Electrocuting an Elephant (1903) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
38 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
Edison and the Electricity War With George Westinghouse
theowinthrop11 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"The Wizard of Menlo Park" was deeply responsible for many things we take for granted in 2007: even if he did not invent them without rivals or assistants, he gave birth to the electric light, the phonograph, the motion picture camera, the electric car battery, the electric power grid (possibly his most important but least recalled invention), the pre-fabricated house, and innovations to the telephone and telegraph, as well as the ticker-tape machine and an early voting machine. The total number of patents is over 1,000 - far more than any other American Inventor.

But Edison was a ruthless business competitor. He frequently had vast legal fights over the precedence of his inventions over rivals. The best example is the telephone, where he was one of seven or eight rivals with claims against Alexander Graham Bell. Actually Edison's invention here was not the central idea that Bell and Gray had come up with independently of each other in 1876, but an improvement on the sound quality of the phone receiver and transmitter that Bell did not develop. Still it was part of the huge 1888 Supreme Court decision that was the longest U.S. Supreme Court decision (a single volume of their reports!) written by Chief Justice Morrison Waite - which, by the way, killed the poor Chief Justice from overwork within weeks of completing it.

In 1886 Edison found an equally ruthless competitor in the area of electric power grids for large cities. This was George Westinghouse, inventor of the railroad air break. Westinghouse's firm had gotten the assistance of a new inventor, and former Edison assistant, Nicola Tesla. Tesla developed "alternating current", which was a rival system to Edison's "direct current". Edison's system was basically a straight circuit system of electricity. Tesla's system allowed the current to be switched from one circuit to another - actually it was a better, and more efficient system. But Edison was determined to break this rival by a publicity campaign.

It started with electric power lines. Edison early on had his lines put underground, so that they would not be endangered by weather conditions. But Westinghouse was forced to have his lines out in the open - like telephone lines. When there were several accidental deaths by repair linemen on Westinghouse's lines (in particular one incident where the repairman was burned alive in front of hundreds of horrified onlookers in Manhattan's business district), Edison started insisting that A.C. current was far more dangerous that D.C.

One result of all this was Edison helping some subsidiary inventors with getting Westinghouse A.C. generators and dynamos for an electric chair. Edison himself always denied that he invented the electric chair, but he helped several lesser figures along the way - for the complete story read Mark Essig's EDISON & THE ELECTRIC CHAIR (New York: WALKER & COMPANY, 2003).

Edison experiment himself with cats and dogs (experiments he was glad to show the public). In the long run, despite assisting in the invention of a new method of execution, Edison failed to dislodge the public support of Alternating Current. But he never stopped trying.

In 1903 he had an opportunity to combine his campaign against Westinghouse and A.C. with his invention of the motion picture camera. He assisted in "putting down" a well known public elephant ("Topsy") who had killed several men. He did so by electrocuting the poor beast with A.C. But the entire killing is on film - and one can view it to this day. It is a pitiful looking film - whatever poor "Topsy" had done it was a poor beast - not a Machiavellian murderer. The moment we see the explosions of electricity sparks that show the death of the elephant, we are aware it will soon be over, but the sudden collapse of "Topsy" is still an unpleasant sight to view. The film leaves a bad flavor in the mouths of modern movie audiences. Yet, sad to say, it probably made a profit for Edison - his description of the film in his catalog of films shows real pride in his accomplishment here. In 1903 it may have been exciting entertainment for many Americans watching it. One is glad that more people are appalled by it today - sometimes one can sense the human race has improved a little bit.
16 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Wrong for all kinds of reasons
Horst_In_Translation21 July 2015
Warning: Spoilers
This is a black-and-white short film from 1903 and it shows us exactly what the title says. For two thirds of this very short film (roughly 45 seconds) we only see how Topsy is taken to the place where she got killed. And in the end, we see the actual electrocution. This is an absolutely inhumane video and I hope Edison was ashamed for filming this, even if he obviously did not order the killing. This film is a definite contender for worst silent film of all time. Maybe you could even cut the "silent". Quite an achievement for such a short movie. Cruel, no value in terms of film, nothing. This should never have been made and I am actually glad that this did not become a common trend among filmmakers back in the day. I thing I saw some bullfighting and cockfighting, but that was pretty much it. Hughly not recommend, especially if you are sensitive when it comes to violence against animals.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Horror Movie
JoeytheBrit4 May 2009
The story behind how this film came to be made has been covered by other reviewers so I won't bother going over it again. Suffice to say, any normal human being will be repulsed by what they see on this short and badly deteriorated film. The elephant whose execution we witness was apparently a killer of men, but that doesn't really justify her electrocution. She's docile enough as she's led to her death, suggesting she's no rogue. Despite the graininess of the picture, the viewer can easily identify the moment the poor animal is zapped by the way her huge body stiffens. A second later, smoke rises from around her feet and a few seconds after that she topples to the ground. That's entertainment, folks.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Depressing
uncletoph17 October 2003
This film is a kind of mixture between a snuff film and an animal experimentation film. I suppose the film is somewhat interesting due largely to its age and its gruesome subject matter, but that's really about it. Edison made some other morbid films, with people being sent to the electric chair, hanged, shot, etc. I think these were reenactments, but the subject matter is the same. For this reason I don't think Edison was trying to tout his DC current as much as he was trying to cash in on audience blood-lust. As an early film buff, I just had to see it. But one time was enough for me. NOTE: For the morbidly curious, this film is available on Kino's wonderful "The Movies Begin" DVD box set. There is an easter egg on one of the disks that allows you to access this film, along with a few "execution" films and films considered adult-themed at the time.
28 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Despicable
A_Roode16 February 2006
This vicious little film is horrendous. My low rating for it comes for two main reasons. The first is that it is an animal snuff film and I find that whole concept so vile it turns my stomach. Filmed over a hundred years ago, I can only hope that we've evolved into something a little more humane and compassionate. This film is complete and utter exploitation, made to cash in on the sensational aspects of the film and the subject. Historical interest aside, this is something to watch only if one finds themselves in the grip of morbid fascination.

Reason number two? Look at the way that the camera is set up. It is placed in the best possible location to fully capture the full effect: long march forward of the elephant, perfect view of the electrocution platform and a cold and clinically dispassionate viewpoint of the elephant with smoke coming out of it before it finally collapses. Sickening.

Thomas Edison did many great things for civilization and his talents and intelligence aren't in doubt. Nobody is perfect, but when you realize that this film provided A) an opportunity for him to trump early cinematic competitors with a sensationalist film of an elephant being electrocuted and B) he filmed the execution to demonstrate the greater effectiveness of DC as opposed to AC, you can't help but wonder if the scientist in him was a little TOO dispassionate and cold. Any number of Peter Cushing's mad scientists would be proud. The rest of us should be ashamed and revolted.
35 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
True Horror of Men
QueenoftheGoons11 May 2021
The elephant was no killer of men. She killed a**hole men that deserved it. I can't even look an elephant in the face knowing what we have done to them over the years. And the ASPCA what a joke! I wouldn't give them money for nothing. They could have saved Topsy the elephant but no they didn't want her. I don't give to the ASPCA for that reason, though there are other reasons. The evil that men do.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A glorification of the lowest facet of humanity.
rooprect6 July 2006
We see Thomas Edison, with a glowing smile on his face, trying to electrocute a 5 ton living being. Eventually he was successful, and so the first animal snuff film is born, cleverly disguised as an amazing achievement in technology. This is scientific arrogance at it's worst, folks. It ranks up there with the doctor who decapitated a monkey just to prove that he could keep its severed head alive for 22 minutes.

Oh yes, there's the absurd excuse that the elephant had been convicted of "murder" and sentenced to death, and that this was a fair and humane "execution". To all the people who are satisfied with this sophistry, please form a line on my right. I'm going to give you all a big collective Three Stooges slap across the head.

Go watch "The Advocate" (1993), a movie based on the true story murder trial of a pig in Mideval France. 500 years later, humans are still a bunch of morons I see.

What's next? We arrest birds for stealing our blueberries? Arrest pricker bushes for assault and battery? Thomas Edison, I hope you have a big fat worm crawling through your eye socket right now. Oh wait, that would be trespassing, wouldn't it? lol
16 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
RIP Topsy
ackstasis7 May 2007
Now here is a fascinating little film from the archives of Thomas A. Edison. 'Electrocuting an Elephant' is sure to arouse highly conflicting feelings among different audiences. Some people see it as absolutely despicable, the equivalent of an "animal snuff film" and an indicator of how loathsome the human race actually is. Others may see it as a glorious demonstration of the power of Alternating Current electricity, an invention that has since revolutionised life as we know it (though this definitely wasn't what Edison had intended). The film-goers among us may view 'Electrocuting an Elephant' as a fascinating cinematic curiosity from the early twentieth century, and a testament to film's ability to incite powerful emotions. I, myself, am unsure how exactly to approach this film – in any case, no verdict may be reached until we know all the facts.

Topsy the elephant was born around 1875. She was a domestic animal with the Forepaugh Circus at Coney Island's Luna Park, measuring ten feet in height and 19 feet 11 inches in length. Over a three year period, Topsy killed three men – two of her keepers in Texas, and a third abusive trainer who tried to feed her a lit cigarette. She was then deemed an unacceptable threat to humans and sentenced to be put down, or "executed," if you were so inclined. Thomas Edison, who had been looking for a means to discredit AC electricity – which had been stealing the market for his DC electricity – suggested that Topsy be electrocuted, and he was able to convince the ASPCA that it would be a humane death.

On January 4 1903, after being fed carrots laced with 460 grams of potassium cyanide, Topsy was led to her execution. A hawser (a heavy rope) was place around her neck, one end attached to a "donkey engine" and the other to a post. Wooden sandals lined with copper were attached to her feet, and these were connected by a copper wire to the Edison electric light plant. It took 6600 volts of electricity less than one minute to kill her, and 'Electrocuting an Elephant' captures every uncomfortable moment of it. Is this an entertaining film? Most certainly not. But, at the same time, isn't it all just incredibly interesting?
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Horrendous event captured for publicity stunt - it does not get much worse.
A_Kind_Of_CineMagic17 August 2015
This film captures the real life execution of an elephant by electrocution. The elephant was killed for two reasons, firstly because it had killed people on more than one occasion, secondly because Thomas Edison wanted to publicise his experiments with electricity.

Some leap to defend this film and the great inventor Thomas Edison who made the film. They claim that Edison's brilliance as a scientist and the advancement in electricity safety he was supposed to be trying to bring about make this an important and legitimate scientific experiment which needed to be captured on film. They claim the fact the elephant had killed people makes it acceptable to kill it in this way. They also claim the elephant would not have suffered any more than any other form of execution.

The flaws to their arguments are this:

Firstly the elephant had been very cruelly treated and had only killed as a result of this cruel treatment. Apparently it killed a man who had deliberately burned the end of its trunk with a cigar. That kind of cruelty is totally unacceptable and an animal killing in those circumstances may need to be 'euthanised' for its own good but does not deserve to be punished cruelly or made to suffer further than it already had. Electrocution obviously is a painful and horrific way to die. No person would choose this death over an overdose of sedatives or a bullet in the brain so if you would not choose that death you cannot claim it is the best method for killing an intelligent animal that also feels pain.

