5/5 Menace 2 Society...
  by Bindy Sue Frønkünschtein (under the rubble)
Two of the greatest actors of all time square off in this masterpiece of suspense and psychological terror. Gregory Peck (To Kill A Mockingbird, The Omen) is Sam Bowden, an upright lawyer. Robert Mitchum (Night Of The Hunter) is Max Cady, a cunning, violent madman who holds Bowden responsible for his 8-year prison stretch. Cady begins to stalk Bowden, his wife (Polly Bergen), and their teen daughter (Lori Martin). The tension builds as Cady slithers along, skirting the law, while terrorizing the family. Sam tries every legal thing he can think of, to no avail. Cady is too smart, and has waited far too long for his revenge! CAPE FEAR is in the same league as PSYCHO, A TOUCH OF EVIL, and other classics of the genre. Mitchum is pure eeevil, convincing us all that he's a very dangerous man who is capable of anything. His Max Cady, along w/ his preacher character from NIGHT OF THE HUNTER, are two of the most wickedly memorable roles in film history! Add this one to your collection immediately... P.S.- It's also fun to see Martin Balsam (Psycho), Telly Savalas (Horror Express, Lisa And The Devil), and Jack Kruschen (War Of The Worlds, Angry Red Planet) in their roles as well!...

5/5 Classic Mitchum
  by Allan William Rupert Jr.
This is one of the all time terror in your own backyard movies. Robert Mitchum plays the normal looking psycho who has locked the cross-hairs his vidictive and murderous hate on a family man and his wife and daughter. Mitchum is absolutely off the charts as the unstopable and ubiquitous evil, he is all in to ruin Gregory Peck's perfect little life, by devouring his wife and daughter. The music is idyllic in the man's yard till terror in the person of Bob Mitchum blots out any sense of normalcy. BUY THIS MOVIE!

3/5 Atmos-Fear
  by C. Rocklein
Mitchum plays a great menacing guy and Peck is not bad as the lawyer trying to save his family. The film's weaknesses are it's points of unbeleiveability, of which there are more than a few. Many things in the course of events are just too convenient and one just has to accept them rather than see how the characters actually acheived them - like when Cody follows Kojak's motorboat in a rowboat. Right. Or when Cody (Mitchum) drowns the police guard who barely puts up a fight, doesn't make a sound, and casually lets himself die - kind of insults the intelligence. But then if our hero had heard the scuffle the movie would've been over a lot quicker. I could go into other things, but would give a lot of the film away. Also some of the shots which are supposed to explain transition from one event to the next are too short almost leaving you to wonder what just happened.

I wanted to like this film better than I did, and I watched it because I usually like black and white films from the early 60s. What this does have in common with many films from that time is atmosphere. How much of that is due to it's being in black and white is open to debate. Just as a color photo and a black and white photo of the same shot will give off a different charge, so too with the movies. It may be partially for this reason that early 60s movies are so atmospheric though I'm not convinced that's the full reason. There is also the sense of new things being tried, new ground being broken, etc. That's another reason I wanted to see this - to compare it with the remake. I wouldn't give it 5 stars just because its old and its actors are famous. Even 4 seems high, while 3 seems low. So 3.5 it is. Getting back to atmosphere - in spite of it's flaws the movie does succeed in wratcheting up the tension, although the low-beleivability factor and the somewhat melodramatic music periodically deflate that tension. For those who don't like to be scared, you can be thankful for small favors.

4/5 Is it strange that I prefer Scorsese?
  by Andrew Ellington (Mulholland Drive)
Before you take my title out of context let me say this; I really, really like this film. With that said, I must confess that, while many here seem to consider this superior to Scorsese's 1991 remake, I feel that Scorsese upped the ante so-to-speak and delivered a more suspenseful and ultimately more intelligent thriller. Sure, this is a lot more subtle than Scorsese's (sign of the times my friend) but just because Scorsese added more violence doesn't make his any less effective. Scorsese tapped into something a little more primal, and by adding the layers of Cady's influence on Sam's daughter he managed to make him even more of a predator.

I won't even get into the fact that Scorsese's ending makes MUCH MORE SENSE.

So, this is obviously the 1962 original starring Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum. For those unfamiliar with the plot, this revolves around a lawyer named Sam Bowden who is being tormented by the recently released Max Cady, a brutal man who Sam helped put away. Determined to make Sam suffer in ways he can't even imagine, Max makes advances and threats towards Sam's wife and daughter, so much so that Sam is forced to step outside the law and take matters into his own hands.

The film, much like Scorsese's, lives and dies in the performances, especially in the man playing Max Cady (in this case, that man is Robert Mitchum). Much like De Niro, Mitchum epitomizes evil with his every movement. Even his southern drawl is abrasive and intimidating. Gregory Peck is not as lucky here. I know that everyone loves him and he is highly regarded as one of the best actors who ever worked, but really, I often find even his most praised work rather bland. He holds his own, but barely here. He doesn't have the sharp magnetism that Nick Nolte brought to Scorsese's film. Nolte and Peck are two VERY different actors. Peck was very understated, subtle and quiet, whereas Nolte often gets on my nerves because of his tendency to overact, BIG TIME. I think that tendency is what made him perfectly suited for this role though, and it is why I am fascinated with what he did. He was able to reign himself in to give a guarded and quiet performance, but it had this underlying layer of spark that simmered below the surface, baring its head at just the right moments. He was able to add layers that Peck forgot about.

I will say this though, J. Lee Thompson was definitely able to add the right amount of tension to this film; and it remains memorable because of that. Even in the ending, which in my opinion suffers from a lack of intelligent structure, Thompson keeps us at the edge of our seat, crippling us almost with a sharp sense of true terror.

In the end I have to say that this is a very good film, I just also have to disagree with all the reviewers who praise this over Scorsese's remake. This is good, but Scorsese's take was superb. Scorsese was able to tie up loose ends, add a little more depth to the plot and find the right actors for the roles, making for a very rewarding experience.

5/5 Stick With This One: The Original
  by Craig Connell (Lockport, NY USA)
Boy, this shows that you can still make a scary movie without a lot of blood, profanity and whatever. Hollywood didn't learn that, however, featuring all of it less than a decade after this was made. The Martin Scorcese 1991 re-make of this movie is exactly what I'm talking about.

This original Cape Fear was legitimately scary, thanks to the performance of Robert Mitchum, who doesn't need to resort to the f-word to be a tough, sick and really an evil character as he stalks Gregory Peck and his wife (Polly Bergen) and daughter (Lori Martin).

Bergan and Martin are two women I don't see too much in films which is too bad. They did a lot more TV work than movies. Another thing you don't see much anymore - a nice, sympathetic policeman - was also portrayed in here nicely by Martin Balsam.

The ending has some holes in it, to be sure, but overall it offers a good 106-minute suspense story.