A Game of Death (1945) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
1932 meets 1945 - really
westerfieldalfred19 October 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I didn't know A Game of Death existed until recently. I tried to watch it on YouTube, but all that popped up was 1932's Most Dangerous Game. There was a colorized version available, so I thought I'd watch this old favorite. Good thing, too. Because this morning I found the 1945 version. Having seen the two films, basically back to back, it gave me chance to compare them.

Game of Death is, through it's first third, an almost scene for scene copy of Dangerous Game. It then diverges until the final third, when it returns to the old plot. Virtually every external shot is taken from the original: the sinking of the model ship, including the view from the bridge, the persons diving into the water, and except for the new captain, Jason Robards, all of the folks eaten by sharks. Finally, it's Joel McCrea staggering ashore. At the castle we meet Nobel Johnson, now a pirate, but a cossack in 1932. The early Johnson lets the dogs loose, and dies in Fog Hollow, while the 1945 Johnson is at the other end of the hollow. Too bad they didn't try split screen. Only one dog is used in the new version; the dog pack is entirely 1932. The heroine has long blond hair, a big mistake. In one scene in the hollow, and another where the couple escape, it is clearly dark, short haired Fay Wray. The excellent waterfall sequence in 1932 is absent in 1945; it would have cost too much to duplicate.

Now, as to the 1945 version, the castle set is well designed, and probably used the doors from 1932. Lighting is flat, however. The direction of Robert Wise is adequate, along with the principal players. The 1932 Leslie Banks' Zaroff was better done, but the 1945 brother was much better than the awful drunk act of Robert Armstrong. The jungle set was excellent, but far less extensive than the 1932. Max Steiner's score should have been re-used; the 1945 one is only adequate.

In spite of all this, the film had its exciting moments, and, if seen without the original would fare much better for lack of comparison. The use of old footage makes the film look much bigger; an excellent example going cheap invisibly.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Enjoyable, less than the remake, but a nice Robert Wise affair...
secondtake24 May 2011
A Game of Death (1945)

A legendary big game hunter is shipwrecked and lands on an island where a reclusive man and his motley crew of servants has been trapping humans and hunting them like wild game. A great idea, and this movie is pretty good at making an entertainment about it.

It's not helpful to jump to the obvious, I suppose, but for those of us who have seen the two major versions of this sordid and contrived tale, the original short story is much better. In fact, the "The Most Dangerous Game" (as the Richard Connell story is called) has wit and drama and surprise, and an economy of telling, that makes it a classic and very readable still.

So this 1945 version of "The Most Dangerous Game" falls short partly because it doesn't want to be as chilling and scary as the story. For one thing, it adds a shade of romance to the thing which cheapens the real essence of the conflict. When our hero, played by John Loder, arrives he finds a pretty young woman (Audrey Long) and her brother are captives there from an earlier wreck, and so we all know the brother is expendable and the man and woman are likely to win the day and drive off in the sunset at the end.

Which ruins the point. The original has a tension of survival built in. It really does turn around the notion of the hunter becoming the hunted. The crazed hunter in this case, since it's 1945, is a German named Erich Kreiger (played by the very American actor Edgar Barrier, who came out of Orson Welles's Mercury players, and who played Banquo in the Welles MacBeth a couple years later).

While we are name dropping, the director is the young Robert Wise, who it might be said never made a bad film in his life, and who had his own start as an Orson Welles tagalong. Even here, where the thrust of it is watered down, there are so many visually terrific parts it is a thrill to watch. In particular are the night shots of the pursued couple in the jungle, with moving camera through the weeds presaging the more famous running shots of Kurosawa's "Rashomon." In fact, the whole movie is very well made and edited, clearly an intelligent technical achievement. On that level, you can watch it with real pleasure.

And the plot will just carry itself along. If you like this at all you should find the Joel McCrae and Fay Ray version from 1932, called "The Most Dangerous Game." It was shot partly on the "King Kong" sets at night when the more famous film crew was at home in bed, except Fay Ray, who of course was the heroine in both. It's essentially the same idea, with Max Steiner music, and it was here that the brother and sister were added to the Connell plot. You can also look for the very good Richard Widmark version, which has a very different feel and intention but ends up with the same hunter becoming hunted scenario, called "Run for the Sun" (1956), currently streamable on Netflix.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
If only Val Lewton were here...
MissSimonetta31 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
As a remake of The Most Dangerous Game from 1932, A Game of Death (1945) suffers greatly in comparison. It simultaneously clings too close to the original picture, reusing lines, scenarios, and even footage, coming off as a largely shot for shot remake, and when it does add new elements to the story, they only drag down the pacing and economy of the movie. We have a whole fifteen minutes of dead screen time, where the characters know the villain's intentions and make a plan which ultimately fails. It's boring and pointless.

