Amazon.com essential video

Tough stuff from director Fritz Lang(M), making his first American film with this 1936 story of an innocent man (Spencer Tracy) who escapes a lynch mob and then orchestrates his apparent murder at their hands. Tracy is superb, and the film is uncompromising, until studio interference takes some of the wind out of Lang's sails right at the end. But as the portrait of a character who comes to reflect the destiny he is trying to avoid, this is still essential Lang and a pre-noir classic.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Lang's First American Film
An insightful study of mob rule, director Fritz Lang's "Fury" (1936) still packs a disturbing punch -- abetted by excellent performances from Spencer Tracy, Sylvia Sidney and Bruce Cabot. The closing shot was studio-imposed and unnecessary, but does not lessen the film's overall impact. "Fury" remains a powerful, thought-provoking drama. The DVD release includes an excellent commentary track from director Peter Bogdanovich.

We've Seen the Enemy And He is Us
What is amazing about Fritz Lang's "Fury" is it's depiction of middle America gone psychotic is it was distributed by MGM, the studio that advanced the Norman Rockwell idyll more than any other.This mirror of the darkest recesses of the American heart remains an obscurity, probably because we cannot admit to ourselves that when law and order break down we are capable of some of the most abhorent behavior.Obvious parallels can be made to what was occuring in Germany at the time of this film's release but our history suggests that, yes, it can happen here.There are many images that are seared in my consciousness from this film none more than that of one of the unruly lynchers munching on a hot dog as the jailhouse burns.Spencer Tracy is simply brilliant as the average Joe who, as a victim of circumstance, becomes the lightning rod for the mob's wrath.Sylvia Sidney contributes solid work as Joe's fiancee and the film's voice of reason.An underrated actress, Sidney also did a good turn in another classic film released in 1936, "Dead End".This film has to be commended for it's brute honesty, though, it took a foreigner to reveal some harsh truths about ourselves.

Smart 1930s Morality Tale from Fritz Lang with Spencer Tracy
"Fury" was legendary German director Fritz Lang's first American film. He spoke English, but not well enough at the time to write fluid dialogue, so Lang worked on the script with writer Bartlett Cormack, who did the actual writing. Lang and Cormack based this morality tale of mob psychology and revenge on a story outline by Norman Krasna entitled "Mob Rule", but they incorporated some elements of a real lynching case that had recently occurred in San Jose, California. Lang's intention was to give the film a realistic, documentary feel. "Fury" gives the impression of looking at the laws and customs of the United States through foreign eyes, which, of course, it is, but I don't know if Lang meant that to be so evident.

Joe Wilson (Spencer Tracy) is a man very much in love with his fiancée Katherine (Sylvia Sydney). The couple are eager to get married but don't yet have enough savings. Katherine takes a job in another city to earn more money, while Joe works hard in Chicago. After over a year of this arrangement, Joe has saved enough money to marry Katherine, and he sets out in his new car to join her. But he is intercepted by police en route and arrested on suspicion of being part of a kidnapping gang. He is held in a small town jail pending further investigation, but gossip spreads of the arrest, and an angry mob descends on the jail. When the mob is unable to break into the cells, they burn and dynamite the jail. Joe is thought to have died in the fire. But he escaped and is determined to avenge his attempted murder by seeing that the lynch mob is prosecuted for murder.

"Fury" isn't the least bit subtle in its message. It states its morals outright, but that doesn't undermine its power. The film is neatly divided into 2 parts: Part one concerns the Fury of the Mob, and part two is about Joe's Fury. The fury of the mob is transferred to its victim, and, although Joe's anger is more justified, "Fury" asserts that it is just as corrosive. At one point, the town barber delivers a monologue on violent impulse. The entertainment value that the public finds in both the lynching and subsequent trial is emphasized. And the state's Governor is reluctant to answer the Sheriff's request for National Guardsmen to protect the jail on account of election politics. The film is generally complimentary of the justice system, but scathingly critical of "mob justice" and vigilantism. "Fury" wasn't a failure when it was released, but neither was it a big success. Looking at it now, I wonder if that may have been because the film is critical of its audience. That's always a recipe for dismal box office. In any case, "Fury" is a smart "social conscience" film of the 1930s that doesn't align itself with any political party or group.

The DVD (Warner Brothers 2005 release): The picture and sound quality are good, but I don't think this is a restored print due to occasional small white specks. The flaws would hardly be noticeable unless you were looking for them, though. There is a theatrical trailer and an audio commentary by Peter Bogdanovich and director Fritz Lang. Yes, Fritz Lang! The commentary alternates between Peter Bogdanovich discussing Lang and the film in the present day and an interview with Fritz Lang that Bogdanovich did in mid-1965. Lang talks about his career, writing and filming "Fury", and differences between American and German filmmaking. Lang's commentary is quite a treat and very interesting. Bogdanovich is also interesting, as he fills in some of the gaps in Lang's comments. The audio commentary is definitely worth a listen. Subtitles for the film are available in English, Spanish, and French.

The scary thing...
is that this film is, with just a little tweaking, just as applicable today as it was then. Mob mentality is mob mentality, even if it's not literal. This is easily one of the best films to illustrate just how imbecilic and lemminglike mobs can be, and how self-righteousness can supposedly cover up for a multitude of sins. Tracy is superb, as are many of the characters, and Lang's direction is near flawless. The only things that keep this from being a 5-star film: The ending, which was forced on lang by the studio, and the fact that some of the acting, including Sydney in parts, is too over the top. Still, one worth watching and owning.

Brutal film !
The inner demons hidden in a crowd will explode with all the expected fury around and innocent man acussed unfairly .

The sociological study of the human being is exposed in all its ugly nakeness .

So after you watch this sinister nightmare brilliantly played by Spencer Tracy, please remind that famous reflection of Ibsen taken from An enemy of the people : ^The majority never has the reason^ .

This movie was the first one made for Lang when he came to North America after leaving Germany .

A major cult movie ! ... Read more

Reviews (13)

The Team Behind "Wake Island"
Today, Wake Island remains a lonely outpost and weather station frequented by Japan's Maritime Self Defense Force units on ASW training, semi-annual MSC supply visits, and continued USAF flights from Hickam Field, Oahu. Located in the Oceanic region at Lat. 19.2833 North and Long. -166.6536 East, temperatures rarely rise above 80 degrees Fahrenheit during December. But almost 60 years ago, it was pretty hot for those Warfighters in Dec 1941. Wake Island, a piece of U.S. territory, was practically seen on every USMC Recruiting Station poster and playing at local hometown theaters. Wake Island- the movie- was released to the general public in late Aug 1942 to help boost morale back at home. This epic war film was made as a factual film chronicle, an authentic picturization of America at war- the first of its kind since a Japanese "stab in the back", on 7 Dec 1941, had changed the course of American history. Over 7,000 military personnel and their dependents first saw it when it was premiered all day long at Camp Elliott's base theater (near San Diego, CA), on 24 Aug 1942. In the making of this film, the United State Marine Corps provided Lieutenant Colonel Francis E. Pierce, USMC (later downed 6 confirmed Japanese aircraft, and C.O. of MCAD Miramar, 24 Oct 44-1 Apr 45) as technical advisor, and Lieutenant Colonel W. G. Farrell, USMC, as liaison officer. Never too far away was the supervising officer of the Marine technical staff- Brigadier General Ross Erastus Rowell, USMC (CG 2d MAW; 1884-1947). Additionally, a special weapons detail comprising 60 Marines from Camp Elliott, under the command of Captain Nicholas Pesecans, USMC, manned and received valued training with the various heavy automatic weapons (.30 and .50 caliber machine guns, and a 37-milimeter anti-tank gun), including one 5-inch naval gun. Also, a squadron of eight F4F-3 Grumman fighters (assigned to 2d MAW) from NAS San Diego airfield, under the command of Lieutenant Colonel John N. Hart (an old Annapolis classmate of Brian Donlevy, and later C.O. of VMO-251 at Espirito Santo) planned the USMC aerial combat against a group of Ryan SC low-wing monoplanes painted to duplicate the Japanese Nakajima- 96 fighters. They were flown by picture and test flyers led by Herbert L. White, and by Frank Clark- chief pilot of the film unit. Not being outdone, one PBY-5A was shown flown by a naval crew stationed at NAS San Diego. Then, there was the giant Pan American Airways "China Clipper" flying boat (a Martin M-130 with top speed 150 mph and 3,200 mile range), whose pilot dutifully took orders from Brian Donlevy. The three location sites for filming were: the Salton Sea, the Great Salt Lake, and the coastal firing range on Coronado Island's "Strand Beach." With Brian Donlevy (1901 - 1972) depicting Major James Patrick Sinnott Devereux (commander of the Wake Marine Detachment from 15 Oct 1941 - 23 Dec 1941; 1903-1988), there was Walter Abel (1898-1987; depicting island C.O., Commander Winfield S. Cunningham, USN); the comedy team of two USMC privates- Robert Preston Meservey (1918-1987) and William Bendix (this was William's second assignment under the Paramount banner; 1906-1964); Albert Dekker who played the tough civilian construction contractor (familiar to fans in two horror films of 1940- Dr. Cyclops and Strange Cargo); and, young Edward MacDonald Carey (1913-1994) playing the heroic role as in real-life comparison to Major Paul A. Putnam (C.O. of VMF-221 fighter squadron consisting of twelve F4F-3 Grumman fighters). His serious respect for the USMC "Flying Leathernecks" would later get him an assignment with Colonel Walter L. J. Bayler, USMC (then Major Bayler, communications officer of MAG-21, better known to USMC as "the last man off Wake Island"). Thus, the audience of 1942 at all home theaters laughed, cried, and howled as the Marines goofed-off, fought one another, and hit hard the enemy landing force in the final scenes. There was the patriotic Chinese- American, Richard Loo (1916-1975), who portrayed the Japanese special envoy- Saburo Kurusu, on his way to Washington for "peace" negotiations. Who can forget that out of the tomato and carrot fields of Imperial Valley, CA, during the hot summer of 1942, some 150 loyal Filipino- Americans did their patriotic part, too, as they volunteered to portray the invading Japanese forces (now known as the 1,000- strong Maizuru 2nd Special Naval Landing Force). Director John Villiers Farrow (1904-1963) brought more than Hollywood skill to this film. He also brought an intimate knowledge of war. He was a Lieutenant Commander in the Royal Canadian Navy until invalided out of service December 1941 after contracting typhus while on duty as executive officer of a Canadian ASW vessel operating in the South Atlantic. Wake Island was his first directing assignment in two years (in 1940 he directed A Bill of Divorcement). And, who would have known that from this film lovely Barbara Britton who played just a brief moment as the wife of the young Marine "Flying Leatherneck" pilot, played by Carey, would shortly after assist a Marine Recruiting Station in Los Angeles, CA. Finally, E. MacDonald Carey soon enlisted into the United States Marine Corps. He was sent to Parris Island, NC, on 7 Dec 1942, for recruit training. Then he was sent to OCS Quantico, VA, for officer training- graduating in April 1943. Would you know it... his first assignment was as a Marine aviation maintenance officer for the Marine Air Group under the command of Colonel W. L. J. Bayler ("the last man off Wake Island") at newly established MCAS Cherry Point, NC. "What a Team!"

In The Days Following Pearl Harbor
Wake Island details the battle for the island in the days immediately following Pearl Harbor. Wake Island was a small, flat piece of nothing in the middle of the Pacific that had strategic importance. When Japanese bombers began attacking, there wasn't much the American Marines stationed there could do, although the battle they put up in the face of hopeless odds was remarkable. Needless to say, the emphasis is on the action here, as it should be, and it is efficiently and effectively played out. There's a number of familiar character actors that give the movie a comfortable feel. The film is competently made, and history lovers and war buffs will no doubt find it entertaining enough.

where is closed captioned?
why not you put on closed captioned and i would buy some of them if that have all of them closed captioned. that would be nice.

Better than remembered
Saw this long ago on TV. We had no Saturday morning cartoons then, only seemingly endlessly repeated WWII movies. This DVD isn't bad at all. Yes, we have all the cliché military and civilian types we're supposed to have in movies of this sort. Yes, we have some VERY well done camera work also. William Bendix and Brian Donlevy great. Worth a look, not "Zulu" but worth a look.

Marines Stand Tall
When you consider the timing of this movie and its propaganda value, then weigh it with the reality of what the Marines did on Wake, this is one of the finest and timeliest movies to come out of WW II.

Good acting, good action, but a few technical details missed (such as calling someone "soldier" - doesn't happen in the Marine Corps; also belt buckles, etc. Minor stuff, given the time). Overall, a solid movie and a good cast.

Well worth Seeing by Marines and those who love 'em.

Semper Fi ... Read more

Reviews (25)

Trippy Trellis and the rest of them
Vincent Sherman is generally underrated and people seem to prefer William Wyler as a director, but to me Sherman gives you the real 100 proof Bette Davis (as well as many other actresses he worked with during a very up and down career).Wyler seems so labored next to Sherman's X-Ray intensity, like he's shooting the film lit only by occasional flashes of lightning.MR SKEFFINGTON, with its teasing title, is one of his very best pictures.

Bette Davis evidently persuades about half the people watching the movie that she is or was a great beauty.That's a sign of good acting, even if she can't sway the other fifty percent from thinking her a fraud.Fanny is one of Davis' great creations, even if you don't buy into her beauty, for she makes you believe in her self-absorption, and the exquisite narcissism which draws men toward her like moths.And yet Fanny has an Achilles heel of her own--two really, if you count the way her self-worth is totally indexed into her good looks, so it must inevitably suffer with the passing of time.But her real weakness is her crazy love for her brother, the indolent character played by Richard Waring in this film, with the Cockettes-style name of "Trippy Trellis."As many have noted, it's hard to take a guy seriously in the movie if his name is "Trippy Trellis."Waring is good in the part, and I wonder why his US career was so curtailed.Maybe it was the curse of that tremulous name.

As for Claude Rains, he lives up to the title role every bit as splendidly as he filled the shoes of "The Invisible Man."There's a bit of the invisible in his performance, isn't there, in the way he retreats towards the wallpaper when Fanny takes every inch of air in the room.And in fact he completely disappears off the screen while the death camps get a grip on him, only for him to make a fantastic Monte Cristo re-appearance at the end.They don't make actors like that any more, do they?Well, they do, but they don't give them their heads the way Vincent Sherman encourages Rains and Davis at every turn."More, more, more!"And also, of course, we don't have Franz Waxman working in Hollywood any more.His delirious score for MR SKEFFINGTON makes "Trippy Trellis" seem almost reasonable.Put this film on DVD now!

Worth Viewing For Several Reasons
"Mr. Skeffington" is slow moving, especially if you are viewing the restored version with almost a full half hour added to what was shown in theaters.

The opening scene of Fanny Trellis' suitors kibbutzing in a receiving room seems to go on forever, with far too much dead air between the genuinely funny witticisms.

Too, Fanny and her suitors are too old to really capture the script's sense of a lusty crowd of marriageable-age aristocrats fighting over a prime beauty and her fortune. And Davis never really conveys that she *is* a great beauty. I've seen British actresses who aren't great beauties carry this off, but Davis doesn't.

But this film is still worth a look for mature film goers.

Claude Rains gives another tremendous, and understated, performance, the film's themes of sacrifice and inner v. outer beauty are genuinely poignant, and "Mr. Skeffington" is of historical interest because it was one of the first films to address anti-Semitism.

It is fascinating for a film-goer of our more "let-it-all-hang-out" era to see the trepidation with which anti-Semitism is discussed -- or, rather, *not* discussed. Whenever someone comes close to saying a word like "Jew" his or her line is cut short. When Claude Rains informs his daughter that it would be better for her to be raised by her unloving, but Gentile, mother, rather than her adoring, but Jewish, father, this viewer was moved to tears.

Too, the themes of inner beauty v. outer beauty are profound. They are echoed in the themes of anti-Semitism and of classism. The true "gentleman" of the piece is Job Skeffington, a short, coarse, low-born Jew. He brings out the beauty in his high-born wife.

His sacrifice in supporting her, and her sacrifice to save her brother, are also moving plot elements.

Davis is, as ever, flamboyant, and it is wonderful to watch Rains never, ever rise to her invitation to overact, especially in the scene in Skeffington's office, where Davis flutters away in fright from a stuffed eagle. Both the character, Fannie Trellis, and the actor, Bette Davis, in this scene are begging Job Skeffington / Claude Rains to overact, to be as histrionic and artificial as she is, but Rains never takes the bait. He depicts a hard-headed businessman with hard-headed acting chops that require no italics.

His lines on the boat after the wedding are also quite moving. He talks about why he married Fannie, and what his hopes are.

Finally this film is poignant because the plot is, as they say "isomorphic to context." Many Movie Moguls were low-born Jewish men who went out their way to capture high-born, beautiful, aristocratic, Gentile wives; they handed their children over to these wives and boarding schools and the wider culture in the hopes that their Americanized children would never experience the anti-Semitism that they had experienced.

If nothing else, this film can be enjoyed as a soap opera with high production values. The sets are lavish, and the plot moves through several decades, so one gets to enjoy the fashions of the teens through to the forties.

Hooray for Claude Rains!!!
I have seen Mr. Skeffington several times, and each time it amazes me.I am really amazed that the subject of the Jew's place in society is addressed at all in a Hollywood movie; it is a delicate and difficult subject.In this movie, it is portrayed with complete honesty and naturalness, with subtlety.It does not blare trumpets and call great attention to itself as Gentleman's Agreement does.As a Jew, I find Gentleman's Agreement embarrassing for that reason; I find Mr. Skeffington revelatory and truthful.There is not one false note.

In the same manner, Mr. Skeffington deals with several other difficult and complex subjects: a marriage that has to fail, because Mrs. Skeffington is very narcissistic and self-involved; in addition, she has an underlying (perhaps subconscious) mild contempt for her husband because he is Jewish.She is also an uninvolved mother.As her husband says, she seems unable to love and in the movie she is obsessed with being the object of love.

There is also a lovely child whose source of unconditional love and nurturance comes almost exclusively from her father.During her parents' divorce, she very narrowly escapes being put into the custody of her un-caring parent and succeeds in being raised by her father.

In addition to the first-class screenplay, directing, casting, and acting, I am very, very pleased to see Claude Rains (one of my favorite actors, and someone whom I would like to champion as being underrated) play totally against type, showing us a side of himself never seen in any other role (as far as I am aware).He plays a warm, sensitive, loving and nurturing husband and--and this is the most delightful--father.He is wonderful on screen with his daughter, and totally believable as a man with a warm, caring heart.In all his roles, there has always been a tremendous vulnerability about Claude Rains, and for once, in this role, the vulnerability is turned into sensitivity, warmth, affection, and courage.It is a relief to see him shed the scabrous mantle of stunted growth, frustration, freakiness, neurosis, and depravity and decadence that he has had to wear in many of his other roles (although he does it wonderfully).

Love is blind in this classic tearjerker--4 1/2 stars
Bette Davis and Claude Rains provide strong performances in this soap operawith comedic touches.Like many movies of its era, "Mr. Skeffington" tells the story of a "bad woman" redeemed by the love of a good man.

Bette Davis plays Fanny Trellis, a beautiful young woman whose sole purpose in life is to surround herself with as many adoring young men as possible. Vain and self-centered,she can't really love anyone except herself and her brother Trippy (an unlikely name if ever there was one) .One ofher conquests is Trippy's boss, Job Skeffington, (Claude Rains), a rich Jewish businessman who loves Fanny deeply and unselfishlyin spite of her shallowness.When Trippy is caught embezzling, Fanny marries Skeffington to save her brother.Trippy reacts with outrage at her selling herself for money (he never mentions the "J" word, but it's implied) and goes off to fight in World War I. Although now a wife, Fanny continues herconquests as a tolerant but none-too-pleased Skeffington watches.His unease is offest by the birth of their daughter, young Fanny--her love makes up for her mother's actions.But this delicate arrangement is upset when Trippy is killed in action and Fanny admits that she only married Skeffington for his money.The marriage disintegrates rapidly until--in a delicious irony-- Fanny and her current flame encounter Skeffington with his secretary at a speakeasy and indignantly divorces him.All but abandoned by her mother, young Fanny goes to Germany with her father to return years later as an adult.Fanny, meanwhile, continues being the Belle of the Ball, acting the girlish coquette even as she grows older.But this ends when diphtheria destroys her beauty andFannyis abandoned by all her former conquests.This is brought home to her she invites them to a party and they come, balding and with their wives.All that remains to Fanny isthe old woman she sees in mirror, and even her daughter leaves to marry one of her mother's former and younger beaus. Fanny is finally forced to contemplate her life and values and realizes the worth of her former husband and his adage, "A woman is only beautiful when she's loved."Today, that might have been the end of the movie, but in 1944 audiences wanted a happy ending .Skeffington returns from a Nazi concentration camp, blind and broken both financially and physically.Fanny, in the only selfless act of her life, takes him in and--the viewer is left to expect--showers upon him the love that he once showered upon her.

This story is vintage soap opera and very much a period piece. Production values are high in "Mr Skeffington," and it's fun to track the passing years through Davis' costume changes. There are a few subtletiesin the movie, but by and large it paints with broad strokes. Davis plays the flirtatious society heartbreaker with remarkable style and is much less restrained than Rains'. But Rains'role calls for less flamboyance and his long-sufferingSkeffington provides just the right warmth and humanity to counter Davis.There are some wonderfully comic scenes in the first half of the movie.Skeffington's amused resignation as Fanny's rejected beaus leave the house with broken hearts is beautifullyplayed by Rains.There are also moments of pure pathos--among them Skeffington's attempts to explain European anti-Semitism to his young daughter and why she must stay with her mother instead of going with him. "Mr. Skeffington" is a classic example of how films can be dated in terms of their stories and themes and yet retain their ability to enthrall.

One of Bette's Best
The first time I saw this movie, I couldn't get over the vanity of Fanny Skeffington. (And she wasn't all that beautiful to boot) having all these men running after her while Claude Rains sit there and put up with her mess for as long as he could and when he goes and get affection from one of his "secretaries", she has the nerve to go and get a divorce from him. Seems to me all those beaus don't do a thing for her that she couldn't get from Claude Rains. In time though, fate deals a heavy hand, and Bette loses the very thing, and yet still carries on as though she hasn't.Very interesting movie. ... Read more

Amazon.com

A neat World War II thriller, 13 Rue Madeleine benefits from the postwar craze for shooting outside the studio. With Quebec doubling for occupied France, this is a spy movie with a sense of open air. James Cagney plays an OSS agent, training his recruits for an important pre-D-Day mission. When one of them turns out to be a Nazi spy, Cagney must parachute into France himself and straighten things out. Director Henry Hathaway and producer Louis de Rochemont pioneered the docu-drama approach with The House on 92nd Street, and they again use newsreel footage and stentorian narrator here, blended into the fictional story. The script is slightly muddled, but there are a fistful of suspenseful situations and a gangbusters ending--as well as the typically wired-up Cagney, who is exactly the guy you want on your side if D-Day is hanging in the balance. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (6)

A lamb is ready ....
This isn't a great movie. It is however, a good movie. THe potential is there for it to be great, but it doesn't rise to the occasion.

The story might have been more engaging if it weren't done documentary style. Small things, such as the French and German characters speaking with the appropriate accents, would have improved the films quality.

I do however like the fact that there are no cheesy romantic subplots. It is also nice to see the Axis powers (in this case the Germans) being portrayed as competent individuals, rather than buffoons as so many other movies of the era do.

Ultimately, this movie is a must addition to my collection because of my love of Cagney. Originally, I had only seen the final scene of this movie when it was on AMC. I will not give it away, but I was so engaged by Cagney's laugh and the look on his face given the circumstances in the last minute of the film, I bought the film. If you're a Cagney fan, I don't think you'll be dissapointed. His performance is quite good. If you're not, then I think I'd skip this one.

A potentially good story goes nowhere
13 Rue Madeleine started out with potential. It opens at a British spy school (where everybody seems to be Americans or French) and the man in charge of schooling this batch of students (Cagney) is told one of the students is a spy and it's up to him to determine who. Some quick scenes of spy training are shown depicting some of the training techniques employed by such schools. This was probably the most interesting part of the film.

From there, the film jumps to graduation day and Cagney has determined who the spy is and is told to send this spy on a mission intended to decoy the Germans from the true date and location of the impending invasion of Europe. Things go wrong on this mission from the start and Cagney has to go in to clean up the mess.

The acting is only 'OK' by all but the mayor of a small French town and American actors play the German officers. They even speak English when speaking amongst themselves. While having 'Germans' speaking English detracts from the film, at least they spared us and didn't try to fake German accents. Furthermore, the Germans are depicted as being competent with their duties instead of bumbling idiots. For these reasons, the film rates two stars instead of only one.

However, this story missed out on so many chances to be a lot better. The spy is discovered from the start of the film and there are no tense moments at all. They could have written the film so that it appeared this one person was the spy but still left the possibility open for it to be somebody else. Furthermore, there are no tense moments in this film at all. There's no suspense and there's no action. It's just a bunch of actors going about living their lives.

Even when the German intellegence agents are onto what's going on the movie just jumps right to the plot point. There's a scene where the Germans are using radio direction finding equipment to triangulate the position of a British agent's broadcast and they find the agent within 10 seconds of the opening of the scene. Again, a lot of cat-and-mouse scenes could have been written into this story but as it is it's too flat - too linear. There's no drama, no suspense, and very little action. Not much to see here.

It's all about Cagney
13 Rue Madeleine gets off to a horrible start with a painfully dated newsreel-style introduction replete with corny voiceover. If you can bear with that for five or ten minutes, the movie mercifully starts to grow more interesting as you watch would-be spies go through a secret training program that tests them physically and--even more so--mentally. From there, it's off to France for some well-paced, yet underdeveloped, cloak-and-dagger action centering on a German double agent, the opening of the Allied second front in western Europe, and the V-2 rockets.

Mercifully, the film mostly avoids cheap or unrealistic sentimentality (outside the opening narration), gratuitous love interests, and the like, and the Germans are shown to be quite competent at their jobs, instead of faceless buffoons. For a 40's war film, 13 Rue Madeleine is actually on the gritty and dark side, and the violence is a bit more fierce and graphic than you might expect. (The broken necks and knifings, not the implausibly bloodless shootings.) The actors generally acquit themselves decently, though they would have been far more engaging if more of them at least attempted the appropriate accents or--better still--spoke German or French where appropriate.

Ultimately, how much you enjoy this film will probably depend on how much you enjoy Cagney. He gives a fine performance here, not particularly nuanced, but full of vigor and seriousness. You can really feel the confidence and daring spirit of his character. Check out the scene where he signs into the hotel room to see how ably he conveys an air of authority. As enjoyable as Cagney can be here, he can't make 13 Rue Madeleine rise above being a merely decent, second-rank war film.

13 Rue Madeleine
One of the few DVD's I regret buying. This film demonstrates clearly that Cagney was one of the worst actors of all time. He is so wooden. He even walks stiffly. The others characters are so sterotypic that it is comic. The only good acting jobs are the German spy and French mayor. In addition, there is an off screen narrator with a strident, metallic voice who makes a bad movie even worse.

Cloak and Cagney go together . . .
13 RUE MADELEINE is one of Hollywood's last stand against the Axis--a post WWII film that explains our cloak and dagger OSS effort which helped whip those sneaky Nazis. The Cloak and Cagney go well together in this film. Cagney captured my pleasant attention since for once he was acting and not making a bully of himself. 13 must be measured against its' historical contribution to movies. It does help explain the American fear of Nazi and Japanese spies at the onset of WWII. We, in fact, had no credible military intelligence until the OSS. As Hollywood's attempt through this film to continue WWII should have rated only 4 stars, however I gave it the extra 5th star because the German soldiers were not portrayed as inept morons. This is a very entertaining film viewed in an historical context. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Somber but beautiful western adventure
This entertaining and colorful western is about the relationship between red men and white men and the differences in the values and ideals between the two cultures. The film has cavalry-Indian skirmishes and derring-do heroics by wagon train guide Johnny Hawks but the white man's greed for gold is the central theme of this story that undoes a peace treaty and has the Oregon-bound wagon beating a hasty retreat to the fort for safety from Red Cloud's warriors. The trouble centers around two unscrupulous white men who trade whiskey for gold to Indians in exchange for revealing the location of gold on Sioux land. Hawks is less interested in gold than he is in a Sioux maiden for whom he leaves the wagon train to be with against his better judgment. The peace treaty ceremonies at the fort have a patriotic flavor, what with the Indians approaching on horseback in their finest war regalia and fluttering war bonnets and colorful shields to the accompaniment of "Columbia, the Gem of the Ocean", and a Mathew Brady protégé is on hand to photograph the event. As Indian fighter Hawks romances the beautiful Onahti, he is pursued by a marriage-minded frontier woman who has her own plans for him when the train gets to Oregon. The film has a brooding quality that's reflected in Franz Waxman's melancholy music score, especially those cues that are highlighted by a lyrical, solo flute.

Indian Fighter
I was very disappointed with this movie.
I saw the original TV airing of this movie in 1962. Over those 40 years, I still remember scenes of the movie, which were not part of this copy. There was a statement at the beginning of the movie, which indicated that the Indian would not speak in their native tongue so the audience would be able to understand the movie better. In addition, I remember that in the end, a soldier (the bugler), silhouetted by the dusk light was standing on a hill holding a girl.
The story line was weak, nearly uninteresting. I felt fidgety watching this poor film. The only thing, which kept me watching, besides the fact that I just threw away good money on this new release, was the fact that I had fond childhood memories of the Indian fighter. But, in all honesty, I have pulled better movies out of Wal-mart's $5.88 bins.
The movie DID appear to be choppy in its story line, as though it might have been pieced together, as if the original film had some damaged parts and were left out. Also, the movie ended abruptly, leaving me feeling cheated. There were several scenes, which looked grainy, as though they might have been 3rd generation copies.
I want a refund! If I had sent this in a theater, I would have walked out and demanded back my ticket price.

THE INDIAN FIGHTER
Have no idea what the guy who complained about the picture being fuzzy, shifting quality and looking chopped up was drinking the night he viewed this movie. Picture quality was excellent and saw no sign of it being chopped up. An excellent western.

disappointment
Either the original or transfer was terribly faulty but picture was poor. Aspect changed from moment to moment. Focus was a bit bleary and night shots were too dark to tell what was going on. And the story, it almost seemed like there were scenes deleted as story line had a very jerky feel to it. As a collector of western films, can only say this ranks among the worst I have purchased.

Kirk Douglas in a pro-Indian pro-environment Western romance
Kirk Douglas is "The Indian Fighter" Johnny Hawks, who returns to the West after the end of the Civil War to lead a wagon train bound for Oregon. Along the way there is the threat of an Indian war stirred up by bad guys Wes Todd (Walter Matthau) and Chivington (Lon Chaney), a couple of whiskey traders who are after gold on Indian land. The Indians in question are led by Red Cloud (Eduard Franz), the Sioux chief who tried to keep the white man from taking over his people's land. Johnny is smitten with Onahti (Elsa Martinelli), the chief's daughter, who distracts him enough from his job to put the wagon train and the local military outpost at risk when Red Cloud's brother is killed.

This 1955 western was filmed on location in Oregon by director André De Toth and the beautiful scenery along with composer Franz Waxman's evocative helps elevate "The Indian Fighter" to above average status. Given the time and genre, some of the scenes between Hawks and Onahti are quite risqué. In the end this is more of a Western romance than a Western action film, and with its inherent sympathy towards both the Indians and the environment, De Toth has made an extremely atypical Western. Elisha Cook has a nice supporting role as Briggs, a character who learned photography from Matthew Brady during the Civil War and has come out West to capture the grandeur of the landscape, and there are several moments when De Toth's has the camera provide the sort of beautiful panoramic shots that Briggs would aspire to take. Not a great Western but there is a lot here that warrants fans of the genre taking a long look.

Trivia Note: Diana Douglas, the wife of Kirk and mother of Michael Douglas at that point in hsitory, plays settler Susan Rogers, who has her eye on Hawks but ends up with hardy Will Crabtree (Alan Hale, Jr.). I remember the actress from playing Professor Tyler on "The Paper Chase." This was the only film the two appeared in together and certain an interesting choice given they each have different love interests. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

SILENT NIGHT,BLOODY NIGHT DVD
A REAL CREEPY HORROR MOVIE WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF WEIRD CHARACTERS. MARY WORONOV IS EXCELLENT IN HER ROLE.THIS IS A SICK MOVIE DEFINITELY WORTH CHECKING OUT. TESS, YOUVE GOTTEN OLDER AND FATTER! SEE THIS ONE!!!! A+++++

Silent Night , Sort of Bloody night
This was an interesting film that was par for the time it was made. The filming was sort of interesting especially when showing the view of the serial killer(The First person view sort of speak). The story was pretty good yet a tad over the top but as you know most horror films are a bit over the top. There is one really bloody scene at the beggining of the film that was graphic but after that don't espect too much blood. I thought this scene was done well and pretty graphic even for today's times. The music in this film is a bit hokey on certain parts but not too bad. The acting was not horrible but it was'nt great either. The part of the film that really stands out to me is the flashback scene. This really made the film spooky. The strange filming it used and the crazy story it explaned helped me like the movie alot more than I otherwise would have. The dvd version I saw came in a four horror film pack called horror classic's. I thought the sound could have been improved and certain scenes could have been transfered more clearly to the dvd but I guess I should just be glad it was even made into dvd format. Overall I think the film is worth a watch or two late at night.

Watchable...kinda.
SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT is one of the earliest of the "slasher" flicks. It inspired such movies as BLACK CHRISTMAS and to a lesser extent, SCREAM. There are a lot of things in this movie that have become staples of slasher films, such as the maniac calling the victims on the phone, and keeping the viewers guessing as to the identity of the killer.

The plot for this movie is a good, albeit simple one. The killer calls the eventual victims and lures them to a house where they meet their eventual demise. However, there are a lot of sub plots (rivaling the nighttime soaps Dallas and Dynasty!) that I found a little difficult to keep up with. Like EVIL DEAD, almost the entire movie takes place in a single night (with the exception of flashbacks, obviously). But unlike EVIL DEAD, there isn't really enough action to sustain it.

The cast is pretty well stocked, with early scream queen Mary Woronov, Patrick O'Neal and John Carradine (who was pretty much wasted in his role). The acting is sufficient to above average, but don't look for anything outstanding here. And although the writing suffers a little in my opinion, there is a lot of well-written dialogue in this film.

The base plot is as follows: Wilfred Butler dies, and leaves his house, grounds and all the belongings (which was used as an insane asylum for a few years) to his only surviving relative (isn't it always that way?), Jeff Butler. The only condition is that he has to keep the house in the same state that it was when he owned it. Jeff adheres to his grandfather's wishes for twenty years, but finally decides to sell it. PLOT POINT: The news travels to a local insane asylum, where we see an escape, but we don't know who it is that escapes. I don't think the writers did, either.

Shortly afterwards, Jeff's lawyer and his mistress arrive to sell the house, and decide to stay in the house overnight. Big mistake. They're the first victims in this new round of killings. Their murders are both violent and bloody. The rest of the film shows the killer luring the victims to the house over the phone. The killer goes by the name Mary Ann, who happens to be Jeff's mother, who as far as he knows died in childbirth. And his father turns out to be none other than his grandfather! The ending itself could have been written a lot better, but the person who turns out to be the killer is a bit of a surprise. But alas, that too turned into a letdown.

The biggest problem with this film is the lighting, or lack thereof. Almost the entire movie is filmed at night, and there seems to be little, if any lighting. There's a scene in the local newspaper office (run by Carradine) where the entire shot seems to be lighted by the single lightbulb hanging from the ceiling! Even the flashlights aren't powerful on this movie (the scene from BLAIR WITCH PROJECT with Heather holding the flashlight to her face is reminiscent of this).

Overall, it's watchable. But the poor lighting, confusing sub-plots and the bad ending pulls it down from a three to a two.

Family Issues..
SILENT NIGHT BLOODY NIGHT concerns an old house that used to be a mental institution. In 1935 (on christmas eve), the "inmates" were released to murder their tormenting captors. In 1973, someone is killing people again, someone connected to the house and it's evil history. Why are certain victims being selected? What is their connection to that awful day in '35? John Carradine is one of those stalked by the insane killer. A surprising amount of gore will thrill gorehounds. No nudity or profanity. A nice twist near the end. Better than fruitcake for christmas...

Great Movie
I bought this movie because it was on the sale rack of my local video store, and it looked interesting...this movie is by far one of the best movies i have ever seen..it is very well written and keeps you guessing until the end.. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

SILENT NIGHT,BLOODY NIGHT DVD
A REAL CREEPY HORROR MOVIE WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF WEIRD CHARACTERS. MARY WORONOV IS EXCELLENT IN HER ROLE.THIS IS A SICK MOVIE DEFINITELY WORTH CHECKING OUT. TESS, YOUVE GOTTEN OLDER AND FATTER! SEE THIS ONE!!!! A+++++

Silent Night , Sort of Bloody night
This was an interesting film that was par for the time it was made. The filming was sort of interesting especially when showing the view of the serial killer(The First person view sort of speak). The story was pretty good yet a tad over the top but as you know most horror films are a bit over the top. There is one really bloody scene at the beggining of the film that was graphic but after that don't espect too much blood. I thought this scene was done well and pretty graphic even for today's times. The music in this film is a bit hokey on certain parts but not too bad. The acting was not horrible but it was'nt great either. The part of the film that really stands out to me is the flashback scene. This really made the film spooky. The strange filming it used and the crazy story it explaned helped me like the movie alot more than I otherwise would have. The dvd version I saw came in a four horror film pack called horror classic's. I thought the sound could have been improved and certain scenes could have been transfered more clearly to the dvd but I guess I should just be glad it was even made into dvd format. Overall I think the film is worth a watch or two late at night.

Watchable...kinda.
SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT is one of the earliest of the "slasher" flicks. It inspired such movies as BLACK CHRISTMAS and to a lesser extent, SCREAM. There are a lot of things in this movie that have become staples of slasher films, such as the maniac calling the victims on the phone, and keeping the viewers guessing as to the identity of the killer.

The plot for this movie is a good, albeit simple one. The killer calls the eventual victims and lures them to a house where they meet their eventual demise. However, there are a lot of sub plots (rivaling the nighttime soaps Dallas and Dynasty!) that I found a little difficult to keep up with. Like EVIL DEAD, almost the entire movie takes place in a single night (with the exception of flashbacks, obviously). But unlike EVIL DEAD, there isn't really enough action to sustain it.

The cast is pretty well stocked, with early scream queen Mary Woronov, Patrick O'Neal and John Carradine (who was pretty much wasted in his role). The acting is sufficient to above average, but don't look for anything outstanding here. And although the writing suffers a little in my opinion, there is a lot of well-written dialogue in this film.

The base plot is as follows: Wilfred Butler dies, and leaves his house, grounds and all the belongings (which was used as an insane asylum for a few years) to his only surviving relative (isn't it always that way?), Jeff Butler. The only condition is that he has to keep the house in the same state that it was when he owned it. Jeff adheres to his grandfather's wishes for twenty years, but finally decides to sell it. PLOT POINT: The news travels to a local insane asylum, where we see an escape, but we don't know who it is that escapes. I don't think the writers did, either.

Shortly afterwards, Jeff's lawyer and his mistress arrive to sell the house, and decide to stay in the house overnight. Big mistake. They're the first victims in this new round of killings. Their murders are both violent and bloody. The rest of the film shows the killer luring the victims to the house over the phone. The killer goes by the name Mary Ann, who happens to be Jeff's mother, who as far as he knows died in childbirth. And his father turns out to be none other than his grandfather! The ending itself could have been written a lot better, but the person who turns out to be the killer is a bit of a surprise. But alas, that too turned into a letdown.

The biggest problem with this film is the lighting, or lack thereof. Almost the entire movie is filmed at night, and there seems to be little, if any lighting. There's a scene in the local newspaper office (run by Carradine) where the entire shot seems to be lighted by the single lightbulb hanging from the ceiling! Even the flashlights aren't powerful on this movie (the scene from BLAIR WITCH PROJECT with Heather holding the flashlight to her face is reminiscent of this).

Overall, it's watchable. But the poor lighting, confusing sub-plots and the bad ending pulls it down from a three to a two.

Family Issues..
SILENT NIGHT BLOODY NIGHT concerns an old house that used to be a mental institution. In 1935 (on christmas eve), the "inmates" were released to murder their tormenting captors. In 1973, someone is killing people again, someone connected to the house and it's evil history. Why are certain victims being selected? What is their connection to that awful day in '35? John Carradine is one of those stalked by the insane killer. A surprising amount of gore will thrill gorehounds. No nudity or profanity. A nice twist near the end. Better than fruitcake for christmas...

Great Movie
I bought this movie because it was on the sale rack of my local video store, and it looked interesting...this movie is by far one of the best movies i have ever seen..it is very well written and keeps you guessing until the end.. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

SILENT NIGHT,BLOODY NIGHT DVD
A REAL CREEPY HORROR MOVIE WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF WEIRD CHARACTERS. MARY WORONOV IS EXCELLENT IN HER ROLE.THIS IS A SICK MOVIE DEFINITELY WORTH CHECKING OUT. TESS, YOUVE GOTTEN OLDER AND FATTER! SEE THIS ONE!!!! A+++++

Silent Night , Sort of Bloody night
This was an interesting film that was par for the time it was made. The filming was sort of interesting especially when showing the view of the serial killer(The First person view sort of speak). The story was pretty good yet a tad over the top but as you know most horror films are a bit over the top. There is one really bloody scene at the beggining of the film that was graphic but after that don't espect too much blood. I thought this scene was done well and pretty graphic even for today's times. The music in this film is a bit hokey on certain parts but not too bad. The acting was not horrible but it was'nt great either. The part of the film that really stands out to me is the flashback scene. This really made the film spooky. The strange filming it used and the crazy story it explaned helped me like the movie alot more than I otherwise would have. The dvd version I saw came in a four horror film pack called horror classic's. I thought the sound could have been improved and certain scenes could have been transfered more clearly to the dvd but I guess I should just be glad it was even made into dvd format. Overall I think the film is worth a watch or two late at night.

Watchable...kinda.
SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT is one of the earliest of the "slasher" flicks. It inspired such movies as BLACK CHRISTMAS and to a lesser extent, SCREAM. There are a lot of things in this movie that have become staples of slasher films, such as the maniac calling the victims on the phone, and keeping the viewers guessing as to the identity of the killer.

The plot for this movie is a good, albeit simple one. The killer calls the eventual victims and lures them to a house where they meet their eventual demise. However, there are a lot of sub plots (rivaling the nighttime soaps Dallas and Dynasty!) that I found a little difficult to keep up with. Like EVIL DEAD, almost the entire movie takes place in a single night (with the exception of flashbacks, obviously). But unlike EVIL DEAD, there isn't really enough action to sustain it.

The cast is pretty well stocked, with early scream queen Mary Woronov, Patrick O'Neal and John Carradine (who was pretty much wasted in his role). The acting is sufficient to above average, but don't look for anything outstanding here. And although the writing suffers a little in my opinion, there is a lot of well-written dialogue in this film.

The base plot is as follows: Wilfred Butler dies, and leaves his house, grounds and all the belongings (which was used as an insane asylum for a few years) to his only surviving relative (isn't it always that way?), Jeff Butler. The only condition is that he has to keep the house in the same state that it was when he owned it. Jeff adheres to his grandfather's wishes for twenty years, but finally decides to sell it. PLOT POINT: The news travels to a local insane asylum, where we see an escape, but we don't know who it is that escapes. I don't think the writers did, either.

Shortly afterwards, Jeff's lawyer and his mistress arrive to sell the house, and decide to stay in the house overnight. Big mistake. They're the first victims in this new round of killings. Their murders are both violent and bloody. The rest of the film shows the killer luring the victims to the house over the phone. The killer goes by the name Mary Ann, who happens to be Jeff's mother, who as far as he knows died in childbirth. And his father turns out to be none other than his grandfather! The ending itself could have been written a lot better, but the person who turns out to be the killer is a bit of a surprise. But alas, that too turned into a letdown.

The biggest problem with this film is the lighting, or lack thereof. Almost the entire movie is filmed at night, and there seems to be little, if any lighting. There's a scene in the local newspaper office (run by Carradine) where the entire shot seems to be lighted by the single lightbulb hanging from the ceiling! Even the flashlights aren't powerful on this movie (the scene from BLAIR WITCH PROJECT with Heather holding the flashlight to her face is reminiscent of this).

Overall, it's watchable. But the poor lighting, confusing sub-plots and the bad ending pulls it down from a three to a two.

Family Issues..
SILENT NIGHT BLOODY NIGHT concerns an old house that used to be a mental institution. In 1935 (on christmas eve), the "inmates" were released to murder their tormenting captors. In 1973, someone is killing people again, someone connected to the house and it's evil history. Why are certain victims being selected? What is their connection to that awful day in '35? John Carradine is one of those stalked by the insane killer. A surprising amount of gore will thrill gorehounds. No nudity or profanity. A nice twist near the end. Better than fruitcake for christmas...

Great Movie
I bought this movie because it was on the sale rack of my local video store, and it looked interesting...this movie is by far one of the best movies i have ever seen..it is very well written and keeps you guessing until the end.. ... Read more