Watch Experiment Perilous For Free

How sad is this?

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

I had only a vague notion of the plot before watching this, knowing only that the central character was a psychiatrist played by George Brent. But despite rather odd characters being wheeled on and off, despite portentous things (The opening sequence of the train besieged by lightning, storm and floods and Hedy Lammar's so-called "special look" in the portrait which itself appeared to be merely an enlarged and retouched photo yet supposedly hung in a museum as work of art) and dialogue; the production, script and cast battled as one so successfully to subdue and ultimately suppress conviction and interest that we parted company after around 20 minutes of viewing.Having watched both versions of "Gaslight" (with which reviewers have compared this offering) I would say both are incomparably superior to it. The earlier British version (fortunately saved from deliberate destruction) offered in the form of Anton Walbrook the most odious villain accompanied by a perhaps a more realistically vulnerable and less beautiful wife than Ingrid Bergman. Both films were intriguing from the outset. I guess that from the start I had misgivings about the casting of George Brent - an bulky actor of limited powers of expression and interpretation who was inexplicably regularly cast opposite Hollywood's very finest (eg Bette Davis). Brent is amiable and at times rather concerned but neither involving nor intriguing. Joseph Cotton for example would have suggested depths which Brent never could.I did not find the sets convincing - like the portrait itself they indicated a deficit of artistry and style however the opening section with its (model?) train besieged by storm and floods was well done. Interesting to note that it received no awards and that its single Oscar nomination was for art direction.

Atmospheric account of a chance meeting on a train that leads a doctor (George Brent) into the strange world of a young woman (Hedy Lamar) and her much older husband (Paul Lukas) . The opening takes place on a night time train ride to New York through cascading rainfall, and the inclement weather conditions continue on into a snowy and cloudy New York of the early 1900's. A story of a rich and jealous older husband with a lovely young wife, whom he had groomed in Parisian salons to enter society, and now feels insecure when she's enjoying the very society that he paid thousands of dollars to educate her to be in, who grew up in Austria and became laden with guilt and who now is so damaged that he can't see clearly enough to recognize his own good circumstances, and thus ruins everything. Director Jacques Tourneur dissects this pathological family (they have a son whom they keep in a bedroom which is up a spiral staircase) with great attention, creating some believable menace in true psychological suspense style. The need for a hero figure (Brent) to rescue the pretty Lamar and her innocent young son and provide a suitable conclusion, and Lamar's rather distracted and distant acting style are legitimate quibbles, but the overall tone is intelligently dark and serious.

Yes, step right up to buy the Brooklyn Bridge. And how about Paul Lukas as the scion of a wealthy New York family with a French name? What came over the people who cast this ramshackle event? George Brent is plausible as a doctor. The others: No.And what was with movies in terms of portraits? Hedy Lamarr certainly was a gorgeous woman. Yes, the portrait of her, through which she is introduced to us, looks like the work of a quick-sketch artist in Provincteown. It supposedly hangs in a museum but it has artistic merit of 2 on a scale of 1 to 100.The movie is well directed and beautifully filmed. And it isn't boring -- though it is predictable. It could so easily have been better, though, it's kind of a shame.

If you are a fan of Jacques Tourneur, "Experiment Perilous" is a must-see. This sinister and beautifully photographed period thriller ranks with Tourneur's supreme masterpieces, "Out of the Past", "Stars in My Crown", "Canyon Passage", "Curse of the Demon", "I Walked with a Zombie", and "Cat People". It is imbued with Tourneur's trademark touch of ambiguity and mystery. One of the reasons "Experiment Perilous" is so underrated is that the story does not flow logically. You have to do a bit of brain work to understand it, but if you are already familiar with Tourneur's cinema, this may come as a revelation. The film has often been compared to Cukor's similar costume thriller "Gaslight" which was also released in 1944 but "Experiment Perilous" is a better and more personal work. The opening chance encounter between Dr. Bailey (George Brent) and Cissie (Olive Blakeney) on the train resembles the mysterious chance meetings of "Cat People" and Tourneur's 1956 film noir "Nightfall". It has been said that the film was set in 1903 as opposed to 1944 because Heddy Lamarr wanted to wear period costumes. Lamarr is undoubtedly beautiful and her scenes with Brent and Lukas are exquisite and sensual.There is an excellent analysis on the film in Chris Fujiwara's book, JACQUES TOURNEUR: THE CINEMA OF NIGHTFALL (1998).