swinging chain becomes a pendulum of doom, its erratic movements mirroring Stone’s unraveling psyche, while the mute Finn’s (Skelton Knaggs) haunting voiceover pierces the silence like a dirge.

The film’s use of single-source lighting, shadow-drenched sets, and the haunting narration of Finn who is mute creates a mood of mounting dread, culminating in a claustrophobic showdown in the darkness of the ship’s hold.

The climax erupts in a brutal struggle in the darkness of Merriam’s cabin, as Stone, knife in hand, finally snaps and attempts to kill the young officer, only to be stopped by Finn, whose own presence and voiceover add a spectral, fatalistic undertone to the film. The Ghost Ship’s terror lies not in specters but in the banality of tyranny, as Stone’s descent into madness culminates in the knife fight drenched in primal desperation. Here, Lewton interrogates the seduction of power, framing the sea as a void where humanity drifts anchorless.

Withdrawn from circulation for decades due to a plagiarism lawsuit, The Ghost Ship has since been recognized for its compact, complex portrait of madness and its almost spiritual take on the dangers of unchecked power.

Richard Dix delivers a chilling and nuanced performance as Captain Will Stone, embodying a man whose authority slowly transforms from a steady anchor to a tightening noose of obsession and madness. At first, Dix’s Stone appears composed and even paternal, eager to mentor the young third officer, but beneath his calm exterior lurks a deep insecurity and a need for absolute control. As the voyage progresses, Dix masterfully lets Stone’s facade slip, revealing flashes of paranoia, rigidity, and an unsettling belief in his own infallibility. His descent is marked by small, tightly controlled gestures and a simmering intensity, never tipping into melodrama, but instead letting the menace build in his silences and cold stares. Dix’s portrayal is that of a man isolated not just by the sea, but by his own delusions, his authority twisted into something both pitiable and terrifying. His performance anchors the film’s psychological tension, making Captain Stone’s madness feel both inevitable and a deeply human study in how power and isolation can corrode the mind.

Some of the key scenes: In the suffocating blackness of the ship’s hold, a newly painted anchor chain hangs like a coiled serpent, gleaming and sinister in the lamplight. When a gale rises, the chain thrashes and lashes against the hull, a living embodiment of chaos barely contained. Captain Stone, unmoving and eerily serene, watches from a lighted window as the crew grapples with the writhing metal-his authority as cold and unyielding as the iron links themselves. The chain becomes a chilling metaphor for Stone’s fractured mind, caught between order and the abyss.

Later, the anchor chain scene takes on a fatal gravity. Stone orchestrates the death of a dissenting sailor named Louie by locking him in with a descending anchor chain, showcasing Dix’s ability to convey both the captain’s chilling calm and his unraveling psyche.

Louie, one of the more outspoken sailors, is sent to supervise the chain as it’s stowed in the loading compartment. As he signals for the chain’s descent, the door behind him is quietly locked. The chain begins its ponderous, inexorable drop, the clanking metal drowning out any cries for help. In the dim, claustrophobic space, Louie is buried alive by the relentless weight of the chain, a death as silent and implacable as the captain’s authority. The rest of the crew only finds his lifeless form after the deed is done, the horror of the moment underscored by the cold indifference of steel and shadow.

That anchor chain scene is mesmerizing and deeply unsettling to me- there’s something so striking and shockingly brutal about watching a man slowly, helplessly buried alive by cold, unfeeling metal, all while the rest of the world carries on above, oblivious to his fate—the poor soul.

Another striking moment comes when the ship’s doctor is unable to operate on a crewman with a burst appendix. The young officer Merriam, pressed into action, must take over the surgery himself. The captain’s chilling detachment and insistence on protocol hang over the scene, and his authority is now a palpable threat rather than a source of safety. The sickbay becomes a stage for Stone’s psychological unraveling, every flicker of light and shadow sharpening the sense of nihilism.

Cinematographer Nicholas Musuraca stands as one of the true architects of film noir’s visual identity; his work behind the camera helped define the look and feel of classic film noir. Works that include genre landmarks like Stranger on the Third Floor (1940), The Spiral Staircase (1946), The Locket (1946), Deadline at Dawn (1946), and the quintessential noir, Out of the Past (1947). Not to mention the atmospheric horror of Val Lewton’s Cat People (1942).

Noirvember – Freudian Femme Fatales – 1946 : The Dark Mirror (1946) & The Locket (1946) ‘Twisted Inside’

Musuraca’s signature style is unmistakable. His cinematography is defined by a masterful use of chiaroscuro, where deep shadows and sharp beams of light carve the frame into stark, expressive compositions alive with both possibility and threat. Musuraca’s cinematography transforms RKO’s standing ship set into a claustrophobic labyrinth of shadow and menace.The film’s use of single-source lighting and shadowy, confined spaces amplifies the sense of entrapment and moral ambiguity, while Roy Webb’s score and the contrasting calypso songs sung by Sir Lancelot on board provide moments of eerie levity amid the gloom.

Throughout, Lewton’s direction and the film’s noir-inspired cinematography use single-source lighting and deep shadows to evoke a world where menace lurks just beyond the reach of reason. The ship itself becomes a floating prison, each corridor and cabin heavy with the weight of unspoken fears, the darkness pressing in as tightly as the captain’s grip on his crew.

These scenes, especially the anchor chain’s deadly descent, capture the film’s unique blend of psychological horror and poetic fatalism, making The Ghost Ship a haunting meditation on authority, madness, and the thin line between protection and destruction.

The Ghost Ship (1943) stands as one of Val Lewton’s most psychologically charged and atmospheric films, a seafaring thriller that eschews the supernatural in favor of a tense, slow-burning study of authority, paranoia, and the darkness that can take root in isolation. The nearly all-male cast and the absence of romantic subplots further intensify the film’s focus on power dynamics, conformity, and the dangers of unchecked power. Parallels to the rise of fascism and the psychological toll of war are unmistakable.

THE LEOPARD MAN 1943

If The Ghost Ship is a tale of authority and the dark psychology from oceanic isolation at sea, The Leopard Man, directed by Jacques Tourneur and adapted by Ardel Wray and Edward Dein from Cornell Woolrich’s novel, Black Alibi is a meditation on fate and the lurking predatory instincts within ordinary life-where fear prowls the shadows of the everyday, and the boundaries between human and beast blur beneath the surface of a seemingly civilized town. The story is transformed from a pulpy premise into a haunting exploration of fear, guilt, and the duality of human nature.

The film transplants Lewton’s signature shadowy anxieties to a sun-baked New Mexico border town, where it unravels as a proto-slasher draped in existential ambiguity.

The story begins with a brash nightclub promoter Jerry Manning (Dennis O’Keefe) who borrows a black leopard to bolster his lover Kiki Walker’s (Jean Brooks) act, hoping to outshine her rival, the fiery dancer Clo-Clo (Margo) and it unleashes chaos when his publicity stunt goes awry. Maria, the fortune teller played by Isabel Jewell, warns Clo-Clo about impending danger (“something black” coming for her). When Clo-Clo startles the leopard with her castanets, the animal flees into the night, setting off a chain of deaths that fracture the town’s fragile peace as the leopard escapes, it ignites a wave of paranoia, coinciding with a series of gruesome deaths and brutal murders that blur the line between animal savagery and human depravity.

The film fractures into glimpses of fragility and moments of defenselessness, each victim-a girl locked out by her mother, and a dancer stalked through barren streets, Consuelo, and a local woman who is trapped inside a cemetery after visiting her father’s grave, another apparent victim of the leopard, etched with tragic intimacy. Tourneur, alongside cinematographer Robert De Grasse, wields sound and shadow like weapons: the echo of claws on cobblestones, the suffocating darkness behind a door, the silent scream of a victim unheard. Dennis O’Keefe’s Jerry Manning, a man haunted by his complicity, becomes a reluctant detective in a world where guilt is as pervasive as fear.

The first victim, Teresa (Margaret Landry), becomes an emblem of the film’s chilling restraint: Tourneur and cinematographer Robert De Grasse use shadows, sound, and off-screen violence to maximum effect, most memorably in the harrowing scene where a young girl, locked out of her home by her mother for forgetting cornmeal, is pursued through the shadowed streets by the sound of claws on cobblestones. Her death occurs off-screen, marked only by a scream and blood seeping beneath a door- killed just beyond her mother’s reach as she listens in horror. It’s a sequence that distills Lewton’s genius for evoking terror through suggestion.

Following the doomed victims in self-contained vignettes, the film’s structure was ahead of its time and is now recognized as a precursor to the American serial killer film.

The film’s brilliance lies in its ambiguity: Are the killings the work of the animal, or a human predator hiding in plain sight? The Leopard Man subverts expectations, its true horror lying not in the beast but in the realization that monstrosity wears a human face—a revelation that would echo through decades of horror to come.

While some contemporary critics found the film uneven, modern reassessment hails its taut pacing, visual inventiveness, and its almost noir-like meditation on fate and fear.

Tourneur and cinematographer Robert De Grasse craft a world where light and darkness duel for dominance. The New Mexico setting, with its adobe walls and arid landscapes, becomes a character in its own right, its sunlit exteriors contrasting with the suffocating gloom of alleyways and cemeteries. The film’s most potent weapon is sound-the click of castanets, the growl of an unseen beast, the eerie silence of a locked gate-each a harbinger of doom. When Clo-Clo, lured by a lost $100 bill, meets her fate in a moonlit arroyo, the camera lingers on her trembling hand, the castanets still clutched in her grip. It’s a moment of poetic brutality, underscoring the film’s theme of fate and the inevitability of violence.

At its core, The Leopard Man is a proto-slasher, structured around sketches of vulnerability. Each victim, their stories intertwining like threads in a morbid tapestry. The killer, revealed to be Dr. Galbraith (James Bell), a curator obsessed with the town’s violent history, embodies the film’s exploration of repressed desires. His confession that Teresa’s mauling awakened a latent bloodlust mirrors Lewton’s fascination with the darkness lurking beneath societal facades. The climax, set against a Catholic procession commemorating a colonial massacre, merges past and present sins, as Galbraith is cornered amid chanting mourners and flickering candles.

Jean Brooks and Dennis O’Keefe anchor the film with understated performances, their guilt and determination reflecting the moral ambiguity of Lewton’s universe. Margo’s Clo-Clo, all smoldering allure and defiant pride, stands out as a symbol of resilience in a world where women are painted as both predators and prey. Yet the true star is the atmosphere– a suffocating blend of noir aesthetics and Gothic melancholy, elevated by Roy Webb’s haunting score.

Initially dismissed as a B-movie curio, The Leopard Man has been reevaluated as a pioneering work that prefigured the slasher genre and modern horror’s psychological depth. Lewton, ever the alchemist of anxiety, uses the leopard as a metaphor for uncontrollable fear, while Tourneur’s direction, a dance of shadows and silence, transforms budgetary constraints into artistic triumphs. The film’s legacy lies in its refusal to provide easy answers, leaving audiences to grapple with the same question that torments Jerry and Kiki: Is the true monster the beast, the man, or the collective complicity that allows evil to thrive? In Lewton’s world, the most terrifying forces are those we cannot see- and those we dare not confront within ourselves.

THE SEVENTH VICTIM 1943

The Seventh Victim, Mark Robson’s directorial debut, is perhaps the most existential, enigmatic, and nihilistic of Lewton’s 1943 trilogy, which I’m focusing on here.

