I
suspect that I owe my long-standing love of the horror genre to two productions
that I encountered as a youngster.
The
first is the “Dragon’s Domain” episode of Space: 1999 (1975 – 1977), about a
deadly monster luring astronaut victims to their death in a graveyard of lost
spaceships.
The
second is that ode to Arkansas’s variation on Big Foot, The Legend of Boggy Creek.
(1972) from regional director Charlie B. Pierce.
I
saw this film at a drive-in when I was four or five years old, and memories of
it have stayed with me ever since.
My
Mom and Dad took my sister Lara and me to a local drive-in theater in Essex
County New Jersey to see a double-feature. The first film was some forgettable
kid’s flick (probably a Herbie movie, or some such thing…). But after it ended,
Lara and I were supposed to go to sleep in the back seat of the car for the
duration of the second movie.
But
the second movie happened to be The Legend of Boggy Creek,
and I remember persistently peeking at the screen -- over my parents’ seats and
shoulders -- watching in horror as the film’s events unfolded
I
wondered not only what I would see on that giant screen, but what the movie
would dare show me. As a kid, I was tantalized by the notion that I might
really see Bigfoot, or discover convincing evidence that he existed.
Even
as an adult, I can summon some moments from that drive-in viewing of The
Legend of Boggy Creek quite vividly. I remember a little blond-haired
boy running through a wide-open field, stopped suddenly in his tracks by the
roars of the Sasquatch creature.
And
I recall the trademark scene in which the Fouke Monster attacks a man (sitting
on a toilet) in a cabin bathroom. That description may sound laughable, but
when I was four or five, there was nothing laughable at all about that attack.
My attention was riveted to the screen.
The
funny thing about “Dragon’s Domain” and the Legend of Boggy Creek is
that the two productions actually share in common a good, scary idea: that there
are things as yet unknown to modern, civilized man; things that we haven’t yet
quantified, analyzed, processed, or thoroughly understood.
That
monster in Space: 1999 for instance, didn’t register on sensors or
scanners, and so no one could prove it really lived…or, at story’s end, that it
had really died.
And
the Fouke Monster, despite his recurring appearances in and around Boggy Creek,
has never been photographed or captured. Despite the best efforts of photographers,
police, reporters and the like, he is still a myth, a shadow-figure existing
outside the bounds of rational belief.
I
suppose some very primal or basic part of my psychic gestalt loves horror films
because they implicitly concern this idea that something magical and abnormal
can yet exist in our technological, overpopulated, hyper-connected world. By
nature, I am more a skeptic than a believer, yet I live in the hope that my skepticism
will be proven wrong, not by some amorphous acceptance of blind faith, but through
the auspices of science and technology.
In
short, I want Nessie and Big Foot and the Mothman to be real. And I want
science to find them.
Because
if these quasi-mythical cryptids are proven to exist, then there is a chance
that there are other things -- other beings -- out there that science hasn’t
yet proved either, and the possibility, I suppose, that there is more to this
human existence than readily meets the eye.
Today,
“Dragon’s Domain” actually holds up a hell of a lot better than does The
Legend of Boggy Creek, but it is
fair to note in any review of the film that I have a strong affection and
fondness it, even if I can’t say with a straight face that it’s a particularly
good film.
What
the film gets right, and notes in a beautiful, even poetic way, is that there
are areas of natural beauty on this Earth where man has not spoiled everything,
and not seen everything. The moments in the film that track with that idea are,
quite simply, beautiful and resonant.
But
before long, The Legend of Boggy Creek gets lost in weird, unintentionally
humorous folk songs about the monster, and travels down other narrative blind
alleys too. The evidence of the monster’s existence, similarly, is so patently unpersuasive
as to be hysterically funny.
In
short, The Legend of Boggy Creek is a movie every fan of horror (and
regional filmmaking, to boot), ought to see, but that doesn’t mean it’s a great
work of art. It is, however, an
unforgettable one.
“…A
right pleasant place to live…until the sun goes down.”
A
mellifluous-voiced narrator named Jim (Vern Stierman), describes his home town
of Fouke -- which borders on the Texas/Arkansas border and houses a population
of less than four hundred. It’s the home to many simple, down-to-Earth folk,
and also, alarmingly, a hairy man-beast, the “Fouke Monster.”
Jim
recalls a time in his child-hood when he heard the monster’s roar and felt
fear, and then launches into an on-screen examination of the creature’s history
near Boggy Creek.
Several
members of the Crabtree family have, for instance, reported seeing it. One man
is certain he shot it.
Jim
recounts for the audience the story of a night that the monster approached the
house of Mary Beth Searcy (Judy Dalton), and the time a cabin fell under siege
from the beast.
Although
hunting expeditions and dogs have searched out the monster, it has never been
seen again.
But Jim is satisfied that
somewhere out in the night, the Fouke Monster still roams…
“He
always travels the creeks. That’s one of the first things we learned about him.”
The
Legend of Boggy Creek
opens with some remarkable photography. The camera (ensconced on a slow-moving
boat) prowls the Arkansas swamp, its eye falling on turtles, beavers, snakes, and
other denizens of the wild.
These
“nature” shots vividly capture the unspoiled beauty of the region, and set-up
the film’s central conceit, that there’s “still
a bit of wilderness” and still “some
mysteries” to explore in the far corners of the world.
Here,
in this untamed, unexplored terrain, there be dragons.
