ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,6/10
3,9 k
MA NOTE
Un baron mystérieux et cruel, dont le visage est devenu figé dans un sourire horrible, demande à un éminent médecin londonien de lui appliquer des traitements expérimentaux pour lui restaure... Tout lireUn baron mystérieux et cruel, dont le visage est devenu figé dans un sourire horrible, demande à un éminent médecin londonien de lui appliquer des traitements expérimentaux pour lui restaurer le visage.Un baron mystérieux et cruel, dont le visage est devenu figé dans un sourire horrible, demande à un éminent médecin londonien de lui appliquer des traitements expérimentaux pour lui restaurer le visage.
- Prix
- 1 nomination au total
Ilse Burkert
- Second Girl
- (uncredited)
William Castle
- William Castle
- (uncredited)
Constance Cavendish
- Mrs. Higgins
- (uncredited)
Albert D'Arno
- Gatekeeper
- (uncredited)
James Forrest
- Geoffery Wainwright
- (uncredited)
David Janti
- Janku
- (uncredited)
Annalena Lund
- First Girl
- (uncredited)
Mavis Neal Palmer
- Head Nurse
- (uncredited)
Charles H. Radilak
- Stationmaster
- (uncredited)
Franz Roehn
- Gravedigger
- (uncredited)
Tina Woodward
- The Girl
- (uncredited)
Avis en vedette
William Castle had cemented his reputation as a director of fun, gimmicky horror films by 1961, but for this one he's (almost!) dropped the fun feel and replaced it with a more serious tone; and in doing so has gone and created his best film! The film opens with an introduction from the director (I said he'd ALMOST dropped the fun feel), and from there we move onto a macabre tale of greed, curses, grave robbing and disfigurement. Based on a novella by Ray Russell, the film takes obvious influence from George Franju's masterpiece 'Eyes without a Face' in that it follows the horrifying idea of someone having their face scarred beyond belief. The tale puts greed at its centre, and it is that deadly sin which is to blame for the title character's affliction. We follow a prominent English doctor who is called to Europe on the request of his ex-lover. While there, he meets the cruel and sinister Baron Sardonicus; a man who is forced to wear a mask as his face is too hideous to look at. It's not long thereafter that we learn the reason for this facial deformity, as the man retells the tale of how he robbed his father's grave for a winning lottery ticket.
William Castle may not be the greatest director of all time, but here he creates just the right tone for the story to flourish in. The Gothic locations, sinister score and foreboding mood combine to ensure that the story is both gripping and as hideous as its central protagonist. This is helped along by the fact that the central characters are well fleshed out, and all of their motives make sense. Mr Sardonicus himself verges on comic book villainy at times, and as the plot is fairly ludicrous, this isn't always the easiest film to swallow. However, Castle ensures that the action always makes sense, and it has to be said that the tale has been given as good handling as it could afford. Castle's love for showboating shows through towards the end, however, when he tries one of his 'interactive cinema' tricks regarding the fate of Mr Sardonicus. It is these sort of things that make William Castle films what they are, and it fits films like The Tingler; but here Castle's segment feels out of place, given that the tone of the movie is largely serious. However, it's not enough to spoil what is a great Gothic horror story and overall I highly recommend this film to horror fanatics!
William Castle may not be the greatest director of all time, but here he creates just the right tone for the story to flourish in. The Gothic locations, sinister score and foreboding mood combine to ensure that the story is both gripping and as hideous as its central protagonist. This is helped along by the fact that the central characters are well fleshed out, and all of their motives make sense. Mr Sardonicus himself verges on comic book villainy at times, and as the plot is fairly ludicrous, this isn't always the easiest film to swallow. However, Castle ensures that the action always makes sense, and it has to be said that the tale has been given as good handling as it could afford. Castle's love for showboating shows through towards the end, however, when he tries one of his 'interactive cinema' tricks regarding the fate of Mr Sardonicus. It is these sort of things that make William Castle films what they are, and it fits films like The Tingler; but here Castle's segment feels out of place, given that the tone of the movie is largely serious. However, it's not enough to spoil what is a great Gothic horror story and overall I highly recommend this film to horror fanatics!
