NOTE IMDb
6,2/10
3,6 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueTeenagers Libby and Kit innocently spend an evening making random prank calls that lead to murderous consequences.Teenagers Libby and Kit innocently spend an evening making random prank calls that lead to murderous consequences.Teenagers Libby and Kit innocently spend an evening making random prank calls that lead to murderous consequences.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Sara Lane
- Kit Austin
- (as Sarah Lane)
Sara Anderson
- Jill Adams
- (non crédité)
Russ Bender
- Police Sgt. Harris
- (non crédité)
Dee Carroll
- Telephone Operator
- (non crédité)
John Crowther
- Tommy Kane
- (non crédité)
Douglas Evans
- Tom Ward
- (non crédité)
Janet Hamill
- Linda Carson
- (non crédité)
Tom Hatten
- Gerald Nyes
- (non crédité)
Glen Vernon
- John Adams
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
That's what the poster ads warned! UXORICIDE! (look it up). William Castle's "I Saw What You Did" is a great little suspense drama, with a perky cast and an intriguing story. Left alone one night while their parents are out of town, teen-aged Libby, her little sister Tess, and Libby's visiting friend Kit amuse themselves by making crank phone calls. They especially enjoy crooning "I saw what you did and I know who you are" to their victims. Unfortunately, one of their calls hits the bullseye--a homicidal maniac who has just murdered his wife. Tense and atmospheric, with delightful performances from Andi Garrett, Sarah Lane and Sharyl Locke as the kids, and strong ones from John Ireland as the psychopath, and the one-and-only Joan Crawford (straight from Castle's "Strait-Jacket") as his blackmail-minded neighbor, who's inexplicably in love with him. Though her part is a supporting one, just try to look away when she's on screen. A word, too, for the beautiful photography-no mean achievement in a low-budget film. Anchor Bay Entertainment released the movie on DVD and VHS back in 1999. The picture quality is sensational. Also included are two fun '' Teaser Trailers'' -one featuring Castle himself. Though the DVD is not ''anmorphic'' it is in Widescreen with no scratches or blemishes anywhere.It must have been taken from the original Universal negative.The one-channel soundtrack is equally strong, though a good DVD system will allow you to upgrade to two-channel,''Simulated Stereo'' which sounds even better. The Trailers are as well preserved as the film itself. Sadly, it's long out of print, and goes for big $$ on Amazon and EBAY. The 1988 Television remake is terrible. Avoid it and stick with the original!
...which is a no-budget thriller.
Two teenage girls (Sara Lane, Andi Garrett) make prank phone calls saying the title line. By mistake they call Steve Marak (John Ireland) who's just killed his wife. Then things get out of control.
One of William Castle's low budget horror films that he churned out in the 1960s. None of them are that good but this is definitely one of the better ones. It's photographed in moody black & white and director Castle makes excellent use of darkness (notice all the darkness above the girls when they make the calls) and shadows and fog (which inexplicably shows up at the end). There's also a very vicious shower stabbing in the first 20 minutes with shots obviously imitating "Psycho". There are also quite a few good moments calculated to make you jump.
On the debit side--there's not enough story even for 83 minutes; Joan Crawford (dressed to the 9s for no reason) is wasted as a next-door neighbor; Ireland is stone-faced throughout; Lane and Garrett are horrible actresses (and, tellingly, never made another movie) and the script has lines that no teenager would utter.
Still, there are worse ways to kill 90 minutes and the jolts in this film do work. Worth seeing if you're a horror fan.
Two teenage girls (Sara Lane, Andi Garrett) make prank phone calls saying the title line. By mistake they call Steve Marak (John Ireland) who's just killed his wife. Then things get out of control.
One of William Castle's low budget horror films that he churned out in the 1960s. None of them are that good but this is definitely one of the better ones. It's photographed in moody black & white and director Castle makes excellent use of darkness (notice all the darkness above the girls when they make the calls) and shadows and fog (which inexplicably shows up at the end). There's also a very vicious shower stabbing in the first 20 minutes with shots obviously imitating "Psycho". There are also quite a few good moments calculated to make you jump.
