Review of Them!

Them! (1954)
5/10
Saucery? Antastic!
10 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
How is one going to find something sensible to say about something like this, despite its reputed Oscar-nomination? There's little point in recounting the story, or, as it's sometimes called, the plot. In fact I never understand why anyone spells out the plot, if someone else has already done so. Surely once is enough? So what can one say ? James Whitmore really was an unusually competent actor. Edmund Gwenn, though not a name I'm otherwise overly familiar with, eventually seems much better than he first looks as though he's going to be. Joan Weldon is dressed in the height of 1954 fashion, and trips elegantly and delicately around the desert, avoiding the tumbleweeds, but to no visibly constructive purpose. The simple truth is that very many films shot in the 1950s were quite abysmal; I wonder if this decade was when film production peaked, worldwide, and quantity exceeded quality in every direction? The "stars", as opposed to actors, were Leonard Nimoy and Fess Parker, although their stardom lay many years ahead of them. If I hadn't been told I wouldn't have recognized Leonard, but Fess was his obvious self. Here he acts the part of a nutcase, afflicted by sanity, in spite of describing a bunch of giant flying ants as "saucers". Huh? Hadn't the term UFO been invented in 1954? Difficult to imagine an object less resembling a saucer than a flying ant, of any size. Never mind. Another reviewer tells me that the male lead became famous as Marshal Matt Dillon, but I regret I've never seen any of his TV episodes.

The opening, with a little actress called Sandy Descher (I learn), was rather intriguing, but it promised more than it came to deliver. One thing I didn't understand was why the mutAnts blasted their holes in trailers and stores from the inside (!?!). How did they get in, to start with? Or did they pop up from underground, entering by bursting through the floors? Another reviewer points out the singularity of the Friday-like footprint. Well, I think the thing to do with this sort of product is give up any hope of consistency, and simply revel in the dialogue and the one-liners. See the discussion forum. A very generous 5 stars.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed