Maddening Sanity


Yes, this is a B movie writ large with a troublesome script based on a world masterpiece of literature. No matter what was done with the story then it could not be deemed an authentic adaptation. Even so, for its time it was pretty good. Lorre, of course, is the prime reason to watch and though this was only his second American film, he still had not grasped what it meant to be in a Hollywood film. His strident moves and almost screaming of the dialog told me this is where most impressionists must have picked up on Lorre's ticks and mannerisms. Many times I found myself making Lorre-like shreiks and grimaces and declaring in a louder than necessary voice that all the activity was "driving me sane!" Watch at your own peril, but don't say you weren't warned.

Absolute perfection in the face of woofing!

reply

Perhaps watching Lorre in this title is akin to watching Al Pacino in his more recent works.

reply

The one Al won his Oscar for was rubbish except for the exclamation.

Absolute perfection in the face of woofing!

reply

And overlooked for Gigli (2003).

Anyway, I can watch Peter Lorre in just about anything. Even his turn as Le Chiffre in the Climax! TV offering of Casino Royale (1954). Hardly his best, but he is nonetheless mesmerizing.

reply

Never saw Giggly, somethings are just too sickening to sit through!

Absolute perfection in the face of woofing!

reply

Late to the thread, Lorre was great in this and I thought Edward Albert was very good also. Well written and pretty compelling. Never saw Gigli, don't intend to.

reply

I like Peter Lorre but I could never picture him as Raskolnikov . I guess I pictured the character as better looking. Have always preferred the French version made the same year.

reply

I think Peter Lorre was excellent, but I really think Charles Boyer would have great in this role as well.

reply