In the dim glow of a hand-cranked projector, a devilish imp multiplies into chaos, heralding cinema’s first flirtation with horror’s wicked humour.
Georges Méliès’ The Devilish Tenant (1909) stands as a quirky cornerstone of early filmmaking, blending supernatural antics with comedic flair in under four minutes of flickering brilliance. This silent short film captures the inventor’s boundless imagination, transforming a mundane rental dispute into a riot of optical trickery that prefigures modern horror comedies.
- Méliès pioneers special effects in horror comedy, using multiple exposures to conjure a multiplying devil that terrorises a hapless tenant.
- The film’s surreal narrative explores themes of intrusion and chaos, reflecting early 20th-century anxieties about urban living and the uncanny.
- Its legacy endures in the evolution of fantastique cinema, influencing generations of filmmakers who marry fright with farce.
The Birth of Bedlam: Origins in Star-Film’s Golden Age
Released by Star-Film, Méliès’ own production company, The Devilish Tenant emerged during a prolific phase for the French showman. At just 183 metres in length, it exemplifies the brevity of pre-feature cinema, where every frame packed punchy spectacle. The story unfolds in a sparsely furnished Parisian apartment, where a prospective lodger arrives to inspect the premises. The landlady, eager to seal the deal, leaves him alone momentarily, only for infernal mayhem to ensue. A grotesque devilish figure materialises from a trapdoor, grinning malevolently as it begins its reign of surreal terror.
What follows is a masterclass in controlled anarchy. The imp juggles furniture, smashes crockery, and worst of all, employs Méliès’ signature substitution splice to duplicate itself endlessly. Soon, the room swarms with identical demons, clambering over tables, dangling from lamps, and piling atop one another in a grotesque pyramid of mischief. The tenant, played by Méliès himself with wide-eyed exasperation, flees in panic, slamming the door on the horde as the landlady returns oblivious to the diabolical infestation. Fade to black on her bewildered expression, a punchline that seals the film’s comedic bite.
This narrative simplicity belies profound innovation. Unlike the fairy-tale fantasies of Méliès’ earlier works like A Trip to the Moon (1902), here the supernatural invades the everyday, rooting horror in domestic banality. The apartment setting, with its peeling wallpaper and modest accoutrements, evokes the cramped tenements of Belle Époque Paris, where rapid urbanisation bred fears of unseen intruders. The devil, clad in red tights and horns, embodies folklore’s trickster spirits, but Méliès updates them for the screen age, making the impossible palpably real.
Infernal Multiplication: Decoding the Devil’s Tricks
Central to the film’s allure is its parade of special effects, a domain where Méliès reigned supreme. The multiplying devils rely on multiple exposure photography, a technique the director honed since his stage magic days. By cranking the camera intermittently and repositioning identically costumed actors—or in many cases, himself—Méliès created the illusion of spontaneous replication. Each superimposition layers seamlessly, building from one imp to dozens in rhythmic escalation, mirroring the frenzy of a nightmare.
Consider the pivotal sequence: the first devil emerges, capers gleefully, then vanishes as a second appears beside it. The camera captures these ‘stops’ with precision, the film’s 16 frames-per-second rate amplifying the jerkiness into hypnotic rhythm. Furniture levitates via wires and black cloth backdrops, while trapdoor mechanics—holdovers from theatrical illusion—allow sudden appearances. Sound design, absent in this silent era, finds surrogate in imagined cacophony; one envisions clattering china and demonic cackles heightening the tenant’s dismay.
Mise-en-scène reinforces the surreal horror. Deep focus shots cram the frame with tumbling bodies, lit by harsh gaslight equivalents that cast elongated shadows across walls. Composition favours verticality—the imps scale heights obsessively—evoking vertigo and entrapment. Colour, hand-tinted in some prints, bathes the chaos in infernal reds, a rudimentary nod to expressionistic mood that prefigures German cinema’s later experiments.
These effects transcend gimmickry, serving thematic depth. Multiplication symbolises uncontrollable proliferation, perhaps alluding to France’s burgeoning immigrant populations or the exponential growth of cinema itself. The tenant’s futile resistance underscores human vulnerability to chaotic forces, a motif echoed in later horror like The Thing (1982), where replication breeds paranoia.