On the debit side--there's not enough story even for 83 minutes; Joan Crawford (dressed to the 9s for no reason) is wasted as a next-door neighbor; Ireland is stone-faced throughout; Lane and Garrett are horrible actresses (and, tellingly, never made another movie) and the script has lines that no teenager would utter.
Still, there are worse ways to kill 90 minutes and the jolts in this film do work. Worth seeing if you're a horror fan.
and she knows who you are!
This is another strange William Castle concoction that features Joan Crawford in one of the B-horror movies she made near the end of her career, and yet the only way they could fit her into this story was to make her a kooky neighbor lady who wears tacky jewelry that looks like some sort of bizarre Aztec armor.
Everyone knows the plot, which involves two teenage girls who spend an evening making prank phone calls and, through the miracle of plot contrivance, stumble into the path of a psychotic man who has just committed murder.
I don't know if any of the other viewers felt the same way, but I really think the movie's violence is a bit shocking for its day. The first murder is an ironic ripoff of "Psycho", with the person in the shower committing the murder instead of being slashed, and I was surprised at how graphic it really is.
Also, I don't know whether this was really the filmmakers' intention or not, but they have captured the excitement of a teenage adventure and carried it effortlessly into a suspenseful conclusion. Ironically, the only thing in the movie that feels wrong is the subplot involving Crawford. It was obviously inserted to give the movie a star and to pad out the running time.
This is another strange William Castle concoction that features Joan Crawford in one of the B-horror movies she made near the end of her career, and yet the only way they could fit her into this story was to make her a kooky neighbor lady who wears tacky jewelry that looks like some sort of bizarre Aztec armor.
Everyone knows the plot, which involves two teenage girls who spend an evening making prank phone calls and, through the miracle of plot contrivance, stumble into the path of a psychotic man who has just committed murder.
I don't know if any of the other viewers felt the same way, but I really think the movie's violence is a bit shocking for its day. The first murder is an ironic ripoff of "Psycho", with the person in the shower committing the murder instead of being slashed, and I was surprised at how graphic it really is.
Also, I don't know whether this was really the filmmakers' intention or not, but they have captured the excitement of a teenage adventure and carried it effortlessly into a suspenseful conclusion. Ironically, the only thing in the movie that feels wrong is the subplot involving Crawford. It was obviously inserted to give the movie a star and to pad out the running time.
I saw this movie when I was about 11 or 12 and I remember it to this day. (I am almost 40.)It scared the wits out of me and I certainly never wanted to make prank phone calls after that! I would love to see it again and share it with my kids. This a great B classic that not many people have seen.
Kids left alone in the house inadvertently play a phone prank on psychopath John Ireland, who has just murdered his trampy Mrs. in the shower! Whenever you see a biography of Joan Crawford's career, this title usually gets left out. True, she has a minor role in it (playing Ireland's neighbor, hoping to blackmail him into marriage), however it's one of the better movies she was involved in after "What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?" William Castle did a good job as producer/director of this story, and the two teenage girls are very appealing and natural. The movie builds some credible suspense (underlined with a jokey tone) and has interesting visual tricks and groovy music. Avoid the awful, too-literal 1988 TV-remake. **1/2 from ****
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesJoan Crawford was approached for this film one month after she left Chut...chut...chère Charlotte (1964) due to an "ailment" that prevented her from working (which is believed to have actually been sick of working with her arch enemy Bette Davis). Therefore, William Castle requested that Crawford's doctors sign a statement attesting that she was completely well before giving her the role.
- GaffesDuring the struggle in the shower with Marek and his wife, her hair goes back and forth from wet, dry, then back to wet again.
- Citations
[repeated line]
Libby Mannering, Kit Austin: I saw what you did, and I know who you are.
- Crédits fousClosing credit (over picture of phone lines): "The End of the Line."
- ConnexionsFeatured in Coming Soon (1982)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Broma macabra
- Lieux de tournage
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 22 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Tuer n'est pas jouer (1965) officially released in India in English?
Répondre