And it scared the hell out of me.
The face is just too smiley for even the cheeriest of folks.
I was scared out of my wits by this black and white movie...most adults would probably find funny. So, decide for yourself.
The face is just too smiley for even the cheeriest of folks.
I was scared out of my wits by this black and white movie...most adults would probably find funny. So, decide for yourself.
Of the William Castle films with which I'm familiar, "Sardonicus" is definitely the best. If you strip away some of the schlocky "padding" (the maid with the leeches, the "beauty contest" in the cellar, etc) you have a remarkably effective and entertaining film. Ray Russell's plotting and dialog are pretty high quality stuff, and some of the conversations have an almost poetic quality, especially in the scenes between Guy Rolfe and Ronald Lewis.
Of course, the dialog is all the more effective when delivered by a fine cast, and the stately, urbane Rolfe, the amiable and stalwart Lewis and the delightfully quirky and sinister Oscar Holmolka elevate this film FAR above its low-budget liabilities. Castle's direction is more than competent, my only complaint being the overly bright lighting throughout the castle interior, which robs many scenes of their creepy potential.
THEN THERE IS THE GRAVEYARD SCENE----a masterpiece of its type in the annals of horror films. Acting, direction, cinematography, etc ALL rise to the occasion, with the shocking revelation within the coffin and the psychological dimension of its effect on Marek/Sardonicus producing a scene which is as horrifying and disturbing as it is memorable; it's impossible to describe--you simply have to see it yourself. And the trauma continues as Guy Rolfe stumbles home in the dark, sobbing pathetically, where his wife (and we the viewer) first discovers his hideous deformity. I initially saw this film on TV when I was 20 years old and it STILL scared the crap out of me! Thank God I didn't see it when it was first released.
HERE'S A THOUGHT--- the shot of Sardonicus' father's corpse is so profoundly upsetting (to US as viewers as well as Guy Rolfe in the film)that I don't believe it was designed and created by Castle and his team; I bet anything that they "FARMED OUT" this shot to an effects team in Mexico--where the horror effects artists were FAR better at creating visuals of this sort. Or perhaps the coffin opening was a shot LIFTED from some earlier, obscure Mexican film, which Columbia might have purchased for this crucial shot in "Sardonicus" (?)
The final shot of the coffin lid opening (all the more creepy since it appears to open BY ITSELF)is interesting; if you look closely, you will notice that this is a DIFFERENT coffin lid than the one in the previous shots; the pattern of dirt and mold is different, as are the seams between the wooden planks. When the father's remains turn up later in the shocking padlocked-room scene, it's clear that the quality of workmanship is nowhere near as good as the coffin figure, instead appearing to be the sort of effect that Castle's production team would have created from their modest budget. I imagine that it's impossible to ever know whether or not my idea is correct, since too much time has passed since the film was made.
Many people make a big deal about the "Punishment Poll" gimmick for the film, but it's really just a distraction for any serious viewer; too bad that Castle's 11th-hour on-screen appearance breaks the mood just prior to the classically understated irony of the final scene.
Of course, the dialog is all the more effective when delivered by a fine cast, and the stately, urbane Rolfe, the amiable and stalwart Lewis and the delightfully quirky and sinister Oscar Holmolka elevate this film FAR above its low-budget liabilities. Castle's direction is more than competent, my only complaint being the overly bright lighting throughout the castle interior, which robs many scenes of their creepy potential.
THEN THERE IS THE GRAVEYARD SCENE----a masterpiece of its type in the annals of horror films. Acting, direction, cinematography, etc ALL rise to the occasion, with the shocking revelation within the coffin and the psychological dimension of its effect on Marek/Sardonicus producing a scene which is as horrifying and disturbing as it is memorable; it's impossible to describe--you simply have to see it yourself. And the trauma continues as Guy Rolfe stumbles home in the dark, sobbing pathetically, where his wife (and we the viewer) first discovers his hideous deformity. I initially saw this film on TV when I was 20 years old and it STILL scared the crap out of me! Thank God I didn't see it when it was first released.