A humane way of killing the elephant would have been to put it to sleep with sedatives/tranquilisers then either shoot it in the brain or gas it or give lethal injection. There were plenty of guns capable of doing the job and tranquilisers, gas etc were easily available. Therefore the only reason to electrocute was for the purposes of demonstrating the effect of electrocution to publicise Edison's advancement of technology. To kill with unnecessary suffering for a publicity stunt is totally wrong and cruel. It is like making films of animal testing nowadays. Some tests may be scientifically necessary but many are not and none of them should be done for entertainment, publicity or money making.

Edison was indeed a brilliant scientist with an important place in many scientific advances but that does not mean that he is allowed to do whatever he wants. There is plenty of evidence of him stealing other scientists ideas, suppressing other scientists inventions and acting unnecessarily cruelly or immorally for personal gain. His demonstrations of electricity were primarily for his financial gain and to promote his position as a foremost scientist. Killing that elephant did not advance the technology or improve our understanding of electricity it was just a cruel publicity stunt. Capturing it on film has created one of the worst films you will ever see. It has no film making quality of any kind and is purely a record of how humans treat animals in terrible ways. Sadly a fact that is true to this day.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Coney Dogs or Coney Dumbo: 25 cents on a stick
cricket307 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
PETA people constantly are deriding Texas, where we perhaps have more than our fair share of stockyards, slaughter houses, and meat-packing plants. But unlike the Swedish meatball folks, we do not grind horse into our tube steaks, nor do we wolf down swan burgers as does the British royal family. But about 22 seconds into this 77.34-second ELECTROCUTING AN ELEPHANT Edison short, a sign is seen above the cheering throng of New York City immigrant spectators along the lines of "Available May 2nd, 1903 at Luna Park: Dumbo Dogs--Elephant on a stick!" No cow suffered in the history of the Lone Star state the way poor Topsy suffers here, led through the pervert crowd by the world's most infamous inventor, chained by ankle rings to four stakes, jolted to tippy-toe as her right front foot begins to sizzle, then felled as five-foot flames shoot from her left hind paw as she's literally burned alive just like Joan of Arc in the 1400s. When last seen, Topsy's head is still thrashing around as her tongue swirls out toward her trunk: the "execution," intended to win old Tom the Osing Osing contract for a human electric chair based on "humane" DC or direct current, has FAILED (leaving men to poke steel rods through her eyeballs or something to finish her off). Not only were tickets sold to this "cultural event," but Edison raked in additional thousands for years to come at his peep show "kinetoscopes." I don't care if Topsy personally killed Tom's mom, dad, wife, brothers, sisters, kids, and grandkids: this event is unwarranted barbarism, and all of the mercenary motives behind it--from novelty meat treats to government contracts to sensationalistic snuff film sales--no doubt inspired Leni Riefenstahl to make TRIUMPH OF THE WILL for Hitler! It's hard to dispute ELECTROCUTING AN ELEPHANT is the most scandalous and horrific 77 seconds in cinema history.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
This short film is disturbing shocking!
ironhorse_iv13 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
First off, let's talk about the elephant in the room, the Wizard of Menlo Park. Contrary to popular opinion that dictates that Thomas Edison oversaw the execution of the elephant, in order to discredit the new form of electricity; alternating current made famous from inventor Nicolas Tesla. This backstory of the film might not be accurate. Edison didn't even bother showing up at the event in Luna Park nor anybody of Edison's correspondence besides the film crew. Also, the idea that Topsy was the victim of the so-called War of the Currents is far reaching. In truth from the late 1890s through 1906, Tesla was more focus on trying to develop the transmission of electrical power without wires than running an AC company to fight Edison Electric. Entrepreneur George Westinghouse on the other hand would, but by 1900 the battles between his company & Edison's ideas use for direct current was pretty much over. Much of this was due to investors such as J.P Morgan. Because of him, Edison has become marginalized within his own company having lost majority control in 1889. The merger that formed General Electric also spell doom for Westinghouse as both companies were now marketing alternating current power with GE outlasting Westinghouse out in the end. While it's true that Edison company had electrocuted several animals in the past to display the supposed danger of AC power. By early 1900 the inventor and his company admit that they had underestimated the developmental potential of alternating current and wouldn't mind anybody using it. So, the idea that Edison still holding a grudge and staging an 'electric wire panic' anti-alternation demonstration at this stage of his career is very unlikely. If anything, this film by the Edison Studios could had been use to promote the potential power that AC might bring. After all, many people believe that riding the lightning at the time was a convenient and humane way to executed the condemned. The director for this short film Edwin S. Porter even shot a similar sentence in 1901 with the reenactment death of Leon Czologsz, the anarchist that killed President William McKinley at the electric chair. While Topsy was also a murderess, I doubt her execution was as humane as Leon with the combination of poisoning and strangulation if the electrocution didn't work much like the botch killing of Jumbo II, two years earlier in Buffalo, New York. Originally the park owners Frederic Thompson and Elmer "Skip" Dundy just wanted to hang the creature similar to the way Mary the elephant was hung from a crane years later in 1916 by the town folks of Erwin, Tennessee, but the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals objected to the idea. Instead they turn to extreme measures. They would use the park's unfinished electrical lines for the Electric Tower to kill the beast and charge admission due to the fact that they couldn't make money selling her. Topsy was led out of her pen into the unfinished Luna Park as shown in the video, but refused to cross the bridge over a lagoon which was cut from the film. Because of that, they decided to rig the electrical lines where she stood. They sent 6,600 volts into her body for 10 seconds, toppling the elephant to the ground. While a lot of spectators says that she died suddenly without making a sound. I really doubt it as the elephant seem to struggle for a while after being electric shock, but who knows, it could be after death convulsions or the steam powered winch tightening the two nooses placed around her neck. Regardless the death was still not needed as she could had easily put back into the wild or a local zoo at the time. While it's true that she was a bit troublesome; unlike the popularly belief that she was a baby elephant. In truth she had a long history of abuse done to her. Hearing stories about Topsy getting burn by a lit cigar and struck by a pitchfork is sad. To add onto that, most of her bad reputation was cause by abusive drunk zoo keepers whom allow misbehavior like her running free in the streets of Coney Island and attacking a police station. Sadly, none of this information could have save her. Regardless, the same electricity that killed Topsy would end up killing the park in 1944 as it burned down. As for Edison Studios, while they market the snuff film as a morbid curiosity under the guise of wholesome family friendly entertainment. The documentary didn't do good. It would end up being one of the worst selling coin-operated kinetoscopes short films during the turn of the century. Ironically the man who brought light to the world would end up having a permanent blemish darkening his record. Overtime the graphic film was mostly forgotten until the rise of the internet where it is available to watch on Youtube. The black and white footage has certainly hasn't aged well with all the grain marks if view. Overall: Regardless of its historical value. This short film about a notorious publicity stunt will still not get no elephant salute from me. There is no electric love here.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not too beautiful
dkp-315 February 2005
I saw this film recently and it was fairly disturbing. My previous reviewer has reacted a little violently to the anti-cruelty issue and for no good reason, this is a factual piece of documentary footage shot a long time before Cannibal Holocaust and should not bear any comparison. I'm pretty sure that given the conditions of Coney Island in those days, over packed, rowdy and boisterous, that the elephant was probably provoked. I believe it was fed a lit cigarette, so there you go. This is a fascinating piece however that reveals a time when it was not unusual to inflict such cruelty on animals for spectacle (diving horses and pig chutes).
15 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
What it is
Polaris_DiB18 September 2006
This is a short that can be viewed for two agendas. The first would be the use of it to promote animal rights activism, as the action of electrocution shown in this short is graphic and painful. The other one, a more theoretical one, is its effect on cinema proper.