The
next scene, in order, is just as strong, for certain. Old Jimmy remembers back
to his youth, and his one-time run across a giant field, when he first heard
the cry of the monster.
“I was seven years old when I first heard him
scream,” says Jim. “I was scared then, and I’m scared now.”
This
line is not only chilling, but the images that go alongside it are remarkably
evocative of childhood, a time of discovery, freedom, and even sometimes fear.
Pierce’s
camera follows little blond-haired Billy on his run through the woods and field,
and times, the audience actually tracks right alongside him, from above, as if
positioned from a low-flying helicopter.
These
well-crafted shots suggest the boy’s momentum, his isolation, and the size of
the wide-open field.
Again,
the feeling is that out there, beyond the horizon, possibilities and mysteries
lurk. The shots of Jimmy running through the field, untended by parents,
unprotected by society, remind me very much of feelings that many of us
experienced children in the 1970s, when we first left the confines of home (and
the eyes of Mom and Dad) to go play.
For
me, there were railroad tracks and a field near my suburban house in New Jersey,
and my parents would often permit me and my friends to play there, under the
bright blue sky, for hours at a spell. The path along those tracks became an opportunity for play and discovery,
and the occasional jolt, for certain (hobos!).
The
opening moments of The Legend of Boggy Creek ably and artfully suggest both the
liberty of childhood -- when your time
was your own, and discovering the world was a constant adventure -- and the
outer limits of that liberty: the fear of interfacing with something mysterious
or truly scary.
I
admire the first several sequences of The Legend of Boggy Creek for so
ably, and with such stunning imagery, capturing these not easily-described
notions Many more expensive films fail
to resonate so effectively, or capture these feelings of childhood so lyrically
and memorably.
But
before long, The Legend of Boggy Creek starts to fall apart.
Is
it a coincidence that so many of the residents who have seen the creature are
named Crabtree? The film introduces us
to Smoky, Fred, Travis and James Crabtree, who all have stories to tell us
about the Fouke Monster. The story doesn’t
stand up, since so many witnesses come from one family.
Similarly,
the monster’s activities -- stealing pigs, turning over flower pats, and
causing a fatal heart attack in a family cat -- don’t exactly rise to the
standard of “hair raising” encounters with the Fouke Monster. These sequences don’t provide one-to-one
evidence that the beast was responsible for the damage. Is it the monster’s fault the cat died of
fright?
And
the folk songs, which elevate Travis Crabtree and the Monster to quasi-mythical
status, undercut the film’s questing, even elegiac tone. It’s difficult to take the search for the
monster seriously when the soundtrack singer warbles “Here the sulfur river flows…this is where the creature goes…safe within
the world he knows.”
By
the same token, descriptions of the monster’s “sour, pig-pen” stench tend to
undercut the horror of the storytelling.
It
seems apparent that The Legend of Boggy Creek owes both its remarkable strengths
and its notable weaknesses to its nature as a low-budget, regional film. It is
not an extruded-by-committee Hollywood product. Accordingly, there are moments
of pure beauty and even poetry here that a Hollywood film might not stop to
recognize or plumb. But then there are also the described moments of bizarre, laughable
narration and action that, similarly, would get re-shot if overseen by the
movie industry.
To
love The
Legend of Boggy Creek -- as I do love it -- you must take the good with
the bad, and understand how those qualities are all wrapped together in an
inseparable, once-in-a-life-time cinematic package.
The
Legend of Boggy Creek
is a time capsule of the 1970s, and yet it is more than that too. At its best,
it is a reminder to all of us that there are more things on Heaven and Earth
than is dreamed of by our science.
And
more so, the film reminds of a wondrous quality about children. Childhood represents a time in which
people are, without reservation, open to the possibility of magic in their everyday lives.
Kids can even find that magic right over there, down by Boggy Creek...
Kids can even find that magic right over there, down by Boggy Creek...
I was eight years old when this movie came out and my reactions to it were similar to yours. Because of the quasi-documentary approach of the film, my friends assumed it was all real, right down to the monster POV shot of the guy sitting on the toilet. I knew that had to have been staged and, therefore, the whole movie could have been a big put on, but my child brain wanted so much to believe it was all true. Strange how kids yearn to encounter real monsters even as they are scared to death of them.
ReplyDeleteLove this film. It was the first film that I was allowed to go and watch on my own. i recently re-watched it and enjoyed it almost as much as I did back in 72.
ReplyDeleteJust like you (and NealP above), I saw this movie in the theater. I was 6 and voted to see "Fantasia," but was outvoted by my older brother and sister. Since it was rated G, my ill-advised parents must've thought it was a Disney-esque documentary. I don't recall my parents' reactions, but Boggy Creek scared the ever-living HELL out of me and my siblings. It literally warped me for life. I live in Tennessee, and any time I'm out in a low, swampy area, the hair on my arms stands up. Although clearly awful and laughable, the movie has a unique quality about it that is absolutely terrifying. Kids today won't get it because, in most areas, the time of leathery old men sitting around a general store telling stories "out of school" and spitting into spittoons is over. It's those rural, Southern moments shown in the grainy, over-saturated, poor audio-having film that makes this film SO authentic and therefore, SO scary, even when you know it's a guy in a gorilla suit. It's the narration, the nature sound effects, and the general atmosphere that makes Boggy Creek an unintentional horror masterpiece for a particular generation of American.
ReplyDelete