[go: up one dir, main page]

    कैलेंडर रिलीज़ करेंटॉप 250 फ़िल्मेंसबसे लोकप्रिय फ़िल्मेंज़ोनर के आधार पर फ़िल्में ब्राउज़ करेंटॉप बॉक्स ऑफ़िसशोटाइम और टिकटफ़िल्मी समाचारइंडिया मूवी स्पॉटलाइट
    TV और स्ट्रीमिंग पर क्या हैटॉप 250 टीवी शोसबसे लोकप्रिय TV शोशैली के अनुसार टीवी शो ब्राउज़ करेंTV की खबरें
    देखने के लिए क्या हैसबसे नए ट्रेलरIMDb ओरिजिनलIMDb की पसंदIMDb स्पॉटलाइटफैमिली एंटरटेनमेंट गाइडIMDb पॉडकास्ट
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideToronto Int'l Film FestivalIMDb Stars to WatchSTARmeter पुरस्कारअवार्ड्स सेंट्रलफ़ेस्टिवल सेंट्रलसभी इवेंट
    जिनका जन्म आज के दिन हुआ सबसे लोकप्रिय सेलिब्रिटीसेलिब्रिटी से जुड़ी खबरें
    मदद केंद्रयोगदानकर्ता क्षेत्रपॉल
उद्योग के पेशेवरों के लिए
  • भाषा
  • पूरी तरह से सपोर्टेड
  • English (United States)
    आंशिक रूप से सपोर्टेड
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
वॉचलिस्ट
साइन इन करें
  • पूरी तरह से सपोर्टेड
  • English (United States)
    आंशिक रूप से सपोर्टेड
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
ऐप का इस्तेमाल करें
वापस जाएँ
  • कास्ट और क्रू
  • उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं
  • ट्रिविया
  • अक्सर पूछे जाने वाला सवाल
IMDbPro
The Flesh Eaters (1964)

उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

The Flesh Eaters

51 समीक्षाएं
7/10

Better than you might think...

This film is an updated for the 1960s version of the traditional late 30s-40s mad scientist tale but one with the surprising addition of gore, used very effectively for the time. Martin Kosleck here provides the mad scientist, a Nazi stereotype not uncommon to earlier eras. The Flesh Eaters themselves make for a memorable menace and the early scene with the two swimmers is an excellent bit of film making. The gigantic ones and their showdown with the hero at the end requires much suspension of disbelief but the monsters are also quite nasty-looking which makes for fun viewing if you're into seeing giant monsters. The final showdown actually reminds me a little of the film KRONOS.
  • Space_Mafune
  • 21 मार्च 2003
  • परमालिंक
6/10

Enjoyable early 60's sci-fi horror.

  • poolandrews
  • 14 नव॰ 2009
  • परमालिंक
6/10

The Flesh Eaters (1964) **1/2

A pilot, a drunken actress and her female assistant, and a groovy beatnik all get stranded on an island where a German scientist (Martin Kosleck) is conducting experiments involving a strange silvery substance in the water that starts eating the flesh off fish and people. This is a cheaply made film that was shot in Montauk, New York, and saves a lot of money by taking place entirely on the beach (their "island"). But it's still fun and manages to overcome its limitations, and Kosleck makes for a good sneaky villain. The hero pilot (Grant Murdock) is pretty poor as an actor, and provides some laughs and funny lines. The beatnik character is a show in himself, man. Can you feel the love? **1/2 out of ****
  • Cinemayo
  • 18 अग॰ 2006
  • परमालिंक

Good old fashioned trash

This movie made a major impression on me when I was a kid and turned on the TV halfway though it on a Saturday afternoon. It was right in the middle of the scene where the archetypical cartoon beatnik character is babbling moronically about his diet...within seconds, I was watching a grown man scream like a little girl while being literally devoured from the inside out. That's all I remember from back then, that and how uncommonly UGLY those monsters turned out to be. I mean HIDEOUS (I'm still convinced that the brain-bug in "Starship Troopers" is just a watered down version of these things).

Later I watched it again, and again.

They start out really small, the monsters, so small that you can't see them except as a swarm. They are electrified somehow--electrified carnivorous blood cells, I think, the result of an evil Nazi experiment--and just sort of twinkle at first.

At the end, one gets really, really big. Once they're big enough to see, you realize just how UGLY these things are. These are old-school special effects, the kind that required some EFFORT, even when they were bad, and I miss that.

To add to this, you have a stranded island-load of the most ridiculous, archetypical, two-dimensional characters saying and doing the dumbest things imaginable. A mad Nazi scientist, a drunken has-been movie starlet, a once-successful pilot with a dark incident that ruined his life, and the aforementioned cartoon beatnik. It's like ten bad movies rolled into one. I'm not even convinced it's unintenionally funny. I imagine the people behind this debacle were made jaded and cynical by their hardships in Hollywood and amused themselves during the filming of this hack work by at least making it fun. My favorite part is when the square jawed pilot asks for something to bandage a wound with, and of course the attractive young women immediately rips her shirt off.

Bad special effects, bad writing, bad acting, and, I'm telling you, the ugliest monster I've ever seen. If this doesn't sound good to you, don't rent it, and stay away from my house.
  • Blaise_B
  • 18 सित॰ 2002
  • परमालिंक
6/10

"Man! What a way to go!"

Surprisingly effective low-budget horror film about a creep (Martin Kosleck) on an isolated island trying to replicate Nazi experiments with flesh-eating organisms. A pilot transporting an alcoholic actress and her assistant is forced to make an emergency landing on the island and business picks up from there. A good B horror flick with some nice cinematography and special effects that were gory for the time. Despite its budgetary limitations it's pretty neat. Most of the movie takes place in one location, on a beach. Several moments of unintended hilarity, such as Byron Sanders' character talking about his ex ("I actually loved that little tramp.") or every scene involving Ray Tudor's beatnik (I'm comin', my people, I'm comin'!"). Sexy Barbara Wilkin has a nice scene taking off her shirt to help bandage Sander's wound. Tame by today's standards of course. Martin Kosleck is good fun as the mad scientist and the rest of the cast is enjoyable enough. Worth a look even if it isn't going to change your life.
  • utgard14
  • 7 अक्टू॰ 2016
  • परमालिंक
7/10

Here's the word man, this movie is kooky!

If you are going to sit down to watch this expecting some top notch special effects, intense acting, and a character driven plot, you deserve to be disappointed. Movies like this cannot conceal what they are or mislead people, so to criticize it for being cheap, hokey, and cheesy is sort like complaining that Star Wars takes place in outer space.

If you are hoping to be entertained, then this movie won't let you down! A reminder of how creepy these old movies can be if you were lucky enough to see it when you were under age 12, movies like this always benefit most when the viewer can suspend their cynicism and imagine they are 10 years old. The lack of any sets used in the film is probably because the actors chewed all the scenery, the gore, for its time, was pretty darn shocking, and the monsters are somehow easily destroyed by the same thing they eat.

Yes, skeletons shouldn't remain whole when the flesh is eaten off them. True, CGI effects blow away the lousy FX. Of course, a woman wouldn't tear off her shirt while the men stood by, still in their shirts and gawking when someone needed makeshift bandages. And I agree, Nazi scientists were not hiding out on Long Island in the 1960's. If you can accept these facts, and forgive the movie in spite of them (and many, many other similar flaws), you won't be let down for one second! Also, the song playing on the transistor radio in the opening scene, performed by a band called "The Teen Killers" is so catchy you won't stop whistling it for weeks!!!
  • rexmaynard-739-337868
  • 20 मई 2010
  • परमालिंक
5/10

Subtlety wins this time around.

  • mark.waltz
  • 12 सित॰ 2019
  • परमालिंक
6/10

"Hey, you think maybe they just kooky?"

Jan Letterman (Barbara Wilkin), the personal assistant to an alcoholic, washed up actress (Rita Morley), hires charter pilot Grant Murdoch (Byron Sanders) on behalf of her employer. Grant is to fly them to Provincetown, but inclement weather forces them to land on a deserted island. There, a German accented scientist named Peter Bartell (Martin Kosleck) is conducting experiments centered around the existence of tiny, silvery flesh consuming creatures that thrive in the water.

"The Flesh Eaters" is noteworthy for such things as being a very early gore film (one of the earliest NOT made by Herschell Gordon Lewis and Dave Friedman), for inspiring a musical act of the same name, and for forcing George Romero to change the title of his legendary "Night of the Living Dead", which was originally going to be called "Night of the Flesh Eaters". It's pretty entertaining as far as schlock horror goes, although it is somewhat overextended. Sometimes it does get silly, tiresome, and overly talky. How one responds to comedy relief beatnik character Omar (Ray Tudor) may be strictly a matter of personal taste. This viewer found his shtick amusing at first, but thought that he wore out his welcome quickly. It has decent atmosphere, good black & white photography (Carson Davidson was the D.P., John Carroll the operator), appropriate music by Julian Stein, and some enjoyably grisly makeup effects. The script by co-producer Arnold Drake has its moments, with some snappy bits of dialogue.

The acting is as bad as you come to expect from such fare, for the most part, with the jut jawed Sanders particularly clunky as the hero. Kosleck, fortunately, rises to the occasion with a wonderfully theatrical portrayal that is in the tradition of countless mad scientists in countless B pictures.

Not bad, for this kind of entertainment.

Future director Radley Metzger was the editor on this show.

Six out of 10.
  • Hey_Sweden
  • 30 सित॰ 2016
  • परमालिंक
3/10

Less Would Have Been More

  • richardchatten
  • 13 अप्रैल 2017
  • परमालिंक
6/10

A gadget this size can supply enough juice to barbecue Brooklyn!

  • sol1218
  • 7 मार्च 2007
  • परमालिंक
3/10

Moderately Amusing

This is an early gore flick and is moderately amusing as both a horror film and unintentional comedy. The dialouge is ridiculous tripe, the actors aren't actually capable of acting, and the character's schemes are chock full of holes but this film manages to pull off some good old school gore (especially the scenes where the mad doctor gets it and the pilot's leg starts to get chewed off. The pacing isn't too bad, but overall this film just doesn't leave much of an impression.
  • DrSatan
  • 16 अप्रैल 2000
  • परमालिंक
8/10

Inventive visual treat with plenty of bite!

Reviewers have not mentioned the gorgeous cinematography of THE FLESH EATERS, which is the work of the director, Jack Curtis, working under a pseudonym, Carson Davidson. Virtually every scene was shot outdoors in the merciless sun of summertime Long Island, but Curtis's lighting banishes unsightly shadows from the actors' faces; indeed, in many moments the exteriors are shimmering, almost silvery in their beauty. Deep focus and shallow focus are utilized with particular effectiveness. The women in the film are very good-looking, and as captured on film, they appear warm and absolutely delicious.

Another useful note is that THE FLESH EATERS was scripted by comic book writer Arnold Drake (The Doom Patrol, Marvel's Captain Marvel, et al). Arnold storyboarded the film, so every shot has the careful, formalized composition of a well-drawn comic strip. One shot, a sterling example of deep focus, sticks with me: the right profile of the hero dominates the left-side foreground of the frame. In a moment, two or three tiny figures at the far-removed shoreline move left to right, from behind the hero's head, and in perfect focus. Self-conscious? Yes. Striking? Absolutely.

Finally, Curtis & Co. shot THE FLESH EATERS silent, which is NOT apparent.The post-production looping matches flawlessly to the performances, and the voices have weight and presence. (Curtis had experience in the dubbing of foreign films for the American market.)

The gratuitous but not uninteresting Nazi-lab sequence was not shot by Curtis, and has none of the visual beauty of the rest of the film. Its shock value, though, is strong.

I rate THE FLESH EATERS AN "8" not against all films, but against other films of its type. As B exploitation, it is ingenious, nastily amusing, and immensely satisfying.
  • dhogan-2
  • 10 जन॰ 2006
  • परमालिंक
6/10

Early Gor Flick Is Worth Watching...For The laughs

  • johnboy1
  • 1 मार्च 2005
  • परमालिंक
5/10

"I can assure you, we are in for a good pounding."

  • classicsoncall
  • 26 जन॰ 2008
  • परमालिंक

Great fun

Shucks, if you're looking for credibility and good acting, of =course= this is the wrong kind of movie! Myself, I watch a film like "The Flesh Eaters" precisely because it is implausible, even cruddy, and chock-full of overripe performances ... and further, of those delicious moments that "a serious film" or "a Hollywood moom pitcher" would never dare attempt.

And Martin Kosleck is always fun to watch. Check out his mini-bio and see if he doesn't deserve your immediate respect, even if he spent most of his U.S. career acting in junk.
  • chexmix
  • 17 मार्च 2002
  • परमालिंक
6/10

The Flesh Eaters

  • BandSAboutMovies
  • 27 नव॰ 2024
  • परमालिंक
7/10

The Drive In Memories

  • HalfCentury
  • 9 जन॰ 2006
  • परमालिंक
5/10

Not really good but has its moments

Studly Grant Murdock (Byron Sanders), alcoholic star Laura Winters (Rita Morly) and her assistant Jan Letterman (Barbara Wilkin) are forced to land their plane (after it malfunctions) on an isolated island. There they meet German Dr. Peter Bartel (Martin Koslek) who seems to be examining marine life...but is he? They're soon joined by the incredibly annoying beatnik Omar (Ray Tudor) and find they're fighting "flesh eaters"--tiny little glowing bugs that love eating flesh.

There's a lot wrong with this film. For starters the plot is silly with some really questionable "science". The characters are all annoyingly predictable--the square-jawed hero, the good girl, the bad (alocoholic) girl and the odious "comic" relief. With the sole exception of Morly the acting is terrible and Omar has GOT to be one of the most grating characters I've ever seen. It gets dull too. But this has (for 1964) some pretty explicit gore--two deaths especially are pretty bloody and gruesome. This is also a prime example of an early 1960s exploitation movie. It was made on next to no budget with pretty unknown actors and (I heard) barely released. It's acquired quite a cult following over the years (more for the gore than anything else) and it was beautifully restored on DVD back in 2005. Horror fans will want to take a peak but it's no great shakes.
  • preppy-3
  • 20 जुल॰ 2008
  • परमालिंक
6/10

Obscure film that might need a remake

The only people who will not be STERILIZED with FEAR are those among you who are already DEAD! The Flesh Eaters is a 60's film which is all but forgotten. I don't know why, because it's pretty damn good especially considering it was the director's only film and the cinematographer's use of black and white and unusual camera angles made the film even more interesting.

There are some gruesome effects in this as well which was something probably not seen much at that time. As the title implies, these microbial monsters devour human flesh at an alarming rate, so we see a few choice scenes of what I'd call "gore" in this film. However, there are some weird composite FX shots which don't work very well, and at times the movie drags with some long dialog scenes. The acting is very good though, and if you can find it check out the version with the Nazi experimentation scene in it.

I'm not usually into remakes, but I think the Flesh Eaters could be remade well if placed in the right hands.
  • jason-40416
  • 27 नव॰ 2016
  • परमालिंक
2/10

They Glow In The Dark

Like so many actors who were refugees of Hitler's Germany who specialized in playing Nazis, Martin Kosleck I'm sure found film roles few and far between. It's the only explanation I can think of for why the poor man took on a mad scientist role in The Flesh Eaters.

Since the film was shot on the Eastern end of Long Island, I assume that's the location. Three people an actress who drinks too much, her personal assistant, and their private seaplane pilot have to make a forced landing because the carburetor ices up. There they run into Kosleck who's your typical mad scientist. Kosleck's created these creatures who glow in the dark and devour flesh and leave a nice intact skeleton.

In this mess of a film, the writers didn't bother with several inconsistencies about how the Kosleck creatures can and are eventually dealt with. Wouldn't want to spoil it for anyone caring to take a look. The special effects are laughable, it looks like it was shot with an old Bell&Howell camera.

Yet Kosleck actually tried to give a sincere performance. Poor foolish man, he should have played it for laughs.
  • bkoganbing
  • 27 अग॰ 2009
  • परमालिंक
7/10

Unexpected surprise

  • gpeltz
  • 25 अग॰ 2018
  • परमालिंक
5/10

A weird monster movie.

