Four Sided Triangle

Bill and Robin are scientists, and rivals for the affection of Lena (played by Barbara Payton-- being the love interest of two men is basically the same role she played in "Bride of the Gorilla"- 1951). It's amazing what two scientists can do, in a barn they bought and converted into a workshop, and with only £2,000 for research funds. They create a machine called a "Duplicator," a.k.a. a "Reproducer," with 2 identical pods, (much like would be used in "The Fly"- 1958). This can "convert energy into matter" (more on that next paragraph). At first they make an exact replica of a watch, then another small object. The plot thickens: Robin marries Lena. Even though Bill could create copies of anything in the world-- gold, rubies, rare drugs, radium-- Bill only wants to create another Lena. The Duplicator has only worked on inanimate objects; Bill modifies it so it can make perfect duplicates of small animals. Oddly enough, Lena agrees to be duplicated. So now we have Lena, and her duplicate Helen. But, since Helen is a perfect copy, she too is in love with Robin! What will the lovesick Bill do now? A hokey, no-budget movie, typical of 1950s flicks with pseudo-science and trite plots. It's curious that even though inventor Bill can be a genius at science, he is a knucklehead at love.

The theme of this movie reminds me of lyrics to the song "Money for Nothing" by Dire Straits-- "Money for nothin' and your chicks for free." The Duplicator seems to create things: effortlessly, cost-free, and out of thin air, sort of like Barbara Eden did in "I Dream of Jeannie." Oh, they say that the matter "is created from energy." According to Einstein's equation, "E equals m c-squared" you can convert matter into energy (a lot of energy). In an atomic explosion, about one gram of matter (Uranium-235) will turn into the energy of 18-kilotons of TNT. This works both ways. You could theoretically convert energy into matter-- but then, it would take the energy of an 18-kiloton atomic bomb to produce one gram of matter! So it would take about the energy of 450 atomic bombs to create one pound of matter. Since Helen weighs over 100 pounds, you would need the energy of 45,000 atomic bombs to create that much matter. Wouldn't it be easier for Bill to try a dating service?

Hey, guys! Did you and your buddy ever chase after the same girl, and lose the girl to your buddy? Sure, we all have. How many of you went out and tried to find a girl *just* like the one you lost? Okay, most of us are still here. Now, how many of you actually went out and tried to reproduce the girl of your dreams? Nope, me neither.

Robin and Bill are buddy mad scientists who are both childhood friends with Lena. Robin & Bill develop a device which makes an exact duplicate of whatever you put into the machine. The amount of energy required to change energy to matter, let alone the ability to exactly order that energy into anything useful, is beyond comprehension or reason. However, it does pose an interesting thought experiment about the nature of identity and what makes one unique in God's universe.

Helen is tortured because she realizes not only does she not have her own identity, but that the man she loves is loved by her "twin". Her world-view is the same as Lena's was before she married Robin. Helen is depressed to the point of suicide realizing that she can never be anything but a shadow of Lena. Bill is miserable because he has lost the girl of his dreams twice to the same man. His cowardace in love contrasts sharply to the point of curiousity with his impetuous, heart-on-his sleeve emotions in other aspects of his life.

The ending gets a demerit because of the need to dress them exactly for the first time in order to build a dramatic conclusion for the audience. Considering that the barn fire claims either Lena or Helen, a more dramatic ending would have had the survivor wrapped in a blanket, and the eventual hospital scene played out there. The emotion of the discovery of the survivor against the burning fire would dovetail nicely. However, this is nitpicking in an otherwise great movie.

Sterno says pull Euclid out of geometry class to watch Four Sided Triangle.

Now here's a film that should appeal to anyone who's ever found him/herself in the unwanted third of a classic love triangle. What to do if you're that unfortunate third wheel? Well, if you're Dr. Leggat, in "Four Sided Triangle" (1953), and you've just perfected your revolutionary duplicating device, you put your gal in it, make yourself a knockoff copy and hope for the best. But things go a tad awry in this very clever tale... I've gotta tell you, I really did enjoy this movie. With its small cast of characters, beautiful B&W photography, imaginative camera angles and laboratory setting, it almost suggested a British variant of an old "Outer Limits" episode. But this is in truth a Hammer film--their first sci-fi outing--and directed wonderfully by Terence Fisher, who would go on to many more successes for this legendary studio. The film is very well written--almost, dare I say it, literately written--extremely well acted and tightly scripted. Yes, it was cheaply made, but somehow everything still looks fine, particularly the impressive lab equipment, and the DVD here is as crisp and clean looking as can be. This cautionary tale on cloning turns out to be a real little gem, and deserves a wide audience. The Maltin book inexplicably gives it a "BOMB" rating, but "DVD Delirium," another wonderful film guide, sings its praises. In this case, I think the Maltin book has got it all wrong. See for yourself...

