Outrage (1950) User Reviews

A courageous, if cautious and dated, attempt to start talking about rape and its aftermath

[bmacv · 7/10 · 25 January 2004]

Ida Lupino was one of the few women to break through the directorial glass ceiling in Hollywood under the studio system. Not surprisingly, she also tackled proto-feminist themes that, when touched at all, were approached in so gingerly a manner that it was seldom quite clear what was being talked about. In Outrage, she treats rape and its aftermath, and though throughout the short movie it's referred to as `criminal assault,' she leaves, for once, no doubt about what happened.

Mala Powers (in her official debut) plays a secretary-bookkeeper at a big industrial plant; she lives with her parents but is engaged to a swell guy (Robert Clarke), who just got a raise and now makes $90 a week. Leaving the plant after working late one night, she finds herself being stalked. In the ensuing scene – the best in the movie – she tries to escape her pursuer in a forbidding maze of buildings and alleys but fails.

When she returns home, disheveled and in shock, the police can't get much out of her; she claims she never saw her attacker (who manned a snack truck outside the factory). Trying to pretend that nothing happened, she returns to her job but falls apart, thinking that everybody is staring at her, judging her. She goes into a fugue state, running away to Los Angeles on a bus but stumbling off at a rest stop.

Waking up in a strange ranch house, she learns that she's been rescued by Tod Andrews, a young minister in a California agricultural town. She lies about her identity and takes a job packing oranges. The two fall vaguely in love, but it's clear to Andrews that Powers is keeping dire secrets. When, at a company picnic, she seizes a wrench and cracks the skull of Jerry Paris, who was trying to steal a kiss, the truth about her past comes out....

It was a courageous movie to come out in 1950, and that may explain and excuse some of its shortcomings. Lupino never recaptures the verve of the early assault scene, and the movie wanders off into the bucolic and sentimental, ending up talky and didactic. Yes, Lupino had important information to impart, but she didn't trust the narrative to speak for itself. Her cast, pleasant but bland and generic, weren't much help, either, reverting to melodramatic postures or homespun reassurance. But Outrage was a breakthrough, blazing a trail for later discourse on what the crime of rape really is, and what it really means to its victims.

A milestone film

[JohnKyle · 8/10 · 25 January 2004]

Forget that this is a "B" movie. Forget that it is in many ways outdated. Instead give writer-director Ida Lupino much deserved credit for addressing a subject which at the time (1950) was taboo in Hollywood. To my knowledge, this was the first film to address the subject of rape and the emotional and mental effects that that crime has upon its victims.

Although much of the cast's acting is pedestrian at best, Mala Powers, who at the time was eighteen or nineteen, gives an excellent performance throughout as the traumatized young woman, Ann, who tries to run away from her "shame." Based on her work in this film, I'm surprised that she did not have a more successful acting career. Tod Andrews, too, has some fine moments as the minister who reaches out to help her.

Ms Lupino, obviously working on a limited budget, was still able to create some memorable scenes such as the pursuit through the streets and alleys leading to the rape, and the police lineup following it. And, she created a bittersweet ending which left me wondering if Ann really could ever have a normal life again.

A damaged psyche post despicable crime.

[hitchcockthelegend · 7/10 · 9 August 2017]

Outrage is directed by Ida Lupino and Lupino co-writes the screenplay with Collier Young and Malvin Wald. It stars Mala Powers, Tod Andrews and Robert Clarke. Music is by Paul Sawtell and cinematography by Archie Stout.

Transport your mindset back to 1950 and you are in all probability going to admire this picture more than you would think. As is duly noted by other reviewers, this pic, and it's treatment of rape as a core subject matter, is dated as such, but that in no way lessens not only its impact and importance in the pantheon of film making, but also the fine work by Lupino. Lupino treads with careful guile, not resorting to sensationalism, it's a super piece of directing from one of the great ladies of cinema yore.

Pic's story deals with how Ann Walton (Powers) is raped and after the ordeal how she reacts to everyday life under her fragile mental state. The decisions she makes, her perception of things and ultimately a near cataclysmic event that brings things to the boil - sort of. Lupino adds in some imposing images, her film noir work serving her well, thus we get odd angles, ominous bulbous lamp lights, lonely streets and clown posters! The pursuit of Ann by a whistling wolf is frightening under any circumstance, but with Lupino adding her noir touches it's positively shattering.

Rest of the pic is tenderly played, a touch too sedate perhaps, while the appearance of a religious slant is forced and not the wisest of choices for the story, but ultimately it's not about mass market appeal. It's about being noticed and worthy, it achieves both for sure. 7/10

Gutsy Effort On Lupino's Part

[dougdoepke · 25 November 2007]

Before this little black-and-whiter, the touchy topic of criminal rape never made it onto the American screen.There were lots of these topics that Hollywood and the Production Code kept hidden until the rebellious 1960's. So it's not surprising that it would take a little independent company like Ida Lupino's Filmmakers to raise the subject. The result is well-meaning but somewhat compromised, which is not surprising since director Lupino had to work with Code demands to get the movie released.

Interestingly, Ann Walton's (Mala Powers) main problem following the assault is not how others might see her, but how she sees herself. And it's a heavy load she's carrying. Will she ever be able to relate to men again? Will they look at her as "spoiled goods" (after all, this is 1950)? Small wonder she runs away rather than face these anxieties at home and at work, even though family and friends are generally supportive. Overall, this first part is earnest and well-done. The chase is hyped to inject some action into the plot, but then this is a movie-- notice how the incurious neighbor fails to respond to the honking horn near chase's end. Had those been screams of alarm from Powers instead, the neighbor's lack of response would have raised an interesting albeit complicating issue.

The second half is pretty much given over to the Production Code in the sentimentalized person of Rev. Ferguson (Tod Andrews). It's he (to quote a phrase) who "gives her courage to face life again". There's some effort at humanizing him-- is it Ann or her dilemma that he's most interested in. Still, his gentle and understanding presence comes across as a little too miraculous and a little too Hollywood. Fortunately, the ending avoids the usual Hollywood cop-out by emphasizing only the hope of a happy resolution for Ann rather than its certainty.

Give Lupino a ton of credit for dealing with the topic in the first place. Given the overall results, I expect she dealt as honestly with the topic as she was allowed to. I also expect today's audiences find the treatment mildly interesting mainly because of Powers' excellent performance that brings out the purely human drama. However, the film works best now as a document of its time, and what the cultural watchdogs of that day thought was appropriate for adult viewing.

Still of vital importance to cinematic and cultural representations of rape in modern society.

[schell-7 · 7/10 · 29 October 2014]

The didacticism and sheer sweetness (a function of film score as well as script and direction) of the cinematic action following the deft direction of a traumatic rape scene will strike many of today's viewers as dated. But upon closer inspection "Outrage" is subtle where least expected--both in terms of its understandings of rape and its expression of a feminine point of view in cinema.

Lupino will not allow a male finance's hasty and almost violent insistence on marriage immediately following the rape of the protagonist (played by Mala Powers) to become separated in the victim's--and by extension the viewer's--mind from the central theme, and plot-motivating device, of rape itself. The villainy of rape cannot be solved by the seemingly heroic gesture of the male, whose "sacrifice" places as much emphasis on the woman's exceptional circumstances as do the violation committed by the rapist. Such attempts to deny the reality of rape simply serve to ensure its persistence. The attempt to erase part of victim's past is another way of treating her as less than human.

The scene in which Powers' character hits an overly aggressive playboy with a wrench lacks the semblance of realism because Lupino shoots it from the point of view of the victim whose action in the present is dictated by the emotions triggered by her remembrance of the past. It's doubtful that any male director would have captured the scene in such non-violent, non-realistic detail and yet enabled us to see the action for what it is--an attempt by the character to erase the impression that the initial criminal act has left on her emotion-mental being.

Some modern viewers will no doubt accuse Lupino of being overly idealistic in portraying the rapist less as a criminal than himself the victim of an illness--one that would be curable, moreover, in a more socially aware and progressive culture. Unfortunately, the sheer logistics of psychological treatment leading to cures of those guilty of such heinous criminal acts will make Lupino's sentiments seem hopelessly naive to today's viewers. But is that sufficient reason to fault the director for acknowledging the gender divide as a two-way street?

Aside: Notice the scene in which the empowering new male friend is shown playing the piano from a camera POV just opposite his hands. In a subsequent scene, the piano is shown placed against the wall, which would make such a shot impossible.

As first I couldn't help but marvel at the similarity of a heavy detective to Hal March, host of the the highly popular "60,000 Question," prior to its exposure. Looking at the credits will reveal that it IS Hal March (the loss of 15-20 pounds obviously didn't hurt his career as much as the downfall of the popular quiz show).

Progress has Been Made Since this FILM !

[whpratt1 · 6/10 · 24 January 2004]

Ida Lupino was a great actress and director and was a strong fighter for WOMEN'S RIGHTS which is shown in this B&W 1950's film. Lupino did her very best to show the great mental HARMS that women must go through all their life when such CRIMES are committed. Mala Powers,(Ann Walton),"Cyrano de Bergerac",'50 was a young woman about to be married and very happy and was deeply in love with her future husband. All of a sudden she is violated and she becomes ashamed to go back to her family, future husband or even work place and runs away with all these mental problems in her mind and soul! She becomes a tortured human being and runs into Tod Andrews,(Rev. Bruce Ferguson),"From Hell it Came",'57, who has problems of his own, however, he is able to help Mala find love and confidence and only scratches the surface for her ever becoming a Normal person and a loving woman. Hal March,(Detective Sgt. Hendrix),"The $64,000Question,'55 TV Series Emcee comes to Mala's aid after she almost kills a young man just trying to show her attention. This film is over 54 years old, but it still tells a story that never seems to END! This was a great effort on the part of Ida Lupino to open up the eyes of AMERICA and LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES!

My God! This is directing!

[drystyx · 7/10 · 2 December 2012]

Ida Lupino is a name that we know for one of the most stunning beauties ever to appear on screen.

And the beauty is great.

So is the actress.

So is the director.

This is a stage fare sort of film. A great film has to work on stage as well as screen. A great film has to inspire kids to make believe, although the subject matter here probably is over the heads of most kids.

This is the story of a respectable young woman, a total beauty on the order of Ida herself, rich in values, who is sexually assaulted.

What she goes through after-wards is well depicted. Not only does Ida show us what the world sees, but she shows us what the young lady sees.

Throughout the film, we get textbook directing and more. Not only is it blocked like a professional stage director would block it, but it is given all the additives that film can give. To say more would be to spoil what will be a pleasant experience for the viewer.

I call it "perfect directing", but you can't have a film this perfect without perfect writing and acting as well. This film excels on all levels.

I am a stickler for credible characters in incredible circumstances. However, here, we have credible characters in credible circumstances, and we still watch with interest. It is a heart filled story that will leave the strong men in tears.

And it is not dated. Still relevant today. A hidden gem.

Engrossing quickie designed for the marquee's second bill...

[moonspinner55 · 6/10 · 26 June 2007]

R.K.O. second-feature about a small town working girl, living with her folks and about to be married, who is the victim of a "criminal assault" (i.e., rape). After reporting her attack to the police, the girl and her parents attract stares and whispers from the curious locals. In a benumbed fog, the girl boards a bus for Los Angeles, getting off in a rural town and meeting a well-meaning pastor. Interesting film, co-written and directed by Hollywood pioneer Ida Lupino, has a tight pace but it isn't well cast. Newcomer Mala Powers spends most of her time staring wide-eyed into faces, running and looking back, running and looking back, while all the men are lookalike-bland, and seem awkward with their ineffectual characters. Not-bad programmer has amusing parallels to Carroll Baker's 1961 film "Something Wild", but there isn't much outrage in this scrubbed scenario--just a stunned quiet. **1/2 from ****

"Criminal Attack/Assault" = Rape

[LeonLouisRicci · 7/10 · 1 July 2013]

The term "Rape" was unmentionable on the Screen in 1950. So here it is referred to as "Criminal Assault/Attack". If this seems silly and dated, just think of the 1980's when we had a President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, who refused to utter the word "Aids" as thousands were suffering and dying. So maybe we haven't matured that much after all.

Maverick Female Film Star/Director Ida Lupino determined to break barriers and push for Women's Rights decided to approach the Taboo and deliver a Story of a previously unseen on the Screen Fear facing Females everywhere.

She handled it quite well, considering, although there are some missteps and considerations given here that make this a noble, but flawed effort. The first half is the most uncompromising, with its expressionistic use of the Camera and a terrifying cat and mouse chase that ends with the aforementioned "assault".

