IMDb user comments for
Reign of Terror (1949) More at IMDb Pro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Index

21 comments in total

---

20 out of 20 people found the following comment useful :-
Unusual and Stunning Anthony Mann Film, 23 August 2004
Author: NoirFan62 from New Jersey

I watched REIGN OF TERROR, aka, THE BLACK BOOK last night and I just loved it! It's one of the most unusual films I have come across and an equally strange hybrid of genres or sub-genres. The great Anthony Mann takes a film that would probably play mostly as a colorful, sweeping, epic piece dealing with the French revolution and turns it, with the help of cinematographer John Alton, into a dark, shadowy and claustrophobic film noir/adventure/spy/suspense tale period piece featuring excellent performances from a cast that includes Robert Cummings, Richard Basehart and Arlene Dahl. The plot is pretty simple actually, Cummings plays an operative of the newly formed republic who infiltrates the inner circle of dictator wannabe Basehart. You see, Basehart thinks Cummings is a regional tyrant as bad as he is called the "butcher of Strasbourg" and he wants Cummings to find his black book which contains the names of friend and foe alike who will eventually be lead to execution once Basehart becomes dictator. However, if the book falls into the hands of his enemies, Basehart is dead meat. Cummings is assisted in his quest by the lovely Dahl. Even though the plot may be thin, the suspense and action are on high as danger and one confrontation after another awaits around every dark, gloomy and shadowy Parisian corner. The look of the film is outstanding. Atmospheric, gritty and dark with shadows everywhere in the great noir tradition. Mann's camera is everywhere as we receive his trademark high angle shots, low angle moments and jarring and disjointed facial close-ups. A truly unique and highly entertaining film with a look and feel that just has to be experienced. I loved it and would recommend it highly to anyone with even the slightest interest in the work of the wonderful Anthony Mann.

---

18 out of 18 people found the following comment useful :-
Mann, Alton view French Revolutionary adventure through film noir's lenses, 31 October 2003

Author: bmacv from Western New York

Out of the chaos and carnage of the French Revolution, Anthony Mann fashions not a sweeping historical epic à la A Tale of Two Cities but a tight and shaded suspense story. His gifted collaborator is director of photography John Alton, whose preference for the murky suggestively limned with light was never so evident as in his work here, in country inns and the cellars of bakeshops and the cobbled pavements of torchlit Paris.

The plot centers on Robespierre (a peruked Richard Basehart), who has embarked on a spree of mock trials and executions of his rivals in preparation to having himself proclaimed dictator; he's just disposed of Danton. A less than adulatory element loyal to the ideals of the newly formed Republic, but not to its current leaders, aims to stop him. One of their operatives (Robert Cummings) infiltrates Robespierre's inner circle by posing as the `butcher of Strasbourg,' a regional tyrant as bloodthirsty as Robespierre himself.

But in the circle of men closest to the power of the state, trust is a commodity in short supply; they watch their own backs and scheme to stab each others'. It's Cummings' job to negotiate this maze of duplicity and locate Robespierre's `black book,' in which he records neither his amatory conquests nor vintages he's sampled but his next victims. Exposure of this book will mean Robespierre's downfall. With the aid of proto-Bondgirl Arlene Dahl, Cummings races the clock in a round of near-fatal wild goose chases.

Reign of Terror remains a costumed adventure – a chase movie – but Mann paces it swiftly and slyly. And, fresh from some ground-breaking work in film noir, he and Alton give it a compellingly sinister look. Most period pieces are lit as if on the equator at high noon; this has to be the inkiest costume movie ever filmed (even Charles McGraw, as a bearded soldier of the Republic, goes all but unrecognizable). The darkness doesn't limit itself to the lighting – the script, by Aeneas MacKenzie and Philip Yordan, rustles with ambiguous motives and queer twists. There's even an ironic note of premonition sounded at the end, when the slimy survivor Fouché (Arnold Moss), asks the name of a young soldier. `Bonaparte,' comes the answer. `Napoleon Bonaparte.'

---

15 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
"The Scarlet Pimpernel"goes film noir!, 1 October 2003
Author: Hans C. Frederick (schweinhundt1967@postmaster.co.uk) from Parma Heights,Ohio,U.S.A.

There isn't anything happening in the plot to this little gem that hasn't been seen in at least 6 or 7 other films dealing with this time period.The difference,however,lies in the treatment.The other movies usually paint the protagonists in bold colors,emphasizing their dash,flair,attractiveness,and nobility,while the leaders of the reign of terror are seen as savage,cruel,inhuman,bloodthirsty,and psychotic savages.Well,they still are in this film,but the hero and heroine also show some pretty dark,sinister aspects as well.So,the good guys aren't the kind we're used to seeing. The pleasent surprise is seeing more versatility from both Cummings,and Dahl.We're so used to seeing them,especially HIM,as rather shallow,lightweight,and frivolous characters on so many sitcoms and comedies.It would have been a nice treat to have had more opportunities to see them do films of this nature.

---

16 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
Brilliant film noir disguised as French Revolution Epic, 10 March 1999
Author: metaphor-2 from United States

True film noir, that densely urban, disillusioned body of work characterized by the deep shadows that separate the characters from each other and isolate them from society, was almost always set in contemporary cities... in France before WWII and in America after it. ALMOST... Anthony Mann's THE BLACK BOOK (aka REIGN OF TERROR) is one of its finest examples, a costume thriller set in the French Revolution, and somehow managing to create the visual style and emotional mood of true film noir in a completely atypical setting.

This is a film to watch for its cinematic, visual brilliance... The story is serviceable, but the experience it services is a thrilling piece of movie art. Photographed by the great John Alton (a man who, it is said, could re-light Times Square at high noon, if necessary) the frame consistently dazzles and intrigues. Anthony Mann's taut and claustrophobic work (rather at odds with the usual French Revolution epic, and with Mann's later work in other genuinely epic-scale costume dramas) draws a compelling parallel between the atmosphere of fear in post-revolutionary France and in mid-20th century McCarthyite America.

---

12 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
Smart staging of the French Revolution on a "B" Movie budget, 21 July 2004
Author: swagner2001 from New York, NY

If you ever wanted to see period piece filmed with great economy, I'd recommend that you check out this movie.

The sets are amazingly bare. But with a few well-placed ornate props, and some smart lighting, creating lots of shadows - the small budget never calls attention to itself.

Don't forget, Anthony Mann shot this shortly after the noir classics T-MEN (1947) and RAW DEAL (1948). REIGN OF TERROR has that same hard-hitting gritty crime movie feel.

Historically inaccurate, perhaps (Maximilien Robespierre is referred to as "Max".) But a fun flick nonetheless.

---

13 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
A whole lotta French Revolution and Arlene Dahl, too, 25 August 2004
Author: michael william parker (vanderbilt651) from New York

This early effort from Anthony Mann (who went on to direct such

classics as Winchester '73 and The Man from Laramie) contains

his typical fast-pacing as well as an alternation between

extraordinarily wide landscape shots and extreme closeups, plus

his trademark fight and horse scenes, but played against the

unlikely backdrop of the French Revolution's Reign of Terror

period. In addition to the stylistic tricks that Mann would later use in

his Westerns, one sees here as well a strong importation of the

noir aesthetic, with its extreme chiaroscuro, complex plotting and

otherwise amoral atmosphere, interestingly grafted onto an

18th-century period picture. A great example of the way style can

often transcend genre expectations.

Apart from these and other notable aesthetic techniques (the use

of extreme, menacing close-up being among the most pronounced), the picture is a great deal of fun, largely owing to the

conventions and limitations of B-level studio pictures that were

standard in its day. Specifically, much of the delight emerges from

the way that Mann fashions a worthwhile cinematic expression

(camp value and all) from resources that many critics might

adjudge second-rate. Rather than drown actors such as Bob

Cummings and Arlene Dahl in period accuracy that would

overwhelm their expressive range, the performers--the entire

picture, in fact--seems to be winking at the fact that it is cramming

the entire Terror into 87 action- and intrigue-packed minutes.

(Dahl-watchers will be especially delighted by her campy, vampy

hijinks as a potential double agent who can impersonate everyone

from the most elegant marquise to a chicken farmer's wife with

just a rearrangement of a few fashion accessories.)

Indeed, RoT packs all the familiar faces of the Revolution into the

action for their respective fifteen seconds of fame: the Marquis de

Lafayette, Danton, Robespierre, Saint-Just and even good-old

Napoleon, who shows up at the end for one of the picture's silliest,

most sublime moments.

To that end, pay special attention to Richard Basehart's portrayal of

the infamous tyrant Robespierre. Forget what you learned in

history class: Hollywood's version is a delightfully malevolent and

distinctly epicene figure, who struts about in a tight-fitting black silk

outfit, is said by other characters not to like women, and who has

placed his elegantly appointed, not-quite-Empire-style

headquarters in the same space as a torture chamber. You will

not be surprised that he's the sort of character who can undermine

the Revolution's hard-won ideals while having his wig powdered

or making a citron pressé into an exquisite goblet. Truth be told, he

seems more interested in the wig-powdering.

All in all, this is an entertaining--and sometimes delightfully

campy--picture whose lightweight aspects are counterpoised by a

strong and accomplished mise-en-scene and a delightful sense

of perversion. Check it out and lock it in!

---

11 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
Exciting & Very Interesting Period Drama, 30 January 2006
Author: Snow Leopard from Ohio

This exciting and very interesting period drama makes very good use of its setting in the French Revolution, blending history and fiction together in a believable fashion. The atmosphere is particularly effective, with the dark photography and claustrophobic settings helping to establish the rampant fear, uncertainty, and paranoia that characterized the era.

At one time, the French Revolution (and the subsequent Napoleonic era) captivated numerous novelists and film-makers alike, and they could comfortably assume that their readers and audiences were familiar with historical figures like Robespierre, Danton, Barras, and the others of the period. In more recent decades, all this seems to have been replaced in the public's imagination by Hitler, the Nazis, and the other figures and events of the Second World War, but in many respects the history of France in the late 18th century and early 19th century is even more fascinating and compelling. And beyond a doubt, its impact still affects the world.

The scenario here has Robert Cummings impersonating a notorious public prosecutor, in order to get close to the bloodthirsty Robespierre, as part of an underground's desperate plans to replace Robespierre's tyranny with the more moderate influence of Barras and his party. The story is well-written, combining action, intrigue, and some Hitchcock-like touches with Robespierre's "Black Book", on which the fate of so many lives depends. Only the lack of a first-rate cast keeps it from being one of the best movies of its time and genre.

The best performances come from Arnold Moss, who is excellent as the slippery, conscience- free Fouché, and Arlene Dahl, who is appealing as the ex-lover of Cummings's character, with whom he has to work closely. The rest of the performances are all at least solid, but often miss the extra depth that could have raised the movie another notch.

Nevertheless, it all works quite well, and it's well worth seeing for its story, atmosphere, and for the intriguing period setting. It represents fine craftsmanship from director Anthony Mann and his cast and crew.

---

9 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Another Brilliant Anthony Mann Film, 22 August 2004
Author: NoirFan62

I watched REIGN OF TERROR, aka, THE BLACK BOOK a while back and I just loved it! It's one of the most unusual films I have come across and an equally strange hybrid of genres or sub-genres. The great Anthony Mann takes a film that would probably play mostly as a colorful, sweeping, epic piece dealing with the French revolution and turns it, with the help of cinematographer John Alton, into a dark, shadowy and claustrophobic film noir/adventure/spy/suspense tale period piece featuring excellent performances from a cast that includes Robert Cummings, Richard Basehart and Arlene Dahl. The plot is pretty simple actually, Cummings plays an operative of the newly formed republic who infiltrates the inner circle of dictator wannabe Basehart. You see, Basehart thinks Cummings is a regional tyrant as bad as he is called the "butcher of Strasbourg" and he wants Cummings to find his black book which contains the names of friend and foe alike who will eventually be lead to execution once Basehart becomes dictator. However, if the book falls into the hands of his enemies, Basehart is dead meat. Cummings is assisted in his quest by the lovely Dahl. Even though the plot may be thin, the suspense and action are on high as danger and one confrontation after another awaits around every dark, gloomy and shadowy Parisian corner. The look of the film is outstanding. Atmospheric, gritty and dark with shadows everywhere in the great noir tradition. Mann's camera is everywhere as we receive his trademark high angle shots, low angle moments and jarring and disjointed facial close-ups. A truly unique and highly entertaining film with a look and feel that just has to be experienced. I loved it and would recommend it highly to anyone with even the slightest interest in the work of the wonderful Anthony Mann.

---

9 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
France's First Revolutionary Dictator, 18 March 2006

Author: theowinthrop from United States

The question will never be really answered: What was the exact set of goals of Maximillien Robespierre, lawyer from Arras, France, who was (from July 1793 to June 1794) the central figure of public attention in France and the apparent dictator of the country? We won't know because he failed in the end - in possibly the most satisfactory fall from power of any dictator in modern history. His secrets died with him.

Robespierre has been painted as the great "green-eyed" monster of the Revolution. That was the phrase used by Thomas Carlyle in describing Robespierre in Carlyle's classic history of the revolution. A prissy, powder-wigged figure, who never found a kind word to say about anybody who was in power - and so undermined several rivals while he grew more powerful. He did give lip service to the Revolution's ideals, but apparently was more in love with the concept of mankind, than in individual men and women. He spoke about a cult of pure reason (an idea he gathered from the philosophes, especially Jean-Jacques Rousseau)and even held a festival for the cult shortly before he fell from power. Not really much to say about his program, except that his proscription made the Reign of Terror what it was.

But was he blown out of size? Some historians in the 20th Century feel that he was not all powerful. He was elected head of the Jacobin Club, and he was a member of the Committee of Public Safety - with eleven other men. The Committee was actually a committee set up with extraordinary powers by the National Assembly, and was supposed to run the war effort against Europe, and keep a lid on the problems on the home front. The historian R.R. Palmer (in "Twelve Who Ruled") makes a good case that Robespierre was not the only one with authority, but that all these men did valuable work. In particular, Louis Lazare Carnot, an amateur who turned out to be one of military history's most amazingly, unexpected geniuses. Carnot built the great French Revolutionary armies that were to be the weapon that Napoleon and his marshals used to conquer most of Europe.

But it was Robespierre (along with his two closest allies on the Committee: Robert Couthon and Antoine St. Just) who was the most fanatical in searching for hidden internal enemies. Their standards are the model for later similar "witch hunters", like Heinrich Himmler, Laventi Beria, and Senator Joseph McCarthy - you find a weak point, spread a lie, and then pound the lie into everyone until it becomes the truth. Robespierre did this with the Royal Family, the Girondists (moderates), General Lafayette (fortunately in an Austrian prison when denounced), General Dumouriez (who decided to surrender himself for safety sake to the Prussians), and then the radicals. He did not have to go after all his rivals. Jean Paul Marat would be stabbed by Charlotte Corday (the Girondists later said they wished she had consulted with them, they would have pointed out another target). But he did confront and destroy his right of center moderate rival Georges Danton, and later his far left rival Hebert.

There are, oddly enough, very few films dealing with this story. Robespierre does show up at the end of "Marie Antoinette", and is Chauvin's boss in "The Scarlet Pimpernel". The various versions of "A Tale Of Two Cities" do not need him (he's not in Dicken's novel). Only two films deal with him that I am aware of. A French film, "Danton", deals with his duel to the death with the great moderate and orator (played by Gerard Depardieu), and how Danton warns the country of the dangers of Robespierre's policies and personality but is unable to avoid being proscribed and executed.

Then there is this film. Directed by Anthony Mann, it paints a dismal view of the Paris of the months of May - June 1794, and how Robespierre finally is brought down. Played (very well) by Richard Basehart, his Achilles heel is a book of names of allies and enemies, and when he will destroy them to achieve total power. Robert Cummings and Arlene Dahl, with a cynical assist from Arnold Moss (as Joseph Fouche, Napoleon's future secret police chief) demolish Robespierre by getting the book into the right hands.

Did the book exist? We don't know. Stanley Loomis, in his interesting "Paris In The Terror" shows that it did not need to actually be in existence. Robespierre always had a proscription list in mind, and had he been smart he could have revealed it and reassured many who would not have stood in his way. But he was too arrogant and refused to do so. Fouche, who was an enemy of Robespierre, spread the word to almost every member of the National Assembly that they were on the hit list. Robespierre was shouted down when he tried to finally explain his plans, and was shot in the mouth just before he was arrested. On July 11, 1794 ("Thermidor" on the French Revolutionary Calender), he, Couthon, St. Just, and a dozen close associates were all guillotined. Although conservative, reactionary "White Terror" occurred in 1795, it was short and not as wholesale. Robespierre's Reign of Terror cost about 14,000 lives in France...and don't forget it was planned to continue for quite a while afterward. As Loomis writes in his study, the Terror died with him.

---

6 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
An intriguing movie, 5 March 2006
Author: LACUES (LACUES@netscape.net) from Independence, California

This is a low budget masterpiece, far more intriguing and suspenseful than most epic films dealing with the same subject. The film noir quality and acting are superb. As mentioned earlier, T-Men also made by the low budget studio Eagle-Lion, were and are memorable films. The cast is first rate . Robert Cummings, Richard Basehart, and Charles McGraw are standouts.

Thank goodness for Turner Classic Movies... it had been many years since I had seen it for the first time on television. Thanks to DVR I was able to record this film when it was played on TCM recently. This movie shows that with good acting, literate dialogue, and a great screenplay are what makes for an entertaining movie, which are in short supply today which too often offer computerized graphics, amateurish acting, and repetitive and crass dialogue instead. Kudos to Anthony Mann and the cinematographer for a great movie.

---

---

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user comments
Your vote history