The island of Doctor Moreau

When this novel was written, back in the England of 1986, the scientific community was in the midst of a heated debate about the ethical implications of animal vivisection. Wells’ participation in the debate was in the shape of a fantastic tale about a doctor who, trying to perfect the animal soul, erases the line that divides man from animal.

The human desire to play god is a constant, perhaps even a needed one. Because of that, the debate goes on, even if its shape has changed and now it is not vivisection but genetics.

The Island of Doctor Moreau is still valid when seen from that viewpoint. But there is a more interesting question , a more universal one, hiding within the book: What is the essence of being human?

For some, it will be an obvious and inescapable fact that we are just one more animal, a naked monkey jailed in the human zoo. For some others, the human will be a category by himself, different in essence from any animal.

For some unfathomable reason I decided to see the 1996 version of the movie, which had seven Razzie nominations back i the year. In this move one can see the whole range of conscience that exists between animal and human, and then it will be clear that there is not much of a difference… Except that humans can be nastier. The evil that Moreau was trying to get out of the animals turns out to be a mere human creation.

The animals on this island can not be called evil. If anything, they are neurotic. Their “Father” Moreau, clearly echoing YHWH, has forbidden everything that their nature wants. Because of that, they live constantly ashamed of themselves, fighting their every urges.

Not to go on All-Fours; that is the Law. Are we not men?
Not to suck up Drink; that is the Law. Are we not men?
Not to eat Fish or Flesh; that is the Law. Are we not men?
Not to claw the Bark of Trees; that is the Law. Are we not men?
Not to chase other Men; that is the Law. Are we not men?

So far, so good. Good book, good philosophy… So…Why did the modern interpretation of the victorian original get seven shameful razzie nominations?

Perhaps we can start with the actors. The main character is played by David Thewlis. You may remember him from his appearance in the Harry Potter series, or perhaps , from Big Lebowski.

…Then again, perhaps you wont remember him. In this movie, at least, he es completely forgettable. On the other hand, Both Kilmer and Brando are very, very memorable…for the wrong reasons.

The great Brando, may his soul rest in peace, plays a Moreau wrapped in fat lady muu-muus, wearing mime makeup and outlandish hats of his own design. (Who knew Moreau was a fashion visionary?)Meanwhile, Kilmer played a stoner doctor assistant, probably from leftover mannerisms from his performance as vocalist for The Doors .

Making a long story short: The interesting ethical-philosophical issues and the beautiful Fairuza Balk can not manage to save the movie. Read the book, or go see if the ‘77 version is more to your liking.