VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,6/10
538
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Un pianista che perde le mani in un incidente aereo riceve le mani trapiantate da un criminale giustiziato, ma le sue nuove mani hanno le tendenze omicide del precedente proprietario.Un pianista che perde le mani in un incidente aereo riceve le mani trapiantate da un criminale giustiziato, ma le sue nuove mani hanno le tendenze omicide del precedente proprietario.Un pianista che perde le mani in un incidente aereo riceve le mani trapiantate da un criminale giustiziato, ma le sue nuove mani hanno le tendenze omicide del precedente proprietario.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Lucile Saint-Simon
- Louise Cochrane Orlac
- (as Lucile Saint Simon)
Donald Wolfit
- Professor Volchett
- (as Sir Donald Wolfit)
Anita Sharp-Bolster
- Volcheff's Assistant
- (as Anita Sharp Bolster)
Recensioni in evidenza
A good story and a good cast are wasted in this amateurishly written and directed misfire. It's nearly as bad as Ed Wood films like PLAN NINE FROM OUTER SPACE.
How these no-talents managed to engage so many name actors is a mystery. It was a French production, I guess, and they tried to film it in French and English, but the results are amazingly tacky and clumsy.
Virtually every scene falls flat or is unintentionally funny. But it's not quite bad enough to be good, like PLAN NINE. It's just bad.
What's worse? Christopher Lee's unintentionally comic "maniacal laughter"? Or the jaunty, jazzy musical score. Apparently no one told the composer he was writing music for a horror film. The grimmest scenes are accompanied by toodling flutes and cheery jazz riffs that would be more appropriate to a 1960s documentary on "Swingin' London".
The best version BY FAR of this much-filmed story is 1935's MAD LOVE, directed by the great Karl Freund, with Peter Lorre.
How these no-talents managed to engage so many name actors is a mystery. It was a French production, I guess, and they tried to film it in French and English, but the results are amazingly tacky and clumsy.
Virtually every scene falls flat or is unintentionally funny. But it's not quite bad enough to be good, like PLAN NINE. It's just bad.
What's worse? Christopher Lee's unintentionally comic "maniacal laughter"? Or the jaunty, jazzy musical score. Apparently no one told the composer he was writing music for a horror film. The grimmest scenes are accompanied by toodling flutes and cheery jazz riffs that would be more appropriate to a 1960s documentary on "Swingin' London".
The best version BY FAR of this much-filmed story is 1935's MAD LOVE, directed by the great Karl Freund, with Peter Lorre.
1960's "The Hands of Orlac" was the third screen version of Maurice Renard's 1920 "Les Mains d'Orlac," following Conrad Veidt's 1924 German silent and Karl Freund's 1935 "Mad Love" (a fourth remake was completed months later, Newton Arnold's uncredited "Hands of a Stranger"). Edmond T. Greville served as both screenwriter and director, shooting each scene in English first, then again in French, ensuring added sex appeal for the slightly longer Continental version. Mel Ferrer sadly contributes a somnambulistic performance in the central role, an acclaimed pianist irresistible to women but about to wed fiancee Louise (Lucile Saint Simon), only for his hands to come out badly damaged from a plane crash (the pilot is played by David Peel, recent Baron Meinster in Hammer's "The Brides of Dracula"). The renowned surgeon Professor Volcheff (Sir Donald Wolfit) is swiftly engaged to work miracles for Orlac, whose recovery involves learning of the concurrent execution of strangler Louis Vasseur, becoming convinced that his repaired appendages formerly belonged to Vasseur. Choosing to simply give up on his career and the woman who loves him, he then finds himself targeted by Christopher Lee's second rate magician Nero, introduced after a lethargic opening half hour, calling on sexy assistant Li-Lang (Dany Carrel) to seduce Orlac and find out what he's running away from. Dany and Lucile offer such stunning pulchritude that Ferrer's absolute lack of passion remains baffling (he was married to actress Audrey Hepburn at the time), leaving all the dramatics to Lee's over the top theatrics and maniacal laughter, the only life that maintains audience interest. In trying to capitalize on the connection with the deceased strangler he hopes to drive Orlac insane or perhaps to murder, an unlikely blackmail scheme that involves Li-Lang to pose as Vasseur's widow. A superb supporting cast is wasted, Felix Aylmer, previously strangled by Lee as "The Mummy," arrives during the final third as Louise's distinguished father, going to Scotland Yard to assuage fears that Orlac's hands are not his own. Sir Donald Wolfit's presence is thrown away as the surgeon, unlike Peter Lorre's obsessive turn in "Mad Love," and a two minute cameo from Donald Pleasence comes at the 65 minute mark, his sculptor Graham Coates obviously intrigued by those fascinating fingers. Lee's role as tormentor is similar to Peter Lorre, merely a small time con artist with delusions of grandeur rather than a brilliant doctor, ably recreating the scene dressed up as the executed killer, complete with steel hooks in place of hands, but neither Mel Ferrer here nor James Stapleton in "Hands of a Stranger" earn the kind of sympathy that Colin Clive engendered in the 1935 version.
One of my sci-fi/horror/fantasy reviews written 50 years ago: Directed by Edmond T. Greville; Produced by Donald Taylor and Steven Palios, for Britannia Films; Released in America by Continental Distributing. Screenplay by John Baines and Greville; Photography by Desmond Dickinson and Jacques Lemare; Edited by Oswald Hafenrichter and Jean Ravel; Music by Claude Bolling; Production Manager: Ben Arbeid. Starring: Mel Ferrer, Christopher Lee, Dany Carrel, Louise Saint-Simon, Felix Aylmer, Basil Sydney, Donald Wolfit and Donald Pleasence.
Remake of a classic silent film has exactly the same plot as "Hands of a Stranger", but poorly done.
Remake of a classic silent film has exactly the same plot as "Hands of a Stranger", but poorly done.
> Christopher Lee told online entertainment site 'Entertainment Asylum' that > there were some movies of his that he'd never watch again. This one was > undoubtedly one of them. The dialogue and plot are banal, and the background > music is virtually nonexistent, meaning that the movie is full of long, > pregnant pauses as actors stride into rooms to read their > lines. > > Nevertheless, Christopher Lee plays an excellent villain. In fact, when put > up against Mel Ferrer's weak portrayal of concert pianist Stephen Orlac, > it's impossible to avoid rooting for the bad guy. > > This is a picture of British horror entertainment before Hammer came along. > All I can say is, thank goodness for Hammer! Watch it for Lee's acting, > Other than that, be prepared to laugh your head off.
I have to admit to dozing a bit during this film. I thought it would be a B movie, hands out of control film. Instead, there are missing action , loooooots of talking, and a silly plot that defies everything that was set up. Christopher Lee is pretty good as the villain, but this story goes nowhere. If one could give up enough of one's life to watch this again, try to understand what Lee was trying to accomplish. It's just plain dull.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizSimultaneously shot in English and French with Mel Ferrer and Christopher Lee, both of whom spoke French fluently, using their own voices on both soundtracks.
- ConnessioniFeatured in TJ and the All Night Theatre: The Hands of Orlac (1979)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Hands of Orlac?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Lingue
- Celebre anche come
- The Hands of Orlac
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 35 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Le mani dell'altro (1960) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi