Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

JohnHowardReid Producer: Norman Priggen. A Julian Wintle—Leslie Parkyn Production, presented by Nat Cohen and Stuart Levy. Copyright 25 May 1962 by Lynx Films. U.S. release through Allied Artists: June 1962. New York opening (on the lower half of a double bill with Day of the Triffids) at neighborhood theaters: 10 May 1963. U.K. release through Anglo Amalgamated: 21 May 1961. Australian release (if any): Not recorded. 9,450 feet. 105 minutes. Cut to 94 and then 80 minutes in U.S.A. SYNOPSIS: Harry Parker (William Peacock) and his wife Jackie (Billie Whitelaw) have a couple of kids, are happy and are getting along fine. The future looks bright, for Harry and his partner Moore (Glyn Houston) have got the contract to carry the weekly payroll of a large company in their new, bandit-proof car — a security assignment that could lead to many more for the new two-man business. This news comes as a shock to handsome Johnny Mellors (Michael Craig). For months he has, with the help of a weak company employee, Dennis Pearson (William Lucas), tailed and timed the old car that used to do the wages run. And that's time well spent when the payroll in question is £100,000 a week.Despite the armored car, Johnny is not going to let go of the prize. His plan to grab this fortune in notes is simple and bold.COMMENT: (On the full DVD version from Optimum): They took 25 minutes out for the U.S. release and it's hard to imagine where they got this amount of slack footage from. True, Miss Prevost is somewhat lacking in color and glamour and undoubtedly some of her scenes could go without being missed, but otherwise this is a compact and excitingly staged, if predictably plotted crime melodrama, with the advantage of appropriately atmospheric actual locations in grimy Newcastle. It's competently acted, though William Lucas rather overdoes his part as a nervous clerk and Miss Whitelaw is neither photographed nor costumed to her advantage. The direction is at its best in the action spots, though sharp film editing increases the tempo of the film whenever things seem to be slowing down. And at least Mr. Craig is much less wooden than usual.

screenman I saw this as a kid at the cinema with my father on its release, and much later on television. Things had certainly dated the second time around, but that's not really the movie's 'fault'. In 1961, censorship was still pretty strict as regards stuff like the depiction of criminal violence. And of course, the villains must never be seen to succeed. At the same time - as other commentators have mentioned - it was filmed on Tyneside but without the 'Geordie' accent. The strength of that regional voice was still so marked at the time as to have been largely incomprehensible to the general (read, home counties) British public. It certainly wouldn't have been understood across the Atlantic. So; safe and clearly-spoken actors were parachuted in. And why not? Authenticity is not much use if it's incomprehensible. Ten years later, even in the much grittier 'Get Carter', how many strong regional accents do you hear? Jack Carter himself is played by London-born-and-bred Micheal Caine. Whilst Ian Hendry, and John Osborne were likewise southern boys. In fact, the only genuine northerner with a substantial role was Alun Armstrong. The 'accented' rest mostly came from the midlands. It would take another 20 years (1991) and the appearance of Jimmy Nail's 'Spender' before the authentic voice of Tyneside would finally be heard in crime drama. So give it a break.The players did pretty well for what was, as a British production, an evidently limited budget. Tom Bell was excellent. His was a sampler of what would later be realised as 'Frank Ross' in the well-crafted TV serial 'OUT', and later 'Prime Suspect'. Micheal Craig was adequate as a slimy-smart master villain. Dunno 'bout the French bird. Maybe to southern middle-class film-making luvvies, a French accent was easier on the ear than an English northern one. The build-up of the plot was well paced and tense. The depiction of the robbery itself was extremely grim. You don't see the sort of preposterous gore and slaughter of a modern flick with its multiple camera sequences and endless flash-cutting, but it was dramatic enough and menacing enough to convey a very plausible sense of violence. The simplicity itself made it more convincing. That's something the slick directors of today with their plethora of special-effects seem to have forgotten. The flawed bank-robbery in 'Heat', for example, is no more tense for all of its mayhem and gunfire.I agree that the story lost a little of its edge towards the end. The concept of a vengeful woman bringing the baddies to book was itself not a very original idea, being an element of Graham Greene's 'Brighton Rock'. But all the gang got their desserts in suitably unpleasant ways, and right finally prevailed.I must also mention the unusual theme/incidental music which was rather daring for its time. A spartan 8-note base guitar riff like something concocted by 'The Shadows' provided extra layers of tension or respite, depending upon the tempo of the moment. It was simple and effective, and carried a surprising sense of menace when the jazz band upped the pace. One is again reminded of 'Get Carter, or even 'Pelham 123'.I wouldn't exactly call this a 'gem' of a movie, but then it certainly wasn't bad either. A movie of the time, like 'Hell Drivers' or 'Frightened City'; you certainly got your money's worth, but not much else. I'm giving it 7/10, which seems fair.

malcolmgsw This has just been released on DVD by Optimum in a very clear print.I first saw it on its original release at the ABC Golders Green on 28th May 1961,sitting in the circle for which i paid the price of 4/-(20p).My view at the time was that it was an excellent thriller.I still find it to be very entertaining but i do have a couple of complaints.Despite being set in Newcastle there is not one character or even bit part player who has a Geordie accent.We have all sorts of other "foreign" accents from Michael Craigs Rada accent,to Kenneth Griffiths welsh and Francoise Orevost and her french accent.What on earth was she doing in this film,she was not a big name in this country the only answer was that she must have been a close friend of the producer!The film is fine till it gets to the last 20 minutes.Quite frankly it is so implausible that it ruins what has gone before.I felt that the writers had just run out of ideas how to end this film.Also it has to be said that Michael Craig is good as a light comedian but a serious actor he ain't.

ericannjones An underrated British film about naive working class criminals. I agree with previous comments regarding the miscasting of Michael Craig, but he was a prominent British leading man so it is understandable that he was chosen for box-office appeal. (Today,one would perhaps cast Albert Finney.) I actually worked on the movie as an extra and met most of the actors. I was particularly impressed with Tom Bell having followed his work in TV plays. He was a young actor who represented the up and coming crop of actors such as Finney, Bates, Lynch and Courteny. Although the film is an excellent record of 60's Newcastle, several scenes were shot in Rugby, where I lived. It was interesting to see how the Rugby scenes were edited into the Newcastle settings. I have a copy on tape.