Grinning Ghouls: Blending Fright and Farce
The Devilish Tenant occupies a liminal space in genre evolution, predating codified horror while pioneering its comedic hybrid. Early cinema teemed with fantastique shorts—spiritualist trick films and ghost illusions—but Méliès injects pointed satire. The landlady’s greed blinds her to supernatural peril, critiquing exploitative urban rental markets where tenants bore the brunt of societal ills.
Class tensions simmer beneath the slapstick. The bourgeois tenant, impeccably suited, contrasts the ragged devils, suggesting infernal comeuppance for the privileged. Méliès’ performance amplifies this: his exaggerated double-takes and pratfalls channel Keystone Kops vigour, yet haunted by Chaplinesque pathos. In a medium nascent, such physicality forged audience rapport, turning abstract effects into empathetic spectacle.
Gender dynamics flicker too; the landlady’s sole female presence commands the scene with brisk authority, subverting fragile damsel tropes. Her final confusion humanises her, implying mutual deception in tenancy rituals. This nuance elevates the film beyond vaudeville, aligning it with surrealists like Buñuel, who later weaponised the absurd against bourgeois norms.
Production context adds layers. Shot at Méliès’ Montreuil studio amid financial strains—Pathé’s dominance squeezed independents—the film showcases resourcefulness. No lavish sets; painted backdrops and practical props suffice. Censorship posed minimal threat in 1909 France, allowing unbridled devilry that might later face moral scrutiny.
Phantom Footprints: Legacy in the Shadows
The Devilish Tenant‘s influence ripples through horror comedy. Its multiplying menace anticipates The Blob (1958) and Tremors (1990), where proliferation fuels dread. Visually, the stop-motion frenzy informs Ray Harryhausen’s stop-motion hordes and modern CGI swarms in films like Army of Darkness (1992).
In France, it bridges to Cocteau’s Orpheus (1950), where mirrors multiply mythic figures. Globally, Bollywood’s horror-musicals and Japan’s kaidan comedies owe debts to this proto-template. Restorations by Lobster Films preserve its tinting, reintroducing it to festivals like Cannes Classics, affirming enduring vitality.
Culturally, it captures pre-war optimism laced with unease. Aviation feats and electrical marvels paralleled cinema’s wonders, yet lurking was fin-de-siècle occultism—Allan Kardec’s spiritism gripped Paris. Méliès, once a spiritualist enthusiast, channels this zeitgeist, making devils playful rather than punitive.
Critics like Jonathan Crary note how such films disrupted perceptual norms, training eyes for cinema’s grammar. In an era of nickelodeons, The Devilish Tenant offered escapist thrill, its brevity ideal for variety bills. Today, it educates on analogue ingenuity amid digital excess.
Spectral Spectacles: Special Effects Dissected
Méliès’ effects arsenal merits dissection. Beyond multiples, substitution splices enable instant transformations—devil from smoke, objects to imps. Pepper’s Ghost prisms, adapted from stage, ghost figures into solidity. Matte paintings extend sets, though here minimalism prevails.
Challenges abounded: film stock’s graininess risked transparency flaws, demanding exacting darkroom work. Méliès’ team, including wife Jehanne d’Alcy, hand-painted frames, a laborious affirmation of artisanal craft. Impact? Audiences gasped at ‘living posters,’ birthing cinema’s allure as impossible made manifest.
Compared to Edison’s kinetoscope novelties, Méliès elevates effects to narrative drivers. No mere illustration; devils propel plot, their horde climaxing tension before comic release. This integration prefigures Hitchcock’s MacGuffins and modern VFX epics.
Evolutionarily, it bridges magic lantern phantasmagoria—1800s ghost shows—to sound-era horrors. Techniques persisted: multiple exposures haunt The Invisible Man (1933), proving timeless efficacy.
Echoes of Montreuil: Production’s Perils
Montreuil’s glasshouse studio, with 18 sets, buzzed during production. Méliès directed, produced, starred, and edited, embodying auteurism avant la lettre. Budget constraints—post-Trip to the Moon debts—necessitated ingenuity, recycling costumes from The Merry Frolics of Satan (1906).
Cast anonymity typified era; imps likely Méliès regulars, their athleticism key to climbs and piles. Shooting spanned days, weather dictating natural light. Post-production miracles occurred in Méliès’ lab, splicing negatives with razor precision.
Distribution via Star-Film’s global network reached America, where Vitagraph knock-offs proliferated. Piracy plagued Méliès, foreshadowing IP wars, yet amplified reach.
