Freaks (1932)

“One of us! One of us!” Who could forget that infamous scene that is spoofed to this very day (latest was in Kevin Smith’s "Clerks" cartoon). Sensitive and powerful, this film is more drama than horror (however, I won’t tell Nate that or I’ll be reviewing "The New Munsters" until I become one of the undead.) The underlying horror quality is present, but this film is much more than just another cult flick.

This is suppose to be the story of the sideshow. Real life “freaks” star in this movie (such as a man who has no arms or legs, midgets, half men/half women, etc.). At first it seems as though this movie is just a showcase for random freakish individuals. However, eventually (around 20 minutes into the movie), a plotline develops. It seems as though the head midget is smitten with one of the beautiful “non-freak” circus ladies (much to his “vertically-challenged” girlfriend’s chagrin). However, it turns out that the non-freak beauty is only after the midget for his money, and an interesting question develops. What makes a monster, the way a person looks on the outside or how they are on the inside?

Very controversial and seemingly insensitive to moviegoers in the early 30’s, this movie spent more time being banned than being played (it was banned in Britain for 30 years and it is still banned in some countries). Even with a lengthy disclaimer in the beginning that seems longer than the first draft of the Bible, many viewers back then weren’t ready to accept this very candid tale of the sideshow. Now hailed as the undisputed masterpiece of the macabre, Freaks was able to overcome this resistance and stands proudly on video shelves today. And, it still doesn’t fail to shock viewers.

I had the pleasure of seeing this movie on the big screen for my very first viewing (it was a special Halloween showing at a hole-in-the-wall joint back in Buffalo, NY). The first thing that caught my attention (besides the random freaks, obviously) was the beautiful cinematography. Freaks is shot as though it was Citizen Kane, which greatly adds to its appeal among horror movie fans. The second aspect that attracted me was its “lay it out on a slab” attitude. It is easy to see how racy this flick was back then (and in some ways, continues to be) and you'd be hard pressed not to applaud at the end toward director Tod Browning's monstrous set of balls. Finally, the story, though many times barely there, never fails to amuse. Even when the story moves a little slowly, you never lose interest. It’s kind of hard to lose interest when every two seconds you see another “freak” with a different mass deformity gracing the screen. Yes, I know that I’m a sick, sick individual. But, hell, at least I’m easily amused.

This is a must see for just about everyone. In fact, I haven’t met a viewer of this movie who didn’t enjoy it. In fact, if you are at this site, you should have seen it already. If you haven’t, rent it immediately and don’t you dare come back here until you see it. Sorry to be so harsh, but seeing it is the only way you can truly be “one of us” classic horror gurus.