Review of The Tingler (1959) by Tom M — 21 Jul 2011

8.3/10.

It's almost impossible to imagine that any horror fan would not find "The Tingler" to be a fun, admirably campy horror flick. It opens with a monologue of warning from its director, William Castle, who seems to be telling us of what a gift it is to be able to simply scream. Watching the film only helped me to realize, furthermore, what he meant by this.

Castle made his movie for fans of the genre, and fans of science-fiction too. It combines the two genres like some sort of miracle; an ingeniously fun and stupendously absurd movie that might exist only for the sake of being quirky. But some movies can get around just by being strange, weird oddities; this is one of them. I thought it was quite spectacular; crafty, campy fun. And that's all it needs to be. I went crazy for this thing.

The problem at the core of "The Tingler" comes from the ever-so-tempting curiosity of man. A pathologist (Vincent Price) discovers through much research that there is a parasite-like creature within all of us. It resides in our spinal area; feeding off of our fear, and controlled/restrained only by our screams.

Price's character names his discovery "The Tingler". The creature has a good chance at killing its host, as it curls up slowly as it feeds off of our terror. That explains that "tingling feeling" in our spines when we are afraid, I suppose. Anyways, back to the story. The creature evades its captors many times, eventually finding its way into a theater full of people - young and old alike.

So I've basically described the entire plot of "The Tingler", and without a spoiler warning. I didn't provide such an "essential thing" because there's really no way of writing this review without spoiling a good deal of the "story". It's not how the story is told and where it does, it is about the execution; and let me tell you, this film is unlike most of its kind. It isn't flashy, it has good-scene-after-good-scene, and Price is a creepy, eerie presence as always.

My favorite scene in the film was one where one of the characters' mute wife witnesses a red hand rise from an equally red bath-tub. This film is remembered because the entire film, except for this sequence, is presented in black-and-white colors. This change-in-color gives the film a shockingly surreal feeling, and we all know how awesome surrealism is. In the end of the day, it's always welcome.

But this is a monster movie, so I should be getting to its critter about now. If you're wondering whether the "Tingler" itself ranks amongst some of the best movie monsters, it doesn't. It's like a huge, somewhat deformed centipede; and it is admittedly creepy and icky, as it should be, but the only real problem is that there's only one of them; so it can't be all that scary. But maybe I shouldn't be complaining; this is a rather wonderful film. For its kind, it is flawlessly crafted, competently acted, well-edited, and so on and so forth.

So I like the idea behind "The Tingler". I also liked the direction and execution. I also liked the self-aware silliness of the script. This is a film crafted with such charm, that it's impossible for a guy like me to resist its guilty-pleasures. It is a monster movie, made how I like them; discreet, nicely-crafted, and in black-and-white, which shall always be king. I recommend "The Tingler", as well as you're willing to suspend your disbelief and go along for the ridiculous ride. The film may indeed have many flaws, but I saw very few. It is what it is; does what it does, and for what it does, it does it well.