Without Warning!

I'd been aware of this film's existence for some years, and although I never imagined it to be a classic, it did seem promising, given the highly competent Levy-Gardner-Laven team (The Rifleman, The Monster That Challenged the World, Slaughter on Tenth Avenue), and Adam Williams, a young character actor (The Big Heat, North by Northwest, The Space Children)I've always enjoyed.

On the most basic level, Dark Sky Films has put together a splendid, bargain-price DVD presenting a 35mm print that is flawless, except for a single, brief "cut" in the film stock late in the story. Otherwise, this b&w thriller is pristine, even shimmering, without speck, scratch or other visible flaw. Where has this print been all these years--Fort Knox? I was stunned by its beauty. A photo gallery is a pleasing extra, and the menu is imaginatively augmented with visual and audio snippets. Open the case and the inner sleeve is decorated with original ad art and a scene from the film.

As a murder thriller with strong overtones of police procedural (complete with v/o narration by the fabulous Reed Hadley), Without Warning is superior stuff, with effectively understated performances, smart, concise direction and plenty of suspense and surprise, including a shock moment near the beginning that will knock you back in your chair.

Williams is creepily attractive (or maybe attractively creepy) as the quiet, psychotic killer of women, with character vet Ed Binns appealingly dogged as the working-stiff police detective assigned to bring the monster to heel. Meg Randall is pleasant and convincing as the central female character(who ends up in considerable peril), and there's a nice turn (in this UA release) by pretty Columbia contract player Angela Stevens (Three Stooges shorts, Creature with the Atom Brain, lots of westerns), as a good-time girl who comes to a bad end.

As other reviewers have commented, Without Warning also is an invaluable visual and aural record of vanished Los Angeles, particularly Chavez Ravine. As archaeology alone, then, the picture is fascinating.

I can't emphasize enough the pleasure and satisfaction Without Warning provides. It's worthy on multiple levels; grab it!

Found this on youtube--thought it might be campy and funny.... hardly! It's low-budget yes--but very well done. Wonderful to see what Los Angeles looked like in the very early 1950's!! Serial killer before that term was invented. Worth your time!!

Like THE SNIPER and HE WALKED BY NIGHT, this film follows both the police and the serial killer they're trying to catch. And it lives up to that standard of quality. As usual, the procedural elements are the weakest parts, with nice attention to detail but rather dry and routine (the corny voice-over, the forensic evidence, the false confessions, the rounding up of the usual suspects, the psychological profiling, the dead-end leads and near misses). But the film absolutely shines when dealing with the killer. Adam Williams (recognizable as the baby-faced baddie from NORTH BY NORTHWEST) is creepy without being at all silly, an air of quiet danger hangs over him. There's a thick tension and dread as he stalks his victims and evades the authorities, with those conflicted moments when you almost don't want him to get caught. The supporting performances are not as memorable, but overall quite solid without anything to complain about. The photography is generally excellent, with terrific use of close-ups and a lot of good location work. Nice score as well. Well-paced and riveting film with some very fine qualities, a nice hidden gem. I'll be buying this one.

This story of a serial killer came out 55 years ago. It's dated primarily in that it isn't gory and graphic. At moments, it feels as if it's about to go that way. But of course the censors wouldn't have allowed it.

The director, though not in anyone's pantheon, has great noir cred. "Down Three Dark Streets" alone is something to be very proud of.

The pace is just right. The acting, by people wholly unknown to me, is professional and convincing.

We know almost from the start who the killer is. It's a matter of whether and when he will be caught. The film languishes more on his bland good looks than on the appearance of any of his victims. He's nice enough looking: rather baby-faced. We see him without his shirt in a long, not extraneous, scene.

The attention paid to the killer reminded me of "The Sniper," which came out at the same time. "The Sniper" is better known and was done on a higher budget. But I wouldn't say it's better. This is a very good, scary movie.

The plot—a serial killer pursuing pretty blondes—is not exactly novel, however, the movie is better than I expected and very well done. Early on, the chase between cops and killer around the concrete jungle of LA freeways is both suspenseful and well staged. In fact the entire film appears to have been made on location, in parts of low-income east LA seldom seen on the Hollywood screen. For example, killer Martin's (Williams) slum-like hilltop neighborhood looks like the genuine thing, but with a good view of LA's downtown, plus the post-war grid of freeways slicing the urban landscape like concrete arteries.

Williams low-keys his psychopathic killer with little change of expression. That way we don't know what's boiling up underneath. Neither, for that matter, are the killings exploited for shock value. Instead the emphasis is on suspense as we follow the police investigators' attempts to track down the madman before the pile of blonde corpses gets higher. The influence of documentary-like approach to police methods is evident throughout. This was, after all, the era of Dragnet on TV. The movie also has a number of good touches. For example, the police chemist who needles the detectives in low-key fashion lends interest to a potentially routine scene; or the little girl with her broken doll that lends poignant flavor to the seedy hilltop neighborhood.

On the whole, the movie is done with care and imagination, and can hold its own with many of the better crime dramas of the day. One thing for sure, it at least merits inclusion in Leonard Maltin's too often unreliable movie guide. To me, it's a rather glaring omission even if it is an independent production with a no-name cast.