The Elephant Man

Rating: 3/10 (25 August 2007)

On many web-sites this movie was a common factor in top classic movies. I was quite interested to see it. I also saw the IMDb review and the poster and that appealed me more. I was too eager to settle down on my chair to view this classic.
This is a second half of 19th century (1860-87) true story of a Joseph Merrick (John Hurt) man with physical abnormalities thus the name Elephant Man. A surgeon Dr. Frederick Treves (Anthony Hopkins) gives refuge to Joseph in his hospital and makes him part of the high circle society of England. But still Joseph faces humiliation from people due to his looks. In the end of the movie Joseph is given standing ovation by the then Queen Victoria and all eminent people.
The movie though based on a true story is a distorted version. Joseph was affected at an age of five by elephantiasis  but the movie starts with a dramatic misrepresentation of a dream sequence (or I do not know real) of an elephant raping a young woman  through whom assumingly this boy is born. The movie's script is a big let down. It showcases typical irritating British-ness; exaggerate the miseries of the man and the goodness of rich British people. Most of the poor people are shown as villainous clowns who are insensitive, ignorant, uneducated, rascals; whereas the rich class is shown as overly sensitive and humane to ugly Joseph. Again I think a total mis-representation! This movie reminded me of a documentary I have seen recently Darwin's Nightmare. African poverty is shown and exploited by the Director to fetch a name in the ignorant and insensitive western audiences. Similarly here ugly looks of a person is exploited by the Director to fetch a name for himself in the ignorant and insensitive western; mostly British rich class.
There are so many things that are badly scripted in the movie that I would not even venture to mention them here. Most IMDb reviews rate this movie very high. I am saddened by the fact that they because they have failed to relate with such characters in real life  they feel so moved in reel life.
What about people who considers being humiliated throughout the life with people's insensitiveness  find this representation over the board.
Acting wise I found everyone more dramatic, and overacted  including reliable Sir Anthony Hopkins. For no obvious reason at all (may be to hide the make-up of John Hurt) the movie is shown in Black and White. John Hurt due to a huge make-up and limping character, even though had some work to do; but with this character  any actor could have done an equally satisfying job.
I think, Director David Lynch is not a competent director, but has achieved some mastery in showcasing miseries of people and earning a living. His list of movies proves that. He may have felt that he is sensitively portraying miseries, but actually he is exploiting miseries to make a name for himself in an insensitive British/ western society.
Because of the fact that this is a true story I give 3 out of 10 for this otherwise  poor movie.
(Stars 3 out of 10)