Julius Rosselli, expelled from Oxford, defies his father by joining jewel thieves. His criminal activities culminate in an unexpected disaster, causing anguish for his father over Julius's l... Read allJulius Rosselli, expelled from Oxford, defies his father by joining jewel thieves. His criminal activities culminate in an unexpected disaster, causing anguish for his father over Julius's life choices.Julius Rosselli, expelled from Oxford, defies his father by joining jewel thieves. His criminal activities culminate in an unexpected disaster, causing anguish for his father over Julius's life choices.
Photos
Annette D. Simmonds
- Marcella
- (as Annette Simmonds)
Thomas Gallagher
- Matthews
- (as Thomas Galagher)
Armand Guinle
- Mr. Dent
- (as Amando Guinle)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Julius Rosselli (Dermot Walsh) is coming home for what his father thinks is just a visit. After all, the young man is going to Oxford. However, he soon admits that he's been thrown out of school. While you'd think his father would be furious, Mr. Rosselli (Charles Victor) adores his son and cannot imagine that he is a bad sort. But Julius is spoiled and rather hateful--and soon falls in with criminal elements. The bottom line is that he wants wealth and fun but doesn't want to work for it. It's a shame, as he's not only hurting his father but has just convinced a nice lady to marry him and she is bound to be disappointed in her husband. All the while, Mr. Rosselli loves his son and puts up with all sorts of verbal abuse from the guy. You really want to see Julius get what he deserves and what happens next, you'll just have to see for yourself. However, expect the unexpected in this lovely little crime film.
"The Frightened Man" turned out to be a dandy movie despite the very low budget and a cast consisting mostly of lesser-known actors. The script was great--with some wonderful characters and a great plot twist near the end. Walsh, in particular, did a great job in his portrayal of Julius--the guy you love to hate. However, Victor also did a darned nice job. Overall a very good film with everything going for it but a big budget. Well worth your time.
"The Frightened Man" turned out to be a dandy movie despite the very low budget and a cast consisting mostly of lesser-known actors. The script was great--with some wonderful characters and a great plot twist near the end. Walsh, in particular, did a great job in his portrayal of Julius--the guy you love to hate. However, Victor also did a darned nice job. Overall a very good film with everything going for it but a big budget. Well worth your time.
I just feel the need to begin by noting that the promotional poster/art for this film is very misleading and should be disregarded. Now, onto the film itself: I was anticipating something good but my expectations were greatly exceeded. The story itself is very solid and the script fully supports it through to its final conclusion. The entire cast does a fine job with Victor, Walsh, and Murray all delivering exceptional performances. Gilling does well in directing this thoroughly engaging and interesting film from beginning to end. Its is very British in all of the best ways and I can hardly think of a recent film that so thoroughly delivered such entertainment in such a short run time. The Frightened Man is definitely one to check out.
I watched this film on Talking Pictures a few weeks ago and I can only say that it had a good story line. Although I think with more famous and charismatic actors, along with higher production values, the film could have been one of the more popular films of the 1950s.
I will again emphasise that it was a very good story line, but more could have been done with the plot.
It was unusual to see Dermot Walsh as a delusional, misguided and inexperienced robber. He usually plays the noble hero. Many people of my age will remember him in the television series "Richard the Lionheart" in the early 1960s, which was very popular with a lot of children - the episodes were often reconstructed when we went out to play afterwards.
But going back to "The Frightened Man", maybe I have missed the point of the whole film - before I submit this review, I may have watch it again on the recording that I made of it.
The enlightening qualities of the film, as well as showing that crime does not pay - not very well anyway - it depicted the more seamier and less glamourous side of London in the early 1950s. Whereas other films such as "Doctor in the House" and "Genevieve" make the era look envious and make us all yearn for the "good old days" when life seemed a lot simpler, this film gave us the opposite view.
The film depicted people working hard to make enough money just to survive on. It showed grey buildings, still dilapidated after the effects of the Second World War - and if other films showed us how nice people were in those days, this film didn't - there were a lot of bad people around in those days.
However, the film had a neat twist at the end and the closing scenes were so poignant that I nearly had tears in my eyes.
Finally, I would like to say a few words about Charles Victor, a very undervalued character actor of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. If this film had been anything more than a 'B' picture and second programmer, his performance as an old Jewish, junk dealer, with contacts everywhere, would have been worthy of an Academy Award.
I will again emphasise that it was a very good story line, but more could have been done with the plot.
It was unusual to see Dermot Walsh as a delusional, misguided and inexperienced robber. He usually plays the noble hero. Many people of my age will remember him in the television series "Richard the Lionheart" in the early 1960s, which was very popular with a lot of children - the episodes were often reconstructed when we went out to play afterwards.
But going back to "The Frightened Man", maybe I have missed the point of the whole film - before I submit this review, I may have watch it again on the recording that I made of it.
The enlightening qualities of the film, as well as showing that crime does not pay - not very well anyway - it depicted the more seamier and less glamourous side of London in the early 1950s. Whereas other films such as "Doctor in the House" and "Genevieve" make the era look envious and make us all yearn for the "good old days" when life seemed a lot simpler, this film gave us the opposite view.
The film depicted people working hard to make enough money just to survive on. It showed grey buildings, still dilapidated after the effects of the Second World War - and if other films showed us how nice people were in those days, this film didn't - there were a lot of bad people around in those days.
However, the film had a neat twist at the end and the closing scenes were so poignant that I nearly had tears in my eyes.
Finally, I would like to say a few words about Charles Victor, a very undervalued character actor of the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s. If this film had been anything more than a 'B' picture and second programmer, his performance as an old Jewish, junk dealer, with contacts everywhere, would have been worthy of an Academy Award.
This rather cheap and cheerful effort actually has quite a decent, complex, plot and Dermot Walsh ("Julius") and on-screen father Charles Victor ("Rosselli") work well together to create just a little more suspense than usual in this British crime drama. The latter runs an antique shop and, occasionally, fences some stolen goods to help fund his son through Oxford University. The pretty ungrateful son manages to get himself sent down, returns home and basically cleans the old man out - whilst, simultaneously - falling for the lodger "Amanda" (Barbara Murray) with whom he runs off only to fall in with some more substantial crooks who are planning a daring diamond heist. When it all starts to go wrong, and the cops begin to close in, poor old Dad tries to help out his ingrate of a son but is it all just too late? It doesn't hang about, the narrative is well paced and the romance kept to a minimum which really helps this to stay on track. Thora Hird and John Horsley crop up now and again to add a bit of cornflour to the gravy, making for quite a watchable hour, or so.
This is not as good
as a Rathbone/Bruce
Sherlock Holmes movie,by any stretch of the imagination.
That being said,it is still a good,
entertaining film.
The camera work is well-done. The plot is reasonably plausable and easy to follow.
Overall,a suspenseful little gem of a movie.
Well worth watching.
Did you know
- TriviaFinal film of Annette D. Simmonds.
- GoofsAll entries contain spoilers
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Rosselli and Son
- Filming locations
- Horbury Crescent, London, England, UK(Street of the Rosselli home)
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime1 hour 9 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 1.37 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content