L'Île du Dr. Moreau

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.