Mjeteconer
Just perfect...
Limerculer
A waste of 90 minutes of my life
Lollivan
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.
Jenni Devyn
Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.
movieswithgreg
If you approach this movie with the expectation that it's a noir crime classic, you'll be disappointed. But if you come to this film for what it was at the time -- the first 3-D movie barely over an hour long, that was rushed through production to beat out a better-known movie to theater audiences -- a low budget but not cheap crime noir with snappy, clever dialogue that Tarantino wishes he wrote -- a black/white crime caper that skillfully blends backlot scenery (the rooftop chase scene must have been literally on top of the actual movie studio soundstages and offices) with Los Angeles street scenery, with genuine 1953-Lost Angeles street scenes, fashions and architecture -- all topped off with solid acting from star and superlative actor O'Brien, supported by journeymen character co-stars -- and for dessert -- the first glimpse of action choreography designed specifically to showcase the brand new 3-D technology (something we still see too much of in modern 3-D flix) -- then what we have is a movie whose parts are better than the sum total. Oh, and did I mention the crazy fun dialogue? If this movie is watched with an eye toward film history, then it goes from a rating of 6, to a rating of 8. This movie is a remake of a 1930s plot, then it was remade as a TV episode. Expect to see it again someday in a modern movie or tv show. It's a solid plot with all kinds of fun possibilities.
Tom DeFelice
This is a tale of two films. The 2-D version is a decent 1950's film noir. Edmond O'Brien and Audrey Totter, both veteran actors, give superior performances. Production values are solid. But you might scratch your head over some of the strange actions (ex: the scared bird and the position of the scalpels). Such visuals slow down the action. And that brings me to the only way this film can be appreciated for what it is. That's in the 3-D version."Man in the Dark" is the second 3-D movie that had a major film release. It was preceded by "Bawana Devil" and was followed by "House of Wax". It's 3-D they way it was first thought of. Objects fly at the screen. There's a natural multi-layer depth. The all around feel is "it's 3-D, look at me!". And that at times makes it a real hoot.The one disappointment is the rear screen shots. The action in the front is 3-D, but the rear projection is just 2-D which is a bit jarring at first.The 2-D version is fine. But to appreciate "The Man in the Dark", you must watch it in 3-D.
sol
****SPOILERS*** More like his previous movie D.O.A then the film it's based on "The Man who Lived Twice" Enmund O'Brian is gangster Steve Rawley who's undergone court order brain experimental surgery to cure his aggressive and anti-social tendencies. The operation worked but it obliterated Rawley's memory. One of the things that it also obliterated is his memory of where he hid the $130,000.00 he and his fellow crooks Lefty Arrnie & Cookie, Ted de Corsia Horace McMahon & Nick Dennis, ripped off in a payroll robbery.Kidnapped off the grounds of the hospital where he's recuperating by Lefty Arnie & Cookie Rawley is worked over in order to find where he hid the payroll money only to get absolutely nothing out of him since his memory has been wiped clean because of his brain operation. It's Rawly squeeze or moll Peg Benedict, Audrey Totter, who realizes that he's telling the truth and rekindles her hot and heavy affair with him not to get the money but him in, the the totally confused Rawley, in the sack together with her.Originally filmed in 3D and it shows in many of the scenes in the movie "Man in the Dark" especially it's heart dropping final at the Ocean Park, in Santa Monica, Amusement Park. Edmund O'Brain as the confused Steve Rawley recreates his role as Frank Bigelow in D.O.A as a man on he run and does it, he had a lot of experience by then, picture perfectly. Ted de Corsia is also perfect as the greedy and at times brainless tug Lefty who as much as he would love to do in Rawley can't until he finds out where he hid the loot that Rawley has no memory of. Audrey Totter turns out to be the gun moll with a heart of gold in forgetting about the stolen loot and just wanting to get back with her former lover, who has absolutely no idea who she is, Steve Rawley and screw the money and live happily after after together with him. But it's the 3D special effects that's the real star of the film with or without 3D capacity on your TV screen that makes the movie as good and exciting as it is.
blanche-2
Edmond O'Brien stars in "Man in the Dark," a 1953 film also starring Audrey Totter. O'Brien plays Steve Rawley, a prisoner who undergoes experimental surgery that's supposed to erase the criminal elements of his brain. It also wipes his memory of past events.Unfortunately Steve and some other thugs committed a big robbery and Steve hid the money. Now that he has no memory, he doesn't know where he put it. His old gang kidnaps him and tries to find out his hiding place. His old girlfriend Peg (Totter) is around, and she wants him to forget the whole thing and go away with her.Steve starts remembering things in the form of bizarre dreams. He and Peg attempt to follow the clues in the dreams to track down the money.Edmond O'Brien made a lot of these B films for Columbia. This one is no better or worse than many of them. The last part of the film takes place in an amusement park, and it's very good.Originally this film was in 3-D, and like some other films, it was filmed in the seen-better-days area of Ocean Park near Venice, CA. I always like seeing the old LA, and this film has lots of shots of it.I had one major problem with this film, and it's a major plot hole. If you had stolen a lot of money and hidden it, why would you agree to a surgery that is going to clean out your memory so that you don't remember where you hid it? I don't know the answer.