cstotlar
Joined Aug 2000
Welcome to the new profile
We're making some updates, and some features will be temporarily unavailable while we enhance your experience. The previous version will not be accessible after 7/14. Stay tuned for the upcoming relaunch.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews16
cstotlar's rating
I saw this film years ago at the cinematheque in Paris and was wowed. I just bought a copy for myself and it is still a wonderful trip.
This is a revenge film, pure and simple, and if it appears somewhat dated from all the copycats that followed, it still packs a wallop. This sort of Old Testament revenge can be found in Lang's work all the way back to "Kriemhilde's Revenge" in the silents. Some things can be figured out - Lang isn't much of a "surprise" director, but we have to savor his vocabulary with the camera set-ups, the lovely symmetry and impeccable timing. Actually the plot devises are rather complex considering who does what to whom, but the film is completely clear and lucid. Gloria Grahame had her moment in the sun - and what a moment! This is a fine, fine noir picture that needs to have more attention. It's Lang at his American best and that's saying something.
Curtis Stotlar
This is a revenge film, pure and simple, and if it appears somewhat dated from all the copycats that followed, it still packs a wallop. This sort of Old Testament revenge can be found in Lang's work all the way back to "Kriemhilde's Revenge" in the silents. Some things can be figured out - Lang isn't much of a "surprise" director, but we have to savor his vocabulary with the camera set-ups, the lovely symmetry and impeccable timing. Actually the plot devises are rather complex considering who does what to whom, but the film is completely clear and lucid. Gloria Grahame had her moment in the sun - and what a moment! This is a fine, fine noir picture that needs to have more attention. It's Lang at his American best and that's saying something.
Curtis Stotlar
When I first saw this I roared with laughter. The performances were impeccable, the pacing seemed right and the premise was fodder for a film of the first rank.
Upon reviewing it many years later, some points jolted me back to reality. This was a play - a glorious one - that perhaps should been left as is. The celebrated presence of Marilyn Monrow is electric as it so often is but the film itself was turgid and stage-bound. When I think of Joshua Logan I think of Joe Mankiewicz (minus his verbal wit) - filmed photoplays with no kind of cinematic skill to speak of. The characters sink quickly into stereotypes and stereotypical behavior. Any sort of character development is basic and predictable. In this way, it is one-dimensional. It would survive beautifully on the stage with the excitement of live action, but on the screen, it gets frozen and static and worse than that, just plain stale.
Upon reviewing it many years later, some points jolted me back to reality. This was a play - a glorious one - that perhaps should been left as is. The celebrated presence of Marilyn Monrow is electric as it so often is but the film itself was turgid and stage-bound. When I think of Joshua Logan I think of Joe Mankiewicz (minus his verbal wit) - filmed photoplays with no kind of cinematic skill to speak of. The characters sink quickly into stereotypes and stereotypical behavior. Any sort of character development is basic and predictable. In this way, it is one-dimensional. It would survive beautifully on the stage with the excitement of live action, but on the screen, it gets frozen and static and worse than that, just plain stale.
I actually rather enjoyed this film. It's a slasher - let there be no question about that - but unlike most films of this genre, this one was really rather well made.
The camera-work was tidy and effective, the angles for the shots were well prepared and the traveling shots were fluent.
The acting wasn't much - the script called more for reacting than acting "per se", but the actors did adequate jobs.
The musical score by Clay Pitts was outstanding. Except for a few sections of rock guitar, composed of pure clichés we'd all expect, the electronic part was exceptionally good. The cutting of the score was clumsy, however, and could have been improved with a minimum of effort.
There are elements of just about everything plus the kitchen sink taken from other films. You can find "Night of the Living Dead", "Psycho", "Rabid" - you name it - but it was fun to watch, unlike the others, because the "fun" was intentional but not overstated. The literal "fear of water" misconception about rabies and the shaving foam-at-the-mouth parts were hysterically funny. The film was gross but it was amusing and not boring at all, where so many slashers fail. I wouldn't recommend either before or after meal though.
The camera-work was tidy and effective, the angles for the shots were well prepared and the traveling shots were fluent.
The acting wasn't much - the script called more for reacting than acting "per se", but the actors did adequate jobs.
The musical score by Clay Pitts was outstanding. Except for a few sections of rock guitar, composed of pure clichés we'd all expect, the electronic part was exceptionally good. The cutting of the score was clumsy, however, and could have been improved with a minimum of effort.
There are elements of just about everything plus the kitchen sink taken from other films. You can find "Night of the Living Dead", "Psycho", "Rabid" - you name it - but it was fun to watch, unlike the others, because the "fun" was intentional but not overstated. The literal "fear of water" misconception about rabies and the shaving foam-at-the-mouth parts were hysterically funny. The film was gross but it was amusing and not boring at all, where so many slashers fail. I wouldn't recommend either before or after meal though.