dougdoepke Plot--An ancient coin enables a college professor to possess certain magical powers; that is, as long as he has the coin on his person. At the same time, he must keep it away from the diabolical Russkies and his scheming faculty rival. I don't know what moviemaker Castle had in mind, but whatever the intent, the results are a flop. The 90-minutes comes closest to a supposed comedy. But then, it's beyond me what's supposed to be funny about pointing a finger that causes a person to double over in pain. And if that's not bad enough, the incantation 'zotz' plus a pointing finger can even kill. Pretty funny, huh. Even the two setups supposed to be funny—the runaway mice and Backus's impaired speech—are more off-putting than humorous. Then couple that with some limply done Russkie shenanigans and a surprisingly bland Tom Poston, neither of which is any help. Unfortunately, the movie lacks snap, style, or anything else that might compensate; that is, unless it's the corps of movie vets, like the delicious Margaret Dumont. According to other reviewers, the screenplay was adapted from a novel that had more serious political intent. I just hope the written word registered better than this cinematic yawner that overall fails to combine fantasy and humor. At the same time, it's interesting to speculate what the savvy crew over at Disney would have done with the same material.

TheMightyEye ZOTZ! unfortunately proves the producer/director's lack of ability with Comedic storytelling. He was a horror flick master but WiIlliam Castle must have thought anything and everything was funny. Perhaps that's why he always seems to have a grin on his face. I can just imagine him rolling in the aisle at the premiere while everyone else is scratching his head. And poor Tom Poston! I remember him (in various TV appearances) as being a funny comic who had a subtle and dry delivery. But in ZOTZ! there aren't really any jokes. I hate to say it but laugh tracks would actually have helped this film.I won't bother to mention the plot, as the other reviews do that well.I don't know if there was any particular William Castle gimmick associated with ZOTZ! but worth note is the opening moment where Castle yells ZOTZ! at the Columbia Pictures Logo, and the lady herself has an actual line or two. It's probably the only claim to fame this film will ever have, except for being a famous turkey.

Ephraim Gadsby William Castle, director of low-budget horror flicks including the original "Thirteen Ghosts", takes on an adaptation of Walter Karig's novel with mixed results.The best thing about the movie are the changes made to the original novel. While it's rare when a movie improves on its literary source material, Walter Karig's book starts out with the promise of being like a Thorne Smith fantasy romp. There's the professor who accidentally acquires a magic power (in the book, to stun or kill by pointing his finger, but instead of yelling "bang" he yells "Zotz"). There's the beautiful femme fatale who may be a nemesis sent from the gods, and who first appeared nude on his couch in a thunderstorm.The novel then dissipates into a tedious cautionary tale about bureaucracy: the professor has a power that will ultimately lead to a bloodless victory in World War II, but even in a desperate war when the nation's self-defense is at stake he can't seem to he can't climb the chain of command in any military or civilian organization in Washington (in that way, the novel is more than relevant in the early twenty-first century). Part of his problem, too, is his own intransigence. He is so obsessed with the cult of personality, so swept away by his own powers, he refuses to outline or demonstrate his powers to anyone less than the president himself.The movie does a good thing by sweeping away all the bureaucratic detritus that made the book so ultimately tiresome. The movie changes the professor's powers (I won't relate that change but it's more family-friendly). The movie gives us a story that might well have been adapted from Thorne Smith in the early 1960s, in a Disney sort of way.Then there are the missteps. Tom Poston is a funny guy, graduating from the Steve Allen show with the likes of Don Knotts and Louis Nye. His movie persona, while likable, is less than dynamic. And the special effects have unfortunately dated. Still, it's a pleasant diversion. And more than "Thirteen Ghosts" it deserves a remake -- not from the book, but reworking this script.

innocuous I own an original copy of this movie on VHS and a copy of Walter Karig's book of the same title. They are both little treasures and should be enjoyed when they are available to you.Karig's book is a satirical little allegory and ends in a manner quite unlike the movie. I don't want to give away the ending of either, but I can assure you that you will enjoy reading the book even if you have already seen the movie (and vice-versa.) I will warn you, though, that the ending in the book is NOT necessarily a happy one.As for the movie, it is indeed a departure from the norm for William Castle, but he dabbled in comedy in several other movies, so it is not THAT out of character. After all, the movie deals with what are essentially supernatural forces.Contrary to what some other reviewers have written, I would argue that this move is much closer in tone to Disney's "Absent-Minded Professor" movies. There are the usual bumbling academics, the sexy-but-safe women, the well-meaning but suspicious Federal agents, the vaguely- threatening-but-incompetent foreign agents, and the likable and innocent hero. When the day is done, the hero defeats the villains, the self-righteous get their comeuppance, the girl gets the guy, and the "secret" is lost again...maybe.The FX are about average for B-movies of that period. As a kid, I was astonished, but they definitely show their age when I watch it now.I really think that kids today would enjoy seeing this movie. Give it a chance, if you get one. This is one rare movie to find on tape.