The Monkey's Paw

Based on the classic short story, THE MONKEY'S PAW concerns the Trelawne family, their need of money, and the result of the paw's entry into their lives. As the story goes, it's supposed to grant three wishes to anyone who simply holds it and asks. Of course, the devil truly is in the details!

After the first wish, we're already dreading the second!

True to the original tale, "Be careful what you wish for", "Don't tempt fate", and "Be satisfied with what you have" are the main ideas.

Though there is some padding, the added story line actually reinforces the idea of the paw's alleged occult powers, as well as the Trelawne's desperate situation. The sparse production takes nothing away from the horror that unfolds.

The short story scared the hell out of generations. This movie does it justice...

A man comes to the Trelawne shop to obtain a painting and one of the items he offers in the trade is a severed monkey's paw. One worker, a dishonest sort named Kelly, at the shop knows the secret of the monkey's paw, that it will grant three wishes for its owner, but the wishes will only bring tragedy for the owner. Trelawne later trades the painting for the paw. He later finds out that he owns 200 pounds to his bookmaker and as a last resort uses the paw to wish for the money. He gets the money but at cost of his son's life when he was killed in a motorcycle race and was given the 200 pounds, the purse for the race. The Trelawnes feel the guilt over the loss of their son, but Mrs. Trelawne knows there are two wishes left, and uses one to wish they here son returns from his grave. Despite the obvious low budget, this film succeeds in telling the story with excellent atmosphere, cinematography, acting, & directing. It does start off slow with establishing characters and settings, but after Kelly tells the story of the paw, it is able to flow better in its story telling. The ending of the film where Mrs. Trelawne uses her wish is amazing to look at despite sounding stagey. Thankfully the film doesn't settle into the obvious generic answer to the story. Rating, 7 out of 10.

I read the review of the English production. It matches one which was filmed for the TV series, LIGHTS OUT as well as the one for SUSPENSE. This story is the reason that so many short horror and mystery stories broadcast on radio in the 1940's should be brought back by the mega film producers of today.

A fine half hour show, broadcast weekly would spellbind their audiences. Hitchcock's, "Hands of Mr. Ottermole" and "Banquo's Chair" were this kind of remake. The fabulous, "Lamb for the Slaughter" was great, but it made murder into a light comedy fantasy.

No major staging, no great sets, just ordinary actors in fear and terror trying to get some advantage from this curious monkey's paw was so powerful. The classic radio show and subsequent motion picture 'Sorry, Wrong Number" should make people see the power of the short story.

Those jokes about three wishes from a genie in a bottle make light of the potential terror from getting what you wish for, with an amulet made from a monkey's paw.

Norman Lee takes W. W. Jacobs' classic short story and transforms it into a second feature.

One of the strengths of the short story is that it is a short story; there is no fat on it, leaving the reader to put the real horror into the story: the failure of the first wish; the hint at what it is knocking, unseen, at the door; the tragic necessity of the third wish. It all takes place in the reader's imagination, the elaborations of what the reader thinks is terrifying. Instead, in order to bring this to an hour's length, there is effectively, a forty-minute prologue; first we are introduced to a seller of curios. Then we see various wares; then the monkey's paw, and finally, the story. Lee paces it very well, and adds a platitudinous epilogue, but the story, although still interesting, is weakened. With Milton Rosmer, Megs Jenkins, and a lot of art direction by Victor Hembrow and George Ward.

Mike-764's summation is obviously that of an updated US presentation & not that of the original short story originally set in the '20s by one of Britain's most popular & prolific spinner of yarns with a twist,W W Jacobs.Through the 30s-50s it was a popular choice for Rep groups and BBC Radio and rates with the best - the famed "Sorry,Wrong No!" as a suspencer for the imagination. Small wonder it was a popular choice for the US "Suspense" series. Adaptations from the 50s for film & TV have altered the "McGuffin" but not always for the best. I probably saw this particular version but not recently, so I can't properly rate it. I have,however,read the play & it is that with which I am familiar. Listen to this in the dark in the original version with the original finish which is the real clincher. Who - or what was knocking at the door after that final wish? Would you have opened it?