Return of the Fly (1959) User Reviews

A quickie capitalizes on the popularity of the original...

[Doylenf · 5/10 · 14 May 2005]

BRETT HALSEY is one of those handsome young actors from the '50s who never quite made it to stardom, and following the trend of other such actors, he fled to Europe where he found a niche for a decade or so in adventure films. He was certainly a competent enough actor and it's a shame Fox never groomed him for major stardom.

Nor did Fox have enough faith in this one to use technicolor (as they did for the original). As sequels go, it's just a fair job on an obviously shoestring budget--and basically, without giving any of the storyline away, it's a story of revenge.

It's all suitably photographed in low key B&W lighting that gives it the proper atmosphere. The performers are capable enough--including Halsey, Vincent Price, John Sutton and Dan Seymour--but their material is scarcely worthy of their combined talents. Fans of this sort of science fiction will no doubt find it has a certain amount of interest.

Anyone who enjoyed "The Fly" will want to see this and probably not be too critical of the shortcomings--although the special effects are not quite as harrowing as they could be.

Summing up: Okay for a viewing, but not likely to be the kind of horror flick anyone will want to revisit.

Return of the classic buzz!

[Vomitron_G · 7/10 · 20 February 2010]

Nice black & white follow-up to the colorful 1958's original. Philippe Delambre decides to continue his father's work, at the disapproval of his uncle François (an ever so great Vincent Price, reprising his role from the first film, this time having a lot more screen time). Inevitably, things go wrong again, but not the way one might expect they would. Actually, the subplot about betrayal and revenge is the one that drives this film and keeps it all interesting. And if you want to know what comes out of the second tele-pod when you throw a human and a hamster together in the first, then all you have to do is watch this sequel to know the answer. Decent classic horror entertainment. And a damn decent sequel to boot.

It's actually not bad

[epatters-3 · 7/10 · 3 June 2008]

Not as good as the first one. But it is still good. I watched this recently because I bought the box set(I have yet to watch Curse of the Fly but I will soon) a month ago. Now on to my review. If you are expecting the Fly to return, then you are going to be disappointed because he does not. It is about his son. His son turns into a Fly. The movie should be called The New Fly. Phillipe as a man/Fly his head is even bigger then Andre's in Part 1. This movie takes place 15 years after Part one. If the first one takes place in 1958(the year it was made) then that means that this one takes place in 1973. Funny because I do not recall seeing disco balls in this movie. LOL. Well this was shot in 1959. I enjoyed this movie. I think that Vincent Price does a better job of acting then he did in the first one. He actually has a bigger role in this one. I recommend this film. If you liked the first part then you will like the second part I believe. My overall rating is 7 out of 10 flies. Enjoy. P.S. The scene where Vincent Price faints is priceless.

Works Well As Light Entertainment, As Long As It's Not Compared With the Original

[Snow Leopard · 6 September 2005]

This is the kind of sequel that can be rather enjoyable as long as you don't hold it up to the standard of the original. It does bear the signs of a movie that was conceived primarily to capitalize on the popularity of its predecessor, and as a result it is hardly as carefully constructed. But as light entertainment, it works well enough.

The first part of the movie connects things up pretty efficiently with the original story, and it's kind of fun to go back to André's wrecked lab, which looks just as it should. Brett Halsey plays André's son Philippe, who is determined to follow in his father's footsteps. While the setup could have led in a number of different directions, the story that actually follows puts an emphasis on action, and it uses the special visual effects rather more freely than in the original "Fly".

From a scientific viewpoint, the whole premise of both movies is far-fetched at best, but in the original, you rarely thought about it because the story was so tightly constructed. In the sequel, the implausibility of the whole thing is harder to ignore. It doesn't detract that much from the entertainment value, but it is a noticeable difference from the first movie.

Except for Vincent Price, the cast is new, but solid. While the production might have a couple of rough edges this time, most of it still looks good enough. Overall, with the right expectations this is a generally entertaining light feature.

Daft but endearing sequel

[Prichards12345 · 6/10 · 30 June 2012]

To be honest I've always thought the original Fly movie a decent effort but no great shakes - it keeps horror mainly off-screen for a tragic romance, and while it's stylish-looking and engaging Vincent Price gets very little to do. Here, at least, he has a slightly more central role. It may be a hasty knock-off but the sequel is a more traditional horror movie and fun to boot.

Of course the Fly here - played by Brett Halsey as the son of the original transmigration inventor Andre Delambre - looks utterly silly, with a massive over-proportioned head that is unintentionally funny. What is often missed is the frequently mentioned problem of giganticism in the movie, which makes it perfectly logical I suppose. Several times characters say they've cracked the problem; the evidence here suggests not!

The action has moved on about 15 years, and opens with the funeral of Helene Delambre. The movie incidentally is crisply photographed in black and white, and in no time at all we are back at Delambre Freres, scene of the original experiments. Even Michael Mark, the actor who carried his drowned daughter into the village way back in the original Frankenstein, pops up as the watchman, and Phillipe Delambre quickly expresses his determination to carry on in his father's footsteps. He, is, however, not particularly on the ball when choosing his assistants.....

Along the way we get a human crossed with a Guinea Pig (yes, really!) and this time the script is clever enough to make sure the human/fly hybrid is no accident. It is not so clever in explaining how on earth The Fly knows of the existence of the dodgy undertaker, though!

So, yep, the movie may be silly once the Fly gets loose, but it remains enjoyable. Turn your nose up if you wish, but there are many worse films than Return Of The Fly.

Solid Sequel!

[ReelCheese · 7/10 · 7 May 2006]

This rushed sequel to 1958's classic THE FLY is actually more entertaining than the original thanks to a faster pace and a greater emphasis on action and chills.

The original fly's son, Philippe, is now a brilliant young scientist in his own right. He seeks to reconstruct the teleportation device that erroneously turned his pops into a frightening (well, silly, actually) insect man. With the project a success, a crooked assistant -- in an apparent murder attempt -- teleports Philippe along with a fly (clever writing, I must say). Like father, like son, this bug man is out to terrorize. But maybe, just maybe the man within the beast can be salvaged.

With decent performances from Brett Halsey and the returning Vincent Price, this 1959 outing deserves its own place on the mantle of great black and white horror entries.

Return of the quick buck pain zone.

[hitchcockthelegend · 2/10 · 5 February 2009]

Years after his father's experiments with matter transportation resulted in terror striking his family, Philippe Delambre decides he wishes to continue his father's work and break new ground in science. Unable to get financial help from his uncle François, Phillipe turns to a shady friend for assistance, a decision that will send Philippe and those around him into utter terror!.

Much like the disastrous creatures that are born out of the family Delambre's experiments, this sequel to the 1958 adaptation of George Langelan's short story is an abomination that not only was a cash cow rush job, it's also a stain on the first pictures' greatness. Unintentionally funny and wasting the obvious talents of Vincent Price (who looks bemused by what's going on most of the time), it's a picture that really has no redeeming features, technically it's poor (the superimposed head of pretty face actor for hire, Brett Halsey, on the fly is cringe worthy) and it lacks any moments of unease to speak of. A quite disturbing sequence involving a mouse/guinea pig scores well in the sicko stakes, but by the time the "Papier Mache" headed fly goes for some emotional weight, well we no longer care what happens to it or those around it.

Some times cheese can be fun and entertaining, but bad cheese tends to stink up the place very quickly indeed, Return Of The Fly is the Stilton of stupidly bad sequel movies. 2/10

Following in father's footsteps.

[lost-in-limbo · 6/10 · 25 February 2006]

Phillippe the son of the infamous Dr. Delambre, who still has an air of mystery around his death, is now a young man who has taken over his father's work, which his uncle Francois wants him to forget about. Though he gets conned into backing the experiment and that's only if he can supervise the project, so it doesn't happen again. The experiment is going quite well, up until later on when Phillippe finds out his mischievous assistant has betrayed him, as he's secretly selling the idea of the teleportation device to another backer. So, to stop the word getting out, his assistant provides him with the same fate that his father had fought. Now, it's a race against time for Francois and Inspector Beecham to save Phillippe from the same aftermath of his father.

Right of the back of the original film, comes a rather quickie of a sequel that doesn't push any limits. Firstly, no way does it come close to the superior original, but as an automatic b-grade monster feature, it's provides enough rollicking fun. Well, when you got Price on show, how can you go wrong? What we get is a bland story structure that lacks an ounce of life and astuteness, though it does have a few inspired moments, but these are far and in between many inferior sequences that come off just plain ordinary with some confusing plot details. The original managed to work around the silly context, but here it tends accept it by working in laughable story turns and monster effects. Even the dialog seems more like schlock, without the savvy and witty dialog that made the first film naturally engaging. The performances are all but cold and lifeless, but with the obvious exception of Vincent Price. He just has a spellbinding presence that when the words roll of his tongue, it has a Shakespearean vibe, no matter how bad the lines were. Price's performance is definitely this film's anchor. The rest of the characters I didn't care for, as they are rather unsympathetic and foolish.

There was just more attention to fabricating unpleasant and cheap thrills, which are more out of control with a monster out for revenge hook-line. It's more violent than its predecessor too. I give it credit that it's more exciting in its basic dementia of its creation, but hell the treatment of the story and effects were laughable. That's unintentionally, though. This one seems more serious, but it's outlandishly executed in a drab fashion. But ironically everything works out in the long run with a happy ending for all… well for the good guys. Now the effects are decent, but when it came to the fly's head on the human body. Why was it that huge!? It looks stupid! Sure, it looks even more hideous, but you got to be kidding, it was funny watching the guy running along while holding onto it, so it doesn't fall off. You could easily tell the guy was having trouble with it, even so when walking! They really out did themselves on that one.

Another note was that the pacing is rather brisk, gladly. Also it does provide slight dose of suspense and atmosphere, but more so it's preoccupied in its second-rate chills and mayhem instead. The flick is shot in black and white, and it does look rather sharp and crisp in detail. Plus there's some showy photography and framework that adds a bit more creative eye to the wailing production. The story's actions on this occasion were just too ridiculous to take seriously with it getting more risible the further it goes, but it seems pretty unaware to all of that.

It's not all that bad, but the quality is replaced by big chunks of camp that's more interested in wowing us with ludicrous action, rather then the strain it has on the characters and their relationships. Still, there's b-grade fun to be had here.

"I know something terrible happened, something even more terrible than suicide or murder"

[bensonmum2 · 5/10 · 13 October 2007]

Following the death of his mother, Philippe Delambre (Brett Halsey) decides to continue the work his father began 15 years previous. His father's experiments in matter transference ended disastrously. Philippe promises his uncle, Francois Delambre (Vincent Price), he'll be more careful and not make the same mistake that took his father's life. But as luck would have it, Philippe is destined to the same horrible fate. Through a one in a million accident, he's turned into a half fly, half human. Though he wasn't able to help Philippe's father, maybe this time Uncle Francois can find the fly and save Philippe.

Return of the Fly is a quick and cheap follow-up to The Fly. Though there are things to enjoy, it's something of a disappointment given the original. The sequel lacks the mystery of the first movie. In this one, we are expected to just accept the whole transference process and that a man can be turned into a fly. No suspense, no atmosphere – nothing. And what about the son Philippe meeting the same fate as his father? I called it a million to one accident – well it's probably more like a trillion to one. Can't the Delambre family get some pest strips or hire an exterminator or something? The notion of a fly getting in the transference machine twice is ridiculous. There are other problems (the fly special effects and the theft subplot for example), but these are the two things that bothered me the most.

Oh, but it's not all bad. The acting is okay. I've never been much of a fan of Brett Halsey, but here he's actually good. Vincent Price is always enjoyable even when, as here, he doesn't have much of anything to do. Also, the scenes of the fly stalking his prey in the funeral home are effective. I'll admit that I jumped every time he popped out of the shadows. Finally, despite the movie's problems and shortcomings, it's still fairly fun. As I've written any number of times now, entertainment is the most important thing when it comes to a movie for me. And while I wasn't bowled over or anything by Return of the Fly, I still had a decent time with it.

Enjoyably Cheezy

[michaeldukey2000 · 7/10 · 9 April 2007]

It's not as howlingly bad as Plan Nine From Outer SPace but there are plenty of laugh inducing effects to sing your fly claws into but what do expect from a teensy budget and a director that was used to doing The Three Stooges Episodes with Shemp.Most of the cast strives for dignity in the face of a script that was hurriedly written and probably uncared for even though you do get the standard over the top moments that were in just about every 50's sci-fi. The effects are legendarily bad and many folks(myself included) have a fondness for them. Where else are you going to see a guinea pig with tiny human appendages? Glen Danzig of Misfits fame even writes about it in a song Return Of The Fly. "Return Of The Fly,with Vincent Price.You guinea pig,Return of the Fly,human hands and feet,Return of the fly." It's a lot of fun and one of my Saturday night TV chiller show faves as a kid.

Return Misses The Mark

[jcholguin · 4/10 · 7 November 2003]

I was not sure what to expect as all of the plans and equipment were destroyed in the first movie but leave it up to screen writers to force a plot from the ashes. Philippe Delambre has grown up and refuses to listen to his uncle, Francois Delambre "Vincent Price" from the first feature. Uncle tries to stop Philippe from following the experiments that killed Andre Delambre and lead to the death of Helene Delambre, Philippe's mother. The boy has become a hard headed and stubborn man that blackmails Francois into funding the experiments of "matter transfer." Philippe's friend, a fellow scientist Alan Hinds plays the part of murderer and traitor. Because of Alan's greed, Philippe ends up becoming what his father did, a "fly-man" but very different, this monster seeks out and kills. That is what sets this film as different, the first film had love as a motive of the lone killing whereas this film, revenge is the centerpiece. There is certainly more action in this film but it lacks the sympathy the first one displays. Still, to watch both films in order is a worthwhile adventure.

A worthy follow-up.

[planktonrules · 8/10 · 25 May 2017]

"The Return of the Fly" takes place many years after "The Fly". The dead scientist from the original film had a son, Philippe, and this young man has grown up and has a fixation of finishing his father's experiments...the same one that turned him into two fly/human hybrids. However, what he doesn't know is that his friend and lab assistant, Alan, is evil and plans on stealing the project. Ultimately, Alan deliberately turns Philippe into the hybrids and shoots Philippe's uncle (Vincent Price) as well!! What a jerk-face! Can they manage to find both fly-brids and reintegrate them back to the creatures they once were? And, can Alan be punished for his infamy?

Rarely would I say this, but this sequel is about equal in quality to the original film. Considering it came out only a year later, this isn't such a huge surprise. It also managed to be creative and original as well as entertaining. Well worth seeing...just like the prior film.

A worthy sequel (in 50s B sci-fi context)

[inews-2 · 7/10 · 19 July 2007]

(spoilers marked below)

Return of the Fly is actually a cut above the average B movie of the 1950s. As a sequel, released only a year after the original, it works quite well as follow-up story.

So many reviewers complain about wooden acting, as if every movie created must be Citizen Kane. The acting in Return of the Fly is many notches above the usual B-grade films. Watch Plan 9 From Outer Space (1959) or watch Killers From Space (1955), then watch Return of the Fly. You'll see that Vincent Price puts in an A-level performance. Brett Halsey plays Phillipe reasonably well. The others aren't on screen long enough to fail. David Frankham, as Phillipe's assistant actually does a creditable job too, in playing the spy.

Some complain of laughable special effects, as if every movie ever made must be 90% CGI. Return of the Fly is no "worse" than the original. Yes, the disappearance in the chambers is more obviously just cuts, (they needed more bright flash to hide the cuts, as the original did), but the costuming is better. The fly-head in the original was a little underwhelming. The fly head in Return is much better.

The rest of the set and props are very obviously re-used from the original, but since it's the continuation of the original story, this never feels like a cheap substitution.

The ultimate morph of the movie -- Phillipe turning into a half-fly / half-man just like his father Andre had, was hardly a surprise when it happened. That's what the audiences expected. You knew it had to happen. But this time around, it's not so improbable as another mistaken fly getting in. No, this time around, there's some cruel irony behind it.

---- spoiler parts below ----

The Return plot adds the concept of things being "disintegrated" by held in electronic storage for later "reintegration." (Consider how Star Trek and Stargate used this concept too, and you can see that Return was not just another Plan 9). Phillipe disintegrates a guinea pig for later reintegration the next day as a test of the storage concept. During the night, his assistant, Alan, (who is really an industrial spy wanted for murder in England out to steal the Disintegrator plans) kills a British agent who tracked him down. Alan uses the Disintegrator to get hide the policeman's body "in storage" following the scuffle. When everyone had gone back to bed, he brings the dead agent back out of "storage" but he cross merged with the guinea pig. Alan kills the guinea pig with human hands, and disposes of the dead agent with huge guinea pig hands.

When Alan later knocks out Phillipe in a confrontation scuffle, he thinks to electronically hide Phillipe the same way, but gets a cruel additional idea. Phillipe was always visibly spooked by flies, knowing his father's fatal mistake. Alan, not knowing any of the history, saw Phillipe's agitation over flies. Alan catches a fly and puts it in the Disintegrator with Phillipe as an impromptu cruel-hearted twist.

Return of the Fly is more of a revenge tale than a love-lost story like the original. Fly- headed-Phillipe seeks out and kills his betrayer Alan, and Alan's secrets merchant.

Unlike the original, Return ends more happily. Fly-Phillipe and Phillipe-fly are put back into the Reintegrator again, and both return to normal. Another reviewer said the machine was destroyed, but it was not. Perhaps this left the door open to another sequel.

All in all, Return of the Fly makes a good double-feature with the original. It's a high-grade B movie.

Terrible...Sullies the good name of "The Fly".

[theshadow908 · 3/10 · 9 May 2006]

In this sequel to The Fly, Andre Delambre's son is grown up and takes over his father's experiments, much to the chagrin of his Uncle Francois, once again played by Vincent Price. As you may well have guessed, the same thing happens all over again, and Phillipe Delambre's head and arm are swapped with a fly. Isn't that a funny coincidence, that the same thing happens again to the son of the original guy? What are the chances? The Return of the Fly quite simply doesn't have the same emotional depth or the same quality of plot at all. The Fly in this film is a giant lumbering idiot that just attacks people for no reason at all. They even add a stupid moment in the film where a man goes through the teleportation pod with a gerbil and comes out with gerbil paws. What's the point? To use up special effects.

The direction, plot, and acting are terrible this time around, and it doesn't have the same feel as the original. It was also a big mistake to make this film in black and white after the original film was done is full colour. Ridiculous.

3/10

Enjoyable sequel, not on par with the original

[squeezebox · 31 December 2003]

THE FLY was a fairly classy, atmospheric sci-fi movie with some horror overtones. It was fun and campy, but also somewhat disturbing in its depiction of a man losing his humanity, a theme which was explored more deeply in David Cronenberg's astonishing remake.

RETURN OF THE FLY is basically a cheap follow-up which is better than it should be. This is mostly due to the always reliable Vincent Price, who returns as the brother of the scientist who became the fly-monster in the original. Here, he desperately tries to sway his nephew from following in his father's footsteps.

The movie concentrates on the son's attempts to recreate his father's teleportation equipment with a hesitant Price helping out, then shifts gears as his other partner, a British ex-con, is discovered to be attempting to steal the research.

This leads to a few misadventures with the teleportation machine resulting in a man becoming a human guinea pig (literally), and ultimately the son becoming a fly-monster himself.

Shot in stark black and white (as opposed to the original's lush Technicolor), RETURN OF THE FLY has a sleazy, grindhouse quality to it. Whereas the original explored the horror of losing one's mind and physical being, this time it's basically just a "monster roaming the countryside" scenario, with any psychological or philisophical aspects thrown out the window in favor of cheap thrills. And while the make-up effects are somewhat improved upon, the ridiculous optical effect of the son's head on a fly's body is unintentionally funny.

Overall, however, it's entertaining enough, and above average for the B-horror movies of the era, though it may be disappointing for fans of the original.

The Fly is back

[chris_gaskin123 · 7/10 · 25 May 2005]

The Return of the Fly is the first sequel to The Fly and followed a year later in 1959.

It is 15 years since the scientist who invented the transportation machine died and his son and brother decide to reactivate it. Once again, the experiments are fairly successful at first but things start to go wrong when he puts the pet guinea pig in the transfer chamber and a fly once again gets in it. The result is the guinea pig has acquired the fly's legs and is then trodden on and killed (animal lovers beware of this scene). He then puts himself in the machine and once again, a fly gets in and he ends up with one of the fly's legs. Towards the end, they capture the fly and the sequence is reversed and Philippe is OK once again and decides not to do any more experiments with the machine and it is destroyed.

The Return of the Fly is not as good as The Fly but is still worth watching. A second sequel, the British made Curse of the Fly followed in 1965 but that was not very good at all. The Return of the Fly was remade as a sequel to 1986's Fly as The Fly 2 in 1989, but avoid, too gory.

Vincent Price reprises his role from The Fly and is joined by Brett Halsey as Philippe, Dannielle De Metz as his lover and Dan Seymour.

Return of the Fly is certainly worth watching and is quite good for a sequel. Excellent.

Rating: 3 and a half stars out of 5.

Very Good Sequel

[Witchfinder-General-666 · 7/10 · 29 October 2008]

"Return Of The Fly" of 1959 is a surprisingly good, and vastly underrated sequel to the fascinating 1958 Sci-Fi/Horror classic "The Fly". While the film does not quite reach the greatness of its predecessor, of course, it is definitely a creepy and highly recommendable film that no lover of Classic Sci-Fi and Horror should miss. This was directed by Edward Berns, as the director of the original, Kurt Neumann, sadly died only shortly after its premiere. The great Vincent Price is back in his role of Francois Delambre, whose brother Andre Delambre (played by David Hedison) was turned into a Human Fly in the original film. Fifteen years are supposed to have passed since the events in the first film, and Andre Delambre's son Philippe (Brad Halsey) has become a dedicated scientist himself. In spite of his worried uncle's warnings, Philippe is determined to carry on his father's experiments. With objectionable results, of course... Vincent Price is my favorite actor, and even though the role of the reasonable, worried uncle may not be typical for the master of sinister and macabre characters, he is once again excellent in his role. Besides Price, none of the other actors from the original appears. The new actors also deliver good performances, however, especially David Frankham is good as an English gangster (as its predecessor, the film is set in Canada). Visually, "Return Of The Fly" is something rare, namely a black and white sequel to a film that was actually in color. It is not clear what reason they had to make the sequel in black and white, but it is save to assume that the budget was lower. The Film has a great plot, however, including a number of sub-plots. The settings from the first film were used again for this, which is a good thing, as far as I am considered. Overall, "Return Of The Fly" may not be quite as essential a film as its predecessor, but it is definitely more than worth a look for any lover of Sci-Fi and Horror in general, and for my fellow Vincent Price fans in particular. Highly recommended!

better than I expected

[HelloTexas11 · 5/10 · 11 October 2008]

'The Return of the Fly' is a surprisingly effective sequel with some neat twists and turns; it also has some laughable special effects and so comes very close to the 'camp' category. What that means is that it can be enjoyed on two levels- as a decent low-budget sci-fi horror flick and also as an unintentional laugh-getter. Not an easy trick to pull off, but 'Return of the Fly' somehow manages. Edward Bernds, better known for directing dozens of Three Stooges shorts, directed here and also wrote the screenplay. A quick check of his other screen credits indicates 'Return of the Fly' was probably the peak of his cinematic career. It appears not much was expected of the film as he was given a budget of $225,000 to work with. In comparison, this is roughly half of what a typical Abbott & Costello movie cost. At first, it appears the story follows the 'Frankenstein' formula; another scientist takes up where the last left off, vowing to complete a failed experiment but THIS TIME won't make the same mistakes. Uh huh. In this case, it is the scientist's son, Phillipe, who takes up his father's mantle and determines to make his disintegrator/integrator a success. In case you don't remember, this device is like an early version of Star Trek's transporter. But his assistant, Alan, turns out to be a con man who is only interested in stealing the machine's secrets and selling them to the highest bidder on the international disintegrator/integrator market. His partner-in-crime (played by Dan Seymour, one of the greatest bad actors of all time) negotiates the price, which we never learn but assume is more than the budget of the picture. Vincent Price is back from the original 'Fly;' twenty or so years have passed but Price appears not to have aged a day. The adult Phillipe really does resemble his father (played by David Hedison) and when he suffers the same fate, his fly-head seems three times as large as the one in the original. I'm sure it isn't really (maybe it's the suit Phillippe is wearing), but it appears quite unwieldy at times, as when he runs through the wood or has to climb over gates or through windows. But the strangest visual moment has to be when evil Alan knocks out a nosy police inspector and puts him in the device after a guinea pig has already gone halfway through the process, so what reappears finally is the inspector with white furry hands and feet. And guess what the guinea pig has. 'The Return of the Fly' moves along at a good clip and it is the added intrigue of the disloyal Alan that keeps it from being a stale remake of the original. One can forgive certain excesses, such as one five minute stretch where it seems the disintegrator/integrator is activated about fifteen times. Every time it is, Phillipe, Alan, and Vincent Price's Francois raise their goggles to their eyes to shield them from the blinding light, then lower them afterward. Up and down. Up and down. I began to suspect I was watching the same footage over and over.

Sequel Not So bad

[cshep · 7/10 · 25 April 2004]

The Return of The Fly, while not considered as Good as the original, still has a lot of charm and atmosphere. It opens at the cemetery,(the death of the wife of the original Fly) and moves along at a good pace. Teleportation movies were not the common of the time, and that is what helps this film stick out.

Brett Halsey(Phillipe Delambre), son of the original Fly, now grown up and wanting to fill in the shoes of his father, wants to advance the cause of Teleportation. Blinded by his ambition, he fails to see industrial espionage, and falls victim to the cross breeding effects of the transfer process. Vincent Price carries the burden of this film well, a credit to his acting ability ! Black and White serves this film , and adds to the suspense . The Curse of The Fly, makes this movie look like Academy Award winning material . I recommend " The Return of The Fly" based on its broad appeal to science fiction fans .

Was very lacking on the whole for me, but has its good points

[TheLittleSongbird · 4/10 · 9 September 2012]

I quite enjoyed The Fly, it had a creepy atmosphere and was well performed. Return of the Fly I wouldn't say was a terrible film but at the same time it was somewhat lacking. It certainly has redeeming values, the Guinea Pig moment is by far the most effective scene of the film and the lighting and sets are suitably haunting. Brett Halsey is very good, but I found Vincent Price to be the best asset. His role is bigger than in The Fly, which is always a treat for fans of his, and again he brings his natural charisma and distinctive voice to proceedings. Sadly, the camera work is awkward and the effects especially Halsey's make-up and "fly-head" are noticeably fake. The script is of cheesy quality, sometimes hilariously, often uncomfortably and the story is mostly too rushed with no real sense of terror or creepiness. All in all, a lacking sequel but not one of the worst. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Solid Sequel

[view_and_review · 6/10 · 23 December 2018]

This has to be one of--if not the first sequel ever. Maybe not but certainly the earliest sequel I've ever seen. Personally, I loved The Fly ever since I was a kid so any follow up was bound to fall short.

This movie takes place years after the death of Andre, the original fly/man. Now his son, Phillipe, is an adult and he wishes to continue his father's work. No way does he become a fly/man the same way as his father?

This movie was a little contrived as most sequels are. Originals always have the benefit of being the first hence that originality factor and more panache. So, while clearly not as good as the original it's still good as a sequel. And if we grade it on the sequel curve it's great.

Help me! Help me! Not again.

[michaelRokeefe · 4/10 · 25 August 2000]

This does not compare with the original. Appears to be a hurry up production. A scientist conducts the same transmission of matter experiments that did not bode well for his father fifteen years earlier. Science gone hay wire. More interesting the first time around.

Vincent Price does nothing above or beyond; but his name sells tickets. Also in the cast are Brett Halsey, John Sutton and Dan Seymour.

Surprisingly GREAT sequel

[Coventry · 8/10 · 25 May 2005]

Granted, I initially feared that this film would be disastrous and a complete waste of time. All the available indicators pointed out that it was just an attempt to cash in on the huge success of the original "The Fly", release not even a year before: quickly scripted, re-using sets and scenery of the original and the plot sounded too much like a repeating of the events occurring in the first. Well, I'm more than happy to announce that I couldn't be more wrong! "Return of the Fly" is an excellent film and definitely worthy of its classic predecessor. It already opens terrific, with grim images of the funeral of Helene Delambre, the heroine of the first film. Her brother-in-law François is forced to tell Helene's son Philippe about the tragedy that overcame his father all those years ago. The fade of his father encourages Philippe – a devoted scientist as well – to continue and finish his work, accompanied by a friend and François himself. I won't spoil what happens next, as it's too different from what you expect and certainly worth fining out yourself. "Return of the Fly" is a great film for multiple reasons. First and foremost, there's the more extended role of Vincent Price. I can't explain what it is about him, but his inimitable charisma makes every movie he stars in a must-see and his monologues (although often about tedious substance) are compelling beyond words. Whatever he speaks about I hang on Vincent Price's lips! Another reason to state this film's greatness is the ingenious use of multiple subplots. Aside being a cool sci-fi adventure, the "Return of the Fly"-script also focuses on typical human greed, betrayal and phobias/ghosts from the past. For some reason (budget-related, perhaps?) it's entirely filmed in black and white, while the original was in color. That's hardly an obstacle, though, since it increases the eerie atmosphere immensely. Besides, the make-up effects are a lot more repellent in this sequel, so the lack of color also neutralizes the effect of the nasty "human fly" images. The ending comes rather abrupt, unfortunately and it's my own personal opinion that Brett Halsey can't handle the leading role David Hedinson did in the first. Luckily, there's the almighty Vincent Price for the good acting and the incredibly beautiful Danielle De Metz as eye-candy. In conclusion: you won't hear me say that "Return of…" outshines the original milestone, but it equally is a must for genre fans and I can't deny that it was more fun to watch. Highest possible recommendation!

The fly returns, this time on a budget

[The_Void · 6/10 · 24 January 2007]

Obviously, this sequel is nowhere near as good as the original 1958 film 'The Fly', but despite obviously being a cheap follow-up and working from a story that basically just rips off the first film, there are some good ideas here and the film is definitely worth watching. The only actor to return from the original movie is Vincent Price, but the story does lead directly on as in true horror sequel style, in this film we follow the fortunes of the original scientist's son, who naturally decides to follow on his father's experiments. Price isn't the only thing that was recycled for this film, however, as the film was apparently written to incorporate sets from the original, although this does make sense considering how the story follows on. The hapless scientist this time is Philippe Delambre, son of Andre Delambre, and a man who has decided to rebuild the transportation device. Along with his friend Alan Hinds and uncle Francois Delambre, they conduct a series of experiments in the hope of succeeding where Andre failed...but naturally, as nothing runs smoothly in a horror film, events take a turn for the macabre...

I'm guessing that black and white film was cheap around 1959 as despite the fact that the original film was shot in colour, this one is in black and white. However, I actually prefer films like this in black and white, so this wasn't a problem for me. Vincent Price took a backseat in the original film, but as his star was rising by the release of this follow-up; he gets a more central role, although he still doesn't appear enough if you ask me. His role here isn't one of his strongest, but anything that features a performance from the great Mr Price is well worth seeing if you ask me. It has to be said that most of the performances (and dialogue) in this film are pretty ridiculous, but among the rest of the cast Brett Halsey, an actor who would go on to make Italian films along with this likes of Mario Bava and Lucio Fulci, stands out as the unlucky scientist. The film obviously isn't very graphic; although it's slightly more violent than the first film, and the transporter machine is put to much better use here. The special effects are inventive too, and work well despite obviously not costing much. Overall, this is at least a worthy follow-up, which while not as great as the original; has its moments and is worth seeing.

Pretty silly, and unnecessary sequel

[preppy-3 · 4/10 · 12 June 2000]

Like father, like son. This is a black & white sequel to the color original. The sone of the originals' father starts the same experiments as his father and the same thing happens to him. The acting is pretty good (Price and Halsey do a very good job) but the makeup on Halsey is laughable, the plot has nothing fresh or original to it and it's nowhere near as intelligent as the original. A pretty dull little film. For Vincent Price completists only. Even the sequel after this "Revenge of the Fly" was better!