La peur au ventre

Pure mystery, you never know what's next in this film. In fact I'm going to keep silent about everything I know, because if you know anything about this film before you see it, it's just not as good.

Once you start the climax filled beginning of this film you just can't move away. It was co-written by the man who co-wrote Tod Browning's Freaks. I swear if you take the 70 + minutes to watch this film, your life will never be the same.

On a scale of one to ten, this film gets an EIGHT! A classic, a MUST see!

I love Shelley Winters in almost everything she does.

However she is miscast.

So miscast, in fact, it throws off Jack Palance's performance.

Jack is a master at snarling and showing contempt.

It is what we like about him as a King-Heavy.

Here though, in every scene he wants to punch her in the face.

He knows that we know he can do better than Shelley Winters.

We want him to.

Their lack of chemistry is a pall over the whole story.

Like I said: Love them both, just not together.

Nobody could match Jack Palance as a fearsome heavy and here, playing a freshly sprung ex-con lead bank robber, his authority over a couple of "punks" - junior gang members - including later-to-be star heavy in his own right, Lee Marvin, is powerful and utterly convincing. Nice details early on such as when presumptuous Marvin attempts to grab at the plan for the caper and 6'4" Palance without a word or look just brushes him aside with a sweep of the arm promises much - but little ultimately is delivered. Enter "Pard" the mongrel mutt to the accompaniment then and later of cutesy music. The furry friendly creature, loyal to the last, refuses to budge from the screen to the very end - unfortunately.

This seemed symptomatic of the movie's uncertain tone - veering from tough as nails crime caper to family fare. Who was to blame? Was it Palance who possessed a face and physique that uniquely qualified him to be the ultimate brute always wanting to demonstrate a reassuring sensitive thoughtful side?

Going into this, I didn't know it was a remake, but within 10 minutes it was clear. Almost exactly a beat-for-beat remake of HIGH SIERRA. It's in color and widescreen, not that that adds much... the original film didn't have great cinematography, but the more claustrophobic frame gave it a little extra tension. Also, they swapped out a black stereotype for a Mexican stereotype. I guess that's supposed to be progress. Other than that, it really is practically identical to the original. The major difference, of course, is casting. I like Jack Palance, but he doesn't have the world-weariness or charm of Bogart. Likewise, I'm very fond of Shelley Winters, but what she does best is playing pathetic, and this character can't be pathetic. You just end up wanting Palance to ditch her. I don't want to be too harsh on this film, though. It's just that I felt like I'd already seen it (twice, even) and the update doesn't do any real updating. A competent but pointless endeavor, stick with Bogart and Lupino.

This is a literal remake of Bogart's High Sierra. The same roads, towns and even on the same rocks where High Sierra was made. It is scene-for-scene the same movie. It is almost uncanny in that respect. I felt deja vu all the way through.

On the plus side the wide screen production and beautiful color are worthwhile, as is the good acting here which I think is equal to the original but that is a matter of each viewer's taste.

Lon Chaney Jr. is terrific in his role and more than holds his own opposite the usually scene-stealing Palance. Also a plus is a classic brute thug Lee Marvin performance. You also get very young Nick Adams, Dennis Hopper and Perry Lopez doing good work.

Lone Pine, Whitney Portal Road and the Sierras never looked better and they are the main reason you might want to watch this if you are vulnerable to being put off by the striking literal remake nature of this film project.