GetPapa Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Claire Dunne One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Brenda The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

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

ferbs54 Now here's a film that should appeal to anyone who's ever found him/herself in the unwanted third of a classic love triangle. What to do if you're that unfortunate third wheel? Well, if you're Dr. Leggat, in "Four Sided Triangle" (1953), and you've just perfected your revolutionary duplicating device, you put your gal in it, make yourself a knockoff copy and hope for the best. But things go a tad awry in this very clever tale... I've gotta tell you, I really did enjoy this movie. With its small cast of characters, beautiful B&W photography, imaginative camera angles and laboratory setting, it almost suggested a British variant of an old "Outer Limits" episode. But this is in truth a Hammer film--their first sci-fi outing--and directed wonderfully by Terence Fisher, who would go on to many more successes for this legendary studio. The film is very well written--almost, dare I say it, literately written--extremely well acted and tightly scripted. Yes, it was cheaply made, but somehow everything still looks fine, particularly the impressive lab equipment, and the DVD here is as crisp and clean looking as can be. This cautionary tale on cloning turns out to be a real little gem, and deserves a wide audience. The Maltin book inexplicably gives it a "BOMB" rating, but "DVD Delirium," another wonderful film guide, sings its praises. In this case, I think the Maltin book has got it all wrong. See for yourself...

dafrieze "Four Sided Triangle" manages to do almost everything wrong. The story had possibilities: two childhood friends who have created a replicating machine fall in love with the same woman; she marries the first; the second decides to duplicate her, forgetting that the duplicate will have the same feelings as the original. It's a fairly simple story, and one that could have been handled nicely in a half-hour segment of "Twilight Zone." Here the writer and director managed to pad it out to 80 tedious minutes, beginning with a completely irrelevant description of the village in which the film takes place (sure, it seems a lovely village, but it plays absolutely no part in the plot, and after the first few minutes of travelogue, the film may just as well be taking place in New Jersey). The doctor (played inertly by James Hayter) is given a lot of narration, much of which is punctuated by platitudinous quotations from poetry. We watch the two scientists raise the money for the machine; we watch them gazing intensely at bubbling test tubes; we watch as they and the woman manipulate the machine, trying to drum up some suspense as to whether it will really duplicate the doctor's watch or not. It goes on forever. The story itself, apart from the cheesy window-dressing, doesn't begin until about the film is half over. The acting gets stagier, the pace gets choppier, the script gets clumsier. The scenes of the village at the beginning are nicely photographed. Otherwise, not one of Hammer's better offerings.

funkyfry ********SPOILERS***********Some suspense but mostly melodrama in this story of the "duplicator" -- a device which really lives up to its name! But -- watch out! -- 2 Barbara Paytons might not be better than one! Solid but acting below anyone's par. Not as good as "Quatermass" but a step in a good direction for Hammer. Why did B. Payton's character give that noir kind of speech and then turn out to be such an idiot? Just another example of screenwriters trying to have their cake and eat it too, I guess.