Les mains d'Orlac

There have been at least four versions of this story*. The original silent version is the best, though the sound remake with Peter Lorre is awfully good. The 1962 version, sadly, is so bad it's almost unwatchable. So what about this 1960 British version? Is it worth your time? It's current rating of 5.6 might seem to indicate the answer, but I decided to watch it and give it a chance.

Shortly after the story begins, the great concert pianist, Orlac (Mel Ferrer) is in an accident and he loses his hands. Considering how important these hands are, it's not surprising that the doctors would try something radical for 1960...give him a double hand transplant! But what they don't realize is that the dead donor was a murderer...and somehow these murderous impulses have been passed on through the hands to Orlac!

Apart from some distracting music, there's nothing wrong with this film...nor anything particularly right about it either. You've got a great basic story but the acting (Ferrer was a fine actor....but not here) and look of the film is a bit cheap. My advice is see one of the previous versions...they are both so much better and have much more energy than this slow version.

*There also was a short remake made for one of "The Simpson's" Halloween specials. In it Snake is finally executed for his infamous crimes and his cool head of hair is transplanted onto Homer...with expected results.

> 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.

I liked this film how cunning Christopher lee was to black mail Mel Ferrer, and how he nearly got away with it, the french version seems to have more pieces to the film compared to the englisch version, (Christopher lee) he spoke excellent french, i have this englisch version i enjoy watching it over and over again.

It's not true what Rainey-Dawn (United States), writes in his review: Orlac knows he has the hands of a "killer", he wakes up on the hospital bed after surgery and sees the two articles on the front page of a newspaper, about him and about the "killer". Mel Ferrer is unconvincing in the role, and the same is Lucile Saint-Simon. The only ones trying to save the film, through his acting value, is Christopher Lee, and through her personal charm, is Dany Carrel. But the movie can't be saved because the whole story is absurd and stupid. The final is a great demonstration.