7/10
Entertaining sequel.
3 April 2013
The deadly Gill Man returns in this sequel where a change in venue really doesn't do it any favours. It's just not quite the same without the Amazon setting; as a result, the overwhelming atmosphere and sense of mystery of the original are nowhere to be found here.

That's not to say that the basic story is bad. It's a logical enough extension of the story of the original in which the Gill Man is successfully captured and brought to Florida's Ocean Harbor oceanarium. While he's on display he's subjected to various experiments (it would be pretty hard not to feel some sympathy for the poor beast) while the "beauty and the beast" theme is continued and the creature fixates on a lovely young scientist named Helen (Lori Nelson).

The always likable John Agar is the lead here, and does his usual solid job. A good supporting cast includes John Bromfield as the macho Joe Hayes and Nestor Paiva, reprising his role of Lucas from the first film. Nelson is fine eye candy, even if she won't make anybody forget Julie Adams. A very young Clint Eastwood makes his first (uncredited) screen appearance as a none too bright lab assistant who misplaces a rat.

The main problem with "Revenge of the Creature" is the fact that by the very nature of its tale it suffers from the Showing The Monster Too Much syndrome. Still, as mentioned, seeing what the creature is subjected to here will certainly strike a chord with the audience. You wish that humanity would have just left him the hell alone.

The underwater photography is still wonderful, and there are some very effective moments, such as Agar and Nelson having a carefree swim not knowing just how close the creature is. Director Jack Arnold, also returning from "Creature from the Black Lagoon", does his usual capable job.

While not in the same league as its predecessor, this is still watchable enough, if slow and talky at times. No matter what, it's always fun to see the Gill Man do his thing, so fans of the Universal-International product of the 1950s should be adequately entertained.

Seven out of 10.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed