This one could have been a minor classic but got butchered by the studio in the editing room. Since the script is mediocre, and the actors, aside from Peter Lorre, not at their best, the movie is quite a letdown, but for two things: excellent special effects of a disembodied hand running around and committing mayhem; and Peter Lorre's bulging eyed performance as a deranged bookworm-astrologer with a, well, disembodied hand fixation. Director Robert Florey tries his best with the material, but fails to create the right pace and feeling for the film. Since Florey and Lorre were both highly gifted men, this is all the more frustrating, as there are flashes of real brilliance in the film for all that is wrong with it. All this goes to show that a good horror movie, like any other kind, has to be built from the ground up. I sense that Florey was so intrigued by the idea of a horror based on a the image of a severed hand that he forgot to make the rest of the movie work. This won't do. Frankenstein isn't just about its set pieces,--the lightning storm, the murders, the burning windmill--it's a story rooted in a time, a place and a community, that concerns credible characters behaving in ways that make sense (even if one doesn't subscribe to their values or care for their motivations). Dracula, similarly, has a certain sweep, beginning in the remote Carpathians of central Europe, then moving to England, as we get a sense of how Dracula stalks his prey, the way he treats people, and why. The Beast With Five Fingers strains credibility from the outset, then goes swiftly downhill. One waits for the big scenes, which do not disappoint, but the story overall is poorly developed, and there's no one to care for or identify with. The movie is an interesting experiment, and worth watching once, yet never lives up to its promise, and is a terrible waste of its brilliant star, who's in very good form throughout.
Review of The Beast with Five Fingers
