Hailed as Roger Corman's best movie 'The Intruder' tells a story about radical racist Adam Cramer (scary performance by William Shatner) who arrives into small Southern town where through his machinations incites white people to racial violence. Daring and unique, not only in Corman's filmography, but in general - rarely a film is so honest and gritty while depicting burning social problems without being one bit preachy about it. No wonder Corman had difficulties to finance the film and why it did poorly at the box office. Until that time 'The Intruder' was only Corman's movie to loose money.The film is worth to watch only for William Shatner who gives performance of a lifetime as sly and vicious spokesman (social worker, as his character calls himself). I got shivers down my spine when he made hate speech, or when he crumbled down in fear when facing the force stronger than him. One of the greatest movie villains ever. Ending is just fantastic when we see the shame on the peoples faces when they realize what they had almost done under the spell of charismatic hate monger. It gives us warning that no matter what is someone's personal views, but things turn really dangerous when someone manages to spread hate and fear into masses.'The Intruder' is one of those film that needs wider recognition. Most of the filmmakers (and Hollywood) need to watch this film and learn how to make socially significant movie.

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?

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.

I had recently seen shame(aka:the intruder,aka;i hate your guts)and must say i believe its one of Roger Cormans best movies ever,it tackles a very controversial subject,integration in the south during the sixties,well Mr.Shatner plays this racist who goes from town to town stirring up trouble,being a real jerk,i would say being a hate monger,that would make Adolf Hitler proud,i always hear stories that Roger Corman lost money on this film,it flopped.and he blamed William Shatner,which explains why he never cast shatner in any more of his films,well Shatner in a few years from this movie would go on to play Capt Kirk on Star Trek,in 1966,shame is however very well made and realistic,too much use of racial slurs but i guess that makes it what it is.the other actors in shame would go on to play in other Corman films like the haunted palace and other films.i am a big fan of Roger Corman films although he had a few bad ones like carnosaur and the sequels.but this one is one of his best films.10 out of 10