Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Zandra The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

Edgar Soberon Torchia Terence Fisher's «Four Sided Triangle» concludes in a conciliatory fashion, after order has been temporarily altered by human forces, with the complete extermination of the man who attempted to change social order and the odd monstrosity that he created. It is not a surprising reactionary ending to a story told by the doctor of Howdean, a township ruled by the Grant manor for fifteen generations. On the contrary, it is an early, consistent ending from Hammer Film, a company that would later specialize in social, sexual and cultural confrontations of British mores. It fittingly starts and ends in a moralist tone, respectively quoting the Ecclesiastes and Ralph Waldo Emerson's texts about God, uprightness, joy, power and man's inventions. As the William F. Temple novel on which it is based, this screen adaptation is also narrated by the town's physician Dr. Harvey who tells the story of three friends he knows since they were kids, who form a love triangle as grownups: Robin Grant is the squire's sole heir ("solid, dependable and conscientious", according to the doctor, played by 31-year old John van Eyssen), poor Bill Leggett is the only child of the village's drunkard ("wild and impetuous"… but a "prodigy", played by Stephen Murray, 41), and Lena Maitland is apparently the daughter of an American woman (the "queen of Bill's dreams", played by American actress Barbara Payton, 26). The two men have become "brilliant scientist" who have created a machine that duplicates everything (including humans), and Lena has returned from America after failed attempts to become an artist of any sort. The woman eventually marries the rich heir, to the despair of lovesick Bill who, in turn, creates Helen, Lena's duplicate, to compensate his urges, with tragic consequences for him and the clone who, as a perfect copy of the original, also loves Robin. Simply put, this is a tale of the fittest, the richest and the youngest, sanctified by the Bible and Emerson. To be fair Fisher does quite well with this oddity, making it melodramatic and scary at turns, and look attractive in spite of its low budget. Fisher and Paul Tabori took a lot of screen time to elaborate the love aspects of the story, leaving little space to the Frankenstein tale. Four years later, as we all know, Fisher would dedicate a whole film to that story with better results and obtain celebrity (along with Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee) with "The Curse of Frankenstein".

Theo Robertson Bill and Robin are two life long friends who have built a machine that can replicate anything . Another friend from childhood Lena arrives in the village and very quickly Lena and Robin fall in love and are married . This hurts Bill greatly because he to is in love with Lena and so duplicates Lena as Helen who is not only identical to Lena but has the same memories as her This is something of an obscure cult classic . Obscure in the fact that it never seemed to be broadcast on British television and cult classic in the fact that was the first science fiction movie produced by the Hammer studios and was directed by Terrance Fisher undoubtedly the finest of the studios in house directors . It's interesting that that the film opens with a religious quote because this predates other Hammer productions later in the decade namely THE QUATERMASS EXPERIMENT and FRANKENSTEIN that have the subtext that there's somethings science should never interfere with and mankinds thirst for knowledge might very well be its downfall . It does become very clear early on however that FOUR SIDED TRIANGLE is a forgotten film for a very good reason - it's not very good Don't be fooled that this is a science fiction from Hammer because the sci-fi element merely exists as a plot device . Two brilliant whizz-kid scientists invent a wonderful machine in their spare time that can duplicate anything , in effect a cloning machine that can clone anything . What a wonderful invention and as everyone points out this is the greatest thing humanity has ever invented and these two blokes built it in a shed in their spare time and probably with their own funds . How likely is that ? " Hold on Theo . HG Wells wrote The Time Machine and that featured an inventor building a time machine in his house . The novel changed literature and you have to suspend disbelief with these stories " Yes maybe but suspension of disbelief is not required with Wells who had an almost supernatural ability to make the incredible seem almost blasé . With this film you're constantly noticing how unlikely everything is . Lena , Bill and Robin are all roughly the same age when we're introduced to them as children then when we're introduced to them as adults Bill and Robin seem to be physically twice the age of Lena .Did Lena invent a time machine and go forward in time ? It's also difficult to buy in to Lena falling in love with Robin who is totally uncharismatic as is Bill . It's not a science fiction film anyway just a sort of love story that has a very dated plodding pace and the only drama takes place at the end and jars because it feels more like a pivotal inciting incident rather than a climax . Someone on this page compared the film to an episode of THE OUTER LIMITS and in parts that what it resembles but that classic American show would have grabbed the premise by the throat and would have done something with it unlike here

dbborroughs Good science fiction film operates as the best science fiction films do, as stories that reflect other subjects. Here its all matters of the heart and what can we do to get our hearts desire. The plot is simple, a heart broken scientist uses a duplicating machine to make a copy of the girl he loves. The trouble is its an exact copy. How that all plays out is the film and its a fine one at that.(a side note some of the themes show up in Andrei Tarkovsky's classic Solaris) This is an early film from Hammer Studios and I've never really been sure why the film isn't better known. Perhaps because its such an early film that no one noticed or perhaps its because its a black and white film and when we think of Hammer we generally think of the color Dracula and Frankenstein films of the 50's and 60's. you really need to see this film because its a neat little story. Its just a finely crafted small scale film.

mlraymond Seeing this movie for the second time, I was struck by how clearly it anticipates Hammer's later Frankenstein films. The relationship of the two scientists, with one more eager than the other to pursue bolder experiments, the look of the laboratory, even specific camera angles of Bill at work, all foreshadow Curse of Frankensetin some four years later.One can see Terence Fisher's style taking shape, though the complete Hammer atmosphere has yet to be established. A major aspect is the seriousness with which the storyline and characters are enacted. Fisher remarked once that when they were filming Curse of Frankenstein, it was tempting at first to do it almost tongue in cheek, but he realized that the more serious the approach, the better it would work in the long run. This film uses that same serious attitude to make the fantastic story seem plausible. The actors make their characters completely believable, no matter how outlandish the plot gets.This is a minor but fascinating exercise in the development of the Hammer legacy, and well worth seeing for anyone interested in Fifties British science fiction.