In The Seventh Victim, Lewton’s gaze turns even more inward, probing the abyss of the human soul. Scripted by Charles O’Neal and DeWitt Bodeen, the film follows Mary Gibson (Kim Hunter, in her first screen role) as she searches for her missing sister Jacqueline (Jean Brooks) in a shadowy, labyrinthine occult underbelly of Greenwich Village where her sister Jacqueline languishes under the thrall of the Palladists, a Satanist cult veiled in bourgeois normalcy.

The trail leads her into the orbit of the Palladists, a secret society pledged to nonviolence but committed to driving traitors to suicide. Not unlike Lewton’s other films, The Seventh Victim contains no overt supernatural element; its horror is existential, rooted in despair, alienation, and the seductive pull of death.

Robson and Musuraca drape the film in chiaroscuro gloom, echoing the influence of European expressionism and film noir. The narrative, fragmented by studio cuts, is dreamlike and unsettling, building to a climax that is both ambiguous and devastating: Jacqueline, hounded by the cult and her own death wish, takes her own life off-screen, the film ending with the sound of a chair falling and a neighbor’s whispered longing for “just one more moment of life.” Mimi’s character, played by Lewton regular Elizabeth Russell, is a striking counterpoint to the film’s themes of despair and suicide. While Jacqueline (Jean Brooks) is drawn toward death, Mimi expresses a poignant desire to keep living.

Kim Hunter’s character in The Seventh Victim is Mary Gibson, a sheltered and earnest young woman whose journey drives the film’s emotional core. Fresh out of boarding school, Mary has a gentle, sincere, and quietly determined style that is modest and unassuming, marked by innocence rather than sophistication. Yet beneath that innocence is a quiet resilience; as she searches for her missing sister Jacqueline in the shadowy maze of New York, Mary’s persistence and empathy set her apart. She is driven by a deep longing to reconnect with Jacqueline, hoping to save her from whatever darkness has claimed her life. Mary seeks not just answers, but the possibility of healing and redemption for her sister, even as she’s drawn into a world far more bleak and complex than she ever imagined. The rest of the cast- Tom Conway as Dr. Judd, Isabel Jewell, and Hugh Beaumont- contributes to the film’s sense of haunted community, each character adrift in a world where evil is banal, and hope is fleeting.

Musuraca’s camera paints a world of shadowy melancholy, where rain-slicked alleys and candlelit rituals frame Jacqueline’s existential torment. Her longing for death, poised between a noose and poisoned wine, becomes a silent scream against life’s futility, a theme echoed in the film’s infamous conclusion: the chair’s crash and a neighbor’s wistful sigh.

The Palladists, with their hollow dogma, mirror postwar anxieties of hidden evils, while subtexts of repressed sexuality and identity ripple beneath the surface. Jean Brooks’ performance, a spectral blend of resignation and defiance, anchors the film’s exploration of despair, making The Seventh Victim less a horror tale than a requiem for the lost.

The Seventh Victim unfolds like a shadowy descent into the underworld of despair, its central metaphor-the hangman’s noose suspended in an empty, dimly lit room-looming over the film as both a literal threat and a symbol of the inescapable pull of death. Val Lewton and director Mark Robson craft a cinematic labyrinth where every corridor and clock tick becomes a reminder of time slipping away, and every character seems to wander, ghostlike, through a city that offers neither refuge nor redemption. Jacqueline, the film’s tragic center, drifts through life as if already half-claimed by the grave, her voice rarely heard, her agency stripped away until she becomes less a person than a vessel for existential anguish and the numbing chill of depression.

Lewton’s Greenwich Village is a modern Dantean underworld, a place where the search for a missing sister becomes a spiritual journey through sin, penance, and the hope dashed by no salvation.

The cult of the Palladists, with their pacifist facade and insidious psychological cruelty, externalizes the internal struggle of suicidal ideation: their whispered urgings to Jacqueline to end her life echo the relentless, destructive voices of depression itself. The infamous scene in which a poisoned chalice is pressed upon her, the day’s light shifting as the group takes turns persuading her to drink, becomes a ritualized dramatization of despair, the cult acting as the personification of every dark thought and voice that seeks to erode the will to live.

The film’s final passages are as poetic as they are devastating. Jacqueline’s encounter with her neighbor Mimi – a woman dying of tuberculosis who longs for one more night of laughter and life- serves as a mirror to Jacqueline’s own longing for oblivion.

When Mimi leaves for her last dance, the camera lingers on the empty chair and the noose, and the sound of the chair’s fall is the film’s closing punctuation: a stark, unblinking acknowledgment of the tragedy of self-destruction. As Jacqueline’s voice repeats the line from John Donne-“I run to death, and death meets me as fast / And all my pleasures are like yesterday”– the film crystallizes into a dark, existential fable where death is not a monster but an ever-present shadow, a seductive promise, and, for some, tragically a final act of agency.

In The Seventh Victim, Lewton does not sensationalize horror; instead, he renders it with the quiet, inexorable force of a tide pulling souls into darkness, making the film not just a tale of cults and murder, but a haunting meditation on loneliness, mental health, and the fragile boundary between longing for life and surrendering to death.

#68 down, 82 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #33 Cat People 1942 & Curse of the Cat People 1944

CAT PEOPLE 1942

Cat People (1942) is a groundbreaking supernatural horror film that redefined the genre with its psychological depth and atmospheric storytelling thanks to the masterful storytelling by Val Lewton. Directed by Jacques Tourneur and produced by Lewton for RKO Pictures.

Val Lewton, a producer-auteur known for his meticulous oversight of every aspect of his projects, collaborated closely with Tourneur to create this new kind of horror film—one that relied on suggestion and atmosphere rather than overt scares. Lewton and Tourneur pioneered a revolutionary approach to horror filmmaking, employing suggestive imagery, chiaroscuro lighting, and masterful use of sound and silence to create an atmosphere of dread and terror through implication rather than explicit violence or supernatural manifestations, establishing a new paradigm that would influence generations of filmmakers.

Jacques Tourneur played a crucial role in shaping the visual style of his films, including his masterpiece, Out of the Past. He employs a masterful use of shadows: Tourneur went beyond standard film noir techniques, using shadows not just decoratively but as fundamental storytelling elements. He created beautiful compositions where shadows defined and redefined mood. Tourneur frequently employed “corridor” style shots, often shooting directly down paths or hallways to create long perspectives. He alternated these with lateral tracks featuring masked foregrounds, creating a rich visual mix. He also focused on “unofficial” architecture, like projecting awnings, to create unique compositions and emphasized complex textures in backgrounds, using elaborate wallpapers, moldings, and grillwork. Tourneur skillfully manipulated lighting to enhance the mood, using soft shadows for intimacy in romantic scenes and darker, more oppressive shadows for tense moments, particularly in the pool scene where an unseen predator stalks Alice, Cat People’s ‘good girl’ noir-like heroine. Tourneur’s visual style often left threats ambiguous, allowing viewers to draw their own conclusions.

Cat People tells the story of Irena Dubrovna (played by the intoxicatingly beautiful Simone Simon), a Serbian émigré in Manhattan who believes she is cursed to transform into a murderous panther if she experiences romantic or sexual passion. Her fears lead to a tense love triangle with her husband, Oliver Reed (Kent Smith), and his co-worker, Alice Moore (Jane Randolph), as well as sessions with the skeptical psychiatrist Dr. Louis Judd (Tom Conway). Lewton aimed to create a film that consisted of psychological depth, an intelligent horror film that explored themes of sexual repression, jealousy, and the clash between science and superstition. Lewton ultimately decided to set the story in contemporary New York, involving a love triangle between a man, a foreign woman with abnormal fears, and a female office worker desperately in love with Oliver.

Val Lewton wrote “The Bagheeta,” a short story that appeared in the July 1930 issue of Weird Tales Magazine. This story was one of Lewton’s early works in the horror genre, published before he began his career at RKO Pictures. “The Bagheeta,” which featured a legendary panther-woman hybrid in the Caucasus Mountains, served as inspiration for Cat People (1942).

The script was written by DeWitt Bodeen, who drew inspiration from myths about cats and curses, as well as Algernon Blackwood’s short story “Ancient Sorceries.” Lewton initially considered basing the film on Blackwood’s 1906 short story which featured a French town inhabited by devil-worshipping cat people. Bodeen researched cat-related literature, including works by Ambrose Bierce and Margaret Irwin. Lewton contributed heavily to the screenplay, ensuring its thematic complexity and subtlety.

Studio directive: RKO executive Charles Koerner gave Lewton the title Cat People and instructed him to develop a film from it. Koerner felt that werewolves, vampires, and man-made monsters were overexploited, suggesting that “nobody has done much with cats.”

Cinematographer Nicholas Musuraca, who contributed his keen photographic eye to some of the most extraordinary film noirs, brought the film’s shadowy visuals to life, employing chiaroscuro lighting and inventive framing to evoke fear through implication rather than explicit imagery. This approach gave rise to iconic moments like “The Lewton Bus,” an early example of a jump scare that has since become legendary in horror cinema.

The mythology behind Cat People blends Balkan folklore with Freudian psychology, portraying Irena’s transformation as both a literal curse and a metaphor for repressed desires. The film also subtly critiques xenophobia through its depiction of Irena as an “exotic” outsider whose cultural beliefs are dismissed or misunderstood by those (Anglo/Christian) around her.

Despite being made on a modest budget of $135,000, Cat People became one of RKO’s most successful films of the 1940s. Its minimalist yet sophisticated approach influenced countless subsequent horror films and elevated the genre’s artistic potential. Though initially conceived as a B-movie, it has since been recognized as a landmark in cinematic history, earning preservation in the National Film Registry in 1993.

CURSE OF THE CAT PEOPLE 1944

The Curse of the Cat People (1944) is another of Val Lewton’s psychologically geared supernatural thriller directed by Gunther von Fritsch and Robert Wise. The film follows in the shadow of Cat People with Amy Reed, the six-year-old daughter of Oliver Reed, and his new wife Alice, who lives in Tarrytown, New York. Amy is an imaginative and lonely child, often escaping into fantasies to cope with her isolation. Her life changes when she meets the ghost of her father’s deceased first wife, Irena, who becomes a maternal figure to her. Meanwhile, Amy befriends an eccentric elderly woman, Julia Farren (Julia Dean), and her troubled daughter, Barbara (Elizabeth Russell), leading to a complex exploration of reality, fantasy, and the power of love and acceptance.

Begin ‘The Bagheeta’: Val Lewton’s fantasy/ reality world of Curse of The Cat People: fearing the female/feline monster and the engendering child. Part I

Val Lewton’s Curse of The Cat People (1944) “God should use a Rose Amber Spot!” Seeing the darkness thru the ‘Fearing Child’ and ‘The Monstrous Feminine’ Part II

#33 down, 117 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #12 Bedlam (1946) & The Body Snatcher (1945)

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror!

BEDLAM (1946)

A Symphony of Dark Patches- The Val Lewton Legacy 1943

bedlam

Bedlam 1946 is Val Lewton’s visually haunting condemnation of mental asylums. Mark Robson directs Boris Karloff in perhaps one of his most vicious roles as the sadistic Master George Sims. Challenged by Mistress Bowen (Anna Lee) for his cruelty and inhumane treatment of the inmates, Sims orchestrates her confinement to Bedlam as she tries to reform the horrible conditions of the place. Stunning and brutal, Bedlam is the most savage story in the Lewton canon. It is a wonderful appearance by character actor Ian Wolfe, who always brings a bit of perspicacity to any film.

Boris Karloff’s performance in Bedlam (1946) is a masterclass in chilling restraint and psychological menace. In my opinion, it is perhaps among his finest and most complex screen creations. As Master George Sims, Karloff trades the Gothic excesses of his more famous monsters for a quiet, brooding authority, a malevolent figure who rules the asylum with wit as sharp as his cruelty, a presence simultaneously polite and terrifying. This is highlighted in the infamous “gilded boy” dinner party, as he expresses glee and a vicious delight, striking not simply for its horror but for the way Karloff infuses Sims with chilling plausibility and hints of perverse enjoyment.

What’s mesmerizing is how Boris Karloff channels both icy calculation and flashes of wry, almost courtly charm, rendering Sims a portrait of domesticated evil by candlelight, an administrator whose sinister schemes and subtle tyranny keep the film taut with dread. Even in the climactic reversal, when the inmates turn on their tormentor, there’s an uneasy pathos to Karloff’s final moments: his gaze flickers between defiance and abject horror as retribution literally walls him in. Karloff’s turn in Bedlam is truly villainous, rather than merely misunderstood, where he transcends archetype to deliver a performance that feels eerily real, haunted, human, and disturbingly close to home. His performance feels uncomfortably familiar or relevant, resonating on a personal or societal level rather than as a distant, purely fictional level of horror. It’s not theatrics but the haunted precision of his gestures and long, deliberate silences that define the role, and elevate Bedlam itself above mere historical horror into something genuinely unsettling.

Bedlam (1946), as one of Val Lewton’s extraordinary visually poetic psychological horror films in his collection for RKO Pictures, is perhaps one of his darkest poems. Val Lewton, known for his stylish horror B-films, co-wrote the screenplay under the pseudonym Carlos Keith, maintaining his approach to horror with a focus on psychological tension and suggestive shadows rather than overt supernatural elements.

The film, which would be the last collaboration with Boris Karloff and his final film for RKO, with the great actor commanding the screen with a deranged subtlety as Master George Sims, the cruel apothecary general of St. Mary’s of Bethlehem Asylum, and Anna Lee as Nell Bowen, a spirited reformer who seeks to improve the conditions for the asylum’s inmates, and the mistreatment of mental health patients in the 18th century.

Set in 1761 London, the film was inspired by William Hogarth’s painting series “A Rake’s Progress,” with Hogarth receiving a writing credit. The story follows Nell Bowen’s efforts to reform the notorious asylum, leading to her own commitment by the sadistic Sims.

Bedlam features several dramatic scenes that highlight the cruelty of the asylum and the tension between Nell Bowen and Master Sims. One of the most shocking scenes involves the “gilded boy,” where a young inmate painted in toxic gold performs for Lord Mortimer’s (Billy House) party, only to collapse and die from the poisonous paint while the callous partygoers and wealthy patrons revel in the spectacle of the poor boy’s suffering. This scene vividly illustrates the callousness of Sims and wealthy patrons toward the inmates’ dire struggles.

The cinematography by Nicholas Musuraca contributes significantly to the film’s atmospheric quality, employing chiaroscuro lighting techniques typical of Lewton productions. The set design, utilizing the church set from The Bells of St. Mary’s (1945), adds to the film’s gothic ambiance.

THE BODY SNATCHER 1945

The Body Snatcher (1945) is a chilling horror film directed by Robert Wise and produced by Val Lewton, set in 1831 Edinburgh. Karloff gives a tour de force, nuanced performance as John Gray, a sinister cabman who moonlights as a grave robber and murderer.

The film also features the sophisticated Henry Daniell with his concrete, chiseled, austere face as Dr. MacFarlane, a physician tormented by his past and Gray’s machinations to make money any way he can. Beloved Bela Lugosi appears in the film as Joseph, a blackmailing servant, and has a notably small role, marking the last on-screen collaboration between the two horror legends.

The story, based on Robert Louis Stevenson’s work, follows Gray’s increasingly disturbing methods of procuring cadavers for Dr. MacFarlane’s medical school, leading to a psychological battle between the two men that culminates in a haunting climax.

Boris Karloff’s performance as John Gray in The Body Snatcher (1945) is a haunting embodiment of malevolent cunning and psychological depth. Karloff crafts Gray not as a mere villain but as a complex figure: a grave robber and occasional murderer who carries himself with a sinister charm that both fascinates and unsettles us to the core. His portrayal balances menace with a sly, almost sardonic humor, making Karloff’s Gray a character whose presence dominates every scene he inhabits without ever falling into caricature.

Karloff masterfully reveals the creeping rot of guilt and amorality beneath Gray’s calculated exterior. His physicality, the gaunt makeup paired with his piercing, icy stare, heightens the sense of impending doom that accompanies his every stalking move. Much like Bedlam, it’s a blend of cruelty and charisma, underscored by sudden bursts of violence that shock precisely because they feel disturbingly real and not exaggerated.

The performance benefits from Karloff’s ability to convey layered motivations; Gray oscillates between ruthless pragmatism and an eerie, almost perverse delight in his grim trade. Karloff’s Gray is not just a dark presence but a pivotal force that personifies the film’s exploration of moral decay and desperation amid the grim conditions of early 19th-century Edinburgh.

Ultimately, it’s not hard to see that Karloff’s Gray is a magnificent study in villainy, one that is chilling because it feels organic, something that Boris Karloff is a master at cultivating, crafted with a precision that transforms a simple tale of grave robbing into a psychological thriller with a lingering emotional punch. It’s a performance that showcases Karloff’s range beyond his iconic monsters, marking The Body Snatcher as one of the dark gems in his storied career.

Some key scenes include the murder of the young street singer, which highlights Gray’s ruthlessness. Gray’s tormenting of Dr. MacFarlane in the pub, revealing their complex history, and the chilling carriage ride finale, where MacFarlane hallucinates Gray’s corpse coming to life. Robert Wise’s direction and Lewton’s emphasis on the pyshcological terror rather than explicit horror fix this in his legacy as a stunning masterpiece, a film that explores the ethical dilemma faced by medical schools in the 1830s when legal cadavers were scarce. This shortage led to a grim trade in illegally obtained bodies by graverobbing, blurring the lines between scientific progress and criminal activity. The story draws inspiration from the real-life Burke and Hare murders of 1828, which also adds a layer of authenticity to the narrative.

#12 down, only 138 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

Sure as his name is Boris Karloff… the legend endures: My Chat with Sara Karloff

Last October I had the incredible opportunity to reconnect with Sara Karloff at the Chiller Theater Convention here in New Jersey. It's really hard to put into words the feeling you get when you're actually talking to a gracious, elegant, kind, regal, and lovely woman who happens to be the daughter of the man you've worshiped since a young child.

I met Sara the year before at the same nostalgic celebration of classic, cult film, and retro television royalty (The Chiller Theatre Convention) and she invited me to sit with her and talk for a while. At the time, fans were buzzing around trying to get autographs and buying memorabilia with images of her father's influential work in horror pictures, or should I say "˜terror' pictures, as Boris would refer to those kinds of narratives in film.

Boris Karloff will forever be remembered for bringing Mary Shelley's existential monster to life, embodied with pathos and empathy. Karloff is the infinite soul of the monster. His character was my introduction to horror films and to a whole new world where I experienced a sense of belonging. Meeting Sara was the closest I could ever get to my hero Boris Karloff. I truly never imagined I would have the honor of connecting in this way, with the great man who changed my perceptions by opening up my heart to love the mysteries of life and the thrill of being both scared and delighted.

So there I sat with this striking, dignified woman who shared and shares her life with my idol, Boris Karloff, who appear in over 200 films and television programs during his legendary career. He will always be the never-ending expression of a genre that refuses– like Frankenstein’s monster– to die. Part of Karloff’s great legacy is how he brought us all together and gave horror fans a hero.

During the reign of Universal’s claim to what would become the most famous monsters in cinematic history, Karloff elevated the studio’s output with his limitless beauty by interpreting the genre through great instinct and intellect, not just in James Whale’s tragic monster in Frankenstein 1931 but as Imhotep in The Mummy 1932.

A few of my favorite Boris Karloff films are three of Val Lewton’s psychological metaphors of fear where he showed the range of his acting skills. The masterpieces Bedlam, Isle of the Dead, and The Body Snatcher were sparked ‘alive’ by his gentle soul and his ability to dive into authentically sinister roles manifesting truly dark, menacing fiends and yet it was the exact opposite of who he was in real life, a fine English gentleman who possessed grace and kindness.

Boris as Cabman John Gray in Val Lewton’s The Body Snatcher (1945) directed by Robert Wise.

Boris as General Nikolas Pherides in Val Lewton/Mark Robson’s Isle of the Dead (1945)

Some of my favorite performances are the set of three films, The Black Cat 1934, The Raven 1935, and The Invisible Ray 1936, all co-starring Bela Lugosi. These pictures too, showcased Karloff’s ability to elicit chills on a wholly deeper level possessing a true passion and understanding for creating thoughtful scary stories. He could be imposing as the crazed Morgan in The Old Dark House 1932, playing twin brothers Good & Evil in The Black Room 1935, and the tragic pianist framed for murder in The Walking Dead 1936. And I adore his more sympathetic and benevolent characters as well — Before I Hang 1940, The Devil Commands 1941, Corridors of Blood 1958, and The Haunted Strangler 1958.

Boris in James Whale’s The Old Dark House (1932).

Boris and Bela in Ulmer’s The Black Cat (1934).

Boris and Bela in The Raven (1935).

Boris Karloff as John Ellman in Michael Curtiz’s The Walking Dead (1936).

Boris as Dr. Janos Rukh in Lambert Hillyer’s The Invisible Ray (1946).

Boris as Dr. Julian Blair in The Devil Commands (1945) directed by Edward Dmytryk.

Boris as Dr. Bolton in Corridors of Blood (1958).

I've enjoyed his films since I was a girl, and I continually watch everything in his long body of work, as I never tire of seeing his incredible talent, his serious portrayals, and the wonderful light that shines through every performance. He has many layers to his persona, but his class, kindness, and thoughtful embrace of the work that is ever-present. Boris has the unparalleled ability to Immortalize the sinister only to be counterbalanced by his divine power in other roles, to draw out our sympathy. He will always be the eternal paradoxical face of terror and gentility.

Sara and I had the most warm and welcoming conversation over the course of that day, and I had the chance to tell her about my deep and abiding affection for her dad. I was in a sparkling daze, because I felt like I was talking to her father as well, and I believe she enjoyed spending time with me too. Sara Karloff is so gracious and delightful about her devotion to her father’s fans.

One little part of our exchange at Chiller"¦

I told her, “He elevated each film to a higher level because of the quality of his acting, the dimension to his emotional output, his body language and that exquisite voice. A soft and dream like tone that is both calming and poetic.

His legacy is that he brought honor to the genre of horror. He contributed to the world an incredible body of work, and he will be remembered so dearly by so many of his. I wasn't exaggerating when I said I wished he had been my grandfather." She replied, “He would have like that, he would have been my grandfather.” The words shot through me with warmth and the joy of awaking from a wonderful dream. Because she meant it.

