Tedfoldol everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Gary The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

utgard14 Delightfully irreverent variation on the old dark house comedy thriller. This one takes place in and below a lighthouse. The plot is so weird and things are explained then unexplained then explained again that I don't fault someone for thinking it makes no sense. But that's kind of the point. It's such a completely off-the-wall bizarre movie that I can't help but love it. It's totally ridiculous from start to finish. If you're too straight-laced for that, then you'll probably be filled with anger at this unassuming movie that's not even an hour that dared to waste your time. I've read a review or two like that and had to shake my head. What kind of sour puss do you have to be to not at least moderately enjoy, if not outright love, this movie? It's got nice sets, a fun cast, and some good special effects (especially for the time). Allen Jenkins is terrific. Yes, Hugh Herbert is an acquired taste. I get that. I admit I've been annoyed by him in other roles with all of his woo-hooing and fidgeting. But that's usually because he felt out of place in those movies. Here, his shtick is right at home. Just relax, don't take it more seriously than it was intended, and have some fun with it.

fibbermac ...this film is downright silly.Being such a fan of Hugh Herbert, I went to great lengths to acquire a DVD of this film and I really wanted to like it, but outside of a few comical moments, I was let down by this film.Hugh Herbert would eventually star in a series of Columbia 2-reel comedy shorts and this film plays much more like one of those Columbia 2-reelers than a feature put out by Warner Bros./First National.It is odd that in such a slipshod production, the special effects are surprisingly well done. Like when they used the remarkable on-screen transition effect mentioned by other reviewers to expose the true identity of the "Octopus". This was only the 4th time I've seen this effect being used in a feature film. (The other three were: The 1935 film "Werewolf of London" where the effect is used on Henry Hull in the very initial portion of his first on-screen transformation into the werewolf, the 1931 version of "Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde" where Fredric March becomes Hyde for the first time, and the 1925 version of "Ben Hur: A Tale of the Christ" where the transition effect is used to show a woman being miraculously healed of her leprosy.) Although, a quick review of the career of William McGann, who directed this film, shows that his one nomination for an Academy Award came, not for directing, but for Special Effects (Visual), for the 1946 film "A Stolen Life" starring Bette Davis. So maybe the use of that transition effect in this clunky little film isn't so strange after all. Judging from this film, McGann appears to have been much better at special effects than at directing.Fans of Hugh Herbert or Allen Jenkins will probably find this film worthwhile. I suspect all others are in for a loooong 54 minutes.

aberlour36 How can you make a bad movie with Allan Jenkins and Hugh Herbert? We now know it's possible. The script is hopeless. The acting, aside from the two main characters, is terrible. The sets are cheap and at times seem ready to fall down. I'll bet that the film was made in less than a week.This is the classic two comics in a haunted house. The result makes Monogram's Charlie Chan series look professional and expensive. I rather like "B" films, but this is a "C." I'll wager that the kids in the Saturday matinées laughed when the fake octopus tentacles come reaching out of the wall to grab people. But why go on? This is a stinker, mercifully unavailable in standard VHS or DVD format.

Joe Stemme A couple of years ago, a 35MM print of this was resurrected for the Boston Science Fiction Film Festival and Marathon (bostonsci-fi.com). Not truly SF, but it was so rare the organizers couldn't resist the opportunity to show it. It moves briskly along and the comedy is amusing enough to carry through the somewhat muddled 'mystery'. The ending, as others have noted, has that incredible pre-CGI morphing effect. Everybody who I talked to after the screening was truly impressed to see how well it was done 50+ years before CGI! In fact, its so seamless, I think it more effective than many a morph effect (for one thing, you feel that it truly IS happening before your eyes, not just some digital bits being manipulated by a computer). I noticed that SH! was playing on TCM this weekend and made a point to DVR the ending of it to watch that effect again. And again. Many times. Slow motion. Frame by Frame. It's still pretty darn amazing!SPECIAL EFFECTS SPOILER:As noted, I agree that it is a variation on the Makeup Effect used in the classic 1932 Rouben Mamoulian version of DR.JEYKLL AND MR. HYDE. Basically, it's done with trick makeup combined with colored lenses and lighting. It's all done "live" on the set. That's why there's no 'seam' where you see an optical dissolve (like those used in the WOLFMAN or THE INVISIBLE MAN). It's possible, that some post-production tinkering was done, but doubtful. It's still an astonishing illusion! The makeup is extremely well done, a wart seems to 'grow' on her nose, teeth get blackened and her whole complexion changes. The only 'give-away' I could detect was that the patterns on her dress get darker and harder to see when the light/filters are switched.Thing is, that one effect is so amazing, that I had completely forgotten about the 'twist' ending...and oh, those freaky offspring!