Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

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

waufo-776-791995 I watched this film a few days ago and I was stunned! Having seen actual news footage when I was 11 or 12 on TV regarding race riots in the South in the early 60s it was actually like seeing them all over again. Having grown up in a little town in New Hampshire the evil shown in the news footage all came back to me after watching this. I am now 67 and regard this movie as an accurate insight into the insane and dark behavior that humans are capable of. I am not an expert on movie production values but I considered the various roles as having been portrayed very well and William Shatner made the perfect demagogue as I have heard some real fanatics and screwballs during my lifetime and Shatner nailed it in the general sense I believe. I liked the camera work throughout and I thought the audio quality was fine, especially for a low budget black and white film from 1962. Some people might think this movie is over the top but it knocked me for a loop as I had seen this film in another form when I was a 12 year old boy on the TV news.

jadedalex It is very little wonder that the Roger Corman production of 'The Intruder' is a very rarely seen 1962 film about integration in the South. The usually affable William Shatner plays a prototype David Duke character, he's even seen cavorting with KKK members in their motorcades.The dialog is full of words certainly too 'offensive' by today's PC standards. The dreaded 'n' word is repeated countless times. Along with 'jigs' and 'coons', the dialogue, though 'offensive' to today's ultra-hip millennials, is gritty and real for its time. I would suggest that 'The Intruder' is a very honest, hard-hitting film, where 'To Kill A Mockingbird' is sentimental and romantic. (I am quite aware that 'Mockingbird' is on so many people's 'favorite' lists. Excuse me.)Personally, I think this no holds barred story about the days of school integration is totally believable and I'm impressed with the fine screenplay of Charles Beaumont, who is more famously noted for his brilliant short stories and 'Twilight Zone' scripts. He has a small role towards the end of the film. As far as our beloved 'PC' world, the internet is a valuable tool for finding films of this ilk. For all I know, the movie may be available on DVD. But I personally had never heard of the title, and I'm familiar with much of Beaumont's and Shatner's work.It doesn't have a happy ending. Why would it?

richardrobins I was in 12th Grade on Long Island, New York, when this film was released in 1962. I discovered this today on EPIX cable. It's a remarkable portrayal of what was happening at the time during the John Kennedy Presidency (before the Civil Rights Movement). Everyone in the New York area knew it was dangerous to travel to the deep South.I was surprised to see William Schatner played Adam Cramer. I couldn't think of who this actor could be, but the performance was very strong. So, this explains what Schatner was doing before Star Trek premiered on television. I am wondering if this was Schatner's first film, and, of course, Corman was such a remarkable director.

Steve Skafte I expected "The Intruder" to be a great film. I'm not sure what I based that assumption on. It certainly wasn't director Roger Corman, who never showed much promise for drama. And it wasn't the fact that it was filmed in the same era in which it takes place. And it wasn't the cast, which, save for William Shatner, I'd never previously heard about. But, still, I wasn't disappointed. A combination of all these factors make it a lean, straightforward film. Corman brings a B-movie sensibility in the best possible way. Budget and time constraints make for quick scenes, edgy attitudes, and a feeling of extreme immediacy.Most of all, this film rests on the terrifying performance of William Shatner (as the "social worker" Adam Cramer). He is unstable, he is inflammatory, he is seductive. He is an almost unbearably intense on-screen presence in this film. He has the unnerving ability to play a character who overacts, who is unhinged, without appearing to be so as an actor. Not that it would matter. Even if he truly was as unstable and complex as the character he portrays, it doesn't take away from the stunning performance.There are artifacts of the time present of course, things which place it in the time in which it was filmed. But these are at a minimum. The actors are remarkably restrained, and straightforward. People speak conversationally, like friends you might know. This is especially evident with Frank Maxwell (Tom, the newspaper man) and Leo Gordon (Sam, the traveling salesman). Both men play men of deep intelligence and a way with words. They are immensely identifiable in their respective roles. The most powerful scene in "The Intruder" is, perhaps, the hotel room confrontation between Maxwell and Cramer. It is the first hint of both Maxwell's strength, and of Cramer's weakness. It is a reversal of sorts, the exposing of the man behind the curtain. There's a dramatic quality to this revelation that hits with real force."The Intruder" is worlds above what its pedigree might suggest. Unlike other, higher-budgeted films on this subject from the era, this one holds up. It's in the trenches, so to speak. In your face, and under your skin. Few films can do that, and do that believably. This one does. Feel free to disagree, but be certain to see for yourself.