Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Armand for the fans of noir movies, it is a really interesting. for each viewer, it can be a sort of gem. precise, dramatic, seductive, slice from golden age, Experiment Perilous has entire air of Hitchcock masterpieces. sure, it is not unique but it remains seed for a form of art who gives to thriller not only fear lines, tension or atmosphere but a special charm. it is a drawing. correct, interesting, beautiful. the virtues of 1944 cinema is basic note but , like important films of period, it represents a little more than part of chain. secret - the wise director who gives perfect nuances to each detail. dialogs. and the science to make ideal tension like a medicine.

Martin Teller A doctor has suspicions about a curious married couple in the early 20th century. There's more than a passing similarity to GASLIGHT here, which may be mere coincidence, although it did come after the 1940 version and several months after the remake. Whereas Cukor focuses on the wife, however, Tourneur sticks with the outsider character, revealing information through investigation and flashback. As a result, this tale feels far less immediate and tense and takes on more of an air of mystery. But the film is crippled by dull characterizations. George Brent is absolute zero and Paul Lukas is only slightly more interesting. Hedy Lamarr is lovely (as we're told MANY times before she appears... few entrances have such a buildup) but quite wooden. I've only seen her in a couple of other movies, but beyond her looks she hasn't impressed me at all. There's also a rather overbearing score, although it is nice at times. I dunno, I feel like I should have liked this movie more. It does have that kind of dreamlike Tourneur vibe to it, I just couldn't engage with the characters and the plot doesn't have a very satisfying payoff.

MartinHafer In 1940, the British version of GASLIGHT debuted. Until very recently, most people didn't even know that it existed, as Hollywood execs bought up all the prints and remade it into an Oscar-winning film (the 1944 version with Ingrid Bergman). When the more famous version debuted in 1944, EXPERIMENT PERILOUS also appeared in theaters and BOTH films are very, very similar. Both films concern a seemingly normal husband who is insane and is trying to drive their wives insane--and it just doesn't seem like a mere coincidence that they both were made at about the same time. Despite the lack of originality, EXPERIMENT PERILOUS is still an excellent film--though I naturally have to knock off a point for being derivative.As far as the acting goes, it was generally exceptional. I particularly liked Paul Lukas, as the insane husband bent on manipulating and destroying his wife, Heddy Lamar. While sounding like Bela Lugosi (after all, they were both Hungarian), he was menacing and exciting to watch.As for George Brent, we was his usual competent and interesting self--sort of an "everyman" character and he did a good job. The only negative can't be blamed on Brent but the writers. That's because at the end of the film, there is a really dumb and clichéd moment-something you know cannot possibly happen. That's because in the huge confrontation scene with Lukas, Brent beats him up and kicks away the gun---but he never bothers to pick up the gun and runs to the next room. Then, as the cliché goes, Lukas returns again and it's yet another fight. In real life, you'd either keep the gun or just shoot Lukas to end the threat once and for all! Hedy Lamarr was the weakest of the main characters, as she was given a typical Hedy Lamarr role. Hollywood insisted on casting her as a zombie-like lady who went through wardrobe change after wardrobe change. Of course she was a beautiful woman, but these sort of "Barbie doll roles" did little to challenge this highly intelligent woman. Sadly, despite having a brilliant mind, you'd never know it from most of the scripts she was given.I do have a mild complaint, though, about the producer not doing his job well in casting the film. Lukas was a Hungarian and Lamarr was Austrian--yet they played parts that made no sense. First, Lukas spoke with this accent but his sister sounded like a typical American. Second, although Lamarr hid her accent better than most European-born American starlets (such as Greta Garbo and Marlene Dietrich), she did NOT sound like a lady from Vermont!! I think Hattie McDaniel or Marjorie Main sounded more like New Englanders than Miss Lamarr! Mentioning where she was from was unnecessary for the plot--they could have easily just said she was from "the country" and left it at that.Despite several mistakes here and there and a derivative plot, the film still works because it was exciting and captivated me. Plus, although this was made by a "2nd tier studio" (RKO), it looked great--with the most realistic weather in any 1940s film I can recall--with rain, snow and sleet at different times in the film. That and the set designs and decoration were lovely.Overall, it's worth a look, but my advice is to seek out the original GASLIGHT--it's the best and most original in the genre.

RanchoTuVu Atmospheric account of a chance meeting on a train that leads a doctor (George Brent) into the strange world of a young woman (Hedy Lamar) and her much older husband (Paul Lukas) . The opening takes place on a night time train ride to New York through cascading rainfall, and the inclement weather conditions continue on into a snowy and cloudy New York of the early 1900's. A story of a rich and jealous older husband with a lovely young wife, whom he had groomed in Parisian salons to enter society, and now feels insecure when she's enjoying the very society that he paid thousands of dollars to educate her to be in, who grew up in Austria and became laden with guilt and who now is so damaged that he can't see clearly enough to recognize his own good circumstances, and thus ruins everything. Director Jacques Tourneur dissects this pathological family (they have a son whom they keep in a bedroom which is up a spiral staircase) with great attention, creating some believable menace in true psychological suspense style. The need for a hero figure (Brent) to rescue the pretty Lamar and her innocent young son and provide a suitable conclusion, and Lamar's rather distracted and distant acting style are legitimate quibbles, but the overall tone is intelligently dark and serious.