christopher-underwood An extremely well executed film with very difficult theme and despite the care and attention, never mind the pre-filming censorship problems, one wonders just who was likely to be the intended audience. Perhaps the answer is in the makers' fight for a certificate less than an 'X' on the grounds that otherwise children would not be able to see it. It seems that the intention was to send out a warning that not all is wonderful in the world and care should be taken when 'strange' men or simply 'strangers' offer incentives for children to disrobe. The film is of necessity disturbing and there seems little chance such a film would even today be made available to 'children', however hypocritical that is. Gwen Watford is excellent and Janina Faye as the 'victim' absolutely spot on in a very difficult role. Brave, literate and very powerful.

moonspinner55 John Hunter adapted Roger Garis' play "The Pony Cart" about the indecent procurement of a child by an adult. Story concerns a British family, recently relocated to a small Canadian village after the father has been hired as the school's new principal, who stir up a town-tempest after their little girl tells of an elderly man (from a prominent family) who asked that she and a school-friend take off their clothes before he would give them candy. The fact the girls approached and entered the old man's house of their own accord, and that he didn't physically touch or hurt them, gives the child's pragmatic grandmother reason to pause; however, the shaken mother wants immediate action, only to learn that the man in question has a history of behavioral issues that no one wants to touch. An unpopular title in the Hammer Films library, but not for the acting or writing (both of which are solid). The taboo subject matter was something neither the British nor US cinemas were prepared to tackle at the time, and the picture was unjustly forgotten. It has an interesting, complex scenario--with both sides weighed in court--that isn't at all dated, with only a bit of sensationalism rearing its head at the finale. Hammer Films never attempted anything of this sort again (because it failed to turn a profit), but the fact it isn't geared towards the mass market makes the film all the more worthwhile. **1/2 from ****

lambchopnixon This film received the critical battering that another controversial film of 1960 also suffered. The differences between the two are manifold, the main one being that whereas PT was a work of genius, working on many levels, which were universally misunderstood, Never Take Sweets From a Stranger is utterly dull, mundane, predictable, and pointless, other than saying 'there's such a thing as pedophiles'. The old man, who's a bit loony and has been put in an asylum for a stretch is back. He's a bit loony but not at all interestingly so. There's no character. The film is made by people with nowhere near the subtlety or intelligence of the makers of Peeping Tom. In Never Take Sweets, the old man has no background, is not at all fleshed out, and in no way shown to have been made as he is as we are all made as we are. The masterful Peeping Tom has its protagonist as a tender victim on a path he couldn't deviate from and shows why, brilliantly. Never Take Sweets has a cut-out for a character, to initiate boring, predictable plot 'twists' carried out by unsympathetic actors. This is only good for people who see Hammer doing non-horror but 'message', as interesting. The film deserves the critical put-down for being so dull.

b_moviebuff This was one of the most controversial films of its time, I remember vividly the the bad press this movie got,but what we have here is now so relevant to today's society and Hammer should ensure this is restored and put on DVD, I managed to track a copy down from the US where it had been on television, the owner of the disc can be found on a very well known auction site, to my knowledge this has never been shown on British TV.Starring veteran and distinguished theatre actor Aylmer, who does not breath one word in the movie by the way is accused by a young girl of being a child molester and is taken to court by the girl's father Patrick Holt, sadly Aylmer is the town's big-wig and is a much respected professor as well as owning most of the land in the town, the case against him is thrown out due to lack of evidence from the young girl.What follows is a harrowing chase scene involving the same girl and her friend from school both chased through the woods by a psychopathic Aylmer and ultimately leads to death of one of the girls before he is caught.Curiously set in Canada with an uneasy blend of stiff British upper lip and north American accents, talky in parts but stick with it to the end where the final scene's are shattering and every parent's nightmare, this movie should be seen by all.