But after that the situations begin to become clichéd and comfortable ways to allow the Victim to come to grips with her Anxiety. The Hollywood Code would interfere greatly and there is one scene that is completely condescending to a Male Stereotype and Cultural Mythology as she is pawed and mashed, defends herself, and is arrested because the brute is "a nice guy". This doesn't seem to be presented as Irony, as His harsh advances are never questioned, and the Film has to be faulted for that misstep.

Overall though it is and Icon of the era and is noted for its breakthrough of at least tackling the subject matter, but it probably played it just a bit too safe to be considered more than a somewhat tepid try at breaking the Paradigm.

THE TRUE OUTRAGE IS NOT KNOWING THIS DIRECTOR...!

[masonfisk · 8/10 · 29 November 2018]

From one time actress Ida Lupino comes one of her efforts as a director. Not many people know Lupino as director & its a shame since she really was a groundbreaking filmmaker who had a prolific output, which I'm ashamed to admit this is my first (& hopefully not my last). This story concerns an attack on a woman (who's about to be married) on her way home from work. The assault leaves the woman in such a state of shock, she breaks off her nuptials & leaves town hopefully to regain some meaning in her life which she does when she meets a kindly doctor among a hamlet of fruit pickers & farmers. Understated yet passionately depicted, the travails of the victim had to be a revelation for the 1950's, going against the grain of what had become the status quo of most male directors. A brave & honorable effort. I can't wait to watch more of her stuff.

A fairly accurate portrayal of how a rape victim would react...

[AlsExGal · 7/10 · 7 April 2016]

... and a fairly accurate depiction of how people in 1950 would have reacted to her. Too many people - then and now - believe in "the just world syndrome " in which they believe that a completely innocent person going about their business could never be victim of such a brutal crime, because if they did believe this was possible, then it could happen to them, and that is just too upsetting to people who think they have a good bead on the world and how it runs.

It's interesting that director Ida Lupino tackled this difficult subject with as much reality as was possible with the production code in force, and that she also picked as the protagonist of the film a girl that looked very much like herself as a young woman - Mala Powers, only 19 when this film was made.

The basic framework is that Mala's character, Ann Walton, is attacked by a complete stranger late at night in a small town while walking home from work. The whole town thus knows what happened to her, she is subject to staring and whispering, and then her boyfriend thinks the answer is to get married right away. But Ann feels dirty and doesn't want any man to touch her, and halfway thinks her beau is proposing - and wanting a quick wedding out of town - out of pity for her and to make an honest woman of her, but without the curiosity seekers that a big wedding might attract.

A real telling scene is when she goes around her house, touching objects, as though she is a ghost of herself trying to remember what things were like before, and comes across a picture of herself at her first communion all decked out in white and smashes the picture, as though any purity in her died with the rape.

She runs away from home - she is a grown woman so she is missing more than she is truant - and tries to pick up the pieces of her life, but still with the image of the man who attacked her haunting her. Big doses of Christianity are injected as to the cure to everything - after all this is 1950 - but I also objected to the implication of all of society's ills as being psychiatric in nature. The preacher at the end is basically saying that Ann is as mentally sick as the rapist! This was decades before society had to admit that some people are just evil and want what they want when they want it and we just need to throw away the key for the sake of the rest of us.

No, I don't agree with every little thing Lupino said here, or maybe was forced to say due to the times, but it is worth watching and not that far off, at least from what victims go through in this kind of crime.

Tense, Dramatic, and...Scenic

[davidcarniglia · 8/10 · 4 November 2020]

This starts off in riveting film noir fashion, with the happy couple Ann and Jim (Mala Powers and Robert Clarke) planning their wedding. With characteristic noir abruptness, the protagonist, Ann, is thrown into a maze of terror. Although there's no rape shown, the nightmarish stalking of Ann--presumably by the creepy snack vendor--ends with her return home, humiliated and desperate from the attack. She's shunned and cannot recover enough to go through with her wedding.

Her subsequent flight to a rural enclave--thanks to being saved by the minister Bruce (Tod Andrews)--switches the tone unexpectedly. The obvious redemptive quality of that setting works magic for Ann's self-esteem and confidence. It does seem, however, that we've gone to a different screen and a different movie. In fact, she has a whole new life, even a new name.

To the folks at the ranch, she's simply a newcomer, then a mysterious runaway. At a dance, she has the misfortune to run into another jerk. She starts to flashback on her first horrific encounter with a guy, and brains this smuck Frank with a wrench. All of a sudden, she's on the run again.

I disagree with those who feel that the lead-up to the first attack has a lot of logical pitfalls. I'm not saying it's realistic; but that it's meant as a subjective, highly stylized view of a traumatic event from the victim's perspective. It's as nightmarish as possible, and that adds a great deal of impact to the theme of isolation and abandonment. But the second attack takes place within shouting distance of a crowd. Why doesn't she cry for help? She tells Bruce that she did scream, but that's not shown or heard.

Running from the scene makes her look guilty. Bruce visits her in jail, but he doesn't get why she clubbed Frank. Now she seens nuts, having hallucinated that Frank was her original assailant. Probably feeling remorse for his attacking her, Frank drops the charges (after all, he's also betrayed Bruce, who's supposedly his friend). Bruce talks the DA into not pressing charges, but the judge thinks she needs treatment. Fortunately, the shrink recommends thereapy, not institutionalization. So she walks.

Now that the cat's out of the bag, Bruce wants her to return home. She wants to stay; "people who mean something to each other never say goodbye" he tells her. Now she gets that she has a good life to return to. Another bus ride, this time home. The end.

The middle part of Outrage is deceptively peaceful; we can figure something's going to interrupt this more or less idyllic existence. When the dance scene comes, the movie takes up the tense atmosphere it began with; a trace of the psychological terror comes back too. A very deep look at a difficult subject. Not quite the best, but very good.

"We all have to stop running sometime. We have to face ourselves."

[gettodamoofies · 7/10 · 21 June 2023]

FILM: 7/10.

Outrage, directed by Ida Lupino, is a remarkable film that dared to challenge societal norms of its time. Released in 1950, Lupino took on the progressive and challenging task of directing a film as a woman, and not only that, but one that focused on the theme of sexual assault and its profound impacts. Even though more than seven decades have passed since its release, it's disheartening to realize that society still has a long way to go in addressing this issue.

Lupino masterfully balances the delicate line between ensuring the story's effectiveness and abiding by the restrictive guidelines set by the Hays Code. The film cleverly sidesteps explicit visuals and instead relies on the power of suggestion to convey the emotional toll inflicted on the protagonist. The result is a haunting portrayal of the psychological aftermath of sexual assault, painting a stark and disquieting picture that resonates even today.

The performances in Outrage are truly commendable. Mala Powers delivers a compelling performance as the victim of the assault, skillfully capturing the character's vulnerability, fear, and eventual strength. The supporting cast, including Tod Andrews and Robert Clarke, provide solid performances that add depth and nuance to the narrative.

However, the film's effectiveness is somewhat impacted by a significant shift in the story halfway through. The introduction of a clergyman and the subsequent exploration of religious themes take away from the film's initial focus on the consequences of sexual assault. While this thematic shift adds complexity to the narrative, it dilutes the impact of the central issue at times.

Despite this narrative detour, Outrage remains an important film that dared to tackle a sensitive subject in an era when it was largely ignored. Ida Lupino's directorial prowess shines through, challenging audiences to confront the lasting impacts of sexual assault. It serves as a reminder that although progress has been made, there is still much work to be done. Outrage is a poignant and thought-provoking film that deserves recognition for its boldness and the conversations it continues to spark.

FORMAT: Blu-ray

VIDEO: 7/10.

1080p presentation, Detail level: Good, Colour reproduction: Excellent, Level accuracy: Excellent, Encode: Good, Master condition: Good

AUDIO: 8/10.

LPCM 2.0 mono audio, Dialogue reproduction: Good, Soundtrack & effects clarity: Good, Dynamics: Good, Surround sound presentation: N/A, LFE content: N/A

MOOFIEMETER: 7/10.

Rape and its aftermath

[blanche-2 · 5/10 · 1 February 2006]

"Outrage" is about rape, though the word is never mentioned. Directed and cowritten by Ida Lupino, it concerns a young woman (Mala Powers) who is engaged to be married and is raped on her way home from work. Traumatized and filled with shame, she runs away from home. She ends up in a community where she is attended to by a minister. However, she doesn't tell him what happened to her. Problems arise.

Though made 56 years ago, the elements of the film ring true, and of course, feelings don't change - the victim thinks she's dirty and behaves as if she is the criminal.

Mala Powers gives a very good performance, exhibiting the shock, nervousness, and terror of the victim. Though the script meanders a bit, Lupino does an excellent job of directing, particularly the action scenes.

In 1950, this film was probably ahead of its time. It's good to see to show us where we were (particularly with no DNA tests or rape kits) and where we are.

Lupino broke a taboo

[dbdumonteil · 21 October 2006]

It was the first film dealing with the burning subject of rape.France,for instance,had to wait till 1977 to see a (female) director -Yannick Bellon- tackle this crime.Bellon had a different way to express her disgust in her "l'amour violé" :she showed the whole scene of the rape which lasted ten interminable minutes and she did not turn the audience into peeping toms ,far from it: most of the time,they had to look away .

Given the Hayes code ,and given the limitations she was working under,Lupino's movie is quite successful.We do not see the rape ,but its aftermath is depicted in lavish details:the scene at the office where the heroine cannot stand the familiar noises anymore is a great moment;the people on the street with their big smile who talk behind her back;the fiancé who cannot understand and who wants to carry on as if nothing has happened;every man becoming a living threat for her;all rings true.

It will take a man's patience,compassion and disinterested love to push Ann towards life again.

One for Lupino fans!

[JohnHowardReid · 7/10 · 3 April 2018]

Producer: Collier Young. Copyright 25 September 1950 by RKO-Radio Pictures, Inc. A Filmmakers Presentation. New York opening at the Criterion: 14 October 1950. U.K. release: floating from December 1951. Australian release: 23 February 1951. 6,988 feet. 77 minutes.

SYNOPSIS: A traumatized assault victim flees her home town.

NOTES: Third film for director Ida Lupino and final film for veteran electrician S.H. Barton (Son of Kong, The Little Minister, etc.). Although elaborately "introduced" in the movie, both Mala Powers and Tod Andrews made their movie debuts in the early 1940s. Rita Lupino is the director's younger sister.

COMMENT: Despite its deceptive poster, trailer and pre-credits sequence, this well-polished "B" is not a film noir. True, both plot and staging have noirish elements, but the bulk of the movie is a one-sided romance between an affable young minister (Tod Andrews aka Michael Ames) and the psychologically disturbed heroine (convincingly played by Mala Powers).

Ida Lupino, as director and co-writer has ensured that the movie looks and sounds true-to-life by utilizing some evocative locations as well as conventional studio sets. The support roster, headed by dull-as-ditchwater Robert Clarke, merely serves as background to the main Andrews-Powers romantic action, though Paris and Mellen are each allowed an effective moment.

Outrage Absent Agency

[jcappy · 7/10 · 5 August 2017]

"Outrage" (1950) certainly does express the personal anger associated with rape, but does it address the increased personal agency that often accompanies it?

Ann Walton (Mala Powers) is first subjected to stranger rape, and is then, in the person of her fiancé, pressured to succumb to an elopement which, in her distraught but furious state, she refuses. She then sets off on her own, but is soon met with more shades of her originals assault, as in leering, appraising men, and in one forced sexual encounter. Fortunately for her, she meets a man who is entirely outside of that degrading continuum.

The Rev. Bruce Ferguson (Tod Andrews) is a guardian to an agricultural community that is reminiscent of the more idealistic co-operative in "The Grapes of Wrath." Though you might say he rescues a lost, emotionally battered Ann, he does more than just take her under his wing. Their subsequent interactions create a kind of equality, mutual trust, and affection rarely scene on screen. Even their youthful, expressive faces seem to match, as they reverberate with warmth, sincerity, and honor. But their evolving relationship is stopped short of love and desire.

The interceding act is a brutish attempt on Ann at a ranch picnic. This creep sends an explicit message that the town is too narrow for Bruce, and too dangerous for Ann. But it also causes an investigation into Ann's past which in turn infringes directly on their present lives.

Bruce then, by force of circumstance, becomes the mediator of Ann's return not only to her family but to an unwanted marriage. So, Ann's new new found sense of identity and bodily integrity is once again on the rocks. Bruce's felt responsibility to her family and to her ex-fiancé's marriage plans take precedence over both a committed friendship and, most importantly, her own advancing sense of personal agency.

By having to return to her unloved fiancé, she must revert to a state of subjection, and this cannot be sugar-coated. She is now being instructed to want what she has already rejected. In a real way, Ann is being returned to the estranged state or void left in her by the violent rape. Her outrage which so enables her to reclaim her self must now be tamed for the sake a lifelong conventional arrangement which she had and has no part in.

This is the movie's weakness. A stronger ending would have Ann and Bruce set out for a new life, not necessarily as lovers, or partners, but as strong allies in a contemptible world that wants to deprive and dispossess both of them of a broader, and more compelling life and friendship.

Brave but highly problematic

[tadaia · 6/10 · 16 July 2021]

While I applaud what Lupino was trying to do here, the idea that she made the scene with Frank physically dominating and imposing himself on Ann despite her frantic objection ABOUT ANN'S so-called "ILLNESS" was insulting... even for 1950. I've seen many films from the 50s, 40s, 30s and even the 20s, with men being far less aggressive, and still getting "checked". That was NOT acceptable behavior even back then, yet Lupino made Ann's wrench-wielding response to Frank solely about Ann.

tough first half

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 4 November 2020]

Ann Walton and Jim Owens are a young couple in love. She has a loving family. Life is good except for the unwanted attention from a food vendor next to her workplace. One night, she is alone after work and he rapes her. Everybody knows. The police is pressuring her. Jim asks her to marry him right away and she refuses. She is completely traumatized and runs away from home.

This is directed and co-written by Ida Lupino. The Production Code would never allow the rape to be portrayed. It's daring enough that it deals with the issue at all. The most compelling part is her facing the stares and the police after the crime. The first half is very compelling. The second half takes the story away from its intensity. I do understand the need for the story to keep moving but I would have liked for her to stay in the boil. She could face more police pressure and could even accuse the wrong person. There are different paths to take. This path is problematic. She still has Jim which muddies her situation. Jim should break up with her and thereby freeing her and piling on one more issue. Nevertheless, the first half is pushing so hard that the second half is able to keep the momentum going despite slowing down a bit.

Outrageous Misfortune

[kalbimassey · 7/10 · 5 July 2020]

Dated and clunky to the point of appearing twee, this early directorial effort from Ida Lupino nonetheless remains a vital piece in the jigsaw of cinematic history. Outrage is a daring and gallant attempt to tackle delicate and largely taboo subject matter in a sensitive and sympathetic manner.

In the aftermath of her ordeal, Mala Powers finds herself patronized by some and ostracized by others. In a male dominated society, despite being the innocent victim, her reputation is tarnished and there is a pervading suspicion that she is considered at least partially guilty by association.

Mentally and emotionally scarred, she takes flight. Soon encountering a Christian pastor (Tod Andrews), a man on a mission to reclaim the flotsam and jetsam of society. He takes her under his wing, offering friendship and support.

The film is historically significant for the censorship of the time, which prevented the use of the word rape. The attack on Powers is referred to as a criminal assault.

Outrage can be viewed as Lupino's starter kit. Three years later she directed 'The Bigamist', a far more polished and accomplished work, which addressed an equally thorny subject in a balanced and empathetic manner. Indeed, she was on a hot streak during this period, taking credit for 'The Hitch-hiker,' a gripping noir and directing some parts of the peerless 'On Dangerous Ground'.

Andrews' future was rather less illustrious. In 1957 he appeared in the inept, low budget horror flick 'From Hell it Came,' prompting critic Ed Naha to write 'and to Hell it can go!'Nuff said.

****

[edwagreen · 10/10 · 17 October 2015]

Outstanding film detailing the mental breakdown of an engaged woman who is molested while on her way home from work. The film shows what mental detachment may bring as well as the repercussions of such a terrible situation.

Mala Powers was terrific in the role of the victim whose life goes complete awry after suffering such an experience. We see the stigmatization that she finds after the outrageous incident. Unable to cope, she flees her home only to find peace and tranquility on a farm and the love of a minister finding his own way after his experiences during World War 11.

We see the kindness of other people, and just when things seem to be getting somewhat back on course, a very forward guy leads Powers to imagine her previous incident and therefore with near tragic consequences.

This was beautifully directed by Ida Lupino and shows the goodness of people in attempting to aid a lost soul.

pretty good

[kyle_furr · 7/10 · 16 February 2004]

This is the second film I've seen of Ida Lupino as a director after 53's the hitch-hiker. I think this one was a better film then that one. This one has a girl who is about to get married and she is then sexually assaulted and doesn't like everyone looking and talking about her so she runs away and and is taken in by a family. I think Leonard Maltin's review is right only to give it 2 and 1/2 stars.

Way ahead of its time...though don't take everything in the film as fact.

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 6 November 2015]

"Outrage" is a film way, way ahead of its time. To think...back in 1950 there was a movie that dealt with rape and its aftermath. It is an excellent film but it's also a film of its time--and in some ways it also gets the topic wrong. I am not blaming it--it's just that back in the day, there were a few misconceptions about the crime--though the film also is extremely sensitive and well worth seeing.

Mala Powers plays Ann Walton, a young lady who is soon to be married. However, one night she is attacked and raped and she is left scared and traumatized. Her plight is so severe that she soon decides the best way to handle it is to run away and start an all new life. The trouble is, running away from her problems didn't solve them and soon she attacks a fresh guy and nearly kills him.

First the good. Rape was never talked about or even alluded to back in 1950, so the film is very brave. Director Ida Lupino handled the rape scene wonderfully--making it menacing but not sensationalistic. Additionally, the film ended on a positive note--instilling a lot of hope.

As for the bad, the film NEVER uses the word rape and the fact that it's a sexual assault is implied but only slightly. Again and again, they said that Ms. Walton was 'a victim of criminal assault'- -and so in that sense the film took a step forward but a smaller step than folks would like today. However, I doubt if the censors would have allowed this. I also thought that the film seemed to say that the man Walton bludgeoned (played by Jerry Paris) was a victim--whereas today he would be seen as being to blame because he refused to take no for an answer and NEEDED to be slapped upside the head with a wrench!! Additionally, the preacher had a speech about getting victims and offenders of all sorts therapy. While this is good for victims, time has shown us that psychotherapies are NOT effective with sex offenders in most cases. Still, they didn't realize this in the day and the film was very sincere in its efforts. Overall, the good clearly greatly outweighs the bad and the film is wonderfully made and a quality production throughout.

Country Matters

[richardchatten · 6/10 · 2 June 2018]

Behind the sensationalistic title lies an earnest social drama of the sort one would already expect of director Ida Lupino, which follows a similar plot arc to the same year's 'On Dangerous Ground', in which a human being damaged by the Big Bad City finds peace of a sort out in the country. (Although was it really possible in 1950 for a stranger to walk straight into a job - especially one involving handling money - without any sort of references or proof of identity?)

The assault on Mala Powers is never described more explicitly than as a "vicious criminal attack", and it COULD simply have been a violent mugging - which would have been bad enough; but the morbid obsession with her on the part of her attacker makes it clear what the full nature of the assault was.

A religious component in the script - caring hunk Tod Andrews who provides Powers with a strong shoulder to lean on is revealed to be a clergyman - is one of many potentially provocative issues left unexplored; and there are various other loose ends. Her attacker is revealed to be not just an average guy who turned nasty, but a messed-up serial offender who progresses from sexual assault to armed robbery. The would-be suitor whose brusque advances prove she's still not safe from such unwanted attentions even in the Garden of Eden she seems to have found is introduced very abruptly - and despatched even more abruptly with a blow from a monkey wrench. The ending is emotional but highly equivocal; although we have been explicitly told that it will probably take years of therapy and guidance to grant her eventual peace of mind.

Outrage

[BandSAboutMovies · 5/10 · 8 October 2023]

Directed by Ida Lupino -- who co-wrote the script, along with producer Malvin Wald and her husband at the time Collier Young -- this was the second post-Code Hollywood film to deal with the issue of rape. The other is after Johnny Belinda.

Ann Walton (Mala Powers) is ready to marry Jim Owens (Robert Clark) when a man who works near her starts following her, finally attacking her. All she can remember of him is a scar. Everyone is supportive, but she feels that Jim will never see her the same way again, so she runs.

She runs again when the bus she is on has a radio message play about her parents looking for her. That's when she's rescued by Rev. Bruce Ferguson (Tod Andrews). They start to grow close, but when another man kisses her at a carnival, she attacks him with a wrench. That's when the reverend learns of her past and helps her to not go to jail.

Instead of giving in to her love, he sends her back home to Jim in an attempt to get back to her old life.

While the word rape could never be said in this movie, Lupino uses that to her advantage. The sad part of this is that a movie made seven decades ago still shows men to be the same as they are today, either wanting to control, own or foul any woman at any opportunity.