Originally intended as a sequel to the far superior White Zombie (1932), Revolt of the Zombies (1936) was unable to be promoted as such due to a lawsuit from Amusement Securities Corporation (one of the financiers of the original), which claimed they had exclusive rights to the word “zombie.” That’s all I’ll say about White Zombie, in an effort to put even more distance between the two films than their four years of release.
That’s hard to do, though, when the best shots in the movie are those of Bela Lugosi’s eyes from White Zombie superimposed over the people Armand Louque (Dean Jagger) controls with his mind. Continually encouraged by his friend, Clifford Grayson (Robert Noland) to steamroll others to take what he wants out of life, Louque gets a little power-hungry after discovering the “secret of the zombies” that grants him mind control abilities.
We learn about this secret in Cambodia during World War I when Louque, Grayson, General Duval (George Cleveland), and General Mazovia (Roy D’Arcy) see it in action and arrest Priest Tsiang (William Crowell) for using it. Unable to locate the secret in the temple of Angkor during the war, Louque finds a clue a couple years later. What does he want out of life, though? A woman: General Duval’s daughter, Claire (Dorothy Stone.)
This is after she uses him simply to grab the attention of Grayson. They go as far as a wedding dinner before she dumps Louque and flaunts multiple public displays of affection with Grayson. Louque will use all his power to manipulate a reversal of the romance, stopping just short of using those powers on Claire herself. That’s somewhat noble, I suppose, but the plan is flawed. It’s just never going to happen.
If Louque is our antihero, then General Mazovia is a more obvious villain. Creepy looking, he wants the secret for himself and will stop nothing short of murder to obtain it… to a certain point. He facilitates events in the plot but never emerges from the shadows to take action that shifts focus from Louque. I watched the movie last night and cannot tell you what happened to his character. It either had no impact or was never revealed.
I don’t want to criticize an independently produced film from 1936 for poor production values, but I’m afraid it’s impossible not to. King Kong was released three years earlier and, sure, it had more money, but you’d think three years later, other films would be better equipped for utilizing backgrounds. I can forgive occasional shots of people walking across the screen in front of fuzzy landscapes; however…
…I just can’t forgive a painfully long scene in which Louque wades through the river to follow a native. It’s not the background mimicking actual movement that’s comical, but the movement of the human beings, completely artificial with deliberate arm movements of someone marching in place. And if we’re to blame the actors, let’s include the fact that Noland appears to be reading cue cards in his opening scene.
So, Revolt of the Zombies is more about a “mad scientist” with “zombie powers” rather than traditional voodoo zombies. The title is accurate, though, because – SPOILER – when Louque releases his spell, his victims snap out of his trance and storm, albeit slowly, his home to get their revenge. Ah, but are they technically zombies at the time? Maybe this movie could have been released without a word that caused legal action.
Revolt of the Zombies is in the public domain. I watched it streaming on Amazon Prime. A restored version is, however, available on DVD from The Film Detective.
Leave a Reply