Russell Braddon's 1964 novel Year Of The Angry Rabbit, features a political satire of the Australian government. The story was conceived as an anti-war, anti-power, anti-capitalism parable. The novel centered on a wealthy landowner with political ties. He forces the prime minister, who is up for re-election, to develop a weapon to defeat the growing rabbit population. I think of the landowner as a Raymond Tusk type character who uses his influence over President Walker. The weapon created turns out to be a super weapon that the Prime Minister uses to gain control of the world. The only thing that stands in his way of world dominance are the side-effects of his weapon – giant mutant rabbits with a taste for flesh. While the novel incorporates humor to tell its outlandish tale, the film's two writers: Don Holliday and Kojak's own Gene R. Kearney, decided to remove any satirical subtext. With the intentional comedy removed, all the actors play straight in light of the absurd narrative they're in.
To say Claxton was out of his comfort zone is an understatement. In an attempt to make the production more within his range of abilities as director, he treated the film like a Western. He surrounded himself with actors and crew from his past and made the decision to disregard any techniques from seventy years of horror cinema – bravo!
What's it all about?
“Attention! Attention! Ladies and gentlemen, attention! There is a herd of killer rabbits heading this way and we desperately need your help!”
In case you were not aware, they will tell you twice during the beginning of the film: “Lepus is the Latin word for rabbit.” Which technically Lepus is the Latin word for hare, but we'll give you that one. The original title, Rabbits, was felt to be too timid, so MGM opted for Night Of The Lepus and designed posters without showing the monster. They hoped no one knew what Lepus meant. Here's my question: if they believed the rabbits would not be scary enough to entice audiences, then why would you make a horror film about giant bunnies?
“But, doctor, rabbits as big and ferocious as wolves? It is inconceivable.”
Yes it is. Just as inconceivable as making a monster movie about ferociously fluffy animals and expecting it to terrify anyone. Lets look at the sub-genre of natural horror. These are films in which nature attacks humans. We know the big films after 1972 like Jaws, Arachnophobia, Squirm, Piranha, Starship Troopers, Graveyard Shift, Lake Placid, and Anaconda. They all feature animals and insects versus mankind. These films feature creatures that are in some sense actually scary. Whether it be millions of worms, man-eating fish, alien praying mantis', killer spiders, or flesh-hungry rats, these films deliver on the promise of scares. They provide fear by showing us that we are only a freak accident or alien war away from losing our dominance within the food chain. The landscape was not too different in 1972. If you look at the films that came before Night Of The Lepus you will see spiders, mutated grasshoppers, wasps, bees, birds, snakes, atomic reptiles, radiated ants, great white sharks, huge leeches, and killer shrews. Even killer rats were featured the year before in Willard. What made Claxton believe that rabbits would be the next deadly animal?
Let's pretend that the bunny rabbits are scary, and lets focus on the narrative. The film begins with a TV report that utilizes real footage of a bunny population explosion. They describe the events as bunny “outbreaks.” In capable hands, we may have had a story about man's overpopulation and how an ecological balance must be found in order to survive. Enter Rory Calhoun as Cole Hilman, the rancher with everything to lose if he doesn't find a way to create balance. Rory Calhoun would find fame later in life with Motel Hell (1980) and Hell Comes To Frogtown (1988). Hilman found a way to naturally get coyotes off his land, but without them, the bunnies have taken over. Who can find a non-toxic solution to his problem? Possibly someone familiar with marsupials and their habits. No, lets try the Bennett family, who are apparently the worst scientists ever. Roy Bennett, played by Stuart Whitman (who went on to Tobe Hooper's Eaten Alive (1977) and voiced a character in Aaahh!! Real Monsters), sums up all he knows about science in one line: “I wish I knew what the effects of this serum would be?” He then uses said serum on a rabbit.
Roy Bennett's wife Gerry is played by the fantastic Janet Leigh. She only agreed to do the film, simply because it was filming near where she was living – it was convenient. Gerry dumbs down all the science talk for us. For an audience that wouldn't understand the word Lepus, it was very important to make the dialogue very simple. Gerry describes to their daughter and us, how they are going to stop the overpopulation of the rabbits, “We're going to make Jack more like Jill and Jill more like Jack.” Thanks for clearing that up. As an audience we are just lucky that the Bennett's have a young child, so when they discuss things that are too intellectual we get the stupid version they tell Amanda. Amanda is also the reason we have a movie. She switches the serum rabbit for a regular rabbit and then whines until her parents let her take one home. She takes the serum rabbit, because it is her “favorite.” In a tearjerking scene, Amanda's rabbit is stolen from her and let loose. Thankfully, the bunny goes and populates quickly, or else we wouldn't have a stampede of “rabbits as big and ferocious as wolves.”