Rather clever, perhaps over-drawn science fiction(for lack of another fitting category) about two young men who discover how to replicate any matter whatsoever. The two lads are assisted by gorgeous Barbara Payton and only one of the guys gets the girl. Soon the other pines for his lost love and tries sending live matter through the replicating devices with the express purpose of duplicating his lost love Lena. Hammer horror icon Terrance Fisher directs this early Hammer film with style albeit on a small scale with a very limited budget. The science of the film shouldn't be dwelled on too terribly long if you want to buy into the film, and it is the means to tell a story of a love triangle which soon has a fourth side - a four sided love triangle. The film has a lot of narration by James Hayter as a doctor that took in one of the men as a boy. Hayter adds some much needed credibility to the film and is a voice of reason - to a degree - and compassion. The implications of the new technology are only superficially explored and soon you see the plot turning into yet another Frankenstein -type film with man destined to try and become God and create life. What makes this film work is Fisher's low-key direction and simple yet sturdy performances by all concerned. Payton is very lovely as well. While certainly not in the ranks of great Hammer films or great Fisher films, Four Sided Triangle is thought-provoking, engaging, and predictable.

**CAUTION: HUGE SPOILERS** In a rural English community, two friends called Bill (STEPHEN MURRAY) and Robin (JOHN VAN EYSSEN) invent a 'reproducer', a piece of scientific equipment which can recreate any object. They are aided in their work by Dr Harvey (JAMES HAYTER), the local GP and a close friend of theirs since they were children. During the celebrations of their fantastic discovery, Robin announces that he is to marry Lena (BARBARA PAYTON), a beautiful woman who both friends have fancied since they were children. Devastated, Bill decides to use the reproducer to create a clone of Lena for himself. However, as the clone is an exact replica, she shares the same thoughts and feelings as the real Lena.

FOUR SIDED TRIANGLE is an absurd but nevertheless enjoyable science-fiction melodrama. Along with STOLEN FACE (see my review), it is one of the very few films from this chapter in the history of Hammer and Terence Fisher to indicate the direction that the company would take when they became Britain's best horror studio. Both pictures share the same theme of a well to do man perverting his skills in order to win the affections of the woman he loves. For example, in STOLEN FACE, Dr Philip Ritter used his knowledge of plastic surgery to recreate the face of concert pianist Alice Brent on a deformed petty criminal because he couldn't marry Alice because she was already spoken for. The very same reason why Bill in FOUR SIDED TRIANGLE felt compelled to use his scientific invention to duplicate Lena. Also both Dr Ritter and Bill were so obsessed in their love for women that they were both unable to see that disastrous consequences could result. Both characters from these two early movies are comparable to Baron Frankenstein in Fisher's THE CURSE OF FRANKENSTEIN. Even though Frankentein was more concerned with bringing the dead back to life than with his love life, he also was too oblivious to the certain doom that faced him when his creature became a criminal lunatic and he intended his creature to be perfect very much as Bill and Ritter intended theirs to be. FOUR SIDED TRIANGLE must also be the only b-picture in cinema history to have the courage of it's own lunatic convictions. This is thanks largely to Terence Fisher who opts to emphasize the causes and consequences of the characters' actions and the moral outcome as well. For instance at the end of the film the screen is filled with a biblical quote "You can either have joy or power you shall not have both". This follows the climax where Bill and one of the Lena's perish in a fire. However, one of them survived and the only way to judge between the clone and the real Lena was by a scar on the back of the latter's neck. Robin is overjoyed when its the real Lena, his wife, who has survived. This is the significance of Fisher's biblical quote. Robin had been tempted by power, but once the machine was destroyed in the blaze, his one opportunity for power was lost but he still had his wife and therefore he had joy but not power. This very much sets the standards for Fisher's skill as a director, whereas most of his films from this period such as MASK OF DUST or SPACEWAYS have nothing to commend them at all. In his best films for Hammer, he had that ability to take a ridiculous storyline and give it conviction by placing attention solely on his characters and the consequences and morality of what could happen if such things did occur in the world. The cast sensibly play it straight and all are suited to their roles with James Hayter shining as Dr Harvey who aids the men in their experiments but at the same time warns them of the dangers they face. John Van Eyssen who was later the head of Columbia Pictures would appear as Jonathan Harker in Fisher's classic Dracula (1958).