La Montagne mystérieuse

When it came to dinosaur special effects in the 1950s, absolutely no one came close to Ray Harryhausen, and The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms still reigns as the classic of that time. Others who dared try and compete were lucky to come in a distant second, but that didn't mean there wasn't a fun quality to their films. The Beast From Hollow Mountain is one of those minor league yet highly enjoyable attempts to combine the two favorite elements of 12 to 15 year old boys when we went to the movies back in the mid-fifties: cowboys and dinosaurs. We knew Guy Madison well from his long run Wild Bill Hickock TV series, which had precious little to do with the real life of that historic character but was plenty of fun all the same. Here, he's a range rider who discovers that his cattle are disappearing. Could it be outlaws? No, the title creature, who attacks Madison, a cute little Mexican kid, the gorgeous Patricia Medina, and a whole host of vaqueros. There is (as was the case back then) precious little dinosaur footage, for the way they kept costs down back then was to 'tease' you with distant growls, but avoid showing you the real thing for as long as possible. After about an hour of this, you got maybe fifteen minutes of actual footage with the creature (who has the weirdest, wildest tongue of any dinosaur in movie history) chasing after Guy and friends with the swiftness of a professional track star. And it's a good thing they keep him offscreen, because he's at best semi-convincing when you do see him. That doesn't make this brightly colored film and less fun to watch. And the way in which Madison gets the thing at the end is a real lulu.

This cowboy and dinosaur movie is better than it's reputation. Though moving slowly in places, it is capably acted and has enough action and plot development to keep both me and my 7 year old son interested. (It did lose the 4 year old periodically)

My only addition to other's previous comments are that I do feel the film holds up fairly well considering it's age. The female lead is surprisingly liberated, being no-one's useless sex object. She manages to make independent decisions, shows that she is quite capable of taking care of herself, and does not panic in the face of danger. When the beast of the title appears she does not scream and panic or fall helplessly to the ground as so many 50's heroines would do, instead her reaction is one of realistic shock and brief fear, followed by quick and decisive action. She even manages to evade the monster for an extended period without tripping or twisting her ankle. during this whole movie she does not do anything stupid or anything contrived to serve as a plot device.

The hero is also fairly realistic. He is neither a chauvinist nor a stereotype. We see that while he is determined to fight for his own rights, he will concede and consider a course of action that will benefit those people he cares for. He is strong and confident without being overly macho, and he is intelligent and thoughtful.

I found the other characters were treated with respect, also. There is no odious comedy relief. Even the drunken father is handled with care and not a caricature. The little boy is likeable, not annoying as is often the case in this sort of vehicle.

I found the wedding festival, which annoyed one reviewer, to be colorful and entertaining. A welcome surprise in a movie of this type.

Finally, although we are forced to wait a long time for the appearance of our monster, and the first appearance is much too abrupt, once it appears it is almost never off the screen and is certainly entertaining. Nit pickers will of course have a field day with the effects. They are, after all, none too realistic. However, the effects do have a unique sort of charm.

The true nature of all of these effect sequences is clouded in rumour and innuendo. It is my understanding from various interviews and articles that when the producers bought the story outline from Willis O'Brien that they also purchased some test sequences which he had created. The rest of the scenes were then produced by the method described in other reviews whereas static sculptures in various positions were substituted frame by frame. If you watch closely it does seem that there may be more than one dinosaur which do not quite match each other, and a few scenes stand out in their fluidity. The running sequences mentioned by another reviewer are obviously much smoother of motion than most of the jerkier scenes. Of course the big rubber-boot feet are obvious.

As for the tongue. Both of my kids loved it! Kids know fun when they see it!

I first saw this movie as part of a group of summer matinees offered for children. Later, I remembered it when it came on TV as part of a Cable TV Monstervision. This movie has some very interesting scenes, it is good family entertainment. I will try to contact the Cable TV Networks to please air this movie so others can enjoy it. IF ANYONE KNOWS WHERE I CAN GET A COPY OF THIS MOVIE, PLEASE E-MAIL ME.

I saw The Beast of Hollow Mountain in the theatre when I was nine. I slept under my bed for weeks. I just knew that T. Rex was going to walk up to 504 5th Avenue West and look in my second storey window and consider me a tender morsel. The world has changed considerably since this movie was in theatres. While it was just as primitive as described by the other reviewers here, this little boy had the be-Jesus scared out of him. I call that good film-making.

Back in the 1950s, the big family weekend outing would be the drive-in movies. "It came from beneath the Sea", "The Alligator People", "Earth vs the Flyimg Saucers", "1984", "The Dam Busters", "The Four Skulls of Jonathan Drake", "Love Slaves of the Amazons", etc. and (when I was 8 or 9) "The Beast from Hollow Mountain". I finally caught it again on DVR on TCM Thur 27 Jun 2013. For what is billed as the first Cinemascope and Color dinosaur movie, "Beast" has rough goodness.

And it is better than I remember. Surprised me. The dinosaur effects are some what better than "Dinosaurus!" 1960 (apparently the reviewers panning the FX have not seen "Dinosaurus!"), but it is not as good as what Willis O'Brien and Ray Harryhausen did together in Irwin Allen's "Animal World" 1956. I think the "Beast..." FX were billed as RegiScope animation in depth.

I have read that Willis O'Brien's "cowboys and dinosaurs" idea had been kicking around since before his "Mighty Joe Young" another movie where O'Brien and Harryhausen worked together. And after O'Brien's death, Harryhausen decided to make his mentor's unmade pet project as "The Valley of Gwangi".

The dinosaur in "Beast..." appears late and the conflict between the gringo rancher Ryan from Texas and the Mexican rancher Enrique, and the growing romance between Ryan and Sarita, Enrique's betrothed, occupies the first two thirds or three fourths of the movie. Mysterious deaths of cattle are attributed to rustlers and the ranchers' rivalry. But after the steer-chomping Beast makes his appearance, he has lotsa screen time in the last part of the film. (OK, I concede the tongue gets to be a bit much in some scenes. Looks to me like the tongue was rotoscoped onto the sequences shot with replacement animation.)

What has stayed with me from seeing this film over fifty years ago, is the scene where Sarita and the kid Panchito are besieged in a cabin by the Beast. That was scary then, and is still is a moment (or that may be my nostalgia acting up again).