GL84 Suffering a car accident, a woman comes to the home of a strange doctor entertaining guests who are staying at the house, but realizing that she's a prisoner in the house she tries every possible way to get away from the asylum.This is a dismally dreadful film that has little to like about it. Most of the film's problems result from the fact that it never once feels like a true horror film, for while it has a potentially creepy premise this one stays so low-going and the same way throughout it plays out as a drama. Nothing happens in it, and the fact that it continually uses the cliché of having her try to get out and get caught only for no punishments to be dealt out gets too ridiculous at times and only hastens the plot's completely dull nature. The fact that it takes so long to even do anything is a huge problem, taking a near eternity to even get to the point of the film. It starts off creepy as the continual denials at finding out what's going on, but then after a while it soon becomes aggravating when it refuses to do anything, and it seems as though all it does is simply run through the same lame psychological torments time after time which results in nothing more than aggravation and irritation at keeping the cycle going hoping that the strange behavior of the other inmates is enough to work this out. There's also a big flaw in that she's captured at the beginning, but is given the reasoning behind her imprisonment at the end which in itself is such a lame motive more should've been done with it as this manages to make the others out there even more noticeable. However, there's some good stuff here at times as one of the main ones is that it goes to great lengths to set up a creepy atmosphere. There's a tremendous effort to keep her at the sanitarium, and after awhile these can be somewhat creepy. The fact that not a straight answer is given until late in the film, despite knowing what happens to them at the sanitarium, helps this have a real air of dread to the scenes. The only other factor that works is the twisted ending, which actually has several things going for it. It's the only thing that feels mildly threatening, with the sequence where it feels like a series of photographs on display being especially impressive. It has a great look to it that seems really freaky, and the twist involved with it is a pretty nice surprise. These, though, are all the film has going for it as all of that pales to its complete inability to feel like a horror film.Today's Rating-PG: Mild Violence.

oscar-35 *Spoiler/plot- Cabinet of Caligari, 1962. A young lady's car breaks down and she has to walk to get help to the nearest walled home. Once invited in, she discovers the house is run by a strange bearded man who is very controlling of her and asks very direct embarrassing challenging questions. This makes her so uncomfortable and she tries to enlist the help of the other house guests and house staff to escape with success. She later tries to seduce the bearded man which brings on an epiphany in her attitude and we find out the real truth of her. She was an older woman who had let her mental illness color her perceptions of the whole situation. She is cured and goes back to reality.*Special Stars- Glynis Johns, Dan O'Herlihy, Lawrence Dobkin, J. Pat O'Malley, Estelle Winwood, Costance Ford.*Theme- The human mind is a magical thing.*Trivia/location/goofs- B & W. English. Dan O'Herlihy plays a double role; good and bad. Script written by the same screenwriter as Hitchcock's "Psycho". Body double used for Ms Johns nude seduction scene. Although several horror/suspense movies (most notably Psycho) were advertised with the warning that patrons would not be seated after film began or during climactic final minutes, ads for this one included the unenforceable caveat that no one would be allowed to leave the theater during the last 13 minutes (the ending).*Emotion- A psychological thriller in the mold of 'Psyco'. I very good impressionistic film that grabs the viewer with suspense, unfortunately the ending is doing deliver as much creativity as the set-up did in the film's beginning.*Based on- Psychological theories of mental illness.

dougdoepke No need to recap the plot or what there is of it.In short, the movie's a mess. The fact that events throughout are being distorted by Jane's (Johns) troubled mind may explain the surreal approach, but doesn't lift the repetitive narrative. I suspect that if one were interested enough, the movie could be analyzed for supposed symbolism. For example, there's the revolving door that appears to revolve Jane in and out of her tormentor's office; or why it is that she's in every scene, staging which does make ultimate sense. But the tricks that are supposed to build suspense (What's going on in this weird place) soon become tiresome once they seem to go nowhere. At the same time, the jarring film score is like lemon on pickle. The arty photography is interesting at times, but fails to lift the repetitive storyline.Now, I'm as big a fan of Johns as most anyone. Her fish-girl in the charming Miranda (1948) is perfect casting. Here, however, her little girl voice and abject behavior appear to be questionable casting, becoming at times shrill and bothersome. Nonetheless, I suspect getting someone of her movie stature was a coup for lowly Lippert Productions, traditionally a budget outfit, to say the least. Anyway, esteemed writer Bloch misfired on this one. Perhaps he got too subtle with his permutations on reality, but I'll leave that to a midnight study group. For me, the results are more tedious than interesting or even weird.

F Gwynplaine MacIntyre The 1962 movie 'The Cabinet of Caligari' (notice that the title does NOT include the word 'Doctor') is often described in reference books and horror-movie magazines as a remake of the classic German silent film 'The Cabinet of DOCTOR Caligari'. It may have been screenwriter Robert Bloch's intention to script a remake of 'Dr Caligari', but the end result which we see here only crudely resembles that silent horror classic ... and the resemblance is mostly handled in dishonest ways. This 1962 'Caligari' has its merits as a creepy tale of psychological suspense, but it certainly isn't a horror film. This movie's dishonest title forces us to compare this film to 'Dr Caligari'. On its own merits (and this movie does have small but genuine merits), this is a minor film that should not be considered a horror movie at all.The IMDb synopsis for this movie describes the premise accurately. Glynis Johns was a poor choice for the crucial lead role in this film. She usually played airy simpletons (as in 'Mary Poppins'), and her whispery voice (which sounds a bad imitation of Joan Greenwood) fails to convey the intellectual weight necessary for this role. The protagonist of this film is an imprisoned woman named Jane Lindstrom; the plot line requires Jane to be sexually attractive but NOT sexually active nor even sexually curious. At one point, when the mysterious stranger Caligari shows Jane some pornographic photos, she is shocked and frightened. Glynis Johns simply wasn't a good enough actress to portray such a woman. And frankly, Glynis Johns (unlike Joan Greenwood, the genuine article) just isn't sexy enough for this role.At one point, the adult Jane witnesses a flashback of herself as a little girl. The child actress who plays Jane in this brief sequence is much prettier than Glynis Johns. Also, Glynis Johns has a prominent mole near her left eye, and the little girl doesn't have this: for these two reasons, the flashback is unconvincing.Richard Davalos is very good as a handsome young man who seems to be aroused by Jane. (To say more than this about his character would be a spoiler.) Davalos was an underrated actor who never got the acclaim he deserved: after his brilliant performance as James Dean's brother in 'East of Eden', Davalos's career went downhill steadily until he ended up playing a bearded lady(!) in 'Something Wicked This Way Comes': an excellent film overall, but a poor performance in a weak role.There's no cabinet of any significance in 'Cabinet of Caligari': they just wanted to crib the old title. This movie has a surprise ending which I shan't spoil for you, although you'll likely guess it a mile off. (I guessed it only half a mile off, but the lady who watched this movie with me guessed it before I did.)One of my favourite aspects of the original silent 'Cabinet of Doctor Caligari' was the weird nightmarish set design, which conveyed the deranged mental state of the film's madman narrator. The lobby cards and posters for the 1962 'Caligari' prominently featured weirdly distorted architecture, implying that this movie is indeed a remake of the silent classic. Unfortunately, you won't see any of that weird architecture in this movie except for a very brief montage just before the surprise ending is revealed. I consider this dishonest, as if the filmmakers decided "We have to bung in a few seconds of nightmare footage so that we can show distorted set designs in the publicity campaign. That way, we can fob off this movie as a remake of the real 'Caligari'." Really, this whole film conveys an air of someone consciously lying in a deliberate attempt to convince us we're watching a remake of that silent classic.The original silent 'Caligari' rates 10 out of 10. This 1962 movie barely rates a 4. But I do recommend this movie, providing you know in advance that it's NOT a remake.