Reviews / 31 October 2005

Cat People

Cat People
USA  /  1942

Jenny / says:

I usually prefer my horror films post-1960, but the Val Lewton RKO series has a soft spot in my heart. Although it isn’t my favorite of the series today (more likely The Seventh Victim or I Walked With a Zombie), Tourneur’s Cat People simultaneously fascinated and frightened me at age 7. The combination of minimalist yet effective scare tactics along with Simone Simon’s tortured psychological state have remained glued in my mind for years since. Noting my partiality for horror films involving women and their sexual tribulations (especially since contributing to this feature), perhaps this was the film that started it all.


Leo / says:

Cruising for dames at the local zoo, all-American guy, Oliver Reed, meets a creepy Serbian, Irena Dubrovna, who seems to have a thing for cats. She likes to skulk around the panther cage, gazing upon the prowling beast, and making a few sketches of it with a sword piercing its torso. But today, she’s happy to be picked up by the charming Ollie, and decides to take him home for some tea and Serbian folklore in her dark apartment. They get along nicely, and in time they marry, in spite of the fact that Irena refuses to kiss her husband because she fears that she will turn into a rabid feline and maul him.

Female sexuality is a rich source of a certain kind of horror—the kind of horror that plays upon the anxieties that prudish bourgeois men have about their wives’ sex lives. Jacques Tourneur and Val Lewton’s 1942 classic, Cat People, exploits these fears about “ancient sin” and “corrupt passions” while also making use of popular concerns about the “atavism” of Eastern Europe. Ollie is an exceedingly regular guy, a stranger to unhappiness with an insatiable appetite for good ol’ American apple pie, and so his marriage to the slinky, brooding Irena is doomed from the start. Unable to drop her Serbian superstitions, naturalize, and “lead a normal life,” Irena retreats into herself, denying her husband even the most discreet of smooches. But of course, this prudishness has the adverse effect of driving her husband into the arms of another woman, and therefore, of inflaming Irena’s own feline-female jealousy and rage.

The genius of Cat People lies in its deceptive simplicity and its literal and figurative obscurity. The acting is rather cheesy, and the dialogue is often hilariously unsubtle (there’s a cat reference every three minutes), but what seems like a straightforward horror tale of metamorphosis and cruel animalistic drives rarely reveals itself in any obvious way. Simone Simon, in the role of Irena, is always as docile as a kitten, and we are unable to picture her as the savage pantheress she fears herself to be. The film plays a skillful game with its audience, neither fully giving nor withholding an image of the dreaded cat-woman. Instead, deep in the rich, chiaroscuro lighting of the film, the viewer sees — or thinks he sees — the shadows of a beast lurking and prowling toward its victim. Tourneur’s film thus utilizes a literal inscrutability that tests the viewer’s ability to discern what is in the frame.

→ Next: Leo recommends Gremlins to Chiranjit


Comments / 2 total / Submit Comment

  1. Tom Huddleston
    31 October 2005
    6:23 AM

    I think Cat People makes a lot more sense when viewed as an abuse metaphor- the horrors in Irena’s past make it impossible for her to experience love, at least physically, and she fears the monster she might become if she lets her desires take over, as those ‘in her village’ did. I don’t see it as a film about the fear of female sexuality, as most reviwers seem to, but in fact a highly sympathetic treatment of an horrific subject. It is the men who are unsympathetic here, especially the creepy, potentially abusive psychiatrist who in the guise of helping Irena in fact deepens her mental instability. But for all its sympathy, the film is deeply pragmatic, even cynical- we never feel that Irena has a chance to put the past behind her and become a ‘normal’ person, she has to die to find peace.


  2. leo
    31 October 2005
    12:14 PM
    Website

    That’s a sharp reading. I don’t know much about the history of the treatment of abuse, so I’m not sure if this would have been a concern at the time the film was made, but I can certainly see your argument. What distinguishes the film, as you suggest, is the sympathetic portrayal of Irena. She’s not demonized or vampish in the way characters in similar horror movies are. Her vulnerability and obvious inner torment make her incredibly hard to pin down. The same cannot be said for her male companions. The psychiatrist is indeed oily, but even her average-joe husband (who has “never had an unhappy day in [his] life”) is a total creep. Then again, maybe he just should have married someone who would agree to kiss him.


Submit Comment / Some HTML is OK / Preview your remarks below


Preview Comment

Credits

Directed by
Jacques Tourneur

Review by
Leo Goldsmith

Source
Image Entertainment / Turner Laserdisc


Related articles

Features: 31 Days of Horror


Statistics

Posted on
31 October 2005

Read
707 times

Comments
2

Jump to comments
Submit comment

Recent Updates