Review of The Elephant Man (1980) by Gareth R — 21 May 2009

Just how important is historical accuracy in a film?

The Elephant Man takes a number of fairly large liberties with the life of its subject. His career and health, which were no doubt already difficult, often miserable experiences, are made considerably worse on screen. He is regularly beaten by his owner. After being rescued by Dr Treves (Anthony Hopkins), he is kidnapped and taken back to the Freakshow, where he is even further mistreated. It's a story that contains absolute depths of human depravity, as people abuse and stare at the deformed John Merrick (John Hurt), as well as very real kindness and humanity, mostly exhibited by Dr Treves. It is a moving story.

It might comfort you to know, then, that some of it isn't true. The real Merrick was treated much better in the Freakshow, and made a decent wage. His owner - the monstrous Mr Bytes, played by mad-eyed Freddie Jones - is entirely fictitious. Once he became a guest at the London Hospital (at his own request, incidentally, and not because Dr Treves rescued him), he was never dragged back to his old life. Even his name, here John, is erroneous: he was really Joseph.

Is it wrong to use this much dramatic license? A lot of biographical stories don't necessarily cut it as tales in their own right, because real life doesn't always fulfil the necessary ups and downs of interesting fiction. Writers of non-fiction that doesn't necessarily scan will use the rotten old argument of "This is how it really happened", but that doesn't excuse a story that just doesn't work. An accurate depiction of Merrick's life would have been less emotionally resonant, and might have been a lesser film. While it is arguably cruel to ramp up the horrors and lows that befell him - something of which the modest Merrick would certainly not approve - it does make for a more soulful, memorable movie. The Elephant Man is manipulative, maybe, but as a piece of fiction it succeeds admirably.

The performances are remarkable. John Hurt is obviously brilliant as Merrick, trapped under a mountain of make-up (which led to the creation of the Best Make-Up Effect Academy Award) but easily helping the audience see past it. Despite the horrific appearance and his various tics, Merrick strives to come across as a real, dignified person. It is masterful to watch.

On a par, however, is Anthony Hopkins. Dr Treves might be a heroic figure and a good man, pulling Merrick away from his abusive background, but he's no saint: at one point he worries that all he's doing is continuing John's life of exhibition, just to further his own career. Hopkins communicates a lot with a look, and his slow, patient delivery all adds to a man that is complex and deeply interesting to watch.

It's a shame, then, that the film doesn't spend enough time putting the two together. Treves and Merrick develop a very real friendship, but we don't see enough of it, or come to fully understand it. Pity, really, since this process of Treves appealing to Merrick's humanity should be the core of the film.

Also, while the direction is patient and sensible, hardly resembling David Lynch at all, the director occasionally can't help himself and inserts the kind of dreamy waffle that helped make his name. The movie opens and closes with odd dream sequences, and they don't enhance the film in any way. Rather than end on an almost profound emotional note, we end with a special effect.

There is still much to commend. The way people warm to John, and the way he is depicted as more and more human as the film progresses, is subtle and impressive. The circus-themed music is eerie and keeps us from getting too comfortable. The black and white photography is marvellous, and the filming style - even the way the camera is handled - seems to authentically mirror period films from the 1940s. Although much about it is exaggerated, the film's depiction of Merrick himself is more than likely accurate: a modest, intelligent man who wins over anybody who takes the time to speak to him. Perhaps it shouldn't bandy phrases like "True story" about, or at least not exactly, but it's a well-told story that feels like it means something, and that, to me, is the criteria for success.