136 opiniones
This controversial adaptation of H.G. Wells' short novel, was outlawed in many nations around the globe due to the unpalatable ethical and religious issues it raised. The film was produced before the infamous Hays Code was set up and thus was able to introduce radical scenes of horror and deviant sexuality that would become taboo until the liberalisation of movies in the early 1970's.
Universal were raking in the money and even some critical accolades with their literary monsters series in the 1930's - Dracula, FRANKENSTEIN, THE INVISIBLE MAN - so Paramount threw in the gauntlet and produced the huge box-office hit DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE. Buoyed by this massive hit they financed another horror novel and chose THE ISLAND OF DR MOREAU (the title was later changed to ISLAND OF LOST SOULS) and Charles Laughton, at the time he was still a relatively new stage actor from England who had previously appeared in THE OLD DARK HOUSE, was cast in the title role. However, the film proved to be a box-office failure and the press mauled it whilst the religious right voiced their anger at the idea that Man could create Man by splicing flesh of various living animals. The possibility of taming animals by grafting humanity into their flesh and the suggestion of bestiality were repugnant to the Church and the film was eventually pulled from release and largely forgotten.
The story, about a scientist playing God on an uncharted South Seas Island, was shocking even on the written page but the filmmakers took it one step further and produced a shocker that even H.G. Wells denounced upon seeing the finished film. Charles Laughton, a close friend of H.G. Wells', was an animal lover who was so traumatised by the scenes of vivisection and barbarism that he would never again visit a zoo for the remainder of his life because it made him ill.
The passing of time has not dulled the power of the film and the very effective make-up designs remain as fresh and exciting as when they first appeared in 1933. There is no dating here and the film speaks to us across the great divide of decades. For those who have seen the European serial-killer film FUNNY GAMES (1997) they will not forget how the murders took place off-screen and the viewer was only privy to the unbearably horrific sounds of pain. Well, ISLAND OF LOST SOULS employed this technique very effectively back in early 1933. The power of suggestion is more profoundly disturbing than a full visual revelation of the violence.
The film moves at a cracking pace and every second of the 71 minutes running time is well utilized, the production values are high and the sets look fabulous, the performances are very good, especially Laughton who resembles a seductive and effeminate Mephistopheles whilst Bela Lugosi, as the Sayer of the Law, is totally convincing in his role as the island elder. His makeup resembles the Wolf-Man and it is impossible to recognise him except through that rich and extravagant voice of his. Lota the Panther Woman, played by the winner of a Paramount publicity audition contest (where over 60,000 hopefuls were tested), is played by Kathleen Burke. Every time she appears the screen sizzles with creamy eroticism. Her body moves like an athletic cat and yet she is very innocent and tender. The moment she uncurls her fingers and reveals her clawed fingers in the moonlight will shrivel the most aroused male member of the audience. The script, although it does deviate from the novel in places, is literate and intelligent. There is a great deal of subtext on display - Laughton dressed in his immaculate white hat and suit and wielding a bull-whip over the animal-natives is a great metaphor for slavery and the invasion of Paradise.
Now, as far as I am aware, this film is currently not available either on VHS or DVD for some strange reason. I was very fortunate in tracking down an extremely rare double-bill Laser-Disc which contained the Universal production of MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE on the first platter. This is an interesting combination because we have two separate production houses releasing a double-bill, in this case Paramount and Universal.
The transfer of ISLAND OF LOST SOULS is a bit soft and there is print damage in places. However, this very aspect gives the film an edge of authenticity and makes it even more riveting. The print looks like newsreel footage of a real event and this gives the drama added realism. The sound is crisp but does occasionally warble in places. Again, it lends the visual horror a documentary eeriness. The packaging is lovely, a gate-fold sleeve opens up to reveal production photos and a detailed commentary on both films. The disc also features a trailer which contains an alternate angle of a shot in the film but this one is decidedly raunchier!
This timeless movie has been neglected for far too long and the time has arrived for it to be remastered for a DVD presentation. Forget the Burt Lancaster and Michael York version from 1977 and the misbegotten 1996 release starring Val Kilmer and Marlon Brando. The 1933 film beats them hands down and is right up there with FREAKS (1932) in terms of naked human horror.
Highly Recommended.
Universal were raking in the money and even some critical accolades with their literary monsters series in the 1930's - Dracula, FRANKENSTEIN, THE INVISIBLE MAN - so Paramount threw in the gauntlet and produced the huge box-office hit DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE. Buoyed by this massive hit they financed another horror novel and chose THE ISLAND OF DR MOREAU (the title was later changed to ISLAND OF LOST SOULS) and Charles Laughton, at the time he was still a relatively new stage actor from England who had previously appeared in THE OLD DARK HOUSE, was cast in the title role. However, the film proved to be a box-office failure and the press mauled it whilst the religious right voiced their anger at the idea that Man could create Man by splicing flesh of various living animals. The possibility of taming animals by grafting humanity into their flesh and the suggestion of bestiality were repugnant to the Church and the film was eventually pulled from release and largely forgotten.
The story, about a scientist playing God on an uncharted South Seas Island, was shocking even on the written page but the filmmakers took it one step further and produced a shocker that even H.G. Wells denounced upon seeing the finished film. Charles Laughton, a close friend of H.G. Wells', was an animal lover who was so traumatised by the scenes of vivisection and barbarism that he would never again visit a zoo for the remainder of his life because it made him ill.
The passing of time has not dulled the power of the film and the very effective make-up designs remain as fresh and exciting as when they first appeared in 1933. There is no dating here and the film speaks to us across the great divide of decades. For those who have seen the European serial-killer film FUNNY GAMES (1997) they will not forget how the murders took place off-screen and the viewer was only privy to the unbearably horrific sounds of pain. Well, ISLAND OF LOST SOULS employed this technique very effectively back in early 1933. The power of suggestion is more profoundly disturbing than a full visual revelation of the violence.
The film moves at a cracking pace and every second of the 71 minutes running time is well utilized, the production values are high and the sets look fabulous, the performances are very good, especially Laughton who resembles a seductive and effeminate Mephistopheles whilst Bela Lugosi, as the Sayer of the Law, is totally convincing in his role as the island elder. His makeup resembles the Wolf-Man and it is impossible to recognise him except through that rich and extravagant voice of his. Lota the Panther Woman, played by the winner of a Paramount publicity audition contest (where over 60,000 hopefuls were tested), is played by Kathleen Burke. Every time she appears the screen sizzles with creamy eroticism. Her body moves like an athletic cat and yet she is very innocent and tender. The moment she uncurls her fingers and reveals her clawed fingers in the moonlight will shrivel the most aroused male member of the audience. The script, although it does deviate from the novel in places, is literate and intelligent. There is a great deal of subtext on display - Laughton dressed in his immaculate white hat and suit and wielding a bull-whip over the animal-natives is a great metaphor for slavery and the invasion of Paradise.
Now, as far as I am aware, this film is currently not available either on VHS or DVD for some strange reason. I was very fortunate in tracking down an extremely rare double-bill Laser-Disc which contained the Universal production of MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE on the first platter. This is an interesting combination because we have two separate production houses releasing a double-bill, in this case Paramount and Universal.
The transfer of ISLAND OF LOST SOULS is a bit soft and there is print damage in places. However, this very aspect gives the film an edge of authenticity and makes it even more riveting. The print looks like newsreel footage of a real event and this gives the drama added realism. The sound is crisp but does occasionally warble in places. Again, it lends the visual horror a documentary eeriness. The packaging is lovely, a gate-fold sleeve opens up to reveal production photos and a detailed commentary on both films. The disc also features a trailer which contains an alternate angle of a shot in the film but this one is decidedly raunchier!
This timeless movie has been neglected for far too long and the time has arrived for it to be remastered for a DVD presentation. Forget the Burt Lancaster and Michael York version from 1977 and the misbegotten 1996 release starring Val Kilmer and Marlon Brando. The 1933 film beats them hands down and is right up there with FREAKS (1932) in terms of naked human horror.
Highly Recommended.
- se7en45
- 17 sep 2005
- Enlace permanente
- netwallah
- 12 may 2006
- Enlace permanente
It's a good story, based on one of Wells' best science fiction novels, but ISLAND OF LOST SOULS never has gotten the kudos that it's fellow science fiction and horror tales of the early 1930s got. For all it's flaws, Dracula (Bela Lugosi's version) remains a classic, and the Spanish/Mexican/American version has gotten an increased audience in the last thirty years. FRANKENSTEIN, restoring the cuts, is still powerful, and the sequels (THE BRIDE and THE SON) are also popular. THE INVISIBLE MAN, for all it's dated special effects, still packs a wallop, as does KING KONG. THE MUMMY, THE BLACK CAT - they have not lost their powers to hold interest. Neither has ISLAND OF LOST SOULS, but it seems to get more of a lambasting by critics than the others. Why? My guess is that the very strength of the film is what turns off the critics: Charles Laughton's performance as Dr. Moreau. I happen to find it a fascinating performance of a talented scientist who is driven to madness by his success in a situation where he cannot really reveal it. For Moreau's ability by physical operations (I almost said by grafting) on animals has led to his being ostracized and forced into exile by his peers in Europe, and he is stuck on this island ruling a kingdom of his half-human/half animal followers. His only companion is Montgomery, who turns on him in the movie and Parker and Ms Thomas are just two people who bungle onto the island by accident (as does the ill-fated sea captain). But in the novel, while there is no love interest like Ms Thomas, the state of the human companionship is not so good either.
Parker's literary version - Charles Predinck - is a shipwreck survivor too, who is horrified by Moreau's experiments (and almost made part of them). Montgomery is more willing to work with Moreau, but Montgomery is not a very admirable type - he's an alcoholic (which is how he ended up with Moreau), and his lack of common sense leads to his demise.
The novel was trying to make a statement about ego-maniacal dictators and their falls from power, which is clearly delineated in the film version. But the end of Moreau is not at the end of the novel. He is killed off by rebellious "subjects" earlier, and Montgomery, thinking they won't harm him, proceeds to drink too much and sets himself up for his own gruesome end. Predinck just manages to kill the most dangerous of the animals, and escapes at the end (as Parker and Ms Thomas do in the film with Montgomery).
Laughton was one of Hollywood's greatest actors. I can't think of that many character actors who had such a wide variety of successful performances. But Moreau, although in his setting he seems natural, is an over-the-top Laughton performance. I believe that is why the critics are so harsh on him. The threatening shouts about "the law" and "the house of pain" are repeated and repeated like the mantras they are. But the critics who hear this think of the Laughton who, a year earlier, had overacted as a mad and jealous submarine commander in THE DEVIL AND THE DEEP with Gary Cooper, Tallulah Bankhead, and a youngish Cary Grant. There are similarities, but that film had a pretty weak script (unlike THE ISLAND OF LOST SOULS). These critics tend to think of those films made by Laughton before his Oscar winner in THE PRIVATE LIFE OF HENRY VIII as overripe, and tedious - not the expert work of his later career. They fail to notice that he was learning his craft in movies, in these years, and his ranting in parts like Moreau or the submarine commander were necessary to learning the restraint that paints Henry VIII and Captain Bligh and Quasimodo. I find one might not think of the film as highly as the other contemporary films I mentioned earlier, but it is a worthy film nevertheless, and important in Laughton's growth as an actor.
Parker's literary version - Charles Predinck - is a shipwreck survivor too, who is horrified by Moreau's experiments (and almost made part of them). Montgomery is more willing to work with Moreau, but Montgomery is not a very admirable type - he's an alcoholic (which is how he ended up with Moreau), and his lack of common sense leads to his demise.
The novel was trying to make a statement about ego-maniacal dictators and their falls from power, which is clearly delineated in the film version. But the end of Moreau is not at the end of the novel. He is killed off by rebellious "subjects" earlier, and Montgomery, thinking they won't harm him, proceeds to drink too much and sets himself up for his own gruesome end. Predinck just manages to kill the most dangerous of the animals, and escapes at the end (as Parker and Ms Thomas do in the film with Montgomery).
Laughton was one of Hollywood's greatest actors. I can't think of that many character actors who had such a wide variety of successful performances. But Moreau, although in his setting he seems natural, is an over-the-top Laughton performance. I believe that is why the critics are so harsh on him. The threatening shouts about "the law" and "the house of pain" are repeated and repeated like the mantras they are. But the critics who hear this think of the Laughton who, a year earlier, had overacted as a mad and jealous submarine commander in THE DEVIL AND THE DEEP with Gary Cooper, Tallulah Bankhead, and a youngish Cary Grant. There are similarities, but that film had a pretty weak script (unlike THE ISLAND OF LOST SOULS). These critics tend to think of those films made by Laughton before his Oscar winner in THE PRIVATE LIFE OF HENRY VIII as overripe, and tedious - not the expert work of his later career. They fail to notice that he was learning his craft in movies, in these years, and his ranting in parts like Moreau or the submarine commander were necessary to learning the restraint that paints Henry VIII and Captain Bligh and Quasimodo. I find one might not think of the film as highly as the other contemporary films I mentioned earlier, but it is a worthy film nevertheless, and important in Laughton's growth as an actor.
- theowinthrop
- 18 sep 2005
- Enlace permanente
Universal dominated the horror market of the 1930s, but every once in a while the other studios would produce a classic of their own. `Island of Lost Souls,' produced by Paramount, is one such film. It's tight, fast, and haunting.
The most striking thing about `Island' is its claustrophobic, nightmarish atmosphere. Some people criticize the hero, Edward Parker (Richard Arlen), as bland and colorless, but I think this works in the film's favor. Since he has no personality of his own, he can be more of an Everyman; he also has no strength to draw upon and is therefore powerless against the horrors around him. He sees the perverse monstrosities Moreau has created on his island, finds himself attracted to and then repulsed by the cat-woman Lota, and then struggles to free himself from Moreau's manipulative control. It's like those nightmares where you try to run away from something terrible but your feet won't move.
Charles Laughton steals the show as Dr. Moreau; his disarming, cherubic exterior somehow enhances his aura of menace. He may not look as blatantly evil as Bela Lugosi, but after a few minutes you just know there's something terribly wrong with this man. The irony is, the creatures Moreau creates are far more humane than he is. The creatures themselves live in a tight society, bound by the laws Moreau has given them; instead of dwelling on their physical awfulness, the film imparts them with a curious dignity and innocence. When the inevitable rebellion comes, I found myself cheering the creatures on, much like I felt my heart go out to the Frankenstein Monster or King Kong.
`Island' is one of those movies you need to watch on a humid summer night, when your clothes cling to your skin and every breath feels like it's coming through a wet towel. Feel the suspense and the terror seep into you, and then try to tell me the old horror movies weren't infinitely better than what passes for horror nowadays.
The most striking thing about `Island' is its claustrophobic, nightmarish atmosphere. Some people criticize the hero, Edward Parker (Richard Arlen), as bland and colorless, but I think this works in the film's favor. Since he has no personality of his own, he can be more of an Everyman; he also has no strength to draw upon and is therefore powerless against the horrors around him. He sees the perverse monstrosities Moreau has created on his island, finds himself attracted to and then repulsed by the cat-woman Lota, and then struggles to free himself from Moreau's manipulative control. It's like those nightmares where you try to run away from something terrible but your feet won't move.
Charles Laughton steals the show as Dr. Moreau; his disarming, cherubic exterior somehow enhances his aura of menace. He may not look as blatantly evil as Bela Lugosi, but after a few minutes you just know there's something terribly wrong with this man. The irony is, the creatures Moreau creates are far more humane than he is. The creatures themselves live in a tight society, bound by the laws Moreau has given them; instead of dwelling on their physical awfulness, the film imparts them with a curious dignity and innocence. When the inevitable rebellion comes, I found myself cheering the creatures on, much like I felt my heart go out to the Frankenstein Monster or King Kong.
`Island' is one of those movies you need to watch on a humid summer night, when your clothes cling to your skin and every breath feels like it's coming through a wet towel. Feel the suspense and the terror seep into you, and then try to tell me the old horror movies weren't infinitely better than what passes for horror nowadays.
- Shield-3
- 21 abr 2001
- Enlace permanente
This chilling adaptation of the H.G.Well's novella, "The Island of Dr Moreau" remains unsurpassed, despite two later wretched attempts to improve upon it. Banned in England upon release! An exotic, but sinister atmosphere pervading Moreau's privately-owned island is enhanced by filming in Black & White, whose shadowy contrasts imbue the setting which a dark, suspenseful tone. Moreau amorally attempts to "play God" by creating "manimals" - hybrid humans and animals - via surgical vivasection and blood transfusion in his laboratory, The House of Pain. Charles Laughton has never been more campily devilish as when playing Moreau - an exquisite performance by a great actor.
Bela Lugosi plays a small, but effective part as "The Sayer of the Law": "Are we not men?" Kathleen Burke as the beautiful, erotic "Panther Woman" who develops an ill-fated romance with the protagonist, Edward Parker (played by Richard Arlen). Crisp direction by Erle Kenton, with nice make-up effects by Wally Westmore. The cutaway from the grisly ending when Moreau is about to be subjected to "surgery of the most fatal kind" in The House of Pain is most appreciated and is what I consider to be an exercise in directorial restraint and finesse. My imagination more than filled in the horrific details. Kudos to Mr. Kenton!
Bela Lugosi plays a small, but effective part as "The Sayer of the Law": "Are we not men?" Kathleen Burke as the beautiful, erotic "Panther Woman" who develops an ill-fated romance with the protagonist, Edward Parker (played by Richard Arlen). Crisp direction by Erle Kenton, with nice make-up effects by Wally Westmore. The cutaway from the grisly ending when Moreau is about to be subjected to "surgery of the most fatal kind" in The House of Pain is most appreciated and is what I consider to be an exercise in directorial restraint and finesse. My imagination more than filled in the horrific details. Kudos to Mr. Kenton!
- Whizzer-2
- 28 sep 1999
- Enlace permanente
I have noticed some commenters found the movie boring or slow. You have to remember that it was made in 1933! The pacing and suspense probably felt very quick to an audience that had never seen TV, and whose primary source of entertainment was radio (for drama, suspense, horror and comedy).
The aspect I find most interesting about this definite classic of the horror genre -- aside from the excellent acting, atmosphere, script (the only adaptation of "Island of Dr. Moreau" that is faithful and the only one that's good) and makeup -- is the way it chronicles the development of film, from silent movies to talkies. Perhaps the reason some viewers find it boring is that one thing the film lacks is any musical soundtrack. I noticed this quite strikingly in some of the long pans that take place, and also in the chase scenes. I may be wrong, but I think this is a holdover from silent movies, when the music was supplied by a live musician playing piano in the movie theater. Certainly some of the emotional reaction shots, and in particular the shots of the group of half-men approaching the camera near the end, which are repeated several times, have the feel of silent movie technique. In fact, the overall feeling I get when watching this movie is that of a silent movie, with talking added in. This movie just seems to me to have been made exactly on the cusp of a time when filmmakers were adjusting their techniques to the use of sound, but hadn't fully arrived there yet.
Of course the movie is also excellent as pure entertainment. Charles Laughton was the perfect Dr. Moreau, and all the other players were well done too. And we all remember the quotes of the Sayer of the Law. I remember another one, though, by the Captain that brings the girl to the island. "No long pig?" he asks, grinning. We are chilled to learn that long pig refers to consumption of human flesh. And the final line, "Don't look back." Overall, this is a frightening look at the way science can be perverted by people with no conscience.
The aspect I find most interesting about this definite classic of the horror genre -- aside from the excellent acting, atmosphere, script (the only adaptation of "Island of Dr. Moreau" that is faithful and the only one that's good) and makeup -- is the way it chronicles the development of film, from silent movies to talkies. Perhaps the reason some viewers find it boring is that one thing the film lacks is any musical soundtrack. I noticed this quite strikingly in some of the long pans that take place, and also in the chase scenes. I may be wrong, but I think this is a holdover from silent movies, when the music was supplied by a live musician playing piano in the movie theater. Certainly some of the emotional reaction shots, and in particular the shots of the group of half-men approaching the camera near the end, which are repeated several times, have the feel of silent movie technique. In fact, the overall feeling I get when watching this movie is that of a silent movie, with talking added in. This movie just seems to me to have been made exactly on the cusp of a time when filmmakers were adjusting their techniques to the use of sound, but hadn't fully arrived there yet.
Of course the movie is also excellent as pure entertainment. Charles Laughton was the perfect Dr. Moreau, and all the other players were well done too. And we all remember the quotes of the Sayer of the Law. I remember another one, though, by the Captain that brings the girl to the island. "No long pig?" he asks, grinning. We are chilled to learn that long pig refers to consumption of human flesh. And the final line, "Don't look back." Overall, this is a frightening look at the way science can be perverted by people with no conscience.
- padawandoug
- 12 feb 2003
- Enlace permanente
Welcome to the House of Pain..... Are We Not Men?
Considering that this somewhat freaky Fantasy/Mad Scientist picture is now 82 years old, I'd say that it actually holds up quite well as far as entertainment goes, especially when you take into account all of films in this genre that have followed it in these many years since its 1932 release.
Set on a small, uncharted island in the South Pacific, Island Of Lost Souls' story is quite effective horror that tells the tale of one man playing god (the sadistic & sinister, Dr. Moreau) who blindly tampers with the reconstruction of evolution within the animal kingdom.
Based on H.G. Wells' novel of the same name, Island Of Lost Souls is, indeed, an atmospheric tale that contains some strange moments of odd-looking creatures seen lurking within the the shadows & darkness.
With its short running time of only 70 minutes, this picture features some truly impressive make-up effects that certainly helped to highlight all of the drama.
Needless to say, Island Of Lost Souls' inevitable climax was a very fitting one where the wicked, whip-cracking Dr. Moreau was finally given "a taste of his own medicine", in the truest sense of those words.
Considering that this somewhat freaky Fantasy/Mad Scientist picture is now 82 years old, I'd say that it actually holds up quite well as far as entertainment goes, especially when you take into account all of films in this genre that have followed it in these many years since its 1932 release.
Set on a small, uncharted island in the South Pacific, Island Of Lost Souls' story is quite effective horror that tells the tale of one man playing god (the sadistic & sinister, Dr. Moreau) who blindly tampers with the reconstruction of evolution within the animal kingdom.
Based on H.G. Wells' novel of the same name, Island Of Lost Souls is, indeed, an atmospheric tale that contains some strange moments of odd-looking creatures seen lurking within the the shadows & darkness.
With its short running time of only 70 minutes, this picture features some truly impressive make-up effects that certainly helped to highlight all of the drama.
Needless to say, Island Of Lost Souls' inevitable climax was a very fitting one where the wicked, whip-cracking Dr. Moreau was finally given "a taste of his own medicine", in the truest sense of those words.
- strong-122-478885
- 11 jun 2014
- Enlace permanente
For those unfamiliar, Island of Lost Souls (1933) is the earliest and easily the superior version of H.G. Wells' Dr. Moreau. This is a beautifully filmed movie that still supplies the creepy moments almost 70 years after being made.
The basic story: A man rescued at sea is dropped off at an uncharted island owned by Dr. Moreau. The island is filled with strange "natives". The man soon learns that the natives are actually the creations of Dr. Moreau. Dr. Moreau is a god to his creations. But, once the "natives" learn that Dr. Moreau is not a god, they turn on him with horrifying consequences.
Charles Laughton delivers one of the best performances in the history of horror as the mad Dr. Moreau. Dressed head-to-toe in white, he is as sinister as you get. A brilliant acting job. The rest of the cast is fine. Bela Lugosi, in a very small supporting role, is quite good. Kathleen Burke (Lota the Panther Woman) is also a stand out. But, this is Laughton's film and he makes the most of it.
The very simple creature makeup is effective. The cinematography, etc. are also quite good. For example, there are several scenes with Moreau standing in the shadows that are especially effective.
This is a film not to be missed. While it may not appeal to the hack and slash crowd, Island of Lost Souls is a wonderful horror movie. For what it's worth, I'll give this one 10/10. (It's a shame Paramount didn't make more horror films in the 30s.) One final thought, the ending of the film is very reminiscent of the ending of Freaks (1932) with the same savagery on display.
The basic story: A man rescued at sea is dropped off at an uncharted island owned by Dr. Moreau. The island is filled with strange "natives". The man soon learns that the natives are actually the creations of Dr. Moreau. Dr. Moreau is a god to his creations. But, once the "natives" learn that Dr. Moreau is not a god, they turn on him with horrifying consequences.
Charles Laughton delivers one of the best performances in the history of horror as the mad Dr. Moreau. Dressed head-to-toe in white, he is as sinister as you get. A brilliant acting job. The rest of the cast is fine. Bela Lugosi, in a very small supporting role, is quite good. Kathleen Burke (Lota the Panther Woman) is also a stand out. But, this is Laughton's film and he makes the most of it.
The very simple creature makeup is effective. The cinematography, etc. are also quite good. For example, there are several scenes with Moreau standing in the shadows that are especially effective.
This is a film not to be missed. While it may not appeal to the hack and slash crowd, Island of Lost Souls is a wonderful horror movie. For what it's worth, I'll give this one 10/10. (It's a shame Paramount didn't make more horror films in the 30s.) One final thought, the ending of the film is very reminiscent of the ending of Freaks (1932) with the same savagery on display.
- bensonmum2
- 4 feb 2005
- Enlace permanente
I'll be brief: If you've never seen this definitive, influential horror film, see it. After all these years, it still has the power to shock. Good performances all around (Charles Laughton in particular). Small wonder this thing was banned in the U.K. for so long. Now that it's been remade (at least twice), it's worth taking a look at the original.
- EYEboy
- 19 nov 1998
- Enlace permanente
- vincentlynch-moonoi
- 1 nov 2012
- Enlace permanente
This fantastical horror movie based on "The Island of Dr. Moreau" is not necessarily scary by today's graphic standards. However, it still manages to touch on the terror of "humanity's inhumanity." It also provides a classic mad-scientist performance which still gives me the creeps. The makeup isn't perfect, but it is far superior to typical fare of the time.
- whiteraven-4
- 14 mar 2002
- Enlace permanente
Just watched this, the first filmed version of H. G. Wells' "The Island of Dr. Moreau" called Island of Lost Souls. It stars Charles Laughton as the lead character who loves performing experiments making animals into humans. It seems Edward Parker (Richard Arlen) gets thrown overboard to his island when the drunken Captain Davies (Stanley Fields) forces him to the "nearby port". There, he meets an exotic woman named Lota (Kathleen Burke) and the doctor's assistant, Mr. Montgomery (Arthur Hohl), before seeing the gentlemanly, if crafty, Moreau himself. Meanwhile, his finance Ruth Thomas (Leila Hyams), with the help of Captain Donahue (Paul Hurst), looks for Ed...I have to admit first out that I didn't find this very scary until the final 10 minutes and some of the dialogue is kinda bland and the lack of a music score (except for the beginning and ending credits) doesn't help. Still, Laughton brings a subtle chill every time he speaks and his later scenes with Bela Lugosi as Sayer of the Law are still pretty effective today especially when the latter keeps saying, "Are we not men?" So that's something to look forward to. But having said all that, Erle C. Kenton provides fine touches in many night scenes and the makeup of the creatures are fascinating in a theatrical way. And Ms. Burke, as Lota, does provide a little sexy presence with Ms. Hyams, as Ruth, some class. (By the way, Kathleen Burke spent the rest of her life in Chicago, Ill., my birthtown, where she previously was a dental assistant.) So on that note, Island of Lost Souls is worth a look.
- tavm
- 11 oct 2009
- Enlace permanente
- Igenlode Wordsmith
- 22 may 2005
- Enlace permanente
I first saw this film in 1933 when I was 7 years old. My 20 year old aunt, who was also my nanny, used to drag me to these things (also took me to equally horrifying Trader Horn and King Kong) instead of taking me to the playground. Even after 67 years, I remembered the scene when someone was lashing the rebellious half-animals.
I checked it out from my video store last year for a re-run. Absolutely magnificent Laughton. Still scary.
I checked it out from my video store last year for a re-run. Absolutely magnificent Laughton. Still scary.
- amadeus-10
- 23 feb 2001
- Enlace permanente
- john_vance-20806
- 9 may 2016
- Enlace permanente
Exceedingly grisly for its day, and still pretty frightening, the movie is an adaptation of the H.G. Wells novel The Island Of Dr. Moreau, about a mad scientist who experiments with evolution in his island laboratory, leading to shocking results, half-human half-beast creatures for whose predicament the term identity crisis would be a gigantic understatement. Their lives are hell, as Laughton's sadistic treatment of them makes their existence sheer pain.
Filmed like a horror movie, which is how it's often classified, the film is more like a precursor of the nature-gone-wild science fiction pictures of the fifties, minus the usual military heroics. It also, thanks to Wells, has the courage of its convictions, and the pessimistic implications of its ideas are not glossed over or simplified in the least. Science, in other words, is not used as an excuse for showing us horror but is rather,--and there's no beating around the bush here--the cause of it.
It is a very dark and gloomy film, and it is impossible for any intelligent person not to ponder the year of its release, 1933, as the reason for this as much as the story itself. This was the year Hitler came to power in Germany; also, Franklin Roosevelt in the U.S. We knew what Hitler was about, or at least his ideas, while FDR was still an unknown quantity. The Depression was at its worst, and millions were unemployed and starving. Without going too far out on a limb it is easy enough to see the lost, tortured souls in the film as victims of the Depression. They are men twisted out of shape by those in power,--like the wicked, white-suited Dr. Moreau--and their future looks grim, their prospects few. "Is this what the world is coming to?", the movie seems to ask. In 1933 it was hard to come up with a glibly optimistic reply. As one of the leaders of the beastly mob asks at one point, "Are We Not Men?". This was a question that at the time had no easy answer. That it had to be raised in the first place is as frightening to contemplate as anything we have actually seen.
Filmed like a horror movie, which is how it's often classified, the film is more like a precursor of the nature-gone-wild science fiction pictures of the fifties, minus the usual military heroics. It also, thanks to Wells, has the courage of its convictions, and the pessimistic implications of its ideas are not glossed over or simplified in the least. Science, in other words, is not used as an excuse for showing us horror but is rather,--and there's no beating around the bush here--the cause of it.
It is a very dark and gloomy film, and it is impossible for any intelligent person not to ponder the year of its release, 1933, as the reason for this as much as the story itself. This was the year Hitler came to power in Germany; also, Franklin Roosevelt in the U.S. We knew what Hitler was about, or at least his ideas, while FDR was still an unknown quantity. The Depression was at its worst, and millions were unemployed and starving. Without going too far out on a limb it is easy enough to see the lost, tortured souls in the film as victims of the Depression. They are men twisted out of shape by those in power,--like the wicked, white-suited Dr. Moreau--and their future looks grim, their prospects few. "Is this what the world is coming to?", the movie seems to ask. In 1933 it was hard to come up with a glibly optimistic reply. As one of the leaders of the beastly mob asks at one point, "Are We Not Men?". This was a question that at the time had no easy answer. That it had to be raised in the first place is as frightening to contemplate as anything we have actually seen.
- telegonus
- 8 ago 2001
- Enlace permanente
- mark.waltz
- 19 sep 2015
- Enlace permanente
- parry_na
- 6 jul 2017
- Enlace permanente
The castaway Edward Parker (Richard Arlen) is rescued by a cargo ship that is transporting Mr. Montgomery (Arthur Hohl) and animals to the notorious scientist Dr. Moreau (Charles Laughton), who lives in an isolated tiny island in the South Seas. Edwad sends a message to his fiancée Ruth Thomas (Leila Hyams) informing that he is safe and sound and will meet her at Apia. However he has an argument with Captain Davies (Stanley Fields) that tosses him overboard on Dr. Moreau's vessel. The scientist welcomes Edward in his island and offers to transport him on the next day to Apia. Edward sees strange natives and is introduced to the beautiful native Latta (Kathleen Burke). They hear screams from a room called the house of pain by Lotta where Edward sees Dr. Moreau and Montgomery operating a person without anesthetic. But later Montgomery gives a justification to Edward that does not know that Dr. Moreau is performing experiences with animals turning them into people. Further, Dr. Moreau decides to keep Edward in the island since Lolla, who is indeed a panther, is developing human emotions. What will happen to Edward?
"Island of Lost Souls" is the original version of H. G. Wells' novel "The Island of Dr. Moreau" to the cinema. The polemic story of an obsessed scientist that decides to play God raised many problems to the producers in UK with the censorship because of the vivisection scenes. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "A Ilha das Almas Selvagens" ("The Island of the Wild Souls")
"Island of Lost Souls" is the original version of H. G. Wells' novel "The Island of Dr. Moreau" to the cinema. The polemic story of an obsessed scientist that decides to play God raised many problems to the producers in UK with the censorship because of the vivisection scenes. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "A Ilha das Almas Selvagens" ("The Island of the Wild Souls")
- claudio_carvalho
- 22 jul 2017
- Enlace permanente
The Island of Lost Souls has such a great characterization of Dr. Moreau by Charles Laughton that Laughton was probably extremely lucky his career did not take the turn of Boris Karloff or Bela Lugosi. He might have wound up playing all kinds of mad scientists instead of the rich and varied collection of people he did portray. As it was, he returned only once to the horror genre arguably and that was in The Strange Door 18 years later, co-starring with Boris Karloff.
As the exiled and disgraced Dr. Moreau, he's discovered a way to speed up the evolutionary process if you accept that all animal life is merely a stepping stone towards mankind. That it involves a particularly brutal form of surgery on them without anesthetic is of no concern to him. He's created his own Devil's Eden in which he is Almighty God.
A quarrel with a drunken sea captain strands Richard Arlen on his island which does not have too many visitors except for cargo deliveries of supplies and more animals for experimentation. Laughton decides to make use of Arlen to see if his most perfect creation, Lota the Panther Woman, played by Kathleen Burke has any sexual drives or will he need further experiments.
Arlen's fiancé Leila Hyams is also looking for him and she arrives on the island setting up a not to be forgotten climax as Laughton's creations discover he's not God after all.
Island of Lost Souls, based on an H.G. Wells novel, is entertainment, but it also makes one think about the limits of science and what happens when scientific advances outrace similar advances in mankind's sense of ethics.
Anyway, I'm sure Dr. Moreau will not be PETA's man of the year.
As the exiled and disgraced Dr. Moreau, he's discovered a way to speed up the evolutionary process if you accept that all animal life is merely a stepping stone towards mankind. That it involves a particularly brutal form of surgery on them without anesthetic is of no concern to him. He's created his own Devil's Eden in which he is Almighty God.
A quarrel with a drunken sea captain strands Richard Arlen on his island which does not have too many visitors except for cargo deliveries of supplies and more animals for experimentation. Laughton decides to make use of Arlen to see if his most perfect creation, Lota the Panther Woman, played by Kathleen Burke has any sexual drives or will he need further experiments.
Arlen's fiancé Leila Hyams is also looking for him and she arrives on the island setting up a not to be forgotten climax as Laughton's creations discover he's not God after all.
Island of Lost Souls, based on an H.G. Wells novel, is entertainment, but it also makes one think about the limits of science and what happens when scientific advances outrace similar advances in mankind's sense of ethics.
Anyway, I'm sure Dr. Moreau will not be PETA's man of the year.
- bkoganbing
- 26 oct 2006
- Enlace permanente
The main reason my initial rating of a 9 suddenly morphed into a 10 are some of the climactic sequences towards the very end of the film in which atmospheric tension and brilliant performances collide to create one of the most evocative finales in horror history. The rest of the film is also wonderful, filled with slight eroticism and bizarre creations little seen in the American films of its day. The material here may be a little dated, but it was still far ahead of its time (in terms of film history, as literary history has already presented us with everyone from de Sade to Joyce by this time) due to its unremitting weirdness and borderline surrealism. In many ways, one can draw many parallels to it and Tod Browning's cult movie legend "Freaks" which was released in the same year. Both cover similar themes, both were somewhat notorious in their day (although "Freaks" was obviously much more so), and both have that 30's horror movie feel to them in which the absence of music feeds the atmosphere delightfully.
The scene in which Dr. Moreau's beastly, but sympathetic, characters rebel against him is one of the most chilling sequences I may have ever seen in a horror film, classic or otherwise. I got legitimate chills when Bela Lugosi's performance lit up the screen with deep intensity, it is easy to mock Lugosi, but it is also easy to praise him, and one must admit that he is one of horror's most beloved icons for many genuine reasons, and that his spot among the legendaries is well deserved, particularly because of this minor masterpiece of blood curdling science fiction thrills.
This is an amazing, mostly underrated film that combines exploitatation, art house, surrealist, Gothic, and classical filmmaking seamlessly, and likely without any awareness. It's deserving of the cult following it has steadily begun to pick up over the years, and holds up well considering its age, and it's so short and entertaining to watch that this no excuse for you not to go out and see it as soon as possible. It's frightening, intense, exciting, suspenseful, odd, shocking, and, in its final moments, surprisingly somber in tone.
The scene in which Dr. Moreau's beastly, but sympathetic, characters rebel against him is one of the most chilling sequences I may have ever seen in a horror film, classic or otherwise. I got legitimate chills when Bela Lugosi's performance lit up the screen with deep intensity, it is easy to mock Lugosi, but it is also easy to praise him, and one must admit that he is one of horror's most beloved icons for many genuine reasons, and that his spot among the legendaries is well deserved, particularly because of this minor masterpiece of blood curdling science fiction thrills.
This is an amazing, mostly underrated film that combines exploitatation, art house, surrealist, Gothic, and classical filmmaking seamlessly, and likely without any awareness. It's deserving of the cult following it has steadily begun to pick up over the years, and holds up well considering its age, and it's so short and entertaining to watch that this no excuse for you not to go out and see it as soon as possible. It's frightening, intense, exciting, suspenseful, odd, shocking, and, in its final moments, surprisingly somber in tone.
- framptonhollis
- 18 ago 2017
- Enlace permanente
"Island of Lost Souls" is an adventurous horror film with elements of science fiction, based on the novel "The Island of Doctor Moreau" by H. G. Wells.
The story follows Edward Parker, a shipwreck survivor who manages to board a freighter delivering animals to a remote island in the South Seas under suspicious circumstances. Upon arrival, Parker encounters the mysterious and unnerving Dr. Moreau, who welcomes his guest with unsettling enthusiasm. Parker is soon introduced to Lota, a seemingly innocent and gentle young woman whose eyes reveal a deeper, haunting truth. As he begins to explore the island, a harrowing, inhuman scream pierces the air - and the descent into horror begins...
The film masterfully balances a dark and thrilling tone. Several sequences are deeply disturbing and claustrophobic, infused with psychological tension that builds steadily. The set design, costumes, and makeup enhance the feeling of isolation and unease, while the night scenes, crafted with dramatic use of light and shadow, are striking. The blend of natural and animalistic sounds, particularly in tense or confrontational moments, adds an eerie edge and heightens the sense of fear and helplessness.
Director Erle C. Kenton succeeds in evoking a primal fear of unchecked experimentation and tampering with nature. Through Dr. Moreau, the film explores the "mad scientist" archetype while delving into broader themes such as the god complex, scientific morality, and absolute control over life and death.
Richard Arlen plays Edward Parker, the curious adventurer and moral center of the story, a man determined to escape a place that grows more dangerous with each passing moment. My personal impression is that the atmosphere of the film almost overwhelms the protagonist - it's that powerful.
Charles Laughton, as Dr. Moreau, delivers a captivating performance. He is cold, passionate, and eerily composed, embodying one of the most unsettling villains of early horror cinema.
Kathleen Burke portrays Lota with a quiet, heartbreaking vulnerability. Her fear, confusion, and inner conflict are expressed more through her eyes and body language than through dialogue, and the camera captures those subtle moments beautifully.
Bela Lugosi, in a nearly unrecognizable role, appears as the Sayer of the Law - a minor but symbolically rich and haunting presence.
To me, Island of Lost Souls stands out as the most thrilling horror film of 1932, even among strong contemporaries like The Mummy and The Most Dangerous Game. I don't believe audiences left the theater contemplating theological or philosophical implications - more likely, they were too shocked and fascinated by what they had just experienced.
The story follows Edward Parker, a shipwreck survivor who manages to board a freighter delivering animals to a remote island in the South Seas under suspicious circumstances. Upon arrival, Parker encounters the mysterious and unnerving Dr. Moreau, who welcomes his guest with unsettling enthusiasm. Parker is soon introduced to Lota, a seemingly innocent and gentle young woman whose eyes reveal a deeper, haunting truth. As he begins to explore the island, a harrowing, inhuman scream pierces the air - and the descent into horror begins...
The film masterfully balances a dark and thrilling tone. Several sequences are deeply disturbing and claustrophobic, infused with psychological tension that builds steadily. The set design, costumes, and makeup enhance the feeling of isolation and unease, while the night scenes, crafted with dramatic use of light and shadow, are striking. The blend of natural and animalistic sounds, particularly in tense or confrontational moments, adds an eerie edge and heightens the sense of fear and helplessness.
Director Erle C. Kenton succeeds in evoking a primal fear of unchecked experimentation and tampering with nature. Through Dr. Moreau, the film explores the "mad scientist" archetype while delving into broader themes such as the god complex, scientific morality, and absolute control over life and death.
Richard Arlen plays Edward Parker, the curious adventurer and moral center of the story, a man determined to escape a place that grows more dangerous with each passing moment. My personal impression is that the atmosphere of the film almost overwhelms the protagonist - it's that powerful.
Charles Laughton, as Dr. Moreau, delivers a captivating performance. He is cold, passionate, and eerily composed, embodying one of the most unsettling villains of early horror cinema.
Kathleen Burke portrays Lota with a quiet, heartbreaking vulnerability. Her fear, confusion, and inner conflict are expressed more through her eyes and body language than through dialogue, and the camera captures those subtle moments beautifully.
Bela Lugosi, in a nearly unrecognizable role, appears as the Sayer of the Law - a minor but symbolically rich and haunting presence.
To me, Island of Lost Souls stands out as the most thrilling horror film of 1932, even among strong contemporaries like The Mummy and The Most Dangerous Game. I don't believe audiences left the theater contemplating theological or philosophical implications - more likely, they were too shocked and fascinated by what they had just experienced.
- bigticket-36199
- 16 abr 2025
- Enlace permanente
My Rating : 2/10
Adapted from one of H.G. Wells' famous science fiction stories,'Island of Lost Souls' explores the character of Dr. Moreau and the story of the Island of Lost Souls. The protagonist is shipwrecked on an island inhabited by strange human-animal hybrids, and the mastermind behind them is the deranged mad scientist Charles Laughton.
Bela Lugosi and a dozen extras are made up to be 'ape-men', with hair all over their face and body.
Unless you are a fan of old horror movies - This movie really isn't that great unless it's your niche.
Adapted from one of H.G. Wells' famous science fiction stories,'Island of Lost Souls' explores the character of Dr. Moreau and the story of the Island of Lost Souls. The protagonist is shipwrecked on an island inhabited by strange human-animal hybrids, and the mastermind behind them is the deranged mad scientist Charles Laughton.
Bela Lugosi and a dozen extras are made up to be 'ape-men', with hair all over their face and body.
Unless you are a fan of old horror movies - This movie really isn't that great unless it's your niche.
- A_FORTY_SEVEN
- 12 mar 2019
- Enlace permanente