Der Schnorchel

A plot common to quite a few suspense movies: apparently good guy gains affection of family, the better to obtain his greedy objectives. The alibi he creates for murder may have been clever in 1958 but today's technology would make it seem obvious.

However, the plot resolves itself to a showdown between the killer and a little girl. While the tale may echo Cape Fear, The Night of the Hunter etc, without their panache, the ultimate resolution is more like Wait Until Dark and the climax is carried off with as much tension and almost as much success. It must be nearly 30 years since I first saw both films - and I recall this climax as clearly as the better known Arkin-Hepburn performance.

Minor but entertaining Hammer thriller, not quite reaching the heights of other entries in their "psychological thrillers" ouevre, but still effective.

The film starts right off with it's main murderer on screen committing his evil deed, clearly establishing his (and the film's) gimmick of the snorkel used as an accessory to murder. So from the very beginning we know this is not going to be a whodunnit. What we have here instead here is a "who will find out" plot.

Once the opening credits have finished, the main plot of the film starts with the daughter of the murder victim feeling almost positive that she knows who is responsible for the deed but at the same time, unable to prove it, as nobody has been able to work out how the act was committed, and therefore the killer has got away with it. The more agitated the daughter becomes, the more the killer starts to see her as a threat to his freedom, and so a cat and mouse game starts to build as both try to outwit each other.

This sounds complicated, and it is, but the roles in the film are quite well defined. The killer is a creepy but charismatic older man, able to convince everyone that he is actually mourning his dead wife, and the "suspector" is a teenage girl who everyone thinks is just over imaginative. I could almost imagine William Castle making this film! The acting is very good, and it's all very British and proper. There are plot twists and the climax is clever and worth waiting for, although as a whole the film has dated somewhat. Quite hard to see now, seemingly only available on the Sony 6 film box set DVD "Icons of Suspense", which is worth a purchase due to it having 5 other hard to see Hammer thrillers. So "The Snorkel" gets a thumbs up from me.

No one could portray the role of a villain with more skill than

Peter Van Eyck. This film was made for him and if you can overlook the obvious predictability of it you will be more than compensated by its more than average share of suspense. Dont miss it if it comes around again, you wont be disappointed.

This is another of the underrated and seldom seen suspense films that Hammer put out in the late 1950's, early 60's. It has sort of a Columbo flavor to it as we see the sinister Van Eyck very creatively murdering his wife in the opening scenes and spending the rest of the film attempting to convince a suspicious niece that he is innocent. It is a very atmospheric black and white film, a media which should be taken advantage of more even today as a tool to establish mood. Van Eyck is superb as the villain and the supporting cast is first rate. The Snorkel is not really a classic but is solid and holds up fairly well after almost half a century. Catch this one on cable or video when you can, you won't be disappointed.

Set in Italy in an ornate villa, you see the crime from the beginning, and how it is pulled off in detail. An apparently fortune hunting husband, Paul Decker (Peter van Eyck), has put a powerful sedative in his wealthy wife's drink causing her to fall into a deep sleep, has taped up the windows, locked the doors to the room she is in, and turns on the gas in the room. He dons a snorkel connected to air coming from outside and stays in the room until the next morning when the servants arrive. He then hides in a section under the floor, with the opening to this compartment hidden by a throw rug. The servants find their dead mistress, call the police, and the woman's death is ruled a suicide. The murdering husband slips out and leaves after everybody has left the villa.

The dead woman's daughter, Candy, about 13, is not buying it. She says she saw the man kill her father - his death was ruled an accident - and says that her mother had no reason to kill herself, especially on the day she was returning home from boarding school. But nobody believes her and her stepfather has a passport stamped by the Italian authorities saying he came back to Italy from France the day after his wife died.

So the rest of the film is a tense cat and mouse game between Candy and her stepfather, with her trying to figure out how he did what he did, and with nobody believing her, and her stepdad doing a good job of playing the grieving husband. He charms the close family friend caring for Candy, and the police seem determined to close the case and call this a suicide because, after all, for the husband to have done it he would have had to be in the locked room the entire time that the gas was on AND live. Of course, the answer is in the movie title, and somehow I think Columbo would have had a harder look at the stepfather than the police did here. In fact, this is set up very much like an episode of Columbo - you see the crime, you see the criminal, but Columbo has to prove what he suspects going initially only on a hunch.

There is a terrific twist at the end and is well worth sticking around to see. Let's just say the ending is heavy.