Reviews of Shock Corridor
Displaying all 3 reviews
Benoît
16Apr12
Shock Corridor de Samuel Fuller est une énorme déception à mes yeux. Alors que je m’attendais à un grand film psychologique et une belle critique acerbe des USA, le cinéaste nous offre une oeuvre très lourde dans son propos et une oeuvre dévoilant trop vite ce qui va se passer.
Pourtant, tout n’est pas mauvais dans ce film. Premièrement, d’un point de vue formel, l’oeuvre est très réussie. Que ce soit au niveau de la mise en scène de Fuller, assez rythmée et jouant parfois de symboles que de l’utilisation remarquable du noir et blanc, certainement une des plus belles réussites du film.
Ensuite, il y a le casting et particulièrement Peter Breck, très convaincant dans son rôle de journaliste qui devient de plus en plus fou suite aux expériences.
Enfin, il y a évidemment cette critique des USA, de l’American Way of Life, du racisme, de la chasse aux communistes, etc. Mais le problème, c’est que sur le fond, le cinéaste agit avec une lourdeur remarquable, tel un éléphant marchant sur des oeufs.
L’oeuvre est très bavarde, ça n’en finit pas. Et tout ça pour assister à un même schéma: le journaliste “coince” un malade, le fait parler et au dernier moment, l’homme redevient un instant fou. Et durant tout le temps où le pensionnaire de l’asile parle, on a évidemment droit à une critique bien précise d’un point de ce qui fait l’Amérique.
Ensuite, le cinéaste nous fait très rapidement comprendre que le journaliste n’en sortira pas indemne. Même si ce n’est pas le point central du film, et qu’on se doute évidemment qu’au bout d’une telle expérience. Tout est cousu de fil blanc.
Difficile d’être convaincu par Fuller avec Shock Corridor, remarquable sur la forme, mais lourd sur le fond.
- Currently 2.0/5 Stars.
Gary Wood
16May11
“Whom God wishes to destroy he first makes mad.” -Euripides, 425 B.C.; quotes Sam Fuller in his opening and closing of Shock Corridor; a sentiment that surely could have been the mantra of Fuller’s predecessors, Conrad and Hemingway; leading men, equal parts brave and naive, into the darkest corners, in search of something, material and/or spiritual; only to be irreparably damaged.
“The story will write itself”, says Johnny (Peter Breck), a writer who enters an insane asylum to uncover the identity of a murderer; a story he is convinced will win him the Pulitzer Prize. Johnny’s stripper girlfriend, Cathy (Constance Towers), expresses grave concerns early on as to whether its safe for Johnny to pose as an insane person. Does she know something we don’t know about Johnny? Or is she just a bit more aware of how a vulnerable soul can be corrupted?
After the initial introduction of cartoon caricatures bouncing off rubber walls, Fuller fleshes out some of the crazies, and Cathy’s concerns prove prescient. Rosco P. Coltrane, or Stuart (James Best) is one of several witnesses Johnny gets close to in order to solve the murder mystery, comforting Johnny after he is sexually assaulted by the most rabid group of nymphos this side of Sex and the City.
As only a filmmaker with limited resources can, Mr. Fuller brilliantly uses color stock footage to tell the witnesses’ back stories (Fuller also makes each witness a symbol of social and political strife). But, of course, the lucidity of the witnesses will be Johnny’s biggest challenge, as each time he is within a breath of hearing the killer’s name, the lunacy returns to consume them.
Fuller compounds the tension, when he places his hero in the most frightening of scenarios: shock therapy; which will lead to a great climax; including a stunning set piece wherein Johnny’s state of mind is symbolized by a tumultuous rain storm within the halls of the asylum. The shot is amazing, partly because it is simply beautiful filmmaking, and partly because it is jarringly unexpected in a low-budget “B-movie”.
Will Johnny be able to solve the mystery before going crazy himself? It’s quite a compelling drama. The story writes itself.
- Currently 4.0/5 Stars.
Sam Cooper
7Jun09
“Nymhpos!”
Samuel Fuller’s Shock Corridor may sound like a pretentious shlockfest, but it’s much more than that. The premise follows a journalist hellbent on winning a Pulitzer Prize award. And how is he going to do this? He’s going to feign madness and be committed to an insane asylum where a murder has taken place. Once inside he’ll just act all goofy and fit in with everyone else, right? Things start to go off-track when he mingles a little too much with the patients, and soon enough their insanity starts to rub off on him. Fuller takes it a notch higher than this though. Each patient that he becomes close with represents Fuller’s view on America, that of conformity and a rather high emphasis on success that could, literally, drive any man mad.
- Currently 4.0/5 Stars.