There's little style to the proceedings: everything is over-lit and lacks the proper horror atmosphere. Everything is watered down and there is no strong sense of suspense. The best parts of the climactic hunt, such as the cinematography, are taken straight from the 1932 film.

None of the actors top the original cast. Not that anyone is especially bad, but they're all rather bland and seem to phone things in.

The biggest difference is that Game was made after the Hayes Code started to be enforced in 1934, while The Most Dangerous Game was a pre-Code picture through and through. The hero in that film is almost as violent as the villain and the violence depicted is rather graphic for the time, unlike the bloodless stuff here. The original also makes the antagonist plans to subject the heroine to the proverbial "fate worse than death" much more explicit, though some of that is still present here in a more subtle manner.

A Game of Death is not a terrible movie, but seeing as it offers no fresh take on this story, it feels stale and pointless. You're better off with The Most Dangerous Game or Run for the Sun from 1956.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not the Most Dangerous Game
Michael_Elliott24 October 2011
Game of Death, A (1945)

** (out of 4)

Robert Wise directed this RKO remake of their 1932 classic THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME. This time out, world-known hunter Don Rainsford (John Loder) washes ashore on a strange island where he learns that its owner Erich Kreiger (Edgar Barrier) likes to hunt humans for sport. You know it's never a good sign when a remake borrows footage from the original film but that's not even the start of the problem with this film. You certainly can't blame the studio for trying their hand at another version of the story but there was so much set against this film from the word go. For starters, that 1932 film is a flat-out classic and one of the greatest and most gruesome action pictures you're ever going to see. With the Hayes Office in full force by 1945 that meant the story had to be toned down and this really kills a lot because you haven't a shot at building up any atmosphere and even worse is that this remake doesn't contain that creepy and raw energy of the original. It also doesn't help but Wise seems to be all wrong for this material. Even though the subject matter had to be toned down that's not a reason for everything to be so lifeless. There's really no chemistry between the cast and when the final hunt does happen it's more boring than anything else. There's not an ounce of energy to be found anywhere and that's a real shame because the story itself is so good that it really shouldn't take too much to get it on the screen. Of course, another major problem is that the 1932 film had such a wonderful cast that it would be nearly impossible to try and match it. I thought Loder was pretty good in the lead but the screenplay really doesn't give him too much to do in terms of acting. Barrier isn't nearly as perverted or creepy as Leslie Banks but he has a few interesting bits. Audrey Long is pretty bland as the female on the island and Russell Wade doesn't do much as her weak brother. At just 72-minutes the film goes by at a rather good pace but the entire time you're just sitting there wishing that you were watching the original.
13 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very good programmer redo of Cooper classic
16mmRay10 November 2008
Warning: Spoilers
While some may consider a remake of THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME pointless, the fact is the story is one of the most popular in modern American fiction and was certainly worthy of another cinematic stab. Contrary to some modern commentaries, A GAME OF DEATH does not feature Nazi characters. The antagonists are certainly German (the Russian Zaroff has become the German Krieger with a henchman, Pleshke, played by Scandanavian actor Gene Roth (the Stooges' friend "Mr. Borscht"). Noble Johnson is back, this time as a mute Islander in pseudo-pirate garb and he is, indeed, seen also via stock footage in his original characterization as Ivan. The narrative is expanded slightly by giving Rainsford an early opportunity to outwit Krieger and a thrilling sequence featuring the hunting of Trowbridge (this time played by Russell Wade). Edgar Barrier's characterization is certainly less boisterous than that of Leslie Banks, but it is no less valid. Similarly, John Loder matches Joel McCrea's paint-by-numbers performance as Rainsford. Audrey Long is lovely, but she conveys absolutely none of the terror that Fay Wray characterized in the original and that is, perhaps, the most serious flaw in this version. The manner in which Miss Trowbridge joins Rainsford on the deadly hunt is fatally offhand and puts a serious dent in the tension of the piece. The sets are fine, certainly worthy of RKO's designers and the old staircase tapestry is back and in full view. Paul Sawtell's music is original (there are no reprises of Steiner motifs) and that is a good thing. A final shot of the lovers smiling is very much out of place and does leave the viewer with a bit of a wince. Overall, though, I recommend seeing A GAME OF DEATH as an exercise in cinema archaeology if nothing else. Oh - and that famous shot of the shark attacking the boat captain, which many have speculated is "negative" in the original because it was cut by censors and then restored incorrectly - well, it's negative in this version too and, I think by design. It's a night scene and the reverse printing gives the effect of the shark attacking in black water. By the way, for those interested in the trajectory of distributorship, the 16mm print I acquired was an NTA print from the 1960's. Heretofore I was unaware that NTA had custodianship of this (and, I assume, THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME) after RKO's rights had expired.
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
John Loder has the right stuff
bkoganbing25 September 2014
Utilizing many shots from the original The Most Dangerous Game and that RKO jungle set that so many classics like King Kong was shot on, RKO made a perfectly acceptable remake of that film now entitled A Game Of Death. Stepping into the leads that were previously done by Joel McCrea, Fay Wray and Leslie Banks are John Loder, Audrey Long, and Edgar Barrier respectively. All are suited to the parts they play, especially Barrier who is a wonderful Teutonic villain. In 1945 every other film had a Germanic type villain, they were so easy to hate.