Both of those stem from a historical sense of what the time period was like. Few people tend to comprehend, or really care, about what was happening in the world at the time the motion picture camera was being invented. It was an age where electricity and light were very new, and the act of filming something was much more a mechanically experimental process than an aesthetic one. It needn't be assumed that then everything created was not artful... a lot of it that survives seems to be... but on the other hand this movie wasn't created to excite any audiences.

Electricity itself was being experimented with not just as something to play with or use to light or create things, but something to be used medicinally, both for life and death. This film is much more an argument for the use of electricity as an execution device, considering that previous experiments on that topic had ended pretty badly. For all its carnage, the elephant dies pretty quickly and cleanly as compared to what it could have been (and I think no matter what the thoughts about this short are, everyone can be on some level thankful that it worked out as well as it did. It could have been a lot worse).

Thus this film has a large amount of importance not only to our culture and society, but also to how we think technologically and the very nature of the world we live in. People in the 21st century have come to accept electricity as just a fact of everyday life, something to pay for as if food or shelter, but that doesn't mean we ever really understood its nature.

--PolarisDiB
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
proof that humans suck
Mr Pants11 August 2000
in response to the response posted earlier, i think a film like this is good evidence towards the theory that humans can be kinda dumb. yeah, the elephant killed some people, but that seems more a reaction to its situation of being captured and paraded around for slack-jawed coney-islanders. in a way, this film was the first edition of "when animals attack!" as it similarly shows the results of animals rebelling against their human captors. of course, this edison film just shows the electrocution, but the meaning is the same.

the film can be seen in its entirety in Mr. Death, as the previous guy posted, and also in a PBS documentary about the rise and fall of Coney Island.
34 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Weak
Torgo_Approves22 April 2007
Oh my God, I was so expecting something more entertaining than this when I downloaded this movie, seeing as 1903 was one of my fave years for movies ever, but it sucked! The "plot", although I'd hesitate to call it that, is about some dumb elephant. It slowly makes its way onto some platform and gets electrocuted to death. Lame. Even for a short film, the plot was too thin to keep my attention. Edison is, like, the worst director ever. Plus, the elephant has no screen presence whatsoever. And the ending? Wow, that wasn't predictable at all. *sarcasm*

The picture quality is horrible too. You can barely tell what's going on most of the time. The only positive thing about this movie is that unlike most other un-scary horror flicks this didn't spawn eleven sequels. Other than that this is a complete waste of money and 1 minute of your life you'll never get back.
4 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
like Bambi vs Godzilla if was crossed with the holocaust
Quinoa19841 May 2016
Now here is some bad storytelling. This is one minute long - sure it's 1903, literally, but still - and we get barely any head up, just two shots: one of an elephant, bound with some wraps, coming up to the camera, and then the next shot the elephant gets electrocuted and falls over to his/her side. Dead. Who committed to this? Why did no one step in, like the police or possibly (if it existed) 1903's version of PETA? And what was Thomas Edison doing there filming it, for posterity? Why didn't he come with a script prepared and some stakes? Where's the three act structure here? Even for a documentary this is poor work.

OK, so that's no very funny, I know. I think it's all I can do to try and mask the fact that I just watched an elephant get electrocuted. It's a purposeless act, but I haven't read the history on it so perhaps there was some context that was there. Maybe the elephant was old or sick and it came from the circus and it was time to set the elephant out to pasture? No, it looks relatively healthy, and as it stands there in poise before the electroshocks happen it seems content enough.

Seriously, I have no idea if it was Edison's notion to shock the elephant, and I'd assume it wasn't (I looked it up and it wasn't his exactly, the elephant would've been killed anyway for killing a couple of people). But the fact is he documented it not for himself but for others to view, and it comes down to one of two things: anthropological purposes (that we see this horrible act for future generations to see and to be horrified by so that we further appreciate the life around us) or, most likely, to gain some public blood-thirst (or again to publicize his electricity, which sounds and is about right). These were the primitive days of cinema, when movies played very quickly, probably at some of the same circuses (or at least in that carnival atmosphere, and to audiences who's attention was brief before going on to this or that.

