A man in a gleaming white suit comes to a small Southern town on the eve of integration. He calls himself a social reformer. But what he does is stir up trouble--trouble he soon finds he can't control.
Catherine meets Nick by accident and, after a whirlwind romance, the two get married and Catherine moves into Nick's apartment only that's the start of problems when an unseen intruder ... See full summary »
Charles Edwin Powell,
A fugitive on the run from the law and carrying several million dollars hides out in the house of a farm family. The tables turn when the family turns out to be even more criminally ... See full summary »
A man in a gleaming white suit comes to a small Southern town on the eve of integration. His name is Adam Cramer. He calls himself a social reformer. But his aim is to incite the people against letting black children into the town's white school. Soon he has the white citizens of the town worked up. He thinks he's leading them; but a man he befriends and immediately betrays knows better. The people have become a mob. The black leader of a church and a white newspaper editor soon feel its wrath. But after a false accusation against a black student, Adam Cramer may find the people are totally and permanently out of his control.Written by
Producer/Director Roger Corman allegedly blamed star William Shatner's performance for the box-office failure of the movie, and the breaking of Corman's perfect track record of successes. Shatner jokingly suggested years later that the re-release title "I Hate Your Guts!" was probably aimed at him. See more »
The swing sets in the final scene change in the number and height of the swings. On 29 July 2015 at the Traverse City Film Festival, Roger Corman explained that they'd been run out of two different towns by law enforcement trying to get that scene done, so it was filmed at three different schools. See more »
[to the little girl he helps out of the bus]
There you go... Ma'am.
Little Girl's Mother:
Thank you... What do you say to the nice gentleman?
See more »
One of the best films on race...this is one not to be missed!
This is an amazing film--and what's even more amazing is that it isn't seen as a classic today, as it's one of the best films on race Hollywood has ever made. Unlike many of the more recent films on racism, what I loved about THE INTRUDER is that it is not sanitized in the least--with intense language and horrible mob behavior that make this film terrific.
The film is a lot like combining ELMER GANTRY with a film about racism. William Shatner is the Gantry-like man who comes to town with the express purpose of stirring up the hatred of the White masses towards the Blacks--coinciding with a court order to desegregate the schools. Why he is doing this is never explained, but you know that Shatner is a man with no scruples whatsoever and he seems to enjoy sowing evil and dissension. As for the town, they respond pretty much like you'd expect. A lynch-mob mentality develops and the crowd is looking ugly. At this point, the film comes to an emotional boil--leading to a wonderful climactic finale.
So why did I like the film so much? Well, one reason is that it proved that given a strong and competent director (Roger Corman), Shatner is a good actor and his bigger than life style works well. Mr. Shatner without such strong guidance is a bad thing indeed, as evidenced by films such as IMPULSE (directed by schlock film director William Grefe). Second, Corman really was not afraid to shock the viewer and did not pull any punches. Unlike many other films about race, this one repeatedly used "bad language" (i.e., I must call it this because IMDb does not allow such words on their site--even if it includes mentioning the title of a movie with one of these "bad words" in it). Because of this, it exposed racism for the ugly beast that it is---warts and all. All too often, films take a sanitized view of racism, but in THE INTRUDER it's as ugly and vicious as you can find. I appreciate this because racism is ugly and vicious...duh. Finally, because it is a Corman production from his ultra-low budget era, it was made with minimal expense using exceptional character actors. Because of this, it's like a textbook example of great film making for less money--with a wonderful script, acting and direction.
Sadly, when this movie came out, it was one of the only Corman films that lost money. Well, you can't blame anyone for this--it was simply too far ahead of its time and the country was not yet ready for it. It's a shame, as apparently Mr. Corman blamed Shatner for the failure of the film--it was no one's fault. Because of this, it needs to be seen and appreciated as a great allegorical film that was unjustly ignored.
Also, in an odd observation, I noticed that Roger Corman was listed as 'Rodger Corman' in the credits. This possibly makes this the only film in which the director's name is misspelled. And, if this review piques your curiosity, the film is in the public domain and can be downloaded and watched for free at sites such as archive.org or other public domain sites.
11 of 12 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this