Horror Classic 13 of 50: REVOLT OF THE ZOMBIES

"Look out! The zombies are revolting!"
"I'll say they are... heck, they're repulsive!"
[Note: That exchange does not occur in this movie. But it should have.]

Remember last week when I said I was beginning to feel the fatigue of attempting to watch 50 "classic" horror movies? Well, that fatigue continued this week.

Now, I like old movies, and traditionally I've always had a fondness for bad movies (Have a Nice Weekend and Scream Baby Scream changed my life). But watching one of these things every week is like eating an entire box of Fruity Pebbles in one sitting: that which is normally a fun treat simply becomes overwhelming, even sickening. And afterward, my saliva is orange.

So this week, before watching Revolt of the Zombies, I attempted to cleanse my scary-movie palate (located somewhere between the hypothalamus and the medulla oblongata) by re-watching Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho.

Psycho, of course, is great. From what I've always read, Hitchcock kept the budget low on the picture, but he made the most of it. Seeing a thriller with (mostly) good acting, genuine suspense, and hey! camera movement! was refreshing. But the other side of that spooky coin is that witnessing the brilliance of Psycho was bound to make anything from the 50-movie pack pale in comparison.

All of which brings me to the subject I've been avoiding: Revolt of the Zombies from 1936. And oh, how it pales.

Synopsis
Okay, so you learned about World War I in your history classes, right? Then you'll remember the part where Cambodia had zombie soldiers. So, in this movie, a team of researchers, who I guess were English, travel to the ancient city of Angkor to hunt for the secret recipe for zombie-makin'. Young Louque has a major crush on the general's daughter Claire... but to his dismay, his best buddy Cliff gets to her first, and soon Cliff and Claire are engaged. You snooze, you lose, pal.

Louque cries for a while, but then he stumbles on a vital and previously missed clue to the zombie spell. Well, before you can say "horrible vengeance," Louque has a veritable army of zombies at his disposal. Only this film's definition of a zombie is not a living dead person, but a living person who has been hypnotized.

When Cliff and Claire realize how powerful Louque has become, they make a deal with him: Claire will give herself to Louque, and Cliff will allow himself to fall under Louque's voodoo thrall. So Louque pretty much comes out on top in this negotiation. Ah, but after talking with his trusted mentor McDonald, Louque has second thoughts: Could Claire ever really love him? Especially after he zombified her boyfriend? Sure she could! Well, maybe. Which is to say... nope.

So he releases all the zombies from his mental control, and guess what they do? They revolt! All over him! Viewing Louque's zombie-ravaged corpse, McDonald speaks these profound words: "Whom the gods destroy, they first make man." Or was it "...first make mad"? I couldn't understand the audio on the DVD.

Lessons I Learned

• Cliff's advice to Louque early in the movie: "If anything or anyone gets in your way, ride roughshod over him." Louque takes this to heart, but it doesn't work out so well for anybody, so the lesson is:
  
• Don't give your friends advice.

My Favorite Line
When Louque is called upon to give a toast at Cliff and Claire's engagement party, he says, "I wish you all the happiness you deserve." That's cold, bro!

Body Count
Three killings that happen onscreen. I think it's implied that Louque's zombie minions killed more people elsewhere. You know how zombies are. Or is it bald people I'm thinking of? No, I'm pretty sure it's zombies.

Comments
This movie was directed by Victor Halperin, the same guy who did 1932's White Zombie from a few weeks ago. According to both Wikipedia and IMDb (the two most reliable reference sources on the planet!), the eyeballs that we see superimposed on the screen when Louque works his zombie magic are Bela Lugosi's from the earlier film. These days that would entitle him to 10% of the profits, so they'd end up hiring a new eyeball actor.

The acting was really bad. I think the stiff artificiality of all three leads really was the primary reason that the movie was so... bad. Also, I had a hard time distinguishing Cliff from Louque. Those 1930s people all look alike to me. I'm still not convinced Herbert Hoover and Margaret Dumont were different individuals.

It's weird that the same director would make a movie about traditional zombies, then six years later make a movie in which hypnotized people are called zombies. Furthering the confusion is the fact that in an early scene, a character refers to the zombies as "robots." Well, what are they? Zombies? People? Robots? Ninjas? Nuns? Cowboys? Unicyclists?

The other thing about this movie is that there are a few scenes where they're supposed to be off in exotic locations... but the actors seem to be standing in front of a photograph or a rear projection of a still frame of an exotic location. Cheap!

Letter grade for Revolt of the Zombies: D-

Next movie in the 50-DVD set: The Giant Gila Monster. I have high hopes for this one. If I don't see some forced perspective or some rear-projected iguanas, I'm going to be sorely disappointed.