How did people react then? I'd be curious to see if they were mortified or found it somehow, some way, entertaining. I'd sincerely hope not the latter, and it suddenly occurs to be the irony that it was because of Edison creating electricity that this could be a possibility to start with. It IS a part of history and in the context it was set in I know I should give it a pass. But in the 21st century, after so many decades where elephants have been decimated and Dumbo has become the example of elephants in cinema, it's really shocking (no pun intended).

I don't know if this should even get a rating, but it does here.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Real, Not Special Effects
nekrotikk2 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This seems to find its way on to a lot of lists of most disturbing horror films, only it isn't a film. In my opinion a film is either fiction or a recreation of real events intended as entertainment, not the actual footage of those events that you would expect to see in a documentary. Even if you see this footage in a documentary it's still the real footage of Topsy the elephant murdered by Thomas Edison and Coney Island workers as part of an experiment. As I understand it Topsy was chosen to die because after a lot of mistreatment including one of her trainers burning her trunk she became difficult to handle. A depressing watch that makes me so glad we now have animal rights.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A short torture film
unraisedwall21 February 2018
Yay torturing animals is fun what the hell 1903 I thought that was illegal plus this is an actual animal killed but at least it's short
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Was watching an Elephant die an interesting thing to record?
Kalashnikovin29 July 2022
Thomas Alva Edison was an innovative man and one of the greatest inventors in history but some of the things he had to do to achieve "breakthroughs" They weren't really nice.

Topsy was a circus Elephant which was sacrificed for this Infamous Video, his death is obviously not very graphic due to the static and the absence of sound but it is still unfortunate to see how they had to reach those points for a simple video.

Even so, it is still an innovative video because it was the first where the death (in this case the sacrifice) of an animal was appreciated, but that is not pleasant to watch at all.

I haven't said too much but I think it was enough to get this material across.

For what I said before, I give this video a 3.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Illuminating
hbh115 August 2014
As an insight into the time (1903), this has some interest;the story is horrifying. Basically the execution of the elephant who had been systematically abused by her handlers and finally killed one, was taken on by Edison and turned into a publicity stunt in an attempt to discredit Westinghouse's electrical delivery system (a/c). Edison was not responsible for the decision to execute the elephant, he merely capitalized on it. It shows what lengths an ugly, uncreative, limited man will go to further his agenda, in this case, further enrich himself by attempting to discredit his rivals. Edison's ambition far outstripped his creativity, and his real genius was in the theft of other's ideas so as to profit from them. This film is a perfect image of the exploitation of nature and the horrors that arise from that. Everybody involved was a moral criminal and should be judged by their actions. It's interesting that Edison would provide a perfect document of his moral paucity as well as the extreme ugliness of the time.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A Novelty Not Worth Chronicling
elicopperman9 September 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Here's a really sad story from the very beginnings of filmmaking, back when it was a novelty.

Topsy the elephant was a famed attraction/helper in Coney Island, but was also a very ferocious killer. After its horrible trainer manipulated it to "sic" the Italian workers, the owners of Coney Island decided to take the 6 ton pachyderm, and for execution, they had the animal electrocuted by Thomas Edison.

Edison, as legendary of a technical innovator as he was, was infamous for frying animals for his own sick purposes. After spending hours hooking up the electrodes, the film crew shot the occasion of Topsy being shocked to death.

For its time, it may have been entertaining for the deranged, but this flick is not something to show to the sensitive today. Even animal activists found it too much, so who's to say this would hold up now?
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Misconception About the AC/DC Current War
Hollywood_Yoda15 October 2018
Everyone who has made a review entry to this short film needs to open a history book and educate themselves. This was filmed in 1903, about a decade after the AC/DC current wars between Edison and Westinghouse. And furthermore, Edison was not involved in the creation of this film, he wasn't at Coney Island the day this event occurred. It happened to be people connected to his kinetoscope company who were there filming.

This was filmed in front of the newspaper writers and staff and invited guests in response to Topsy having killed a person in 1902. The reason it was filmed, I'm not sure, except maybe posterity and proof of the death. Although the death seems somewhat humane, Topsy was also poisoned and had ropes around her neck. The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals had stepped in to stop the death of Topsy, but ultimately, were not successful. It should be noted that Edison's film company made many short subject works at Coney Island from 1897 through the 1910s, usually without his input or guidance.

The misconception that Topsys death was staged by Edison just for the AC/DC current war is ludicrous, as it's false. And the myth was popularized wrongly in science magazine Wired in 2008; and an episode of Bob's Burgers titled Topsy in 2013.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cruel? Yes, but see this movie as part of that period of history
mvanhoore29 January 2014
First of all: It wasn't Edison who sentenced this poor elephant to death It wasn't Edison who abused the elephant It wasn't Edison who made the public bloodthirsty

Edison's involvement with the execution of the elephant is by providing the equipment and then filming the event. So making use of two of his "inventions". That he also makes a profit off the fate of the elephant has to be blamed to the nature of humankind that is still eager to see extreme violence. I only have to mention the success of the Faces of Death movies and you see that nothing has changed in 100 years.

What about the movie which in fact is a documentary or rather a newsflash. The filming is accurate en there is some historic significance. So it is important that this movie still exist and shows us a world where cruelty on animals (and human beings) was still a public affair.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Underrated
mattlow3 May 2017
This is by far the most underrated film of the early film era. The composition and editing is way beyond its time, the acting was beyond words, and the direction was superb. Why it was snubbed at the 1904 Academy Awards, I will never know, perhaps it was a race issue, but I digress. Topsy the elephant's performance is really outstanding, and we would not see a performance of that caliber until Jake Gyllenhall's in Donnie Darko. My final thoughts are that this film is an American triumph of not only film, but artistic expression in general.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
So hideous it is impossible to rate
AlsExGal30 December 2022
Topsy the Elephant belonged to the Forepaugh Circus and spent the last years of her life at Coney Island's Luna Park. Because she killed one trainer (who burned her trunk with a lit cigar), and subsequently became aggressive towards two other keepers who had struck her with a pitchfork, Topsy was deemed a threat to people by her owners and killed by electrocution on January 4, 1903 at the age of 36.

Inventor Thomas Edison's employees oversaw and conducted the electrocution, and he captured the event on film. Edison used the film in his campaign against George Westinghouse and AC technology. Edison himself was not present at the electrocution.

Initially, Topsy was supposed to be hanged, but other ways were considered when the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals protested. Edison then suggested electrocution with alternating current, which had been used for the execution of humans since 1890. Topsy was fed carrots laced with 460 grams of potassium cyanide before the deadly current from a 6,600-volt AC source was sent coursing through her body, partly as a demonstration of how "unsafe" his competitor's (George Westinghouse) alternating current design was. The event was originally witnessed by an estimated 1,500 people.

Some background- Direct current is not easily converted to higher or lower voltages. Tesla believed that alternating current (or AC) was the solution to this problem. Alternating current reverses direction a certain number of times per second -- 60 in the U. S. -- and can be converted to different voltages relatively easily using a transformer. Edison tried to counter the increasing popularity of AC power with demonstrations of AC electrocuting animals and thus trying to prove the technology was unsafe. This short film just happens to be his most famous demonstration.

The Edison company submitted the film to the Library of Congress as a "paper print" (a photographic record of each frame of the film) for copyright purposes. The submission may have saved the film for posterity, since most films and negatives of this period decayed or were destroyed over time.

On July 20, 2003, a memorial for Topsy was erected at the Coney Island Museum.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed