Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

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

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

MartinHafer "Teen-Age Crime Wave" is clearly intended as an exploitational film--to scare the audience and sensationalize the topic of juvenile crime. Plus, it's doggone silly because the teens in the film are all closer to their 30s than their teen! Oddly, this sort of bizarro casting was the norm in the 1950s--even with higher quality films of the genre such as "Rebel Without a Cause" where only one member of the starring cast was high school age! Yet, in spite of its low budget and all its other obvious shortcomings, there is something strangely entertaining about this film and I do recommend it--but still give it a 5 due to the production values. As far as entertainment goes, it's far better. The acting is good for unknowns and the script is excellent--probably too good for a film of such low pedigree! It's a great film for exploitation lovers or someone wanting something different.The film has a familiar theme--similar to "The Desperate Hours" in that a group of psycho criminals take a family hostage and spend much of the film menacing them. A similar low-budget film made just a few later is the surprisingly good "The Sadist"--by Arch Hall--a man known for genuinely crappy films! It's well worth seeking if you like "Teen-Age Crime Wave".

dougdoepke The "teenagers" in this crime wave are all at least 25, with Sue England clearly over-age. But it doesn't much matter because the movie never really gels. Tommy Cook strikes the tough- guy poses, but despite the energetic effort can't work up a convincing menace or snarl to go with it. Too bad a Jan Merlin or a Nick Adams didn't have the part. Then too, I wonder what the story is behind Mollie McCart. Her acting is uneven at best, still she does present an interesting screen presence. Her meager credits look like she left acting after a brief fling. Nonetheless, with more seasoning, she might have developed into an actress of note. However, both look like Oscar candidates next to poor Frank Griffin who appears too petrified to register anything but a frozen stare. Rarely have I seen anyone so clearly uncomfortable performing on screen. No wonder he switched from acting to Hollywood make-up man.1955 was the year teen sub-culture emerged with rock music, James Dean, and Elvis. Drive- in movies were catching on with both youngsters and movie-makers, a niche Roger Corman would exploit to the hilt. Actually, this Columbia release plays like a drive-in special with its emphasis on sex, fast cars, and juvenile delinquency. It's also cheaply produced, the screen time mainly confined to the drab farmhouse. I expect producers recognized this and tried to compensate with the boffo climax at the Griffith Park Observatory. The staging is pretty contrived, but does make for an interesting backdrop to the chase scenes. It looks like the classic Rebel Without a Cause and this movie were made about the same time, and I wonder which had the Observatory idea first since both use it. My guess is that fast-buck artists at Columbia anticipated Rebel's success and sought to ride the coattails. Anyway, the film blends two popular movie topics of the time—home invasion and juvenile criminality. Beyond that, there's little to recommend, except maybe a few laughs. (In passing—slight correction in another review: the Fugate-Starkweather murder spree was 1958, three years after this movie.)

thedeuce-1 This is a very worthwhile diversion. Tommy Cook overacts all over the place, but it does provide many enjoyable chuckles. Molly McCart does a fine job as Terry and deserved a successful career based on the talent she displayed here. While Sue English as Jane portrayed her character satisfactorily, the role did not require much of a stretch. Given her obvious attractiveness, I am surprised I was not previously aware of this actress! This production must have had an "in" with the Griffiths Observatory, as they were certainly given full access to the site! Recommended fun! James Bell,the farmer, is immediately recognizable from the dozens of TV and film roles he's had over the years!

Michael_Elliott Teen-age Crime Wave (1956) ** (out of 4) Good girl Jane (Sue England) gets mixed up with bad girl (Molly McCart) and soon both of them are headed to jail even though Jane is innocent. On the way to jail June's boyfriend (Tommy Cook) kills the cop and takes the girls with him where they land at a farm house where they hold an elderly couple hostage. This is yet another juvenile delinquent movie from this era, which seemed to have at least ten per month. This one here comes from director Sears who's best known for the laughable The Giant Claw and thankfully this one here features just as many laughs. Yes, if you're expecting Citizen Kane then you're going to be disappointed but if you want some cheap, exploitation laughs then this is a decent little time killer. The movie runs at a pretty fast pace except for the final twenty-minutes where things slow up a tad too much. I think knocking off ten-minutes of the 77-minute running time would have helped things. As for the actual film, you get girls fighting and bad guys Cook and McCart acting tough. All of this makes for some pretty good laughs but McCart actually manages to be very entertaining with her seduction/tough girl image. The scene where she tries to seduce the farmer's son in the barn is priceless. Cook doesn't give what I'd consider a good performance but it is campy enough to deliver some fun. The production values aren't too bad and the supporting players do decent enough of work but in the end this film is all about nostalgia and laughs and it has plenty of both.