Cult Review
Senior Film Conservator
If you like vintage oddities and aren't afraid of feeling a little uncomfortable while watching people from the 1930s show off their strange lives, you might dig this. If you need, you know, a plot or characters that actually talk to each other, stay far away. It’s basically a parade of 'look at this weird thing' for twenty minutes.
Watching this feels like stumbling onto a dusty shelf in a basement you weren't supposed to enter. It’s got that specific, scratchy energy that reminds me a bit of the random b-roll found in Screen Snapshots, Series 9, No. 11. It doesn’t try to tell a story; it just demands you witness the bizarre.
There is a segment about a one-armed typist that lingers just long enough to make you feel like an intruder. Then it pivots immediately to a 'sheep-goat'—whatever that actually is—and you just have to roll with it. The pacing is absolutely chaotic. It’s like the editor was working on a dare.
Jimmy Wallington guides us through this with a voice that sounds like it’s being projected from a tin can. He sells these 'freaks' with the same enthusiasm a carnival barker uses to sell cotton candy. It’s weirdly hypnotic, even when it’s bordering on exploitation.
Sometimes the film cuts away right when you get interested in the background. Who was that guy in the hat? Why does the boat look like it’s glued to the grass? The movie doesn’t care about your questions. It just keeps moving to the next strange thing.
It’s definitely not as polished as something like Sylvia Scarlett, but that’s the point, I guess. It’s messy. It feels like a relic. It’s the kind of thing you watch when you’re bored at 2 AM and want to feel like you’ve traveled to a different dimension where sheep-goats exist. 🐐
Don't look for meaning. There isn't any. Just enjoy the weirdness and move on.

Year
1935
IMDb Rating
—

Editorial
Deciphering the legacy of transgressive cult cinema.
Community
Log in to comment.