  • michaelRokeefe
  • 8 नव॰ 2007
  • परमालिंक
9/10

A Minimasterpiece

Truth to tell, I had not heard of this movie until recently, but after reading several laudatory reviews in various film books, and after hearing a coworker buddy of mine rave about it, I quickly put it at the very top of my list of films to rent. And boy, am I ever glad I did! "The Flesh Eaters" (1964), as it turns out, is nothing less than a horror minimasterpiece; a genuine sleeper whose relative obscurity may soon change, thanks to this crisp-looking DVD from the fine folks at Dark Sky. In it, an alcoholic actress, her hotty blonde assistant and their hunky-dude plane pilot are forced to land on a barren island near NY's Long Island, right before a hurricane. There, they encounter a scientist played by Martin Kosleck, who is working with the teensy critters that give this film its name. Kosleck, a German Jew who nonetheless excelled at portraying weasly Nazi types throughout the '40s, is superb in the lead role, but then again, all the actors in this film are surprisingly fine. The film also boasts beautiful, high-contrast B&W photography, utilizing bizarre camera angles and point-of-view shots; some highly effective gross-out scenes; and some truly original-looking monsters, both large and small. The film gets wilder and wilder as it proceeds,and offers some real surprises toward the end. Thus, this little independent shocker is just dynamite, and a real find for the jaded horror fan. It's also suitable for the kiddies...say, from 10 and up. It'll warp them a little, but they won't soon forget it, and will probably rave about it to THEIR coworkers one day...
  • ferbs54
  • 14 नव॰ 2007
  • परमालिंक
6/10

Good older Scifi Movie

Hey, it's not exactly a SciFi Classic but it is an original for the time...it has a lot of different elements that make movie's fun to watch like: 1)the Hero and the girl 2)the comic relief 3)the mad scientist and 4)the unbelievable Monster. You just cant beat this combination in a good Scfi movie Even the new films of today rely upon this for success.

If this were being made today it would be full of computerized special effects which would make it prettier but not much more interesting and still would not be a number one summer box-office hit but thats what made the kind of films the cult classics they were.
  • pmadd-2
  • 2 जुल॰ 2005
  • परमालिंक
5/10

Strange and Campy

"Grant Murdoch" (Byron Sanders) runs a charter airplane which two young ladies named "Jan Letterman" (Barbara Wilkin) and "Laura Winters" (Rita Morley) hire to fly them to Provincetown out near Cape Cod. Unfortunately, a hurricane causes them to make an emergency landing on a semi-deserted island. The only occupant is a marine biologist by the name of "Professor Peter Bartell" (Martin Kosleck) who helps them survive the hurricane. They soon discover that they are stranded and that there is a flesh-eating microorganism which is gradually making its way inland. At any rate, rather than disclosing all of the details and risk spoiling the film for those who haven't seen it, I will just say that this was a strange and campy horror film from the early-60's. Although it had good camera work, some pretty actresses and some decent performances there really wasn't anything unique about the movie that separates it from typical grade-B movies made during this time. Even so, I suppose it's worth a look for those who enjoy films from this time-period. As such I rate it as average.
  • Uriah43
  • 23 जन॰ 2014
  • परमालिंक

इस शीर्षक से अधिक

एक्सप्लोर करने के लिए और भी बहुत कुछ

हाल ही में देखे गए

कृपया इस फ़ीचर का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए ब्राउज़र कुकीज़ चालू करें. और जानें.
IMDb ऐप पाएँ
ज़्यादा एक्सेस के लिए साइन इन करेंज़्यादा एक्सेस के लिए साइन इन करें
सोशल पर IMDb को फॉलो करें
IMDb ऐप पाएँ
Android और iOS के लिए
IMDb ऐप पाएँ
  • सहायता
  • साइट इंडेक्स
  • IMDbPro
  • Box Office Mojo
  • IMDb डेटा लाइसेंस
  • प्रेस रूम
  • विज्ञापन
  • नौकरियाँ
  • उपयोग की शर्तें
  • गोपनीयता नीति
  • Your Ads Privacy Choices
IMDb, एक Amazon कंपनी

© 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.