Iâ€™ve tried hard over the years to better understand THE BEAST WITHIN (1982). Heck, I even coerced myself recently to read the same-titled novel itâ€™s loosely based on thinking that might help me fathom it further. (Itâ€™s by Edward Levy and I secretly loved it.) Both the book and the movie involve a man who is chained in a cellar and subjected to a tortuous existence, feeding on rats and human flesh. His ordeal is such that he physically converts into a subhuman beast who eventually escapes, rapes a woman and passes his acquired depravity onto the resulting offspring. The child is seemingly fine for a while but eventually the inherited malevolence breaks through. In the book, the transformation involves traditional werewolf or demonic possession motifs and in the movie, the poor guy turns into a cicada. Donâ€™t laugh! I think thatâ€™s well, original and the cicadaâ€™s 17-year stagnation period fits in nicely with parents and teenagersâ€™ anxiety about the changes that come with adulthood, you know, the natural morphing of sweet obedient children into those terrible creatures with their own ideas! Plus, cicadas are gross, shed skeletal husks and chirp that terrible tune! They certainly do deserve an invite to the horror table.
Only it doesnâ€™t really work. Itâ€™s a big jump going from a man turning into a feral brute and a man transforming into an ugly loudmouth grasshopper and THE BEAST WITHIN doesnâ€™t quite have the springboard legs to achieve the leap. Iâ€™d blame the script but how can I when itâ€™s from the pen of TOM HOLLAND of PYSCHO II, FRIGHT NIGHT and CHILDâ€™S PLAY fame? I have to assume something larger went haywire during production although I guess talent has been known to hibernate on occasion too. One rumor I came across stated that about a half hour of filming was lost and that they had to move ahead regardless which would explain much but not everything. Besides the movie mumbling and muttering its way past the dubious cicada issue (if you listen closely black magic band-aids are placed over the hole), thereâ€™s still the frustrating problem of having barrels of exposition and little of it useful. And then thereâ€™s the beast itself who, when caught at the wrong angle, looks less like an insect and more like drunk E.T.
Donâ€™t get me wrong I fucking adore the special effects in this movie. They are over-the-top outlandish, freakiskly fantastic and deliciously squishing, especially in the traffic-stopping transformation scene. Itâ€™s just that the monster in its fully evolved form is a bug-eyed goon in a wobbly rubber suitâ€¦not that he doesnâ€™t give good decapitations. So why do I keep returning to this flick when Iâ€™m fully aware of its limitations and why would a rational person expect it to be anything other than its crazy self knowing that itâ€™s directed by the same dude (PHILIPPE MORA) who dosed the world with THE HOWLING 2 & 3 and my personal favorite brain-exploder COMMUNION?
No matter its disjointed nature, THE BEAST WITHIN has a weird, off-putting apprehensive vibe. Maybe thatâ€™s just residue from my own trepidation after succumbing to its effective â€œWE DARE YOU TO WATCH THIS!â€ advertising campaign thirty years ago or maybe itâ€™s due to the swampy, sleazy, southern-fried insanity setting- I donâ€™t know. Itâ€™s also got a great cast. RONNY COX and BIBI BESCH make nice, sympathetic parents and the rouges gallery of creepy local residents is gonzo strong with DON GORDON, LOGAN RAMSEY and JOHN DENNIS JOHNSTON. (If you donâ€™t recognize their names, youâ€™ll recognize their faces) An I WAS A TEENAGE CICADA movie would be bound to the ground without a decent actor playing the teenage cicada and PAUL CLEMENS does an admirable job and is remarkably adapt at melding himself with some seriously heavy make-up. Really, the way he contorts his face into unnerving expressions makes some of the lesser effect reliant scenes the strongest and Iâ€™d bet LON CHANEY would give him a thumbs up (after he threw-up).
Iâ€™ll always be a tad disappointed in this movieâ€™s inability to state its case in a less jumbled manor but if you invite the right people to the right place, canâ€™t you still have fun even if cohesiveness is a no show? I think we all know I can. THE BEAST WITHIN is a monster movie and monster movies can get away with dancing around with a lampshade on their head especially if that head is committed to expanding to ten times its size in the finale. Thatâ€™s a party in my book and if I have to crawl around in the dark to get there so be it.
My first R-rated horror movie, so it’ll always have a soft spot in my heart! I really liked it, forgive its shortcomings, and the final transformation scene is really good. I’ll never forget the audience actually screaming – and yes, a few even covered their eyes!
That sounds awesome Dr. D! I wish I could have been there.
Another thing I liked about this movie that I hadn’t noticed before and forgot to mention are the Lovecraft references, the mortician’s name is Dexter Ward! The book definitely had that vibe so kudos to Holland for expanding on that idea.
And I love the foreshadowing scene of the Dr. playing around with that squishy toy. I thought that was really clever. Man, I miss the days of those air-bladder effects!
Unfortunately, I haven’t seen the movie, but I’m well aware of the transformation scene. It’s so slimy and disgusting and wonderful.
Apparently, in Germany the movie was called “The Angel Face: Three Nights of Horror,” and in France it was called “The Entrails of Hell”! Very vivid titles, but maybe not as relevant to the movie as “The Beast Within”.