I told her, “He exuded such a gentility, that even with his most brutal characterizations in film, you always knew it was the actor of the man. And quite the grand actor he was. I wanted to mention, how much his voice is so unique. He has a depth, and a pathos that no other actor possesses.”

She replied, “You are correct about his voice. It was remarkable. It not only was his British accent, but the way he could soothe you or scare you with his voice. He was indeed a fine actor and a wonderful human being.”

We had a long conversation that day, laughing and talking about contributions he made to dramatic television performances aside from the collection of well-remembered films, from silents to drama, his films were not exclusive to the horror genre. Talking about Boris makes me dewy and teary-eyed, explaining what I think about his great body of work and the legacy he left us as one of the most memorable cultural icons.

Even though he is the recognized face of "˜horror', early on Boris Karloff acted in many different films with varying scenarios and narratives that weren't connected to the classical horror genre. James Whale's Frankenstein for Universal was Boris Karloff's 81st picture. He had done theatre and dramatic films, like Howard Hawks’ The Criminal Code 1930 where his brilliant performance as Galloway had a particularly restrained hostility. As neither a monster nor a bad guy, he created a figure of dark and shadowy apprehension.

He also appeared in the ultra-violent Scarface 1932  for Howard Hawks. Aside from being the host of CBS's Thriller anthology series, where he opened up each episode with his own ominous epilogues for Thriller with his cheeky sense of humor, "Sure as my name is Boris Karloff — this is a thriller!"

Boris’ droll epilogue to Thriller episode Roses Last Summer starring Mary Astor

My favorite performances were his collaborations with Val Lewton. They are psychological in tone and gave Karloff the highly layered characterizations that allowed him to reveal his dynamic versatility surpassing his monster image in the Universal cycle of horror films. Lewton gave Karloff a place to flex his subtlety of the human psyche and how we all struggle with the light and darkness of the soul and he captured that nuance brilliantly. While Universal excelled by manifesting corporeal monsters, Val Lewton played on the monsters of the mind. Here Boris was able to convey these darker complex personalities with depth. Lewton used elements of dark and light within us all, and Boris Karloff was a master at dancing between the shadows of Val Lewton's complex vision.

And that is what he managed to portray within Jack Pierce's makeup for Frankenstein's monster. Beneath the fierce snarling innocent that rose from death and was born into a cruel world, judged by his ugliness and his otherness, Karloff imbued the monster with a sadness that evoked pity. He could transmit that to us, through his eyes and his thoughtful movements.

Since the last time we spoke, Sara and I have maintained a connection and I had the great privilege of continuing our conversation where I got to discuss her iconic father a bit more. If COVID-19 hadn't thrown the world into chaos and changed how we now interact with each other, this month would have been another wonderful celebration- spending the day together regaling Boris Karloff's career and the man himself.

Sara: Hello

Jo: Hello, Sara?

Sara: Uh-huh

Jo: Hi, it's Jo Gabriel. How are you feeling?

Sara: I'm better, thank you. I'm still recovering but I'm better.

Jo: Yes, you sound a little bit better.

Sara: Yes, I am. I'm listening to your CD.

Jo: You are! And?

Sara: I am enjoying it immensely!

Jo: Oh, that's good! I wanted you to like it.

Sara: Oh, it's marvelous.

Jo: Oh, good!

Sara: It's so relaxing and it's so autumnal (I never can say that word). And it's just like walking through the woods and it's like listening to a brook babble. It's just wonderful.

Jo: Are you feeling up to doing a little talking about your Dad?

Sara: Sure, I'd be glad to.

Jo: Ok, wonderful, because as I said, I'm going to start delving into his career and really doing a very extensive feature on him on my website. And in order to do that it's going to take some time and some research and I really want to do a good job.

Sara: Oh, I'm sure you will.

Jo: Thank you. It's a labor of love and I think it's about time that I do it. And now that we have this connection I thought it would be good to include a little conversation with you about a few things I am curious about.

Sara: Ok, that's fine.

Jo: So, you know, you and I when we were sitting and talking at Chiller, we talked a little bit about how your father loved working with Val Lewton.

Sara: Yes, indeed, he did.

Jo: Yes, Lewton's work is very visual like poetry and I think a lot of the films showcase the depth of your dad's versatility as an actor. His performances in those particular films were extraordinary. Do you want to tell me a little bit again about how he felt working with Lewton?

Sara: Well, I think I can only say what I've read and heard but my father said that working with Val Lewton and his films saved his soul. You know, he had made so many "“ well he made 3 Frankenstein films and then by the time he made the Val Lewton films the quality of the films being offered had really diminished. And he said that working with Val Lewton was such a joy. It was such a pleasure and such a joy because he and Lewton got along so beautifully. They were both well-educated and well-read men. And they enjoyed one another's company. And those scripts were well written and well directed and well shot and well lit. And they were in black and white and they were suspenseful. And he and Val became good friends and my father really enjoyed doing those high-quality films after some of the ones he'd been doing. And they were well-received by the public. They've stood the test of time. My father got to certainly prove his acting skills. He enjoyed working with the other actors, working with good scripts. It just was a joy for my father to make those 3 films.

Jo: Yes I was going to ask about that. I know director Mark Robson and director Robert Wise were both really accomplished directors, but is there one particular film out of the three? I mean, I love Bedlam and thought that was extraordinary. But is there one that he talked about more?

Sara: You know my father didn't talk about his work and he didn't bring it home. But I do know that he was really very very pleased to have that opportunity. But I never heard him state a preference amongst those 3 films.

Jo: Well that's interesting and I'm not surprised that Val Lewton was one of his favorites, favorite body of work to put his stamp on. So the other thing I was wondering "“ I have something written here. It says "Boris Karloff's gentility and grace show through the monster, the Frankenstein's monster. Which is partly why he's so transcendent in that role, because of his embodiment of the monster. And I really think he, the monster, was beloved by your father and beloved by the fans. And he knew when to leave that character with dignity. Can you tell me a bit about his feeling about that role?

Sara: Well, you know, that role made such a pivotal difference in his life both personally and professionally. And he was forever grateful for that difference. And he felt a certain debt of gratitude to that role. He often would in tongue-and-cheek refer to the monster as his best friend. He did say the monster was the best friend any actor could ever have because it made such a huge difference in his life. But, it was his decision to stop playing that role after those 3 films because he felt that the storyline had been developed as far as it could or should be before it fell apart and before the creature became the brunt of bad scripts and bad jokes, as it did. And he just didn't want to be a part of that because he did feel a debt of gratitude. My father was a very gracious human being. A very gentlemanly human being. He was an English gentleman with a very self-effacing sense of humor. He understood and portrayed the creature with a sense of pathos and elicited empathetic reactions from those viewers at that time. And he said that children got it. They understood the creature was the victim and not the perpetrator, and any acts of violence were reactions more than proactive. So, that's the way he played it and that's the way the audience perceived it.

Jo: Yes, and that was my introduction into horror films was feeling that sympathy towards his characterization and feeling empathy and feeling like I was on his side. And he was provoked and he didn't do anything wrong, he didn't even ask to be here. And just feeling that kind of camaraderie with the "other." He evoked that in children and I think we're all grateful to him for that.

Sara: Well, I think that is the reaction that his roles elicited and that was how he intended to play it. And I think that there were times when James Whale wanted a bit harsher performance and my father stuck to his guns.

Jo: Good, good! And he was right. It was good instincts.

Sara: I think it is proven to be so in cinema history.

Jo: Absolutely. He's one of the most iconic figures. I think that's why it's so eternal and it's because he was definitely right. And I think that anybody else who might've played Frankenstein's monster, it would have been a who different ballgame.

Sara: Well, it would've been a different portrayal. And who knows if it would've been better. It would have been different. That's all one can say.

Jo: Ehhh, I don't know if it would've been better but I'm partial [laughs].

Sara: Well, you know it would've been different. [laughs] That's all we can bet on.

Jo: [laughs] Yes, that's for sure. Another thing that we talked about was his involvement with the television anthology show Thriller that he hosted and starred in 6 episodes. And he seemed to love his work on that. And his little introductions like little soliloquies, were so wonderful. Can we talk a little about that?

Sara: Oh, sure! He loved doing that show and he was proud of it. And again they were some of the best writers and actors and directors of the time involved with that show. And it was a fine, fine production. I mean, people like Ida Lupino, I mean you can look at the jackets for each show and recognize the names today"¦

Jo: Yes, John Brahm. They had a host of good writers and actors, and the character actors were wonderful.

Sara: They were indeed. And then as you said, my father's introduction to each was a bit, not really tongue-in-cheek, but he had a good time doing them.

Jo: And you could see that he really did. And you could see in the beginning they were trying to figure out where they wanted the show to go. Whether it was going to be more crime thriller like Alfred Hitchcock or if it should be more supernatural. And I think once your father took over and started doing the hosting I think it really went in the right direction.

Sara: Well it did indeed. And it captured a large piece of the audience, the viewing audience. And gave Hitch a run for his money.

Jo: Oh yes, I know. I had heard there was something where Hitchcock extended his show to an hour to try to compete with Thriller because it was doing these 50 minute episodes that were like little movies. So I heard there was some kind of, I guess, competition between the two. But I thought Thriller was very unique and very self contained and had it's own thing going for it. You know I was reading that Boris worked on something like 80 pictures and stage performances before he landed the role of Frankenstein's monster.

Sara: It was his 81st film.

Jo: Yes, it was his 81st film. That's incredible. And I was reading in particular that he did a lot of work with director Howard Hawks where he worked on The Criminal Code and Scarface. I know he didn't bring home his work or talk about it, but it is fascinating that there's this whole other aspect of him before he played the monster.

Sara: He did a lot of silents, and a lot of serials. He referred to himself as having been an extra 3rd from the left in the 4th row. He was in the business 10 years and nobody knew it. And 20 years, 10 years in British Columbia in theatre and then 10 years in Hollywood. And as he said Frankenstein was his 81st film and nobody saw the first 80.

Jo: [laughs] Right, right. But now they do. Now they go and they revisit a lot of his work, I know I do.

Sara: And they're trying to redo some of his silents and put them back together.

Jo: Oh, that's wonderful.

Sara: Yes, that'll be fun if they're able to do that.

Jo: Yes, that would be wonderful. Last year, the year before this one, when we first met, we had a good laugh about the picture The Raven which your father costarred in with Vincent Price and Basil Rathbone and how they used to play practical jokes on one another. Do you remember the story you told? They were playing tricks on the set and I just don't remember quite all of it"¦

Sara: Well one of the"¦ I can't remember which of the two films it was, Basil was put in a vat and they thrown all sorts of awful things into that vat of water like cigarette butts and I don't remember what else. And then they sat one it when he was in there and wouldn't let him out.

Jo: [laughs] Oh my goodness! So were they always doing things like that?

Sara: Well that's one example, I don't know all of them. A lot of them are lost to history. And I know that Peter Lorre had a tendency to not learn his lines and adlibbed which drove my father crazy.

Jo: Oh, really? Oh that's interesting [laughs].

Sara: And Vincent was much better at handling that than my father. My father was a stickler for himself learning lines and speaking on cue. And Peter, I guess, drove everybody crazy, including Roger Corman, because he didn't learn his lines and he adlibbed a lot.

Jo: Wow, right. You'd think that Roger Corman would encourage adlibbing because he would just go for broke. He'd do anything on the set. And I could see Vincent Price being"¦ he was a bit of a jokester too, so"¦

Sara: Oh yes, all of them where. All of them had a wonderful sense of humor.
Jo: Yeah, they must've had a fantastic time together as an ensemble of actors with each bringing their own thing to the table.

Sara: Oh, indeed and they had such a good time working together because they'd know each other all for years and respected one another professionally, and liked each other personally. And having a chance to spoof their own boogeyman images in these films was a great treat.

Jo: Yes, definitely. Well I have just one more question for you. Beyond being one of the most beloved icons, he's definitely the finest caliber of actor. And I think he transcends the ideology of the horror genre.

Sara: Oh yeah, he did some comedy and he guest stared on an enormous number of television shows of the day. He did some drama. He did a Joseph Conrad with Roddy McDowell and he did all sorts of things.

Jo: Oh yes, I've seen that performance and it was actually an extraordinary performance. Well, one of the things that strikes me about him is that he gives a very emotional and thoughtful contemplation on the human condition. He seems to tap into"”in the most subtle ways"”people's personalities and the inner machinations of people in his performances. And that's probably why the Val Lewton films were so important to him because they were very psychological and suggestive. But this is the question, and I don't know if you can answer it. What do you think your father would want his greatest legacy to be?

Sara: Oh, I can't really answer that. I think that he was a man of integrity and kindness.

Jo: And that's it. That's his legacy. Because that's what seems to remain. I always hear how gentle he was and how gracious he was with the people he worked with. Well, then, putting it this way his legacy definitely lives on through that and through his timeless work. And you travel all over as a curator of his memory. Are there things you hear quite often or most commonly about your father's legacy? Is there one common thing that comes up when you speak to his fans about him?

Sara: Ah, that he was so different than the roles he played. That he was a man of great kindness and gentleness. And how different that was from his roles. And that he had a sense of humor.

Jo: Well, that's what strikes me about him. And I say this to you honestly that when I see him, whenever he comes on the screen, I cry because I feel his gentleness coming through. No matter what he's playing. He could be playing the most nefarious sinister character and yet I know that he's Boris Karloff and I know he's acting and I get into the film. But it makes me cry because I feel like there is such a greatness there. And it comes through. And I mean it that I really wished he was my grandfather [laughs].

Sara: [laughs] Well, he was a lovely man, he really was. He was a lovely human being.

Jo: I wish I could have met him. I mean I feel close to him in a way because we're talking and I see his legacy lives through you. And you keep that alive"¦

Sara: Well, his fans keep it alive. His fans keep his legacy alive. For which I am extremely grateful.,

Jo: Yes, but you keep it alive too. You do a great job of reminding us that he gave us you and"¦

Sara: And he gave us his body of work.

Jo: Yes, he did that too. And I will always love him"¦

Sara: Well, that's wonderful to hear certainly as his daughter.

Jo: I really want to thank you for spending this time talking with me about him. And I think that the fans are absolutely going to love it. And you have my music to keep you company.

Sara: I do indeed. Thank you so much. It's just beautiful, I'm enjoying it immensely.

Jo: Thank you, I love playing piano. That's one of my great passions.

Sara: Well, you can tell from your music.

Jo: Thank you.

Sara: How long have you been playing?

Jo: Since I was 8 years old. For many years I taught myself how to play.

Sara: Did you really?

Jo: Yes, I was going to be trained as a classical pianist and I did have recommendations to Juilliard. But I chose to play my own music and not go the classical route. And I'm happy for that because I play my own work. And I don't think not training hurt me any"¦

Sara: Oh heavens, no. It's beautiful.

Jo: Yes, I wanted to find my own way. And I'm very proud of it.

Sara: Well, I can see why, thank you for sharing it with me.

Jo: Thanks for letting me share it with you. Use it for your healing and I'll be in touch with you. I'll send you the finished piece but we'll speak before that.

Sara: That's great, thank you so very very much.

Jo: You're welcome and thank you for spending time.

This is your EverLovin’ Joey saying Grandpa Boris’ Feature tribute is coming your way!

Chapter 4 – Queers and Dykes in the Dark: Classic, Noir & Horror Cinema’s Coded Gay Characters:

CODED CLASSIC HORROR THEORY “The Uncanny & The Other”

“Scenes of excessive brutality and gruesomeness must be cut to an absolute minimum.”

“As a cultural index, the pre-Code horror film gave a freer rein to psychic turmoil and social disorientation because it possessed a unique freedom from censorship… the Hays Office admits that under the Code it is powerless to take a stand on the subject of ‘gruesomeness.‘(Thomas Doherty)

Horror films in particular have made for a fascinating case study in the evolving perceptions of queer presence; queer-horror filmmakers and actors were often forced to lean into the trope of the “predatory queer” or the “monstrous queer” to claim some sense of power through visibility and blatant expressions of sexuality.- Essential Queer Horror Films by Jordan Crucciola-2018

Though Hollywood execs refused to show explicit queerness, they were willing to pay for scripts that dealt with characters who were social outcasts and sexually non-normative. The horror genre is perhaps the most iconic coded queer playground, which seems to have an affinity with homosexuality because of its apparatus of ‘otherizing’ and the inherent representation of difference. The horror genre crosses over boundaries that include transgressions between heterosexuality and queerness. The villain, fiend, or monster plays around with a variety of elements that, while usually separate, might merge male and female gender traits.

The horror film, in particular, found its place asserting a queer presence on screen. The narratives often embraced tropes of the “˜predatory queer’ or the “˜monstrous queer’ in order to declare themselves visible while cinematic queers were elbowed out of the way. Filmmakers had to maneuver their vision in imaginative ways to subvert the structure laid out for them by the Code.

As Harry M. Benshoff explains in his book Monsters in the Closet: Homosexuality in the Horror Film, “Immediately before and during the years of World War II, Universal Studio’s horror films began to employ a more humanistic depiction of their monsters,” and the films of Val Lewton, like Cat People, reflected “a growing awareness of homosexuality, homosexual communities, and the dynamics of homosexual oppression as it was played out in society and the military.” So even though Hollywood execs refused to show explicit queerness, during the first true horror boom in American cinema, they were willing to pay for stories about social outcasts and sexually nonnormative figures. Horror fans thus found themselves awash in some of the genre’s most iconic queer-coded characters of all time.

On a Greek Island, Boris Karloff plays Gen. Nikolas Pherides in Val Lewton/Mark Robson’s Isle of the Dead, 1945. Driven insane by the belief that Thea (Ellen Drew), who suffers from catalepsy, is the embodiment of an evil vampiric force, is a demon called a vorvolaka. Lewton drew on collective fears, and all his work had an undercurrent of queer panic and a decipherable sign of homophobia.

The Vorvolaka has beset the island with plague. Thea- “Laws can be wrong, and laws can be cruel, and the people who live only by the law are both wrong and cruel.”

The Pre-Code era was exploding with American horror films that reflected the angst, social unrest, and emotional distress that audiences were feeling. Personified in films that used graphic metaphors to act as catharsis, the images were often filled with rage, as Thomas Doherty calls it ‘the quality of gruesomeness, cruelty and vengefulness’. Think of the angry mobs with their flaming torches who hunt down Frankenstein’s monster, eventually crucifying him like a sacrificial embodiment of their fury. James Whale’s adaptation of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein 1931 was a smash hit for Universal. Other studios were trying to ride the wave of the awakening genre of the horror picture. Paramount released director Rouben Mamoulian’s adaptation of the novella The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, by Scottish writer Robert Louis Stevenson, published in 1886. The film Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, which was released in 1931, stars Fredric March and Miriam Hopkins. During the Pre-Code period, many horror films proposed grisly subject matter that would shock and mesmerize the audience. For example, actor/director Irving Pichel’s The Most Dangerous Game (1932) starring Joel McCrea, Leslie Banks, and Fay Wray.

In 1932 Michael Curtiz directed Doctor X starring Lionel Atwill who would become one of the leading mad scientists of the genre.

Michael Curtiz’s macabre horror/fantasy experiment of homosocial ‘men doing science’, crossing over into profane territories and embracing dreadful taboos!

All scenes below are from Dr. X (1932).

Fay Wray is Atwill’s daughter who is the only woman surrounded by a group of scientific nonconformists.

The adaptation of Bram Stoker’s story of the Eastern European incubus was interpreted by Tod Browning in Dracula 1931, immortalized by Hungarian stage actor Bela Lugosi with his iconic cape and mesmerizing stare. While his nightly visitations were blood-driven and cinematically sexual in nature, there is a very homoerotic element to his influence over Renfield (Dwight Frye) and his gaze of gorgeous David Manners as John Harker.

Bela Lugosi looks down upon David Manners in a scene from the film ‘Dracula’, 1931. (Photo by Universal/Getty Images)

Robert Florey directed the macabre Murders in the Rue Morgue (1932) based on a story by Edgar Allan Poe. And a film that has no connection to Poe’s story but in the name is one of the most transgressive, disturbing horror films, rampant with vile taboos, such as necrophilia, incest, sadism, satanism, and flaying a man alive, is the unorthodox The Black Cat (1934). The film stars Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi, one of four pictures they would do together. A pair of enemies who have a score to settle, ghosts of a past war, and stolen love all take place against the backdrop of a stylish Bauhaus set design and high-contrast lighting.

Paramount released Murders in the Zoo (1933) with Lionel Atwill, a sadistic owner of a zoo who uses wild animals to ravage and kill off any of his wife’s (Kathleen Burke) suitors. Kathleen Burke is well known as the panther girl in Erle C. Kenton’s horrifically disturbing Island of Lost Souls 1932, an adaptation of master fantasy writer H.G. Wells’ The Island of Dr. Moreau. Incidentally, Welles, Laughton, and his wife, Elsa Lanchester, had been good friends earlier on, before the filming of Lost Souls. The film stars Charles Laughton as the unorthodox, depraved scientist who meddles with genetics and nature. He creates gruesome human/animals, torturing them with vivisection in his ‘house of pain.’ The film also stars Richard Arlen, Leila Hyams, and Bela Lugosi as The Sayer of the Law.

In 1933, King Kong showed a giant ape grasping the half-naked object of his affection, with unmentionable connotations of bestiality between the ape and Fay Wray. With scenes of Wray writhing in his gigantic paws, he lusts after her until his desire kills him. It’s almost like fantasy noir: the object of your desire will ultimately kill you!

The 1930s and 1940s Fear the Queer Monsters:

Re-assessing the Hitchcock Touch; by Wieland Schwanebeck -As Rhona Berenstein asserts, the horror genre “provides a primary arena for sexualities and practices that fall outside the purview of patriarchal culture, and the subgeneric tropes of the unseen, the host and the haunted house.”

By the same token, Kendra Bean concludes that Mrs. Danvers is portrayed as “a wraith; a sexual predator who is out to make Mrs. de Winter her next victim.”

Queer characters in horror films during the early period, reveal similarities between Mrs. Danvers and the staging of earlier sapphic characters, such as Gloria Holdens’s well-known portrayal of Countess Marya Zaleska in Dracula’s Daughter 1936. Yet, similar to the self-discipline of Mrs. Danvers, Dracula’s Daughter remains a figure of primacy and pity Ellis Hanson argues Dracula’s Daughter presents “the possibilities of a queer Gothic” early on in Hollywood history, “rich in all the paradox and sexual indeterminacy the word queer and the word Gothic imply.

There was a revival of the horror craze during the period of WWII. The Hollywood studios, both major and ‘Poverty Row” like Monogram and Republic, realized that horror movies were a lucrative business. The studios began to revisit the genre, looking for not only fresh formulas but they resurrected the classic monsters, dropping them into new plots. They also envisioned uniting gangster films with horror films, and this homogenizing led to a ‘queering’ of the two styles that demonstrated phallocentric ( guns, scientific penetration) and homoerotic themes and images into a sub-genre.

Public awareness of homosexuality reached a new height during these years, primarily due to the new set of social conditions wrought by war. Slowly , the love that dare not speak its name was being spoken, albeit in ways almost always obscurantist, punitive and homophobic. The linkage of homosexuality with violence and disease remained strong. Monsters in the Closet -Harry Benshoff

Rhona Berenstein, in her insightful book Attack of the Leading Ladies points out that films featuring the mad scientist trope operate with the homosocial principle, which speaks of the homoeroticism of males working together in consort subverting science together as a group of men who hide behind their objectification -the female object of their gaze, are in fact, figures of objectification themselves. They are simultaneously homosocial, homoerotic, and homophobic in aspect; … potentially possessing an extra-normative commitment between the two men.

Mad Doctor movies are homosocial in nature. The Mad Doctor movie is a subgenre that, below the surface, glorifies intimate male camaraderie and male homosexuality, and by the close of the picture, society, the prevailing culture, must, in turn, annihilate that which is repressed. However, it is not exclusively a vehicle to express homosexuality through homosocial interactions. There is a component not only of male bonding, but also a world without women; the thrust is a synthesis of misogyny and patriarchal tyranny and oppression of women. Homosocial relationships between men in these science horrors show the man’s desire for connection to other men, even one created by his own hand.

According to Twitchell in his Dreadful Pleasures and Attack of the Leading Ladies, Rona Berenstein, Colin Clive as Dr. Frankenstein in all three Universal pictures, was at least performing bisexuality. Whale’s 1933 Frankenstein might give way to the homosocial realm of the mad scientist trope of ‘homoerotic indulgence’ as these men exclude women from the pursuit of their fulfillment. Twitchell views the scientist’s fluid sexuality in order to examine the concept of a man controlling women’s primacy of giving birth. This might explain Dr. Frankenstein’s venture into unnatural reproduction—a process he wants to divert to himself without women’s exclusive right to motherhood. In the scene where he is as close to giving birth to a full-grown man, he seems to display sexual arousal when his creation comes to life. Henry Frankenstein provokes nature and defies his heterosexuality. As Whale was an openly gay director in Hollywood, it can be pondered whether he knew exactly what he was suggesting. Thesiger’s sexually ambiguous, or okay, not so ambiguous Dr. Pretorius, the mad scientist who pressures Henry Frankenstein to revitalize his experiments and create a mate for the monster. Pretorius is the scientist who insists that Henry continue his creative efforts in Bride of Frankenstein. Vitto Russo called Thesiger, a “man who played the effete sissy”¦ with much verve and wit.”

George Zucco, like Lionel Atwill, often portrayed the unorthodox scientist who flirted with taboos. He plays mad scientist Dr. Alfred Morris in The Mad Ghoul (1943) As a university chemistry professor, he exploits medical student Ted Allison (David Bruce) with his experimental gas that transforms Ted into a malleable, yielding macabre ghoul, whom Morris directs to kill and remove the victim’s hearts using the serum to temporarily bring Ted back from his trance like death state. David Bruce’s character is represented as a ‘queer’ sort of young man. He is not quite masculine and is unable to get his girlfriend, Evelyn Ankers, to fall in love with him. As the Mad Ghoul, he becomes a monstrous queer.

In 1932, director Tod Browning’s Dracula was based on Bram Stoker’s story of a fiendish vampire who, in a sexually implicit way, violates his victims by penetrating them with his fangs. The story pushed the boundaries of storytelling, and there was an inherent subtext of ‘queer’ ravishment when he sucks the blood of Dwight Frye to make him his loyal servant.

In Jonathan Harker’s Journal, the protagonist recounts his impressions of his interaction with the vampire, Dracula “As the Count leaned over me and his hands touched me I could not repress a shudder. It may have been that his breath was rank, but a horrible feeling of nausea came over me, which do what I would, I could not conceal.” For (Noël Carroll) the entry in his diary conveys revulsion by the Count’s closeness and offensive presence, which causes him to become sickened.

But it also could be read that Harker’s ‘shudder’ is not about his revulsion, but rather, an uncontrolled sexual response to the vampire’s looming over him, which could be interpreted not just as hunger for his ‘blood’ but an expression of repressed sexual desire and the fear it causes.

Horror movies have always pushed the boundaries of normalcy, by virtue of the fact that these films are inhabited by ‘monsters’, something ‘queerly’ different. And it is natural to observe two diverging responses to the impact of the horror genre and often, its persecution of what is ‘different’ and the source of what causes our anxiety.

Dracula may appear as the image of a man, but the count is far from human. While monsters in classical horror films are based on systems of maleness, they are split from being actual men. Although there are physical interactions and suggestive contact with the heroine, there isn’t the foundation of heterosexuality, but something quite deviant within their aggressively erotic encounters and/or assaults. The understanding of sexuality and the most narrow identifications that are assigned to varying orientations in a large sense is not translatable for the deeper layers of the monster and their relationship to their victims. In Hollywood, horror films can be seen as heterosexuality being invaded by an abhorrent outside force; inherent in the underlying message could be racism, classism, sexism, and gay panic. Though it can be interpreted as a landscape of heterosexuality that is in the full power of its universal presence, horror films are perfect platforms that can illustrate the collapse of heterosexuality and the subversion of sexuality.

The horror genre is a breeding ground for portrayals of the shattering of heterosexual power. This can be seen in Lambert Hillyer’s Dracula’s Daughter (1936) starring Gloria Holden as the sapphic vampire who lives in a New Village-type artist’s den, which signals her outsider status from domesticity and normalcy.

In White Zombie (1932), Bela Lugosi plays the eerily menacing Legendre. He turns men into lifeless workers who run the sugar mill. Legendre also begins to turn the plantation owner, Charles Beaumont (Robert Frazer), into one of his zombies. His motivation for his control over people is ambiguous, though there seems to be sexual reasoning for both the beautiful Madeline (Madge Bellamy) and Beaumont. In the scene where Beaumont is nearly paralyzed, Legendre’s control over his male victim parallels the sexual entrapment of the movie’s heroine.

MAD LOVE (1935) I have conquered science! Why can’t I conquer love?

Karl Freund’s Grand Guignol Mad Love (1935) shifts from gazing at the female to gazing at the male. Here, the focus is on Peter Lorre in his American screen debut as Dr. Gogol, who has an obsession with Frances Drake as Yvonne Orlac, an actress who works at the Grand Guignol Theatre. To Gogol, she is the typified defenseless heroine whom he tries to lure away from her husband, Stephen (Colin Clive), using his knowledge of scientific alchemy.

Though Gogol tries to become Yvonne’s master, his Galatea, there are critics who read the struggle between the two men as not just a rivalry for Yvonne’s love but Gogol’s desire for Stephen as well. Gogol is responsible for grafting new hands onto Stephen’s mangled body after a train crash. Mad Love could fit the criteria for the subgenre of science/horror films where the male gaze is diverted from the female object toward other men, in this case, what connected the two was the preservation of Stephen’s hands. Why, then, is it not possible that the focus could shift from Gogol’s attraction to Yvonne to the homosocial dynamics between Gogol as a doctor and his subject, Stephen?

Mad Love possesses some of the horror genre’s most tenacious performances of gender play. (Carol Clover) asks us to take a closer look at Freund’s film. It is less about the “suffering experienced by women, but at a deeper, more sustained level, it is dedicated to the unspeakable terrors endured by men.”

In a similar fashion to Waldo Lydecker’s (Laura) and Hardy Cathcart’s (The Dark Corner) pathology of objectifying Laura and Mari, Gogol worships Yvonne – his Galatea, with a measure of scopophilia that lies within his gaze upon the perfection of female beauty. To control and possess it. The pleasure is aroused by the mere indulgence of looking at her.

Gogol pays 75 francs to purchase the wax statue of Galatea. The seller remarks, “There’s queer people on the streets of Montmartre tonight.”

Gogol’s maid, Francoise, talks to the statue, “Whatever made him bring you here. There’s never been any woman in this house except maybe me… “I prefer live ones to dead ones.”

A Time Magazine review of Mad Love in 1933 notes this queer appeal directly, even comparing Lorre’s acting skills to those of another homosexual coded actor: I find the comment about their faces rude and insulting to both Lorre and Laughton, both of whom I am a tremendous fan.

Mad Love’s insane doctor is feminized throughout the film… In fact, the same reporter who noted Gogol’s sadism argues for his feminine demeanor: “Lorre, perfectly cast, uses the technique popularized by Charles Laughton of suggesting the most unspeakable obsessions by the roll of a protuberant eyeball, an almost feminine mildness of tone, an occasional quiver of thick lips set flat in his cretinous ellipsoidal face. This reviewer came closer than any other to articulate the subtext of mad doctor movies. He seems on the verge of noting that Lorre, Like Laughton is an effeminate madman obsessed by unspeakable homosocial desire. – Attack of the Leading Ladies: Gender Sexuality and Spectatorship in Classic Horror Cinema by Rhona Berenstein.

Frances Drake’s heroine masquerades as a wife who deludes herself into believing that her husband is more masculine than he really is. Gogol has a curious empathy with Stephen, whom he touches frequently and prolonged. Although Gogol pursues the heroine, Yvonne, at the theater, forcing a kiss on her, his focus is primarily manipulating Stephen’s body, rejoining his hands and massaging them to stimulate life back into them. When he realizes that Stephen’s hands cannot be grafted back successfully to his wrists, he turns to another man, the hands of a knife thrower who was executed as a notorious murderer. Once Stephen recovers from the surgery, he can no longer continue as a concert pianist, but does develop the desire to throw sharp knives.

On the surface, the plot of Mad Love appears to be a heterosexual obsession; the most unspoken context is the connection between Gogol and Stephen. “As is true of Frankenstein’s labor of love in Whale’s first film, Gogol sews men’s body parts together, and the result is a monster of sorts. (Berenstein)

In the film’s climax, Yvonne hides in Gogol’s bedroom and pretends to be the wax statue of Galatea. When Gogol touches the statue, she lets out a scream. In a euphoric daze (as in the original story), he believes that he has the power to bring Galatea’s statue to life. Yvonne begs him to let her go as he tries to strangle her.

Stephen then rushes to his wife and holds her in his arms. With his eyes fixed on the offscreen space in which Gogol’s body lies, he croons: “My darling.” The homosocial desire is destroyed when Stephen murders Gogol who intones, “Each man kills the thing he loves”“” echoing on the soundtrack.

In the film’s closing moments, the secret desire is finally spoken out loud…Has Stephen killed the man he loves? Given that the phrase that Gogol mutters was written originally by Oscar Wilde, whose homosexuality scandalized the British social and legal system in 1895, reading the homosocial desire into Mad Love within the very last moments, we are left to decipher the suspended cues. We are left with Stephen’s gazing at Gogol’s face and his knifed body as he lay dying, he speaks the words, “˜My darling” while the camera frames the two men sharing that moment in the closing scene.

The mad doctor narrative is particularly predisposed to homosocial impulses. “intense male homosocial desire as at once the most compulsory and the most prohibited of social bonds” – Epistemology of the Closet (Sedgwick)

Sedgwick investigated early fantasy/horror novels, Shelley’s Frankenstein 1818, Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde 1886, and Wells’ The Island of Dr. Moreau 1895. At the beginning of the 1930s, these stories centered around mad doctors who delved into unorthodox, profane explorations and were all adapted to the screen. All of these nefarious or scientific, inquisitive men cultivated secret experiments, challenging the laws of nature. What Sedgwick found was that the Gothic literary representations of men performing homosocial collaborations were ‘not socially sanctioned and shunned.’

It was considered a necessary narrative element as well as a monstrous possibility that threatened to subvert the status quo. The combination of these two attitudes is expressed in homosocial narratives- male bonding is both horrifying and guaranteed, entailing the simultaneous introjection and expulsion of femininity. (Sedgwick)

“My darling”…

James Whale was a gay auteur who often imbued his work intentionally or with the ‘intentional fallacy’ of a ‘queer’ sense of dark humor. This comical, campy absurdity was always on the edge of his vision of horror and subtle profanity. His picture, The Invisible Man (1933), adapted from H.G. Wells’s story and starring Claude Rains, was classified as a horror film by the Code.

Dr. Jack Griffin (Rains), the antihero, is a frenzied scientist addicted to his formula as he seeks the ability to make himself invisible. His sanity begins to ‘vanish’ as his hunger for power, delusions of grandeur, and bursts of megalomania grow out of control. He plans on assassinating government officials, and he becomes more belligerent the longer he turns invisible. The idea that he displays radical ideas and runs around in the nude didn’t seem to arouse the censors; in 1933, a letter from James Wingate to Hays states, “highly fantastic and exotic [sic] vein, and presents no particular censorship difficulties.”

What’s interesting about the presentation of the story is that the coded gay leitmotifs were paraded out, right under the Code’s noses, and didn’t stir any indignation for its ‘queer’ humor.

Gloria Stuart and Claude Rains in James Whale’s The Invisible Man 1933

The Invisible Man perpetrates campy assaults on all the ‘normal’ people in his way, with intervals of sardonic cackles and golden wit and, at the same time, a menacing reflection of light and shadow. Claude Rains is a concealed jester who makes folly of his victims.

“An invisible man can rule the world. Nobody will see him come, nobody will see him go. He can hear every secret. He can rob, and wreck, and kill.” –Dr. Jack Griffin (The Invisible Man)

Claude Rains plays Dr. Jack Griffin, an outsider (a favorite of James Whale’s characters) who discovers the secret of invisibility, which changes him from a mild yet arrogant scientist into a maniacal killer. The film bears much of Whale’s campy sense of humor, with Griffin’s comic shenanigans abound until things turn dark and he becomes uncontrollably violent. “We’ll begin with a reign of terror, a few murders here and there, Murders of great men, Murders of little men, just to show we make no distinction. I might even wreck a train or two… just these fingers around a signalman’s throat, that’s all.”

According to Gary Morris (Bright Lights Film Journal), ‘The film demands crypto-faggot reading in poignant scenes such as the one where he reassures his ex-girlfriend, who begs him to hide from the authorities: “the whole world’s my hiding place. I can stand out there amongst them in the day or night and laugh at them.”

Though Griffin’s (Claude Rains) character is unseen at times, there are potent moments when he is animated as he skips to the tune, “Here we go gathering nuts in May,” flitting around like a fairy.

It is suggested that The Invisible Man is a metaphor for the way homosexuals are seen/not seen by society – as “effeminate, dangerous when naked, seeking a male partner in “crime,” tending to idolize his fiance rather than love her, and becoming ‘visible’ only when shot by the police…monitored by doctors, and heard regretting his sin against God (i.e., made into a statistic by the three primary forces oppressing queers: the law, the medical establishment, and religious orthodoxy” (Sedgwick)

The Invisble Man [undressing] “They’ve asked for it, the country bumpkins. This will give them a bit of a shock, something to write home about. A nice bedtime story for the kids, too, if they want it”

Continue reading “Chapter 4 – Queers and Dykes in the Dark: Classic, Noir & Horror Cinema’s Coded Gay Characters:” →

Nature’s Fury Blogathon: Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds (1963) Melanie Daniels as Metaphor: Wanton With Wings-“What are you? I think you’re the cause of all this, I think you’re evil!”

nature27sfury_them

The clever & cheeky Barry of Cinematic Catharsis has summoned this great and powerful idea for a Summer Blogathon! Whether it’s the weather, or giant mutant bugs, blood hungry sharks, large animals run amok, or the elements gone awry–Nature’s Fury can be seen in so many fascinating and awe inspiring feature films and those lovable B movie trends that showcase the natural world in chaos. I immediately thought of Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds as it is a film that has stayed burned in my mind since I first saw it as a child. Certain scenes will never lose their power to terrify.

And in celebration of this event, I’ve actually written a song and made a film/music mash up to tribute Tippi Hedren in The Birds, with a montage from the film featuring my song Calling Palundra…

iconic scene the running

Hitch birds

“The Birds expresses nature and what it can do, and the dangers of nature. Because there’s no doubt that if the birds did decide, you know, with the millions that they are, to go for everybody’s eyes, then we’d have H.G.Wells Kingdom of the Blind on our hands.”-Alfred Hitchcock

tippi and crow promo shot

“Why are they doing this? They said when you got here, the whole thing started. Who are you? What are You? Where did you come from? I think you’re the cause of all this… I think you’re evil EVIL!” –Actress Doreen Lang playing the hysterical mother in the diner!

This tribute video features my special song written just for this blogathon…. Here’s Melanie Daniels & the birds– with my piano vocal accompaniment, ‘Calling Palundra’

The children’s song “Risseldy Rosseldy” heard at the school when the crows began to unite as a gang is the Americanization of an old Scottish folk song called “Wee Cooper O’Fife”

FullSizeRender
Image courtesy of: Jürgen Müller’s colorful Movies of the ’60s

On its face, The Birds can be taken literally as a cautionary tale about the natural world fighting back against the insensitivity & downright barbaric treatment of nature’s children and the environment at the hands of humankind. Is it a tale of simple, unmitigated revenge against the town for the killing of a pigeon? Or is there something more nefarious & psycho-sexual at work? Once you peel back the top layer of the visual narrative, there are multiple metaphors at work.

giphy

From Dark Romance: SEXUALITY IN THE HORROR FILM by David J. Hogan- “Hitchcock’s The Birds (1963) is probably the ultimate expression of this sort of nameless dread. It is a film that cheerfully defies description: it is horror, it is science fiction, it is black comedy, it is a scathing look at our mores and manners. It is a highly sexual film, but in a perversely negativistic way.”

Before the release of The Birds in 1963, Tippi Hedren made the cover of Look Magazine with the heading “Hitchcock’s new Grace Kelly.”

Tippi Hedren in Marnie 1964
Tippi Hedren in Marnie (1964). What Grace Kelly had in pristine beauty and sophistication, Hedren possesses an undertow of sensuality that pulls you into that gorgeous mystique.

As with Hitchcock’s other, worldly beautiful blonde subject — the strong-willed socialite Lisa Carol Fremont (Grace Kelly) in Rear Window (1954) The Birds features the stunning Tippi Hedren as the coy, confident, and a bit manipulative Melanie Daniels a San Fransisco socialite who descends upon Bodega Bay with a similar uncompromising will. Stiff, stolid, and cocky Lawyer Mitch Brenner (Rod Taylor) meets Melanie in a pet shop where the two share shallow, faintly romantic barbs and repartee. Mitch is shopping for a pair of love birds for his sister Cathy’s eleventh birthday and Mitch pretends in a condescending manner to mistake her for the clerk.  Melanie goes along with the mistaken identity as a way to flirt until his slightly mean-spirited joke backfires when she accidentally lets a canary loose while it lands in an ashtray Mitch throws his hat on it and places it back in its cage smugly saying “Back in your gilded cage Melanie Daniels.” revealing that he not only knew who she was from the very beginning and has quite a snotty preconceived notion about this socialite whom he appears to judge as running with a ‘wild’ crowd and is amoral. He manages to make a bit of a fool out of Melanie. The contrast between the flirty glib and calculating Melanie Daniels and the less interesting, judgemental, and arrogant Mitch Brenner kicks off a chemistry that really isn’t as vital to the story as what the two personalities represent.

CapturFiles_5
As Melanie is about to enter Davidson’s Pet Shop, she hears and sees a tremendous gathering of Seagulls in the sky. It is a foreboding moment of things to come…

Continue reading “Nature’s Fury Blogathon: Alfred Hitchcock’s The Birds (1963) Melanie Daniels as Metaphor: Wanton With Wings-“What are you? I think you’re the cause of all this, I think you’re evil!”” →

A Symphony of Dark Patches- The Val Lewton Legacy 1943

This post is a feature…As part of the CLASSIC MOVIE HISTORY PROJECT BLOGATHON hosted by the fantastic gang over at- Movies Silently, Silver Screenings & Once Upon a Screen– Visit these wonderful blogs during this historic event and fill your head with a collection of fascinating movie memories.

classic-movie-history-project-the-mummy-banner

tcm-promo-image-lewton-500

From Dreams of Darkness-Fantasy and the films of Val Lewton by J.P. Telotte:
“{The audience} will populate the darkness with more horrors than all the horror writers in Hollywood could think of… if you make the screen dark enough, the mind’s eye will read anything into it you want. We’re great ones for dark patches.” – Val Lewton

Swimming pool scene Cat People '42
Jane Randolph as Alice Moore in Val Lewton’s Cat People 1942 directed by Jacques Tourneur.
Bedlam
A scene from Bedlam (1946) directed by Mark Robson.

During the 1940s, Val Lewton and his ‘Lewton Unit’ used the essential vision of fantastic darkness to recreate a very unique style of horror/fantasy genre, one which challenged Hollywood’s notion of the tangible monsters Universal Studios had been manufacturing. Lewton, while working at RKO Studios, produced an exquisite, remarkable, and limited collection of films that came face to face with a ‘nightworld.’Lewton used our deepest, darkest psychological and innate fears that dwell within the lattice of shadows of our dreams and secret wish-fulfillment.

RKO_Radio_Pictures_logo

“Our formula is simple. A love story, three scenes of suggested horror and one of actual violence. Fade out” -Val Lewton

Lewton worked at MGM between 1926 and 1932 and then served eight years under David Selznick. He had published nine novels and a number of short stories. In addition, he produced regular radio show versions of MGM films. He also had ties in the industry as his aunt was the very influential silent actress Alla Nazimova.

Nazimova 3
The great stage and silent screen actress Alla Nazimova-Val Lewton’s very influential aunt…

But Lewton had left his mark with Selznick and in 1940 rival company RKO was interested in hiring him..It was actually Selznick who negotiated Lewton’s contract.

lewton+life

“My task is to initiate a programme of horror pictures to be made at the comparatively low cost of 125,000 each. Which should compete successfully with Universal horror films. Which cost anywhere from 300,000 to a million dollars. I feel I can do this quite easily, and the Universal people spend a lot of money on their horror product. But not much on brains or imagination.”-Val Lewton

Frankenstein-Meets-The-Wolf-Man-1943

Lewton assembled a close-knit group of collaborators who would shape the distinctive atmosphere of his RKO films. For Cat People, he brought in Mark Robson as editor, DeWitt Bodeen—an associate from his years with David O. Selznick—to write the screenplay, and Jacques Tourneur, an old friend and colleague from A Tale of Two Cities, to direct.

He chose Nicholas Musuraca as his director of photography and Roy Webb to compose the musical scores. They all worked on countless RKO films. It was Lewton’s intention to create quality pictures, though he was constrained by a low budget. Jacques Tourneur had said that Lewton was an idealist who had his head up in the clouds and would come up with impossible ideas. However, for Tourneur, his feet were planted firmly on the ground; yet somehow they complemented each other perfectly. Tourneur, master of the moody atmosphere, claims it was a very happy time in his life, and that Lewton’s gift to him was the filmic poetry that he was able to carry with him forever.

Jacques Tourneur is one of my favorite directors. With his masterful use of shadow and dreamlike vision of the world, he made one of classic horror’s greatest films, Curse of the Demon 1958, starring Dana Andrews and Peggy Cummins, as well as the film-noir masterpiece Out of the Past 1947. Robert Mitchum gives the film its weary, fatalistic heart, while Jane Greer is mesmerizing as Kathie Moffat, one of the ultimate femme fatales whose charm, intelligence, and danger make ruin feel irresistible!

out-of-the-past-2
Jacques Tourneur directs Robert Mitchum and Jane Greer in Out of the Past 1947.
Niall and Cat
Jacques Tourneur’s moody horror with Niall MacGinnis and cat Curse of the Demon 1957.
Lewton Unit
Part of the Lewton Unit- image from the documentary The Man in the Shadows, top left: Roy Webb, composer; Val Lewton; Nicholas Musuraca, cinematographer; Mark Robson, editing/directing; DeWitt Bodeen, writing; and Robert Wise, director.

“Horror is created in the mind of the spectator. It’s necessary to suggest things. In all my films you never saw what caused the horror. I saw people screaming in the theater when there was a young girl in a swimming pool, but you never saw the black leopard. The lights blaze up at the end. And there’s Simone Simon. Something has definitely happened. -Jacques Tourneur

Jacques-Tourneur
Jacques Tourneur looking over the film sketches.
jacques tourneur-on location for berlin express
Jacques Tourneur on location for Berlin Express 1948.

“Lewton gave us something quite different than what’s known as Hollywood craftsmanship you can say that he presented us with a parallel world in which everything feels both real and a little unreal-familiar but strange. The characters and the viewer slip into a mysterious, troubling gray zone. Where real life and dream life come face to face. And where beauty and destruction merge. Lewton and Tourneur really created a new kind of cinematic beauty”-from The Man in the Shadows Val Lewton documentary

The Golden Boy in Bedlam
the golden boy from Bedlam

Learning from his last employer, Selznick, he made sure to supervise absolutely every aspect of the film’s production, from casting, set design, costumes, direction, and editing. He even rewrote every script himself without taking credit or under a pseudonym. In this way, he developed his own visual style of storytelling, having prepared each detail before shooting.

“My feelings are generated, however by more than my gratitude for that first opportunity. They come from the warm and highly stimulating creative experience I had working with Val. He taught me so much about directing and filmmaking in general…Val Lewton was one of that fairly rare species, a truly creative producer. As such, he was able to achieve an outstanding reputation for the high quality, unusual and interesting “B” pictures he produced at RKO Studios starting in the early 1940s” Robert Wise, March 1994

Robert Wise behind the camera
Robert Wise behind the camera
Wise, Robson & Lewton
Robert Wise, Mark Robson & Val Lewton

“I remember him staying up until all hours of the night working on screenplays. He enjoyed having his hand in the writing. I used to that that he went out of his way to pick inept writers so that he’d have to redo their work. He used to write on a Royal typewriter;he used only two fingers but he was very fast. He’d talk out the different parts as he wrote them and, since my bed was just on the other side of the wall, I’d fall asleep listening.”–Nina Lewton Druckman from the Reality of Terror by Joel Siegel

Robert Wise was part of the Lewton Unit, one of my favorite directors, who would go on to direct some of the most outstanding films in a variety of genres, from musicals like West Side Story 1961 and The Sound of Music 1965, to Lewton’s Curse of the Cat People 1944 and The Body Snatcher 1945, noir masterpieces, Born to Kill 1947, The Set Up 1949 and The House of Telegraph Hill 1950, I Want to Live! 1958, his last being Odds Against Tomorrow 1959, to sci-fi and Gothic ghost story masterpieces Day the Earth Stood Still 1951, The Haunting 1963, and The Andromeda Strain 1971.

Day The Earth Stood Still
Michael Rennie and Gort in Robert Wise’s Sci-Fi masterpiece The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)
The Set Up
Robert Wise’s boxing noir The Set-Up 1949

Lewton drove himself very hard, trying to achieve something beautiful and of high quality. He and his team were given a very small budget, a cast of veritable unknowns, and evocative titles that were sensationalist and lurid in nature and did not truly represent an accurate account of the narrative. There were no gruesome fiends nor even evidence of malevolent forces at work in his ordinary everyday environments. Yet RKO’s studio head Charles Koerner dictated such titles as Cat People 1942, Curse of the Cat People 1944, Bedlam 1946, Isle of the Dead 1946, The Body Snatcher 1945, I Walked With A Zombie, The Ghost Ship, The Leopard Man 1943 and The Seventh Victim 1943.

“If you want to get out now, Lewton told Bodeen, I won’t hold it against you.”

Continue reading “A Symphony of Dark Patches- The Val Lewton Legacy 1943” →

Val Lewton’s Curse of The Cat People (1944) “God should use a Rose Amber Spot!” Seeing the darkness thru the ‘Fearing Child’ and ‘The Monstrous Feminine’ Part II

Begin ‘The Bagheeta’: Val Lewton’s fantasy/ reality world of Curse of The Cat People: fearing the female/feline monster and the engendering child. Part I

This post continues from Part 1 at the link above!

And now, Part II

FANTASY as REALITY, REALITY as FANTASY – From page 112, Chapter 7, J.P Telotte Dreams of Darkness

The Curse of the Cat People (1944)

The child per se makes us uneasy, ambivalent ; we are anxious about the human propensities concentrated by the child symbol. It evokes too much of what has been left out or is unknown, becoming easily associated with the primitive, mad and mystical. – James Hillman ” Abandoning the Child” in Loose Ends.

The evil little girl in Master of the Macabre Mario Bava’s Kill Baby Kill (1966).
The embodiment of evil in a little blonde girl from Federico Fellini’s segment Toby Dammit of 1968’s Spirits of The Dead.
In stark contrast to those two iconic evil imps of horror (above), Amy Reed is not supposed evil incarnate, but she does threaten the equilibrium of the ‘normal’ world her father inhabits.

To continue with this blog post about one of Lewton’s very precious stories, less dark than his others, and dealing with childhood, the fears of, and by, children.

All of Lewton’s works dealt with subject matters that forced us to push the boundaries of ‘the familiar.’ They challenged us to face a darker, more mysterious reality of the natural world and the incomprehensible landscape of the human psyche.

Curse of the Cat People (1944) acts as a cinematic continuum to Lewton’s Cat People 1942, featuring Simone Simon once again as the alluring and sensual Irena Dubrovna Reed, who may or may not have belonged to a race of beings that could shapeshift into the physical form of a large cat or black panther when sexually aroused.

The symbol of Irena synthesized the fear of women’s sexuality, sexual freedom, the women’s body, and often the correlation that is made with women’s emotional existence and madness. What is engendered in Cat People (1942) is far less about a woman who can morph into a predatory feline and more about the collective fear of ‘The Monstrous Feminine.’

Amy lashes out at the little boy who has crushed her beautiful friend, the butterfly. Fear the woman/child.

While Amy is not Irena’s biological daughter, Amy is truly more of a progeny to Irena and the mystique she embodies because they are both alienated figures who are frustrated and misunderstood. Who stand outside the social community which is pumped from the veins of ‘rational’, normative thoughts and behaviors. Amy is the figure of ‘The Fearing Child,’ an innocent who not only has ‘power’ but can wreak havoc in our ‘normal’ world.

Both characters are imaginative and rely on their senses. They are more connected to the natural world, to the darkness, which is associated with feminine energy, and less intellectual, which is considered a masculine marker. They are considered emotional, irrational, and dangerously unpredictable. The character of Oliver Reed is just as frightened and, moreover, threatened by his six-year-old little girl as he was of his beautiful and tragic wife Irena, who was more a victim than ever, the ‘monster’ she was perceived to be.

In Cat People, Curse of the Cat People, I Walked With A Zombie, The Leopard Man, The 7th Victim, and Isle of the Dead, there aren’t concrete Monsters as in Universal films, as in Frankenstein’s creation, Dracula, or The Wolf Man.

Universal’s Bride of Frankenstein 1935 Literal monsters in a corporeal world.

RKO studio heads had a mistrust of Lewton’s creative vision, his unconventional approach to some esoteric subject matter, or volatile subjects such as a woman’s sexual desires. Lewton, rather than using literal lumbering, fanged, or hairy monsters, used the powers of suggestion and shadow to tell the story.

Irena emerged from Lewton’s shadow world in Cat People 1942.
Little Amy is lost within the emerging shadows of the old dark house in Lewton’s Curse of The Cat People 1944.
Barbara Ferran is always placed by a door like a bystander; she is bombarded by Lewton’s shadows.

Lewton disliked mask-like faces that were hardly human, the kinds of images that were expected from the horror genre he was infiltrating. Lewton liked to reveal the monsters that were lurking in the subconscious, primitive recesses of our own imaginations. Shadows become the monster in these films; they are the mysterious layer that surfaces in a world that only makes sense in the light of day. And Amy draws the shadows to her…

They do not have scary faces; they are quite human and, in fact, ordinary. He takes the ‘familiar’ and inverts it, subverts it, rattles the soundness of an accepted experience, and turns it into either an illusion, a nightmare, or a fit of paranoia. He taps into our childhood fears and sets those fears on the frightened characters in his shadow plays. Usually, the thing they fear is uprooting their own personal desires and the fear of coming face-to-face with them.

The tragic and tormented Irena in Cat People 1942.

Oliver couldn’t handle Irena’s sexual desires, nor her desirability; it triggered too much of his own primal urges, and so he demonized her, a fragile girl in a foreign country who believed in folklore from her very ancient set of beliefs handed down for centuries.

Oliver Reed has a fear of foreign Objects!-Cat People 1942.

A story that was quite often itself ambiguous as to whether the threat was real or imagined. RKO wanted to be in competition with Universal, so they added footage of a menacing Panther, which was inserted into several scenes of Cat People.

Continue reading “Val Lewton’s Curse of The Cat People (1944) “God should use a Rose Amber Spot!” Seeing the darkness thru the ‘Fearing Child’ and ‘The Monstrous Feminine’ Part II” →