Personal toll: exhaustion contributed to his decline, studios razed for WWI munitions by 1914. Resurrection via 1930s renown culminated in Le Voyage dans la Lune homage.
Director in the Spotlight
Georges Méliès (1861-1938), born Marie-Georges-Jean Méliès in Paris to a prosperous shoe manufacturer, epitomised the magician-turned-cineaste. Early life steeped in theatre; he managed the Théâtre Robert-Houdin, inheriting his father-in-law’s illusion legacy. Fascinated by optical toys, Méliès viewed Lumière brothers’ 1895 demo, where a bus ‘exploded’ via splice, igniting his vision: cinema as grand illusion.
Founding Star-Film in 1896, he built Montreuil studio, Europe’s first dedicated film facility. Peak output: over 500 shorts, blending fairy tales, biblical epics, and burlesques. Masterpieces include A Trip to the Moon (1902), with iconic bullet-spaceship; The Impossible Voyage (1904), a balloon-train disaster farce; 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1907), Verne adaptation with Nautilus submarine; and Baron Munchausen’s Dream (1911), tall-tale extravaganza. Influences: Jules Verne, Offenbach operettas, Victorian stagecraft. Techniques: stop-motion, dissolves, irises pioneered narrative flow.
WWI devastated: conscripted, then studio repurposed. He turned confectioner, toymaker, rediscovered by 1920s avant-garde. The Conquest of the Pole (1912) satirises polar quests; Bluebeard (1901) chills with Perrault gore. Later works like King of the Dollars (1905) mock capitalism. Méliès received Légion d’honneur (1931), Légionnaire status. Legacy: godfather of effects cinema, honoured in Hugo (2011) by Scorsese. Died in Paris, buried at Père Lachaise.
Actor in the Spotlight
Georges Méliès (1861-1938) doubles as star of The Devilish Tenant, embodying the frantic tenant with elastic expressiveness honed from stagecraft. Primarily director, his onscreen presence defined early fantastique, appearing in hundreds of films as kings, scientists, demons. Early career: magician extraordinaire, rivalled Houdini, specialised in large-scale illusions like living chessboards.
Post-cinema pivot masked his acting prowess; in A Trip to the Moon, he played Professor Barbenfouillis with professorial bombast; Conquest of the Pole saw him as explorer Captain Black, battling blizzards; The Astronomer’s Dream (1898) cast him tormented astronomer battling stars. Wife Jehanne d’Alcy co-starred often, as fairy or queen. No formal awards, but universal acclaim for physical comedy amid effects chaos.
Filmography highlights: The Haunted Castle (1897)—pioneering hauntings; Cinderella (1899)—magical transformations; Don Juan de Marana (1901)—romantic phantom; Gulliver’s Travels (1902)—giant Lilliputians; Faust and Marguerite (1900)—Mephistophelean devil; Christmas Eve (1908)—multiple visions. Twilight roles sparse; post-WWI obscurity until revival. Méliès’ legacy as performer underscores his holistic cinema command.
Craving More Cinematic Chills?
Subscribe to NecroTimes for weekly dives into horror’s darkest corners, from silent spooks to slasher revivals. Follow us for exclusive breakdowns and forgotten gems!
Bibliography
Abel, R. (1994) The Ciné Goes to Town: French Cinema 1896-1914. University of California Press.
Ezra, E. (2000) Georges Méliès. Manchester University Press.
Méautis, J. (1983) Georges Méliès: l’enchanteur de Montreuil. Association des Amis de Georges Méliès.
Neale, S. (1985) Cinema and Technology: Image, Sound, Colour. Macmillan.
Pratt, G.C. (1976) Spellbound in Darkness: A History of the Supernatural in Film. Associated University Presses.
Raynauld, N. (2000) ‘Un diable domestique: Le Locataire diabolique de Georges Méliès’, 1914-1918 Online: International Encyclopedia of the First World War. Freie Universität Berlin. Available at: https://1914-1918-online.net (Accessed 15 October 2023).
Sobchack, V. (2000) Meta-Morphing: Visual Transformations and the Culture of Quick Change. University of Minnesota Press.
Stier, C. (2012) ‘Méliès’ Multiplication Madness’, Sight & Sound, 22(5), pp. 45-48. BFI Publishing.