L'Étrange Créature du lac noir

I've noticed that some of the reviewers that hated this actually love to watch it. Over and over. I have to separate the different levels of like and dislike with a film like this. Cheesy? That's a word that popped up several times, Yes it was cheesy, but lovable. Silly story line? yes. Less than stellar acting? Yes. Simplistic? Yes. Fun to watch? Yes. Like one reviewer said, "They don't make em like this any more". I'm glad they don't. It was an era in film making that has passed and I appreciate films like this because they exemplified a time when we weren't very sophisticated. I'm happy to have grown up in a time like that, and that's why I watch movies like this one. Sophistication isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Unlike other sci-fi flicks from the 1950s, "Creature From The Black Lagoon" is not a film to laugh at. It's better made. Just by the title we know there's a monster lurking about. Yet, for the film's first 24 minutes we don't actually see it, only one of its claws. And that holding back of the monster's appearance fosters suspense and mystery. In addition, the film's B&W cinematography is good, for its time, with lots of credible underwater shots. And while the dialogue does contain lots of exposition, the film at least tries to educate viewers.

There's nothing complex about the story. A scientific crew heads for the Amazon to do an archaeological dig, after a large fossil is found. The crew ends up at the Black Lagoon, a place of serenity, with its still waters, surrounded by palm trees and the sounds of monkeys and exotic birds. Through much of the film the peaceful setting together with soothing background music actually makes for a rather relaxing movie. Even when we see the monster, it seems lonely and hardly threatening as it glides gracefully through its watery home.

I suspect that the film's popularity when it was first released relates to the creature's distinctive appearance, with those moving gills and those bulging dark eyes. And of course, back in those days, the film was made for 3-D viewing, a novelty then that made the monster seem more real. Today, the film has an ever-so-slight environmental theme, given that at least one of the scientists prefers that the monster not be harmed, and given that humans obviously are encroaching into its habitat.

Because so much of the plot takes place underwater and therefore lacks dialogue, and given a runtime of only about 78 minutes, there really isn't that much to this movie. But what there is of it is interesting for its historical significance as a precursor to later sci-fi films, and for a monster that's not only photogenic but also alone and arguably lonely in a world that has passed it by, after eons of time.

While nowhere near as intelligent, thought-provoking and well made as Anderson's brilliant "Incredible Shrinking Man", this is still smarter and more complex than your average monster movie, especially of its era.

This creature is neither tragic hero, nor unstoppable villain. He's just a living being, a prehistoric half-man, half fish, behaving as his evolution has conditioned him, attacking invaders to his Amazonian paradise, attracted to the female human.

The film is full of mind numbing exposition, mediocre acting, low production values and heavy handed staking out of its ethical positions; the humanistic scientist that wants to study and understand the creature versus the base desires of the expedition's financier who wants to kill the thing and bring it back to the world as a trophy.

But there are sequence of power and even poetry, as the creature swims silently beneath the team's female scientist (and eye candy). There are moments her that Spielberg would echo in "Jaws" years later, but here the threat is more eerie and complex than terrifying. And watching the creature pathetically gasp for breath like a fish out of water is a sad and strong image (actually, a lot of the creature's movements, especially under water, are surprisingly convincing as something other than a man in a latex suit).

While not, for me, the classic some see it as, it's still a solid cut above the dumb Saturday afternoon entertainment that has lead to our forgetting most of its cinematic cousins, but keeping this creature alive.

Today, "The Creature From the Black Lagoon" is considered a classic. The film itself has become a cliche for the "man-in-a-rubber-suit" monster movie, and the "gillman" is now included in the pantheon of classic movie monsters -along with Dracula, Frankenstein, and the Wolfman.

I was a teenager when I first saw this Sci-Fi/Horror gem on television in 1965--the film was already ten years old by then--and I loved it. Surprisingly--even after a decade of watching technically sophisticated, state-of-the-art, unbelievably realistic prosthetic, animatronic, and computer-generated movie monsters--today's teenagers still love the old "rubber" prototype of all swamp monsters -"The Creature From the Black Lagoon". This is especially true of teenage boys. Why? Perhaps every adolescent male can relate to the film's star: the Creature is horny, inarticulate, moody, misunderstood, not pleasant to look at, and is unbelievably awkward with girls -the ultimate teenage "geek". We all remember this classic scene in the movie: the film's beautiful heroine (Julie Adams) decides to take a dip, unaware that the Creature is swimming below her. The image is archetypal : the powerful "masculine", and the overtly seductive "feminine", beautifully juxtaposed in a stylized sexual union. Then, from the murky bottom of his lagoon, the Creature leeringly watches Adams as she performs an erotic underwater ballet, and he knows that, for the moment, he can only look, not touch. (Is the "scaly one" shy and insecure? Or does he simply have a Catholic upbringing?) Indeed, much of the film's imagery lends itself to Freudian interpretation.

