SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Kimball Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Horst in Translation (filmreviews@web.de) "Der Frosch mit der Maske" is a pretty bad title for this German black-and-white film from the late 1950s. It is actually a human with a mask obviously and you could see it as a bit of Germany's take on the character of Scarecrow. He is one of the key players in the criminal underground here and prefers to kill his enemies with poison. I personally felt early on, also the introduction, there were a couple scenes that were interesting and they certainly could have turned this into an edge-of-seat crime thriller. Instead the inclusion of far too many characters and unintentionally comedic elements made this 87-minute film uninteresting for the most part. Quite a shame as there was certainly the possibility of a better film here. Eis and Bartsch adapted this Edgar Wallace work over 25 years after Wallace's death and the duo worked on several of these German Edgar Wallace films. The director is Harald Reinl this time and he is mostly known for his Winnetou films. Overall, "Faces of the Frog" (much better international title is not worth the watch. Towards the end, I really did not care who the Frog really was, even if I suspected it. Not recommended.

bensonmum2 While I enjoy watching these German-made krimis, I've yet to find one that I just love and can recommend without hesitation. That holds true with Fellowship of the Frog. The best I can say is that it's about average. The plot is twisted and nonsensical like you'll find in most krimis. I won't even attempt to go into it other than to say it involves a masked criminal known as The Frog who, with his seemingly endless supply of flunkies, is responsible for a string of robberies and murders in London. For reasons only he knows, the Frog seems to have set his sights on a young woman named Ella Bennet and kidnaps her brother Ray to get to her. It's up to Scotland Yard and an amateur detective named Richard Gordon to put a stop to this devious criminal.There are several things in Fellowship of the Frog to enjoy. The film gets off to a nice start. It's appropriately dark and foggy with the requisite smoky (though unmemorable) jazz score playing in the background all helping to create a nice sinister atmosphere. The movie features a couple of faces familiar to even a novice fan of krimis like myself – Joachim Fuchsberger and Eddi Aren't (I'm sorry about the apostrophe, but the IMDb spell-checker seems intent on putting it there). While both are quite good, I especially enjoyed Aren't's unusually quiet performance as the all-knowing butler James. However when the second act begins, most of the good feelings I was having toward Fellowship of the Frog came to an end. To call the second act slow would be a gross understatement as the movie all but grinds to a halt. I had to go back and play a couple of scenes over to make sure I hadn't missed anything as my mind wandered. Fortunately, my persistence was rewarded with a delicious twist near the end that's as shocking as any I've seen recently. It almost saves Fellowship of the Frog from mediocrity.One final note, I understand from doing a little research that this movie is notable for being the first of the Edgar Wallace based krimis produced in the 50s and 60s. Because of that fact, and regardless of the film's shortcomings, Fellowship of the Frog is necessary viewing for anyone calling themselves a fan of these movies.

mirmarek This movie is an abomination, and its making should have been considered a capital crime.One of the great mysteries of film-making is why nobody ever has made a faithful movie adaptation of this wonderful mystery. It is a tale of a really gripping mystery, nice old-fashioned romance, and dry English humor. Why did the makers have to change Richard Gordon from a Scotland Yard policeman to an amateur detective, introduce the idiotic role and caricature of his English servant, change the part of the main storyline about the murder charge and circumstances of Gordon's struggle to save the accused, etc., etc.? These producers and directors who always think they can make a better story than the one in the book should write the original script themselves and not to rape another person's product.

goblinhairedguy This was the first of the long-running German "krimi" series based on the mysteries of Edgar Wallace (actually, there were two simultaneous series from rival companies, the other based on the works of the author's son Bryan). As Tim Lucas and other astute critics have pointed out, the films were the precursors of the Italian giallos and ultimately the slasher pictures of the 70s and 80s. They also have obvious stylistic links to the superhero and superspy action genres of the 60s.Most of the key elements of the series already appear in this effort -- the foggy Soho underworld settings; the cabaret shows (which became progressively sleazier); the archvillain with his bizarre modus operandi and grotesque henchmen; the clever, persevering but underappreciated Scotland Yard inspector; the flippant comic antics of Eddie Arent (here appearing as the consummate English butler with Kato leanings) who is always smarter than he seems; the statuesque ingenues; the unfathomable plots featuring dozens of red herrings; and the quite violent-for-the-time stalk-and-murder sequences. Later the series would rely more on flashy camera tricks and tongue-in-cheek stylistics (especially under Alfred Vohrer's nifty direction), but here the proceedings are mainly played straight. Harald Reinl's work was always atmospheric but rather stiff in its mise-en-scene and ragged in continuity. However, this film features quite a sadistic, eye-opening ending that seems to have wandered in from a Jess Franco opus. Well worth a look, especially for amateur film historians.