BEHOLD, THE MISSING LINK... " THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON"

You know I always go on about “visiting our cinematic elders”. You know, checking out those films that were the “firsts”. Learning about our cinematic history. If you’re a movie buff, this is positively fun. If you’re a bit of a geek like me, you can rattle off whole lists of films that carry the same traits down the “family line”. The Creature from the Black Lagoon is definitely one of the main precursors to the “monster movie” that “spawned” films ranging from Cloverfield (2008) to The Host (2006). And I’ll tell you something else – don’t knock it until you actually try it. Because since it was made in 1954 it may well lack the kind of special effects we are used to today. The “creature” may look a little “off” by today’s standards. But get past that. If you manage to actually get past it – you have a cracking movie experience waiting for you. There is a reason why its director John Arnold was pretty much considered the king of sci-fi back in his day... 

This is the story of a scientific expedition that uncovered a lot more than the scientists on it bargained for… A find in an unexplored place in the Amazonian jungle spurs on what could be one of the greatest scientific discoveries of our time. The missing link in the human ancestry between life in the water and life on land no less! But little do the scientists know that what they are about to encounter is not just ancient history – the creature lives! Hidden for years, undisturbed in the Amazonian Black Lagoon, the creature awaits… And he does not take all too kindly to being disturbed…

Yes, this film has all the traits of the “monster abducts beautiful female lead” films that followed it. It is almost what one might call a perfect classic example complete with love triangle. The female scientist on the trip is romantically engaged with one of the other scientists there (I say romantically engaged purely because the film makes a “thing” of how modern it is by underlining the fact that they are dating but not engaged to be married. The couple – more pointedly the man of course – fend off chides concerning “when they are getting married”. But they are not all that “modern” because David, the male lead is very much the “good guy”, the ethical scientist who wants the good of the creature and science. His boss, Mark, the other leg of the love triangle, is the ambitious one, out for fame and glory, “almost akin to a big game hunter”. I like the fact that the film tries to make a more “ethical” point about science, although it may seem a little clumsy by today’s standards. We have become a tad more used to “subtle” arguments, this is true, but the 50s were relatively new as far as the “talkies” went. In the eras after silent cinema, where the lack of sound meant everything else had to be incredible exaggerated and subtlety took a while to master. Well, that and the fact that the films were a good deal shorter than they are today – and with only just under an hour and half to play with you don’t have time for long drawn out subtle arguments.

The other point is that the film makes a legitimate effort to be scientifically accurate, describing the potential dangers of “the bends” (i.e. decompression sickness) although very little is made of this point – I suspect it was supposed to be a plot twist but then at some point got axed for reasons unknown. Also detailed explanations are given to any “every man” type character that can realistically be found – so the film is doing its level best to be scientifically accurate and believable. And this, despite the “gill man” character, shows the film is trying to be realistic on a different level – representing a step away from the “fairy tale” quality of a lot of films and trying to ground the story in reality and science with as little suspension of disbelief involved as possible. This of course sets it up as one of the precursors of modern science fiction as opposed to fantasy  - making it all the more important in cinematic history.

I am well aware that “old” films are not to everyone’s taste. But this is an important one. Much like the gill man himself, it bridges a gap between an older tradition in cinema and what we recognise as “modern cinema” today. If you are a geek you will definitely enjoy it. And shall I tell you something, even if you’re not, between its close parentage to modern films you’ll still probably enjoy it. Not just because you’ll giggle at its “oldy-worldy”ness either. Although, credit where it is due, you will probably enjoy doing that too J