HERE'S A THOUGHT--- the shot of Sardonicus' father's corpse is so profoundly upsetting (to US as viewers as well as Guy Rolfe in the film)that I don't believe it was designed and created by Castle and his team; I bet anything that they "FARMED OUT" this shot to an effects team in Mexico--where the horror effects artists were FAR better at creating visuals of this sort. Or perhaps the coffin opening was a shot LIFTED from some earlier, obscure Mexican film, which Columbia might have purchased for this crucial shot in "Sardonicus" (?)
The final shot of the coffin lid opening (all the more creepy since it appears to open BY ITSELF)is interesting; if you look closely, you will notice that this is a DIFFERENT coffin lid than the one in the previous shots; the pattern of dirt and mold is different, as are the seams between the wooden planks. When the father's remains turn up later in the shocking padlocked-room scene, it's clear that the quality of workmanship is nowhere near as good as the coffin figure, instead appearing to be the sort of effect that Castle's production team would have created from their modest budget. I imagine that it's impossible to ever know whether or not my idea is correct, since too much time has passed since the film was made.
Many people make a big deal about the "Punishment Poll" gimmick for the film, but it's really just a distraction for any serious viewer; too bad that Castle's 11th-hour on-screen appearance breaks the mood just prior to the classically understated irony of the final scene.
I saw this in the "show" when I was about 10, and seriously, I have never forgotten it. About 20 years ago, I noticed that it was on a station out of Toledo in the middle of the night, and even though I had to get up in the morning, and they had commercials every 10 minutes, I stayed up (after setting the alarm to GET UP) and watched the whole movie... I guess I am a William Castle fan, I have to admit it. (One other that still kills me is Homicidal, and woo hoo Richard Rust is in it, too, my favorite!) I play the lottery every day now, too, and that storyline about the ticket in the grave just GETS ME!! This is one odd film, like everything Castle does, but ya gotta love it!! It sticks with you, once you've seen it, you are hooked forever.
Of the great William Castle's classic gimmick films, this is generally regarded as one of the lesser ones. It should be seen for the amusing period piece that it is, and for the hilarious concept of the "Punishment Poll" with which it was originally exhibited. Upon its original release, viewers were allowed to vote "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" for the fate of the title character. In actuality, there is only one ending, but it's a pretty good one. The actors in this film are all good, with Oscar Homolka being the highlight as the sinister assistant. There is good atmosphere, with plenty of fog and shadows, and the story is intriguing, if not entertaining. The music by Von Dexter, who worked on several other Castle films, is also notable. Definitely a fun film for those who like the old-time horror films which sacrifice gore for suspense, and a must-see for fans of William Castle.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesWilliam Castle: [gimmick] During its initial theatrical release, attendees were given small white cards with luminous thumbs with which to vote thumbs-up or thumbs-down.
- GaffesSir Robert "invents" the hypodermic needle, despite its having been invented decades earlier than the film's 1880 setting.
The film doesn't say Sir Robert invented the hypodermic needle. It correctly says that Alexander Wood invented the modern hypodermic needle and syringe. However, it is true that this invention was made long before the date the film is set in.
- Autres versionsAn alternate version was supplied for drive-ins. For this version, only the footage of 'William Castle (I)' was different. For the drive-in version, instead of the "Punishment Poll" cards, the audience was asked to flash their headlights to vote on the ending. The Columbia exchanges could replace the two William Castle segments to make an existing print suitable for drive-in bookings. As with the theater version, there was only one ending filmed.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Creature Features: Mr. Sardonicus (1972)
- Bandes originalesFoggy, Foggy Dew
(uncredited)
English folk song
Performed by Ronald Lewis
[Sir Robert sings the song while he's taking a bath at the Baron's castle]
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Mr. Sardonicus?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Der unheimliche Mr. Sardonicus
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 29 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant