Editing Freaks (1932 film) (section)

====Contemporaneous====
{{quote box|align=right|bgcolor=#FAFAD2|width=22%|quote=What about the Siamese twins—have they no right to love? The pin-heads, the half-man, half-woman, the dwarfs! They have the same passions, joys, sorrows, laughter as normal human beings. Is such a subject untouchable?|source=–1932 press release from MGM responding to accusations that the film exploited its subjects{{sfn|Matthews|2009|p=57}}}}

Despite the extensive cuts, the film was still negatively received by moviegoers, and remained an object of extreme controversy amongst the public upon initial release.{{sfn|Smith|2012|pages=94–96}} Critics' responses were also divided.{{sfn|Hawkins|2000|pages=141–142}}{{sfn|Hawkins|1996|p=265}} MGM attempted to address criticisms of [[exploitation film|exploitation]] by promoting the film as one compassionate toward its subjects, with tagline such as "What about abnormal people? They have their lives, too!"{{sfn|Matthews|2009|p=57}} At the time of its release, the film was regarded by numerous critics as marking the end of Browning's career.{{sfn|Smith|2012|pages=94–95}} ''Freaks'' became the only MGM film ever to be pulled from release before completing its domestic engagements,{{sfn|Vieira|2003|p=49}} and it was pulled from distribution after its New York engagements concluded in the summer of 1932.{{sfn|Matthews|2009|p=57}} Disillusioned by the backlash the film received, MGM studio head [[Louis B. Mayer]] sold the distribution rights to [[Dwain Esper]] for a 25-year period for $50,000.{{sfn|Matthews|2009|pages=57–58}}

A number of reviews were not only highly critical of the film, but expressed outrage and revulsion.{{sfn|Matthews|2009|pages=56–58}} ''[[Harrison's Reports]]'' wrote that "Any one who considers this entertainment should be placed in the pathological ward in some hospital."{{sfn|Smith|2012|p=209}} In ''[[The Kansas City Star]]'', [[John C. Moffitt]] wrote, "There is no excuse for this picture. It took a weak mind to produce it and it takes a strong stomach to look at it."<ref name="TCM">{{cite web |url=http://www.tcm.com/essentials/article.html?cid=581452&mainArticleId=581107 |title=The Critic's Corner – Freaks |editor-last=Miller |editor-first=Frank |website=[[Turner Classic Movies]] |url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151230045341/http://www.tcm.com/essentials/article.html?cid=581452&mainArticleId=581107|archive-date=December 30, 2015}}</ref> ''[[The Hollywood Reporter]]'' called the film an "outrageous onslaught upon the feelings, the senses, the brains and the stomachs of an audience."{{sfn|Smith|2012|p=209}} ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'' also published an unfavorable review, writing that the film was "sumptuously produced, admirably directed, and no cost was spared, but Metro heads failed to realize that even with a different sort of offering the story is still important. Here the story is not sufficiently strong to get and hold the interest, partly because interest cannot easily be gained for too fantastic a romance." The review went on to state that the story "does not thrill and at the same time does not please, since it is impossible for the normal man or woman to sympathize with the aspiring dwarf. And only in such a case will the story appeal."<ref>{{cite journal |author=''Variety'' Staff |date=July 12, 1932 |title=Film Reviews: ''Freaks'' |journal=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|page=16|url=https://variety.com/1931/film/reviews/freaks-1200410603/|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160916164210/http://variety.com/1931/film/reviews/freaks-1200410603/|archive-date=September 16, 2016}}</ref>

While a significant number of reviews were unfavorable, the film was well-received by some: ''[[The New York Times]]'' called it "excellent at times and horrible, in the strict meaning of the word, at others" as well as "a picture not to be easily forgotten."<ref name=nyt>{{cite web |url=https://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9E07E6D61031E333A2575AC0A9619C946394D6CF|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141007180458/http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9E07E6D61031E333A2575AC0A9619C946394D6CF|archive-date=October 7, 2014|title=Freaks |date=July 9, 1932 |work=[[The New York Times]] |access-date=June 21, 2015}}</ref> The ''[[New York Herald Tribune]]'' wrote that it was "obviously an unhealthy and generally disagreeable work," but that "in some strange way, the picture is not only exciting, but even occasionally touching."<ref name="TCM" /> Columnist [[Louella Parsons]] wrote an enthusiastic report on the film, noting that "for pure sensationalism, ''Freaks'' tops any pictures yet produced...&nbsp; In ''Freaks'' there are monstrosities such as never before have been known. If you are normal go and see them for yourself, if not, well, use your own judgment."{{sfn|Matthews|2009|p=56}}

[[John Mosher (writer)|John Mosher]] of ''[[The New Yorker]]'' wrote a favorable review, calling it "a little gem" that "stands in a class by itself, and probably won't be forgotten in a hurry by those who see it." He found its "perfectly plausible story" a key to the effectiveness of its horror, writing that "It's a chilling notion to imagine these weird beings, with their own lives and vanities and passions, all allied in a bitter enmity against us." Addressing the controversial subject matter, Mosher stated: "if the poor things themselves can be displayed in the basement of [[Madison Square Garden (1925)|Madison Square Garden]], pictures of them might as well be shown in the [[Rialto Theatre (New York City)|Rialto]]. They may hereafter even be regarded in the flesh with a new dread bordering on respect."<ref>{{cite magazine |last=Mosher |first=John C. |date=July 16, 1932 |title=The Current Cinema |magazine=[[The New Yorker]] |location=New York |publisher=F-R Publishing Corporation |pages=45–46 }}</ref>