How a 1930s Christian Propaganda Film Became a Stoner Cult Classic (2024)

Originally titled Tell Your Children, now more prominently known by the much cooler title Reefer Madness, this 1936 low-budget exploitation film was financed and commissioned by a church group with the intention to raise awareness on the "dangers" of marijuana to a ludicrous degree, only for an astonishing turn of events to transform it into a stoner cult classic that’s still remembered today. The artistic value of propagandic work is a topic of strong contention. While Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will, commissioned by Adolf Hitler himself during the Nazi regime, and even D.W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation, are two works that are widely commended for the advancements they made within the cinematic medium, they are also rightly abhorred for the messages that they use the medium of cinema to perpetuate.

Fortunately for marijuana enthusiasts, Reefer Madness is widely considered one of the worst films of all time. A critical and commercial failure, it was rediscovered in the 1970s and redistributed as a result of its lack of copyright, landing in the same ballpark as Tommy Wiseau’s The Room or Ed Wood’s Plan 9 from Outer Space as a film that’s enjoyed for being "so bad, it’s good." However, it begs the question, can a film with a cult following that’s endured over 80 years since its initial release even be considered a failure? The ultimate irony of Reefer Madness being reclaimed by cannabis culture (now widely accepted as one of the best movies to watch on 4/20) lies more so in the fact that a deeper reading can even view it as satirical, criticizing the illegalization of cannabis (and the resulting controls criminals have over its distribution) or a lack of gun control with the ways that its central events unfold.

RELATED:

‘Reefer Madness’ Blatantly Compares Marijuana to Opioids and Crystal Meth

Feeding into the frenzy surrounding its cult fandom, the plot of Reefer Madness is appropriately ludicrous, featuring several high school students whose lives are almost destroyed by their (frankly, quite moderate) cannabis consumption, with the effects of cannabis in the film being portrayed like Breaking Bad portrays crystal meth. The film claims that smoking cannabis leads to hallucinations, extremely violent criminal actions, and sexual deviancy.

Indeed, the film makes no attempts to mask its propagandic, fear-mongering attentions, highlighting the drug’s effects of uncontrollable laughter (fair enough) only to dive into the violent insanity it induces (too far) in a Star Wars-like opening title scroll, ending on a note that warns its viewers that their children may be the drug’s next victim (hence the original title). Another story told, plucked straight from an educator’s "Marijuana Files," features a young male marijuana addict murdering his entire family with an axe under the influence of the drug. Given its blatant exaggeration, it’s not hard to imagine rows of people in its 1970s midnight screenings or even today laughing uncontrollably, joint in hand, at the preposterously dated outlook on display.

The Story of ‘Reefer Madness’ Can Be Read as Satirical

There are two primary stories that viewers watch unfold when settling in for Reefer Madness. The first involves a teen boy who drives after smoking a joint and commits a hit-and-run accident. That one highlights a serious concern, as driving under the influence of any substance, no matter how recreational, can lead to life-threatening mistakes and should never be performed. The second and primary story is where things get interesting. Bill Harper (Kenneth Craig), an athletic and academically proficient high school student, becomes embroiled in the marijuana scene after being invited to parties where dapperly dressed criminals smoke reefers and laugh maniacally together. Ironically, it looks like a lot of fun, offering a classier alternative to smokers who aren’t fans of hoodies or smoking on the streets.

Where its message truly becomes muddled comes from the fact that Bill is shown having a pretty good time. He has a fling with a new girl he meets (Lillian Mile’s Blanche) and visibly enjoys his time under the influence, in spite of some initial hesitance. Things take a turn for the worse when Bill’s friend Mary (Dorothy Short) comes to the house looking for her brother (the aforementioned hit-and-run driver), where one of the criminals and ostensible reefer addict Ralph (Dave O’Brien) attempts to sexually assault her while under the influence. Here’s the thing: Bill (still totally high), enters the room and, in complete control of his senses, attempts to rescue his friend from the assault. However, Ralph’s criminal boss Jack (Carleton Young) attacks him with a gun, causing a misfire that shoots Mary dead. He then places the gun in Bill’s unconscious hand and frames him for murder.

The irony in the above scene lies in the fact that cannabis itself was probably the last thing at fault in this tragic scenario. Had marijuana been legalized in the world of the film, Bill likely wouldn’t have been hanging out with any criminals to begin with. Furthermore, had gun control been instated in the era, there would have been nothing to shoot Mary with as a result. The scene would work significantly better within a campaign for gun laws or even marijuana policy reform, for it showcases the tragic consequences of demonizing a strictly recreational and medicinal drug.

‘Reefer Madness’ Was Directed By a Filmmaking Pioneer

While unintentionally hilarious, there’s still a debate to be had surrounding the film’s harmlessness, as its status as an "educational work" and the misinformation it spread did in fact contribute to the drug’s criminalization which put millions in prisons over the years. However, if strictly taking its current reputation into account, it’s worth noting that its director, Louis J. Gasnier, was in fact an enormously successful film pioneer, having launched the career of Max Linder (whose onscreen persona was one of the first recognizable recurring characters in cinematic history) and directed the wildly successful melodrama serial The Perils of Pauline in 1914. That’s even earlier than D.W. Griffith’s work on 1915’s The Birth of a Nation, widely considered the first narrative film of all time.

Of course, one’s age is never synonymous with greatness. However, Gasnier shows off his directing chops with this brisk 66-minute feature. As Bill is put on trial for the murder he’s been framed for, the jury debates whether or not to convict and execute him. In a scene that could have surely inspired the entire plot of the iconic 12 Angry Men (ironically the yin to Reefer Madness’ yang, as the former is considered among the best and the latter among the worst films ever made), one juror is overcome with guilt at the thought of sending the young boy to hang. His guilt proves infectious in an entirely visual matter when the head of the jury is overcome with his own (entirely sober) hallucination, seeing a swinging noose superimposed on the wall before him, illustrating his own guilt in inciting a guilty verdict. It’s one of the most haunting shots of the decade, and one that offers hope to Gasnier’s fans that he may have been advocating for an entirely different message the entire time.

Whether it’s the unintentional hilarity, the hypocrisy on display (characters abuse alcohol casually and constantly throughout the film), the genuine formalist merit, or the fact that it may subtly be critiquing different aspects of society, it’s easy to see how Reefer Madness found its place among the stoner midnight movie circuit today. In spite of the misinformation it spread within the era, there is something endearing to be found in the fact that a critical and commercial failure could find its audience several decades later and become a staple of the very culture it intended to vilify. If anything, Reefer Madness highlights the ridiculousness of the initial illegalization of cannabis; a weapon that’s now been repurposed by its victims to ensure that the world doesn’t return to such an ill-informed and zealously religious moral agenda.