The major change is from Robert Armstrong to Russell Wade as the brother of the leading lady. Armstrong certainly was far more entertaining as the dissolute drunken playboy. But Wade was certainly more of a challenge to the hunting skills of Barrier.

As we know the game that Barrier hunts for sport is man. Barrier is excited to find that one of the shipwrecked who visit the island is a noted Frank Buck type hunter in Loder. Like the original Loder proves to have just the right stuff.

If you liked the original, you'll find A Game Of Death suited to your taste.
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A Weak Film
BaronBl00d23 July 2000
Why RKO felt the need to remake The Most Dangerous Game 13 years later eludes me, but they did and really did so poorly. This film bears little resemblance to its forerunner except in the basic plot, which it even has the temerity to change in all the wrong places. Director Robert Wise, early in his career, has little to work with here. The script is shallow, the sets and budget very small...so small in fact that most of the chase scenes and scenes with dogs are from the 1932 version of the film. In point of fact, very little has been added here at all, except some third-rate performers(with the exception of Edgar Barrier in the Zaroff role) and some tedious and plotting scripting and direction. Noble Johnson is back...yes he was in the first film..and they even use footage of him from the earlier film looking completely different. Why? Oh well...I guess it was not suppose to be anything real good...and to be sure it does not even come close to being good. Do yourself a big favour and watch the original. That is a masterpiece!
20 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
By-the-numbers but adequately well-made remake
gridoon202413 July 2020
It's been a couple of years since I watched the 1932 "Most Dangerous Game", but from what I recall this "Game Of Death" is an almost shot-for-shot remake at times. That means that there are few surprises for those who have seen the original; on the other hand, the remake is made competently (by the director of some future megahits Robert Wise). Edgar Barrier makes for a suitably hissable villain (in keeping with the new time period, he is now German and hates "weaklings"). **1/2 out of 4.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Game of Death: Passable remake
Platypuschow19 April 2019
A Game of Death is a remake The Most Dangerous Game (1932) in fact it's one of many remakes. This however is a very close "Loyal" one which though has tweaks could easily be confused with the original because of both the visuals, plot and actor choices.

Once again it tells the story of people involved in shipwrecks who find themselves taken in by a mysterious stranger on an island. Little do they know he is a hunter and his choice of prey, man!

It's a great premise and the movie once again does a decent enough job of telling the story. I do however think that 13yrs earlier they told the tale better.

Again this is fairly loyal, it's essentially the same movie just with couple of tweaks and structural differences. Ultimately it's the near identical so if you've seen the original you'll get absolutely nothing out of this.

Watchable stuff, but inferior to The Most Dangerous Game (1932).

The Good:

Well made remake

The Bad:

I cannot root for a hunter

Recycled footage

Too close to the original
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
It's fine
rdoyle291 December 2022
This is a pretty straightforward remake of RKO's 1932 adaptation of "The Most Dangerous Game" with Robert Wise at the helm, his first directorial outing outside of Val Lewton's production unit. John Loder is the lead. Edgar Barrier is the villain ... German this time as would be appropriate just post WWII. Audrey Long and Russell Wade (returning from "The Body Snatcher") are Barrier's other guests.

This version is fine, is rather unnecessary. Loder is not a very exciting lead, but Barrier is pretty good if nowhere near Leslie Banks' caliber. Really ... the film's greatest sin is being an okay remake of a masterpiece.

In a weird touch, outtake footage from the 1932 film is used as a cost-saving measure resulting in Noble Johnson showing up in two different roles in the same movie ... as Barrier's mute servant in the 1945 footage and as the hound handler in the 1932 footage.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A Faded Carbon Copy of the 1932 Original Film
Rainey-Dawn8 February 2017
This is basically the same exact film as the original The Most Dangerous Game (1932) - only a few changes involved in this remake... and the casting isn't as good either. I highly suggest the original 1932 film over this one... the changes in this remake kinda mess up the original idea to a degree. Now if all you can get a hold of to view is this remake then I will say it's worth watching.

Might I suggest a LOOSE remake: Bloodlust! (1961)?! It isn't a carbon copy of the the 1932 nor this 1945 close remake. It doesn't pretend to be Most Dangerous Game - but it's simply a LOOSELY made remake. Bloodlust! makes enough changes to give us a different story along the same vein where A Game of Death is faded carbon copy of the original film.

I like Bloodlust! better than this 1945 film. This 1945 is so close to the 1932 original (made only 13 years later) that it's makes you question RKO why did you bother to remake the sublime original into a faded copy? No A Game of Death is NOT an awful film - it's pretty good - but why did RKO bother making this remake when the original film is so much better?! 5.5/10
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Hidden classic
tvsgael2-216 May 2018
When I saw this unobtainable remake on one of the cable channels, I was immediately drawn in, which was the opposite of what I was expecting. Credit the director for this, as it may not have been possible if it had been by a less than skilled professional. He got the most out of the actors, and and the sets were believable. I give this movie high marks for production value and telling the story again, but just as compelling a way.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good fun for lovers of classic Bs.
Hey_Sweden30 January 2024
John Loder ("Now, Voyager") plays Don Rainsford, a renowned big game hunter & author. He survives a shipwreck, but is able to make it to a nearby island, presided over by a seemingly genial host, Erich Kreiger (Edgar Barrier, Welles' "Macbeth"). He also meets other guests of Kreigers' who are also shipwreck survivors. However, Kreiger turns out to be a fellow hunter and genuine madman who's now hellbent on hunting the ultimate game: his fellow man.

13 years after "The Most Dangerous Game", R. K. O. Filmed this second screen adaptation of the enduring Richard Connell story. While this itself doesn't really qualify for classic status, it's still a lot of fun. It DOES have a fair amount of set-up to sit through, but the "game" is made intriguing by the fact that the heroes are onto our villains' plan fairly quickly, but HE knows that they know. Although fairly atmospheric, this film consists mostly of talk until a reasonably exciting finish.

Directed by the talented and versatile Robert Wise ("The Sound of Music", "The Haunting", etc.), made when he was an in-house director at R. K. O., this features a solid cast, with Barrier standing out as the deranged bad guy. Loder is a jut-jawed, stolid hero. They receive able support from Audrey Long ("Born to Kill") - playing the sole female character, Russell Wade ("The Body Snatcher"), Russell Hicks ("The Little Foxes"), Jason Robards Sr. ("Isle of the Dead"), Gene Roth ("Earth vs. The Spider"), Noble Johnson (who was also in "The Most Dangerous Game"), and Robert Clarke ("The Hideous Sun Demon").

Although this may well be a somewhat watered-down version of the tale, that will only serve to make this viewer interested in the 1932 film, which is supposed to be quite intense and nasty for its time.

Seven out of 10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
The Most Dangerous Game of Death.
BA_Harrison30 April 2023
As directed by Robert Wise, this remake of The Most Dangerous Game (1932) isn't a bad film but it suffers from being totally redundant. The script changes a few scenes, but for the most part the plot sticks very closely to the original, with many moments being re-enacted shot for shot.

John Loder plays world renowned big game hunter Don Rainsford, who swims ashore on a supposedly deserted island after the yacht on which he was travelling hits rocks and sinks. Exploring the jungle, Don finds a castle and is surprised to find it occupied: the owner is Erich Kreiger (Edgar Barrier), also a keen hunter; the other occupants are Krieger's staff, and Ellen and Robert Trowbridge (Audrey Long and Russell Wade), survivors of a previous wreck.

It eventually transpires that Krieger has been deliberately luring ships onto the rocks and using any survivors as quarry in his nightly hunts.

If you haven't already seen the excellent 1932 classic, then you'll probably find A Game of Death hugely entertaining; however, those familiar with the earlier film won't find it anywhere near as gripping, especially since the original pre-code movie was able to be far more shocking, and featured a much better cast (Joel McCrea, Leslie Banks, and the lovely Fay Wray).
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gamesmanship...
azathothpwiggins21 July 2021
Director Robert Wise shows what he can do with Connell's classic story, THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME.

Big game hunter, Don Rainsford (John Loder) finds himself on a mysterious island after surviving a shipwreck. He soon becomes a guest at the fortress-like mansion of Erich Kreiger (Edgar Barrier), who also happens to be a hunter.

As Rainsford begins talking to other "guests" of Kreiger, he discovers a sinister plan to hunt the ultimate quarry.

Though I personally prefer the original 1932 version, and Leslie Banks' Zaroff over Barrier's Kreiger, Wise adds some nice touches and upgrades here and there. The inside of the mansion is impressive, and the "trophy room" is far more ghoulish!

This movie is reminiscent of Wise's work with Val Lewton. The suspense builds perfectly to the inevitable climax.

Highly recommended...
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Lackluster treatment of classic story
kevinolzak24 August 2023
1945's "A Game of Death" was the second official screen version of Richard Connell's enduring 1924 short story "The Most Dangerous Game," a battle of wits on a tiny island where the hunter becomes the hunted and vice versa, first done at RKO under its original title in 1932 by "King Kong" filmmakers Merian C. Cooper and Ernest B. Schoedsack. Both RKO versions add more characters to the mix, an inebriate unable to escape his fate and a beautiful sister, the ultimate prize for the victor. Don Rainsford (John Loder) is a world-renowned big game hunter who gets more than he bargained for after his ship is destroyed on dangerous coral reefs over shark infested waters near a small island that he soon learns is not deserted but houses the elaborate abode of Erich Kreiger (Edgar Barrier). His host is delighted to meet a fellow sportsman and revels in sharing his own exploits in tracking and killing across the globe, revealing a forehead scar where he was gored by a Cape buffalo. Kreiger's zeal in the chase led him to forsake the rifle for bow and arrow, freely admitting that even this had grown tiresome before moving to this South American island hideaway, once a haven for pirates, now his own private game reserve. Pretty Ellen Trowbridge (Audrey Long) and her brother Robert (Russell Wade) confide in the new arrival that two other guests have disappeared since they went hunting with Kreiger, and a search of his trophy room reveals a head being pickled in a jar. Now that the game is afoot, Rainsford must find a way to lure his host into a tiger trap set in the jungle while avoiding Kreiger's masterful use of weapons and dogs to assure victory. The climactic hunt is held back until after the 50 minute mark, whereas the 1932 version got down to business sooner with its shorter running time and Pre-code atmosphere (the painting on the staircase revealed the bare breasts of its captive female, and the door knocker is similarly adorned). John Loder was perhaps a better choice for protagonist than the much younger Joel McCrea, but his performance is only adequate, juvenile leads Audrey Long and Russell Wade lacking the gravitas of Fay Wray and Robert Armstrong. Also coming up short is Edgar Barrier's near comatose performance in the role of German villain, the intensity of Leslie Banks' Russian Zaroff sorely missed in his lackluster portrayal (Banks clearly had an edge in partially paralyzed facial muscles that made his wide staring eyes bulge out). Present in both entries is the welcome sight of "King Kong" veteran Noble Johnson, repeating his mute manservant role and also appearing in stock footage once the hounds are let loose. Here is where the original footage clashes with the new, shots of Zaroff alternating with Kreiger, and director Robert Wise repeating the POV camera shots behind and in front of the actors on the run. Wise had previously scored his finest early triumph with Val Lewton's "The Body Snatcher," and seems handcuffed by slavishly following another filmmaker's work, unable to maintain tension during the lengthy buildup where the audience has to wait for the characters to catch up with events. As remakes go it's not terrible, just relentlessly mediocre.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
"I never joke about hunting. It's been my life"
hwg1957-102-26570421 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Another version of 1932's 'The Most Dangerous Game' and indeed even using some footage from that film but it doesn't have the same impact as the earlier movie. The sets are good and there are some atmospheric scenes but it does lack punch. This is partly due to the blandness of the cast though Edgar Barrier as mad human hunter Erich Kreiger does his best to be Germanically evil like a Nazi who despises those whom he considers as his inferiors. The final chase is well staged but what was original footage and imported footage it was difficult to tell. Kreiger is one of those villains who plays soulful music at the piano after each one of his killings, which is supposed to make him sympathetic? All in all it was an unneccesary remake.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hidden Robert Wise's gem
searchanddestroy-15 January 2023
It is not widely shown in the great director's filmography, and I can't explain why. It is the remake of a classic from the previous decade: THE MOST DANGEROUS GAME. But that's not a reason, despite the "copycat" scene for scene filming, I admit. As Roy Boulting will do one decade later in RUN FOR THE SUN, the Nazis, fierce Nazis, are the villains in this adventure film. It is not Bob Wise's best, of course, especially if you consider the rest of his filmography, but it should be named on the same level as THE BODYSNATCHER or BORN TO KILL. CURSE OF THE CAT PEOPLE is also a Wise's gem which not legions of movie buffs talk about. Anyway this one is pretty good, even with an used story which will be over and overused in the future by dozens - if not more - of directors and screenwriters, novelists.... It is forbidden to neglect the view of this film. From RKO pictures. And available on You Tube.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Guests of Kreiger
jarrodmcdonald-19 March 2022
Warning: Spoilers
There may be a tendency to compare this remake to the original 1932 version, also produced by RKO. I will refrain from doing that here, because Robert Wise's version is a worthy effort deserving its own discussion. And despite some outtakes from the original- exterior jungle footage- it is a unique telling of Richard Connell's 1924 short story.

Mostly it is a product meant to show how the grim horror of war, in the form of mad Nazism, can be thwarted and overcome. The villain is no longer a Russian, but a displaced German patriot. Expertly played by Edgar Barrier, he does not value human life. He hunts it for sport. The film is a study of the lunatic's mind, a man who possesses the key that can destroy humanity.

A sense of paranoia began during the last part of the second world war and increased in the years that followed. The free world worried how architects of the Third Reich would try to evade justice and find ways to continue their reign of terror after Hitler's death, at new outposts.

In this story German tyranny can be observed on an unnamed Caribbean island. We're told the place was once inhabited by a now deceased pirate who built a large castle with bars on the windows. Herr Kreiger has taken over the estate, and he lures ships along the jagged reefs with lighting tricks. The vessels' bottoms get caught on the reefs and become cut up. They overturn, and survivors if there are any, swim from the wreckage to the shores of the island and become Kreiger's guests.

The beginning of our drama has a world-renowned hunter and author named Don Rainsford (John Loder) as the sole survivor of the latest shipwreck. He meets Ellen Trowbridge (Audrey Long) who was previously shipwrecked on the island with her brother Robert (Russell Wade). The Trowbridge siblings inform Rainsford that Kreiger is preventing them from leaving, even if he appears rather hospitable. They suspect a diabolical motive, and after searching a hidden room, discover the preserved remains of unlucky castaways.

Realizing they have to outsmart their host to stay alive, they quickly devise a plan to throw Kreiger and his men off-guard. But Kreiger is no fool and stymies their efforts. He kills Ellen's brother during an outdoor chase scene that leads to a lagoon. As his henchman Carib (Noble Johnson) looks on, Kreiger takes sadistic pleasure in winning this game by shooting an arrow into Robert Trowbridge's back, while Trowbridge is trying to swim to safety.

The strength of the story is not just its foreboding atmosphere, which Wise and his cinematographer J. Roy Hunt handle so effectively. Or in the suspense that comes from the protagonists attempting to escape. It is more in how Kreiger and Rainsford match wits, since both of them are skilled outdoorsmen. Both see the hunter and the hunted from their own experience. These vantage points shift dramatically at the end when Rainsford finally gets the upper hand.

One thing that amuses me about the story, as told on screen, is how the bloodthirsty villain commits savage acts then returns to the living room of his home to play soothing music on the piano. As if nothing violent or horrible has happened.

After his game with Rainsford seems to have played out, he sits down at the piano for another requiem. He thinks the big hunt is over. That he is once again alone in this world...until the next ship capsizes and he is joined by someone else.

But Rainsford is not done with him. Rainsford is back from the edge of a cliff and re-enters the house. He will kill Kreiger and his brand of evil this time. The door will not be left open for a sequel. Just another remake.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed