Isle of the Dead (1945)--the Ideas Are Just as Important as the Chills

Once again, I like Lewton’s films for the way they’re so much more than chills and thrills. This film deals with a group of different issues—and I’m not sure if the film deals with them in a coherent way. (I’d definitely like to hear some opinions about that.) Here are some of the thoughts and questions off the top of my head:

1. The watchdog (which could have been the title of the film). What is the meaning and significance of this concept in the film? The general is called the watchdog, but what is he guarding and protecting? Is he protecting the country? (Certainly, his troops.) Is he protecting the law? Democracy? social stability?

2. What is the film saying about this protective stance? The film seems to condemn or at least portray the general as if he’s wrong or misguided. Do people agree with that?

3. Is the film about this watchdog mentality or is it about tensions between science/rationalisty and superstitition? What is the film’s position on these issues?

Ideas? Forget it!
Don’t you know that it is possible for a work of art to be too intellectual for its own good?

Don’t you know that it is possible for a work of art to be too intellectual for its own good?

Sure, but to conclude—“ideas forget it”—seems a bit extreme. Have you seen the film? I don’t think it’s too intellectual, but I’d be interested in hearing why you think that’s the case.

i think it’s overrated (don’t kill me). it has some nice atmosphere and that creepy woman in her nightgown. karloff is good but they had to halt production for him to have back surgery. the central female character from the original script was deleted entirely. i thought it was kind of a mess frankly

inspired by this böcklin painting, of which there are a number of versions. the painting also hangs in a room in i walked with a zombie. lewton was said to have been fascinated and terrified by this painting as a child. so i think i’d have to say the chills came first, the ideas later…

“The watchdog”

I haven’t got a chance to watch this again recently, but if I recall correctly, isn’t there a statue of Cerberus on the island “guarding” the cemetery?

Edit:

@Ruby

I don’t think this is a great film by any means (unlike Shane—well, that’s actually a personal favorite—which you spit on ;). I’m not sure if I think any of the Lewton films are great films per se, but all of them have been delightful and surprising—both in terms of the substance (i.e., the films actually deal with some serious themes in a decent way) and the filmmaking. This is no different. I watched this with my father, and we had a decent conversation about the themes in the film.

@Matt

Yes, that image is showed several times in the film (it might even be the last image), so I’m sure the watchdog motif is significant. What it represents is something I’m not sure about.

Cerberus was stationed at the border of the underworld and the, um, not-underworld to make sure that no one got back across the River Styx, so, on one level, that’s apropos of the fear of the “crossing over” of the vrykolakas. On another level, Jazz, I think it’s trying to get at something about leadership—that as military/political leader, Pherides is sort of stationed at the border of science and superstition, rationality and irrationality, life and death, etc., and he has to keep people on the right side in order to keep to state functional. The First Balkan War also literally re-drew the map of of the Balkans:

“All Ottoman territory west of the Enez-Kıyıköy line was ceded to the Balkan League, according to the status quo at the time of the armistice. The treaty also declared Albania to be an independent state. Almost all of the territory that was designated to form the new Albanian state was currently occupied by either Greece or Serbia, which only reluctantly withdrew their troops. Having unresolved disputes with Serbia over the division of northern Macedonia and with Greece over southern Macedonia, Bulgaria was prepared, if the need arose, to solve the problems by force, and began transferring its forces from Eastern Thrace to the disputed regions. Unwilling to yield to any pressure Greece and Serbia settled their mutual differences and signed a military alliance directed against Bulgaria on May 1, 1913, even before the Treaty of London had been concluded. This was soon followed by a treaty of “mutual friendship and protection” on May 19/June 1, 1913. Thus the scene for the Second Balkan War was set."

so the sense of a watchdog at the (literal) border was important in that regard as well.

It is amazing that people try to read something significant into crap Hollywood horror pulp.

^ Because Hollywood is incapable of stumbling upon meaning.

Arcanus = troll

On another level, Jazz, I think it’s trying to get at something about leadership—that as military/political leader, Pherides is sort of stationed at the border of science and superstition, rationality and irrationality, etc., and he has to keep people on the right side in order to keep to state functional.

I think there are many possible layers to the watchdog motif—whether the film handles this in a coherent and skillful fashion is the question I’d like to answer. I think you’ve touched on two—Pherides as a watchdog in terms of the military.

There’s also a sense of guarding the stability of a social group. In the beginning he orders an officer to commit suicide for a dereliction of duties (even though the officer was a friend). Pherides also killed Greek citizens that failed and refused to pay taxes—which is the reason the servant girl despises him. (There are some potentially important dialogue that occurs between them. Pherides says something like, “They’re not Greeks because they didn’t obey the law.” And she comes back with something about how his approach is not humane, or something. Let me know if you recall these lines when you see this again.)

My father and I discussed the issue of science and superstition, but we were both a little confused because at first Pherides strongly upholds the scientific approach, but later switches, wholesale, to the more superstitious one. (We thought that the transition was too abrupt and lacked any basis.) So I think there is some potential for this reading, but I’m pretty unclear about it right now.

Cerberus was stationed at the border of the underworld and the, um, not-underworld to make sure that no one got back across the River Styx, so, on one level, that’s apropos of the fear of the “crossing over” of the vrykolakas.

Agreed—but I think the metaphor goes beyond this.

“we were both a little confused because at first Pherides strongly upholds the scientific approach, but later switches, wholesale”

But this happens with political movements too sometimes, right? Progress and reforms get corrupted by all kinds of things . . . particularly in the face of crisis? Even some of the most notorious facist movements of the 20th century initially gained a lot of popular support because they offered solutions to things like unemployment, political instability, the facists in Italy gave women sufferage, etc., and then went on to do all kinds of insane things. The Stalinist purges in the Soviet Union. There are other examples too, I’m sure.

@jazz- so i can never live down the shame of shane? i think i was most disappointed in this film as it was made by the director of the seventh victim which i loved so much (i haven’t seen ghost ship yet). also i saw it on martin scorsese’s ‘11 scariest films’ list so my expectations were pretty high. i too found the plot a bit confusing re the general’s motivations but it’s not that surprising considering there was a break of six months in filming and many things were changed in the script. that cerberus statue is pretty cool though

@Matt

But this happens with political movements too sometimes, right? Progress and reforms get corrupted by all kinds of things . . . particularly in the face of crisis?

Not this abruptly, though. I guess Karloff’s performance didn’t convince me that the character would or did make the transition so quickly. (There should be some struggle or conflict during the transition.)

I think the example of the power corrupts political leaders or regimes is pretty different, too—but even that evolves through time. (I think with all regimes and leaders, power—the desire and maintenance—often trumps any political ideology and values.)

@Ruby

I really liked The Seventh Victim (and from what I recall I think it’s a better film than either Ghost Ship and Isle of the Dead—not sure if would lead to as interesting a discussion, though.), and based on the other circumstances you revealed surrounding your viewing of this film, I can understand your reaction. (Again, I don’t think these are great films, and if I saw them with that expectation, I probably wouldn’t have liked them as much, too. The “scariest” line is hard to take seriously for me. This film wasn’t scary in the least, although there are some effective moods—and I can understand if viewers were scared at the time of release.)

(Sorry, I couldn’t help the Shane dig. Just a little fun. You’re A-OK in my book, Ruby! :)

“Not this abruptly, though.”

Right, not literally, but if you think of it as allegorical, it’s compressed for the purpose of heightened drama.

Right, not literally, but if you think of it as allegorical, it’s compressed for the purpose of heightened drama.

I don’t buy this. I don’t know if the film is allegorical—metaphorical, yes. Then again, Pherides mainly seems to be a pramatic person rather than an ideologue. In other words, he’s not psychologically invested in the scientific approach. He’s about what works and he starts jumps to the superstitious view when the scientific one seems to fail (although I’m not sure the film establishes this well).

So I would amend this line—“Pherides is sort of stationed at the border of science and superstition, rationality and irrationality, life and death, etc., and he has to keep people on the right side in order to keep to state functional”—and say that Pherindes will rely on whatever approach or ideology maintains stability or security. (But what does that say about the watchdogs of society?)

OK, I’ll buy that—the important thing is to keep everyone on the same side of the line.

OK, I’ll buy that—the important thing is to keep everyone on the same side of the line.

Or whatever provides stability and security. Do you have any thoughts about what the film is saying about this? The first thought that comes to mind is the tension between individual liberty and social stability and security. The film clearly seems to be condemning the approach the values the latter over the former. (What was the social context at the time that could shed light on the film?)

I’d like to unpack and interpret Phradies final fate—specifically the fact that Mrs. St. Aubyn kills him in a trance. There does seem to be more underlying meaning and significance here.

What about the symbolic significance of being on the cemetary island?

A couple side-notes, one trivial, the other less so. First, the trivial—did anyone think that the actor who played Thea (Ellen Drew), the servant girl, looks like Debra Messing?

Second, to what extent do the titles reflect the meaning of the film? With Lewton’s films, I get the sense that the titles were mainly chosen to attract viewers, more than pointing to the meaning of the films. What do others think?

Photograph found in Lewton’s scrapbooks

The titles were forced on him –

From ‘More from Hollywood’ : “He was given assignments which most contract producers would have filmed on the back lot and shrugged off as evil necessities, but he approached each assignment as a challenge. Forced to submit to exploitation titles, he was determined that the pictures hiding behind the horror titles should be films of good taste and high production quality.”

Sometimes constraints are more productive that complete freedom.