By Doug Gibson
“Murders in the Zoo” is a largely forgotten fairly large-budget
Paramount film from 1933. It merits far more attention. Like its Paramount
predecessor, the better-known “Island of Lost Souls," it has scenes of sadism
and pain that are unique for its era. Film critic Leonard Maltin has called the
film “astonishingly grisly.” In any event, it’s a great tale and well worth
owning.
The opening scene is a shocker. A man, Taylor, is being
calmly tortured by Lionel Atwill’s character, who comments that he’ll never
kiss another man’s wife again. Taylor is left in the jungle, presumably to die
due to the elements or wild animals. Hands tied behind his back, he staggers
forward. As he turns his face, the camera reveals that his lips have been sewn
shut! And his pain-filled, terrified expression adds horror and discomfort to the scene.
The film involves a sadistic, psychopathic millionaire
sportsman named Eric Gorman, played very well by Atwill, who murders men who
display a romantic interest in his wife, Evelyn, played by Kathleen Burke (the
panther woman in “… Lost Souls.” The
murdered man, we learn, had kissed – in jest – Evelyn. Gorman announces that he
has disappeared, dryly telling his wife that he "didn't say" why he left.
Gorman returns from the Indo-China region with many wild
animals that are put in a financially struggling zoo. The principals there
include Professor Evans (Harry Beresford), his pretty daughter Jerry Evans
(Gail Patrick), and her romantic interest, Dr. Jack Woodford (played by future cowboy
films star Randolph Scott). Meanwhile, Evelyn, despite her brutish husband, is
engaged in an adulterous affair with playboy John Lodge, played by Roger
Hewitt. Also thrown into the plot for comic relief is alcoholic public
relations man Peter Yates, played by Charlie Ruggles, a popular comedy player of
that era. In fact, Ruggles is top-billed!
More murders occur prior to the climax. It’s interesting to
see films other than “… Lost Souls” that feature the iconic, beautiful Burke, and
she’s not a sympathetic character. Nevertheless, the audience cares about her
fate because her husband is a world-class movie villain. Atwill’s pursuit of
Burke’s Evelyn from their home to the zoo, where he throws her, alive, over a
bridge with alligators below is chilling.
By far the most interesting character is Atwill. He is
absolutely superb portraying a combination of intimidation, strength and
cruelty. Picture a combination of Leslie Bank’s Zaroff in “The Most Dangerous
Game” and Lee J. Cobb’s Johnny Friendly in “On the Waterfront.” A merciless
character, he sees his wife as his possession. Atwill’s Gorman is also cunning,
able to change his personalities and facial expressions on a whim to to his
advantages and desires. The scene where he demands sex from his unwilling,
repulsed wife is macabre. He taunts her with brutal, pre-murder sexual humiliation much the way Fredric March's Mr. Hyde did to streetwalker Ivy, played by Miriam Hopkins in "Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Hyde," another shocking pre-code horror.
In one of most erotic pre-code scenes ever, Hopkins' Ivy comes close to seducing the Dr. Jekyll side of March's character, which eventually unleashes the sadistic Hyde.
In one of most erotic pre-code scenes ever, Hopkins' Ivy comes close to seducing the Dr. Jekyll side of March's character, which eventually unleashes the sadistic Hyde.
Atwill’s performance is worthy of Lon Chaney’s best
silent offerings and it would have been interesting to have seen Chaney in the
role. Scott is semi-bland as the ultimate hero who gets the girl but it’s fun
to see him in a non-cowboy role.
Obviously, once the code was enforced, for decades viewers missed the opening lips sown shut scene. Since it serves as sort of a prologue, it could easily be cut. Another scene, less shocking but perhaps reminiscent of the morals codes of the early 1930s, that was cut for decades was a tipsy Ruggles, waking up after fainting from seeing a snake, asking if anyone knew where a laundry was.
Do you get it? It's a kind of funny, but what's even funnier is that it once offended censors.
"Murders in the Zoo" made money for Paramount but not a lot. The grisly opening scene may have scared off repeat viewings, and a publicity stunt by the studio of using real animals in a scene backfired, as the animals went out of control, with deadly fights and one panther escaping for a while.
Obviously, once the code was enforced, for decades viewers missed the opening lips sown shut scene. Since it serves as sort of a prologue, it could easily be cut. Another scene, less shocking but perhaps reminiscent of the morals codes of the early 1930s, that was cut for decades was a tipsy Ruggles, waking up after fainting from seeing a snake, asking if anyone knew where a laundry was.
Do you get it? It's a kind of funny, but what's even funnier is that it once offended censors.
"Murders in the Zoo" made money for Paramount but not a lot. The grisly opening scene may have scared off repeat viewings, and a publicity stunt by the studio of using real animals in a scene backfired, as the animals went out of control, with deadly fights and one panther escaping for a while.
No comments:
Post a Comment