UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Intcatinfo A Masterpiece!

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

Terence McArdle A harrowing indictment of lynch mob violence, The Sound of Fury (AKA Try and Get Me) pulls no punches. Out of work family man Frank Lovejoy gets involved in small time stick-ups with sociopath narcissist, Lloyd Bridges (yes, the Sea Diver star). Eventually, they progress to kidnapping. Bridges' true character comes out and leads to murder. Lovejoy's family man breaks down, drinks heavily and confesses his duplicity to a woman he has picked up. She goes to the police and the two are arrested. A local scandal sheet starts whipping the community into a frenzy, an announcer actually calls for a lynching on the radio and soon a mob takes out Lovejoy and Bridges as they await trial. That's it -- and that last scene is absolutely terrifying. This was a courageous movie to make at the height of the McCarthy era (1950). The story was inspired by a 1933 lynching in San Jose of two kidnapping suspects; a murder by mob that was actually condoned by then Calif. Gov. James Rolph. The movie conveys a real ambiance of poverty and grittiness beyond the typical film noir posturings of the era. Lovejoy and Bridges are at their best. The Lovejoy character is sympathetic and fragile while the Bridges character is a true predator. And dig the weird narcissism and almost gay vibe that Bridges gives off when he poses in the mirror for Lovejoy at their first meeting. Director Cy Enfield was gray-listed and split for the UK where he did the great Hell Drivers (1957) and Zulu (1964). This is his forgotten masterpiece and actually outdoes the similar Fury (1936) by director Fritz Lang.

jc-osms Interesting little B-movie thriller, which starts with the theme of what an honest but desperate man will do to help his family survive, moves on to a loaded discussion on sensationalist lurid journalism before ending with a damning indictment of mob rule.It's quite a trip and to get us there introduces us to the memorable character played by Lloyd Bridges, a cocky young psychopath whose petty crimes take along with him on the lure of easy money, unemployed, hard up family man Frank Lovejoy. It's not long though before Bridges' true character comes to light, escalating in no time to a kidnapping and brutal murder with disastrous outcomes for all concerned.For its time, this is all pretty heady stuff, shown to us in matter of fact style by director Endfield with to my mind anyway, little real deference to noir conventions. The film is a bit slow to get started but once Bridges appears, it picks up on his manic energy. Some of the peripheral characters are just a bit too obvious, like the humanist professor friend of the sensationalist journalist whose screaming headlines, the film would have it, egg the local townsfolk to storming the jail while said journalist's own realisation of his part in the mayhem is also a little laboured but these are counteracted in some measure by some effective low-key character acting by Lovejoy and Katherine Locke as the lovelorn girl with whom Bridges sets him up for alibi purposes.The concluding riot scene, (with it seems a lot of university students to the fore!) gets the biggest budget and is effectively staged, reminiscent of its predecessor in Lang's classic "Fury", before the big downbeat message is double-underlined for us as the credits roll.A very watchable and considering its era, bold movie with interesting characters, dealing with big subjects and ending with a thundering moral message to boot. Quite a lot to pack in and done pretty well all round, I'd say.

beresfordjd Lloyd Bridges always gives good value whether as a complete villain, as here, or as a hero- remember Sea Hunt? Sea Hunt was my favourite TV series when I was an impressionable kid. I also loved him in the Airplane movies, showing a real talent for comedy. He is the best thing in this B movie. Most of the other actors I am sure were not professionals and Frank Lovejoy was not up to par either and usually I have quite liked his performances. I am watching it as I type this and am far from impressed by it - brave treatment of a dark subject or no. The actress who plays the manicurist is close to appallingly bad. Where were the razzies when we needed them? I am interested enough to see it through ,however, so it cannot be quite as bad as I am painting it. There are lots of film noir movies from this era that were so much better. This could have been superb with a better, more able cast (Lloyd Bridges aside). I think a lot of this was dubbed later so it affects the acting and atmosphere.

harrisonransom An awesomely powerful look at the divide between social classes in the US circa 1950 culminating in the transformation of law-abiding citizens into a violent, blood-thirsty mob bent on taking the law into their own hands. The mass psychology of mob violence couldn't be better portrayed. I have no idea how this truly moving film could have fallen into obscurity. It's message that violence never resolves conflict is as painfully current today as it was in 1950. Will we never learn from the past? One of the darkest Noir films I've seen. Generates a successive waterfall of emotions spanning the spectrum of human experiences, needs and drives. Well acted and well worth watching. Very highly recommended.