OK, so it's not exactly "Beauty and the Beast" -the Creature's passion is purely primal and elemental. But still, the fact that he restrains himself, satisfying his carnal curiosity with a simple caressing of Julie's ankles, and then retreats back to the gloomy bottom of his underwater sanctum to secretly watch her react in bewilderment, suggests he may be more human than he appears. But, alas, as any good Freudian will tell you, repression often leads to disfunction. And later in the film, in a brief, but beautifully filmed underwater scene, the Creature savagely drags the tantalizing "Playboy centerfold" down into the Freudian depths to his subterranean grotto -perhaps to hide her under his bed...where his mom can't find her. (I apologize for the metaphor. It's getting stale, I know.)

"The Creature From the Black Lagoon" was directed by Jack Arnold ("The Incredible Shrinking Man"), who (from 1952 to 1960) directed a series of fantasy/horror films for Universal Studios, including "Revenge of the Creature" -this film's sequel. Arnold would certainly object to us reading too much symbolism in his gillman, but the Creature may not have achieved such enduring status in monster-mythology if not for the fears and anxieties of the movie-going audience of the '50s. Arnold's dramatic use of the Creature succeeds, of course, by exploiting the human fear of the unseen threat lurking below -a very primal, deeply embedded in the human subconscious, and one that's been ruthlessly exploited by filmmakers in countless horror films. But Arnold's beast may also represent a more intellectualized fear. In the 1950s (and beyond), the threat of nuclear annihilation was very real, and like the creature in Shelly's "Frankenstein", Arnold's lagoon creature represents an elemental force of nature that, once discovered and awakened by science (even well-intentioned science), cannot be controlled -perhaps like the newly tapped, but untamed, power of the atom. Or (and this may sound like apostasy in one of John's pretentious, sophistical, over-intellectualized movie reviews, in which I've constantly and digressively wandered into the Freudian morass) perhaps the Creature is not a mataphor for teenage angst, forbidden knowledge, or cold-war anxiety. Perhaps the Creature is nothing more than a guy in a scary rubber suit chasing a pretty girl around a movie soundstage. But where's the fun in that?

"The Creature From the Black Lagoon" is still fun to watch. Actors Richard Carlson (the sophmoric, but noble-minded paleozoologist) and Richard Denning (the ambitious financier) play off each other well. And Julie Adams is simply gorgeous in her custom-made swimsuit. Also, the beautiful (albeit black & white) underwater photography by James C. Haven is appropriately surreal: as the men begin their search and descend into the black depths of the lagoon, they intermittently twirl and hover amidst penetrating shafts of sunlight from above; and as the camera pans the peaceful bottom-landscape of the lagoon, the gillman suddenly springs from clouds of disturbed sediment, thrashing through curtains of shimmering air bubbles and drifting weeds, determined and unstoppable in his persuit of the human intruders. But one of the best things about the movie is the music. Some of the themes--written by Henry Mancini and Herman Stein--are quite beautiful; for example, as the expedition slowly makes its way up the dark Amazon, an ensemble of gentle woodwinds can be heard -a soft, subliminal prelude that lets us know we are entering another world, a primeval world. And who can forget the Creature's signature theme--the brassy, bombastic, three-note progression of DA DA DAAAAA!--whenever "Creech" appeared on the screen?

Of course, the best thing in the film is...the Creature. Jack Arnold suggested that the design of the gillman suit be based on the graceful form of the Motion Picture Academy's "Oscar" statuette. (Really!) The suit was designed and brilliantly crafted by make-up artist Bud Westmore, and there were two versions -one suit for filming on land, and another for filming underwater. On land, the gillman was played by Ben Chapman. Olympic swimmer Ricou Browning wore the gillman suit in the underwater scenes. The "dry suit" that Chapman wore was beautifully colored with iridescent greens and blues, and mottled with many other marine hues. The "wet suit" worn by Browning was a bright yellow -the marine hues chosen for the "dry suit" photographed too dark when filming underwater.

Yeah, I really love this movie. I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's just one geek relating to another. You see, in the final reel, neither of us got the girl.

"Creature from the Black Lagoon" is the quintessential 1950s monster movie. It's got a bathing beauty in the form of Julie Adams, whose character has a seemingly never-ending supply of impractical swimwear for a trek into the heart of the Amazon. Richard Carlson and Richard Denning give us some good old-fashioned 50s beefcake and spend most of the film running around with their shirts off. And, like the best monster movies from this time period, it can be taken straight or interpreted as being full of all sorts of sexual and gender subtext. You know, the men always comparing the size of their harpoons, the woman being pretty much useless and only there to be saved, the creature representing some kind of forbidden sexual fantasy.

This is a sexy movie, too. Everyone's always wet, there are all these scenes of Julie Adams and the creature swimming together in the water with him almost but never quite stroking her body, the men seem as anxious to hop in the sack with each other as either does the girl. It's a lot of fun, but leave your 2019 sensibility at the door in order to fully enjoy.

And as others have said, the creature itself looks amazing. Whenever there's a close up of its face, it really looks like it has fish eyes and gills and never looks like a man in a fish costume. The whole movie looks really good, actually, probably because there was some serious talent behind the camera, which surprised me for such a low-budget movie. William Snyder handled the cinematography, Ted Kent the editing, and Hilyard Brown and Bernard Herzbrun the art direction, all of them men who had been nominated for or won Oscars in the past for other things.

Of all the monster movies I've seen, this is easily one of the best.

Grade: A-