Claudelle und ihre Liebhaber

I saw this movie 35 years ago on late night TV and was totally and utterly spellbound by it -- so much so that this many years later I still remember it.

The stark quality of the movie, as shown through the dialog and other "devices" underlined the desperate nature of the characters (the fact that Claudelle knew she didn't have what she wanted but didn't know what that was or how to get it) and their suspicious natures in that someone might find what they were searching for.

A marvelous, fascinating character study. All good literature is nothing more than character study and good movies must have well-developed characters to be considered good. "Claudelle Inglish" is both.

I remember this film from the very early '60s. In those years we saw a lot of movies at the so-called "grind houses" on West 42nd Street (on both sides of Times Square); the deal, for us, was terrific: a double feature for "never more than 99 cents!" The first film to break that price barrier was Mercouri's NEVER ON Sunday. After her amazing bitchiness in A SUMMER PLACE, Constance Ford was again remarkable in this motion picture. I feel that this film, like too many others, is nearly forgotten today. But, when graduates, with a B.F.A. in Film, Theatre and Television, can look you in the eye and confess that they've "never heard of Marlene Dietrich", what can one expect?! Another one, a 2004 NYU grad, had never heard of THE GLASS MENAGERIE. Perhaps it's not the students but the schools that are failing!

This movie starts out appearing to be the usual b-movie shlock morality tale - and that beginning is where any similarity ends. Claudelle Inglish winds up having a place right beside movies like Showgirls and Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, just for sheer shock value.

The basic premise is familiar enough, sweet young thing is seduced and then jilted. However, nobody knows that, since her beau is not a total creep; her shameful secret is still safe from the townspeople who would label her a whore - so here's where the fun starts, since our heroine, literally overnight, decides to transform herself into the town tramp anyway. Why? Uhhh, why not?

Of course it would have made perfect sense for Claudelle to just go ahead and marry the older, unappealing rich man who all but drools on her, but that would be too easy, and it won't happen here. In fact nothing here plays out the way you would expect it to, and that is the brilliance of this film and why it is something you have to see to believe.

This is trash at its very finest, and to tell anything more about what happens after Claudelle creates her own hell would spoil everything.

This movie is sometimes described as sleazy, but it was the advertising emphasizing the girl gone bad theme that is sleazy. She had a lot of help on the road to perdition. Constance Ford as her unhappy frustrated mother is terrific, and is a major force driving her daughter to accept gifts for her favors. Her well meaning father is no help to her or her mother, he is content being a share cropper, living in a house with no running water. Reviews rarely mention Frank Overton,and appears to be a minor character in the beginning. Starting on Broadway, he has a wonderful voice. But in this film it's his eyes that tell everything. He goes from innocuous small town shopkeeper to husband cheating with Claudel , and anguished father of a dead son. Multiple peoples bad choices lead to the destruction of 2families, not just Claudel.

FYI, Ford Rainy appears in this film as well as Last Mile, as did Frank Overton, only the roles are reversed. Watch both films for some powerful acting and a lot of anguish.

Potboiler from Erskine Caldwell's novel about a Southern sharecropper's daughter, broken-hearted after being rejected by her soldier-fiancé, turning from timid girl to tramp in order to even the score. Producer-screenwriter Leonard Freeman is rather timid himself within this potentially sweaty and sinful scenario; we're never sure just how far our heroine is going sexually with the drooling males in town--or if she's just a tease (had the film been made only a few years later, it might've been a more salacious melodrama). Diane McBain is well-cast as Claudelle Inglish, and she gives a good performance, but restrictions of the era prevent her and director Gordon Douglas from exploring the character with any depth. As a result, the finale doesn't provide the emotional punch Freeman or Douglas probably hoped for. Instead of being a classic tragic figure, Claudelle merely seems guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. **1/2 from ****