(NOTE: Possible spoiler, but it all really depends on what you think of as a "spoiler".)
I just finished watching "X: The Man With X-Ray Eyes" and to tell the truth, I'm a little unsure of what to make of it. It is such a beautifully flawed film, I don't know whether to call it quirky, great, horrendous, or what. I suppose I'll just write and figure out what I wanted to say at the end.
I'll start with the low points. Of course, it's horrendously dated and tacky, but that's the problem of the modern viewer, not the film. The plot is incredulous and has a couple of huge, gapng holes (pun intended), but if you're watching a film called "X: The Man With X-Ray Eyes", you shouldn't be expecting Mamet.
The film's dialogue thins out in many spots, and in fact, some of the lines seem to come right out of a High School drama project. The film also seems padded in places, most notably the stretch in Vegas and the car chase that seems to go on forever. It's as if they needed to stretch out the film in these spots, in order to make it feature-length. Lastly, director Roger Corman relies heavily on the "special effects" in the film, which are quite interesting when first used and then because of overuse, rarely reach the same intensity again.
However, the film's high points overshadow the roughness, most of the time. The acting is superb (despite some incredibly hokey dialogue), especially from Ray Milland in the title role. However, I was personally knocked out by Don Rickles (no, really), who puts in a truly real and unforgettable performance as a sideshow carny who finds his meal ticket in X.
Let's see, what else...the story is truly wonderful in spite of its hokiness; it makes the viewer think about many issues. "Are there things man was not meant to know?" "Can science go too far?" "Can knowledge drive one mad?" Or, as my brother asked, "Why doesn't he use his powers for good, like getting sex?"
Finally, many scenes are both emotionally and viscerally shocking. The carnies' conversation with the mysterious "Mentallo" is starkly haunting, as a man who has been driven away from everything he knows is being reprimanded by ignorant fools that cannot comprehend his situation. The final scene in the Christian revival tent is both chilling and shocking, as we watch the nearly mad Xavier relating his tale of the "eye at the center of the universe" and being damned by the preacher, who tells him, "If thine eyes offend thee, cast them out!!" In the 1960s this would have been gut-wrenchingly sickening; it's effect is dulled only slightly on a modern audience.
So, what are my final thoughts? Despite its flaws, "X" is still a very good film, bordering on great. It's definitely a "must-see" for any fan of horror or sci-fi, and even people who wouldn't normally see a film like this should give it a try. It may not always be pretty; it may not always be shocking; it may not always be good. But the last frame of the film will always remain with you, and you'll want to talk about it with someone when you're done, even if it's only to say, "Was that as weird as I thought it was?"
I just finished watching "X: The Man With X-Ray Eyes" and to tell the truth, I'm a little unsure of what to make of it. It is such a beautifully flawed film, I don't know whether to call it quirky, great, horrendous, or what. I suppose I'll just write and figure out what I wanted to say at the end.
I'll start with the low points. Of course, it's horrendously dated and tacky, but that's the problem of the modern viewer, not the film. The plot is incredulous and has a couple of huge, gapng holes (pun intended), but if you're watching a film called "X: The Man With X-Ray Eyes", you shouldn't be expecting Mamet.
The film's dialogue thins out in many spots, and in fact, some of the lines seem to come right out of a High School drama project. The film also seems padded in places, most notably the stretch in Vegas and the car chase that seems to go on forever. It's as if they needed to stretch out the film in these spots, in order to make it feature-length. Lastly, director Roger Corman relies heavily on the "special effects" in the film, which are quite interesting when first used and then because of overuse, rarely reach the same intensity again.
However, the film's high points overshadow the roughness, most of the time. The acting is superb (despite some incredibly hokey dialogue), especially from Ray Milland in the title role. However, I was personally knocked out by Don Rickles (no, really), who puts in a truly real and unforgettable performance as a sideshow carny who finds his meal ticket in X.
Let's see, what else...the story is truly wonderful in spite of its hokiness; it makes the viewer think about many issues. "Are there things man was not meant to know?" "Can science go too far?" "Can knowledge drive one mad?" Or, as my brother asked, "Why doesn't he use his powers for good, like getting sex?"
Finally, many scenes are both emotionally and viscerally shocking. The carnies' conversation with the mysterious "Mentallo" is starkly haunting, as a man who has been driven away from everything he knows is being reprimanded by ignorant fools that cannot comprehend his situation. The final scene in the Christian revival tent is both chilling and shocking, as we watch the nearly mad Xavier relating his tale of the "eye at the center of the universe" and being damned by the preacher, who tells him, "If thine eyes offend thee, cast them out!!" In the 1960s this would have been gut-wrenchingly sickening; it's effect is dulled only slightly on a modern audience.
So, what are my final thoughts? Despite its flaws, "X" is still a very good film, bordering on great. It's definitely a "must-see" for any fan of horror or sci-fi, and even people who wouldn't normally see a film like this should give it a try. It may not always be pretty; it may not always be shocking; it may not always be good. But the last frame of the film will always remain with you, and you'll want to talk about it with someone when you're done, even if it's only to say, "Was that as weird as I thought it was?"