This is the convoluted psychological thriller melodrama that has seemingly outgoing Glynis Johns hobbling happily down the street searching for help after her car breaks down. She knocks on the wrong door, and ends up being trapped in a beautiful bedroom by the strange title character who keeps a severe eye on her, and his beautiful assistant who also insists that she cannot leave the premises. Dan O'Herlihy is the titled character, a rather mysterious man who may or may not be a doctor, and what kind he may or may not be takes some patience to find out. The lovely assistant is soap opera favorite Constance Ford, denying that she is Caligari's mistress, but also maintaining innocence in Glynis's his accusations that they are leading a perverted lifestyle and keeping Johns locked up to keep it their secret. Others present include dizzy Estelle Winwood, her aging boyfriend J. Pat O'Malley and a handsome young man, Richard Davalos who expresses a romantic interest in Johns. she uses her wits to determine why she is being held against her will, and ends up in some precarious predicament that are dreamlike and quite intense. It becomes pretty obvious what actually is going on about halfway through the film, but I'll give that to you to discover. Obviously influenced by the similarly-named silent film, this is not as artistically brilliant but has some great moments.John gives an excellent performance and is matched by O'Herlihy and Ford. the issue with the film is that it seems to take itself way too seriously, and like other psychological melodramas of the time, is trying too hard to emulate classic mental illness films like the snake pit. However, it is certainly better than "The Caretakers" which dealt with life inside a mental institution and came out the following year. Disturbing and convoluted, this is a perfect example of the 60's artistic flop and a good example why the new eave style of films worked better with European filmmakers.

Here is a film that much improves on a second viewing. The first viewing, unfortunately, may turn a lot of people off because of its moderate pace and what comes across as bad writing and bad dialog. But give it a try... or two tries. All that seeming badness is there for a reason. This is the story of Jane, a woman on 'vacation', whose car has a flat. She gets out and walks, ending up at the house of a very powerful and apparently evil man, Caligari, who keeps her captive. Others she meets at the place come across as characters from the Twilight Zone. In fact, everything about this place and its characters, plus the way they interact with Jane, is very off. Characters seem to appear for no reason and sometimes deliver dialog that is purposely over the top and even wildly campy. The plot focuses on Jane's relationship with Caligari, who appears to be some whacked out psychotherapist, and her attempts to escape his psychological as well as real hold on her. Other people at this house try to help her escape... or do they? By the end of the film, though some may see it coming a mile away, everything is put into focus. I wanted to re-watch the film right away, but decided to give it some breathing room. When I finally did re-watch, I was amazed at how much more interesting it was, knowing what I knew from the first viewing.*** SPOILERS NEXT PARAGRAPH:Of course what we learn is that we have been viewing the world through the mind of a mentally deranged woman. Once we see that, as we watch the film the second time, we can see that all the weirdness, bad dialog and bizarre character behavior was really Jane's mind playing tricks on her. The tricks reveal what a state of denial Jane is in about her fear of aging and losing her beauty. I'm sure many women have problems facing this aspect of their lives. The visuals of the film and concepts like a revolving door to enter Caligari's office, the twisted stairwell, the stark lighting, and effective use of still images, all contribute to creating a very uneasy state of mind. When I first watched, some scenes truly creeped me out, though they made me laugh at the same time. On second viewing, they still creeped me out, but the laughter was gone. The major flaw in the script is that following a major mental trauma Jane is considered "cured" and well enough to leave what we find out is not Caligari's 'home', but a mental institution. *** END SPOILERS This movie is certainly not everyone's cup of tea, but I think it's an imaginative remake of the 1919 expressionist "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari," minus the somnambulist and the bizarre sets. Yet the remake's visuals hearken back to the design of the original. The twisted stairwell, an amazing hallway dream sequence that could have been right out of the 1919 film, the psychologically conceived sets and often artificial lighting really recreate the mood of the old film.Glynis Johns is quite effective as Jane. She plays her right on the edge. Her conversations with Caligari (Dan O'Herlihy) are laughably disturbing. Often Jane's shock of what she sees is our shock as well. I know many find this film just plain terrible, but I think it has many surprises if you give it a chance (or two!). Gerald Fried's inventive score fleshes out Jane's state of mind beautifully. "Caligari" may have been pitched as a horror film, but it's not. If you go into it thinking it's a fright film, you'll be disappointed. As a voyage into the depths of insanity, though, it has a lot going for it. Just like Jane, who enters a house expecting one thing only to find something very different, you need to know what you're getting yourself into before watching!

This is truly a dreadful movie. The Twilight Zone served up this sort of thing much more efficiently on a weekly basis at the same time, with production values that were hardly any worse, but infinitely more entertaining. Any of Serling's writers could have compressed this into 25 minutes with no loss whatsoever, and they could have shot it in an afternoon. Glynis Johns, for all she has to work with, could not possibly be less sexy, even by early 60s standards. The only redeeming feature is perhaps the historical interest of exposing how appallingly stupid psychiatric theory was at the time, and for many still is. But lots of other contemporary movies accomplish this in a much more interesting way -- say, David and Lisa, any movie with Anthony Perkins, even all those forgettable movies featuring the absurd psychiatrist with the vaguely cosmopolitan accent, and a perfectly trimmed lip mustache. It's a shame that they used the Caligari name, which is the only thing that keeps this alive.

What was Robert Bloch thinking when he wrote this? As weird as the character's interactions are (no understandable motivations), the dialogue is full of dramatic clichés out of any context, like clips from a soap opera. Not a very thrilling blend for a horror movie. The original 1920 movie involved mesmerism and somnambulism: this film does both - it will hypnotise you into sleep immediately, even in the light of day. However, if you can stay awake, the story does have some dramatic impact, and the acting is fine throughout. The twist ending was done one better in a very similar 1950's EC comics (ie Tales from the Crypt) where the woman is cured but starts to have a relapse that cycles her back to the beginning of the story (a la "Dead of night").