The Manchurian Candidate (1962) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
316 Reviews
Sort by:
Manchurian times
cristianocrivelli9 November 2017
Time is the ultimate judge, isn't that what they say? Well 1962's The Manchurian Candidate is all the evidence I need. It feels ahead of it's time still and so relevant. In 2004, Jonathan Demme - one of my heroes - remade it with Meryl Streep - one my favorites - and Denzel Washington - one of my favorites - and the whole thing felt so old hat that I had to see John Frankeihemer's 1962 version again. Wow! Angela Lansbury creates one of the greatest villains in movie history. She is phenomenal and like it happens she's the kind of monster you can't have enough of. Frank Sinatra is really good here and the creepiness of Laurence Harvey is unsurpassed. So, well, yes, time has confirmed and protected the greatness of this outrageous thriller.
19 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A political and social thriller/drama ahead of its time.
teren20 August 2001
John Frankenheimer's surrealistic direction and George Axelrod's adaptation of the 1959 book by the same name offer Laurence Harvey a career defining role.

Set in 1950's, A Korean War veteran Raymond Shaw(Harvey) returns home to a medal of honor for rescuing his POW platoon from behind Chinese lines and back to safety. One of the returning soldiers, (played effectively by Frank Sinatra) however, has recurring dreams of his platoon being brainwashed and Shaw committing acts of murder.

He eventually convinces army brass that Shaw is still a puppet of his Communist-Marxist operators.

Angela Lansbury, (although barely a few years older than Harvey was at the time) plays his mother in a tour de force role. She absolutely captivates and steals every scene she is in, playing a very complex role that needs to convince the viewer of many things without much dialogue.

There's a rich cast of characters, including Janet Leigh, Henry Silva, James Edwards, and a painfully accurate James Gregory. Each character weaves through the methodical subplots and tapestry of Frankenheimer's masterful "Hitchcockian" pace.

I won't give away the plot, but dear readers, allow me to sat that this one is really worth watching--until the nail-biting and chilling conclusion.

There are many undertones in this film -- political, sexual, class and power, and social. You will want to view this film several times to approach it from different perspectives.
113 out of 133 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Timeless Political Thriller
Calum Rhys19 July 2014
The picture that introduced sleeper agents to film, 'The Manchurian Candidate' is a classic political thriller that still remains as intriguing as it was 52 years ago. Starring Frank Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, Janet Leigh and Oscar-nominee Angela Lansbury, 'The Manchurian Candidate' is an outstanding and unparalleled thriller set in the midst of the Cold War, a tale of politics, family, distress and guilt with flawless direction from Frankenheimer. A benchmark of American cinema, 'The Manchurian Candidate' is a film that is is not only a timeless political thriller but also a satire of American history and propaganda.
40 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Truly, a gem!
fastmike24 January 2005
Probably John Frankenheimer's best production, and Frank Sinatra's best cinema performance.

I saw this because of the recent 'remake', I would assume that the reader will be making the same comparison. Having never seen this before, I found myself riveted to the story, and absolutely great performances by Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, Janet Leigh, Angela Lansbury, Henry Silva, John McGiver, James Gregory, and Leslie Parrish.

Coincidently, I had just recently finished reading some previously published works about the cold war, in particular the Chambers-Hiss court cases.

It might be accident, but I wouldn't doubt it might have been intended by Frankenheimer to choose Harvey, who resembled Hiss, in appearance and McGiver who resembled Chambers appearance. When this was released in 1962, the Hiss-Chambers spy fiasco was still fresh in the public's mind.

Other American political images are not for want of satire either, since Lansbury and Gregory seemed to have reminded me, in appearance, of Mary and (honest) Abe Lincoln.

The pace, style and non stop tension rivals Hitchcock; it will certainly have you wondering if he had anything to do with this! Truly Frankenhiemer, excels here.

Because Sinatra was box office magnet, most of his other roles seemed 'fitted' for him. Not here! You'll have a chance to see the real Frank Sinatra, really working to make the part work, and without a doubt, he too excels in his role.

I don't think I'll bother to see the recent version yet. I want to see this original classic a few more times.
55 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of the Finest Movies of Its Genre
Snow Leopard15 February 2006
Still one of the finest movies of its genre, this original film version of "The Manchurian Candidate" features excellent atmosphere, memorable characters, and a first-rate cast. John Frankenheimer's direction shows a very good understanding of the material and its potential, and indeed it is a rare example of a top quality movie being made from an average novel, rather than the other way around.

Frank Sinatra and Laurence Harvey carry the bulk of the movie, as former members of the same military unit in Korea, who slowly learn the truth about their shared past. Both give fine performances, with Sinatra's character perpetually nervous and fearful of what he will find, yet compelled to get at the truth, while Harvey as Sergeant Shaw is coldly self-composed, and contemptuous of anyone else's weakness.

The supporting cast is also excellent. Angela Lansbury's icy presence as Shaw's mother is unforgettable, Janet Leigh makes an intriguing woman of mystery, and James Gregory is flawless as a pestilential, brainless Senator. Khigh Dhiegh also has some fine moments of refined cruelty as evil mastermind Yen Lo.

Some of the finest scenes come from the dream sequences, which are crafted very well from a technical viewpoint, and which also ring true with the story as it comes out. They produce some chilling moments, as well as making the plot concept - which in itself is pretty far- fetched - seem more believable.

With the passage of time and the dissolution of Cold War tensions, it's now possible to watch this without any political baggage, and to allow the excellent production to stand on its own high quality, rather than on any contemporary sentiments.
25 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Powerful, Wicked Satire.
nycritic9 March 2005
Warning: Spoilers
By the dawn of the 60s America had not been through with McCarthy-ism, the Korean War, and Communist witch hunts when it was already aiming towards a Cold War situation and ultimately, Vietnam. So much plays into this movie which came out at exactly the right time and place that even years later, layers of subtext can be garnered from its paranoiac, frightening images.

Power is a deadly thing to deal with, especially when it falls into the hands that should have it the least, and the word seems to dominate every angle of THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE like a glowing ball of fire. The power to control minds and bend them to darker wills. The power to control the people into believing what the powers-that-be want. The power to demolish anything or anyone considered an even remote obstacle. The power to seize power, extend it outward, blindly, into a waiting globe.

And so does this disturbing, dark tale of the search for power in the political world takes place, with some of the most indelible images ever transferred onto the face of cinema. Frankenheimer amps up the paranoia already oozing from the story and with some truly nightmarish sequences brings forth a Creation that always seems like it will disclose some hideous, unseen force playing behind the scene -- the deceptive hydrangea scene at the beginning of the movie and the train scene where a shaken Sinatra meets Leigh who seems to be sincere are two very uneasy sequences to follow through, for example, because both disorient and succeed in sticking needles of doubt into your mind in more ways than one. You know something is completely wrong here and what lies beneath is always unsettling than what is eventually uncovered.

This is a character study as well as a political satire: while there is plenty of tension throughout, deep characterizations come through, and needless it is to me to state Angela Lansbury's terrifying performance as Mrs. Iselin, or Laurence Harvey's chilling portrait of a non-entity, a victim and a puppet who's design is to serve as a killing machine and a false hero. Much can be also said of Janet Leigh's Rosie, since her part suggests she also knows and is more than what she reveals, but sadly the film drops what might have been an interesting side story from the moment she appears on the train and talks in that coded language. It seems she only serves to be Sinatra's "controller." As for Sinatra himself, he's an asset and a weakness. He's too old to be Laurence Harvey's equal in combat, and his persona often comes through, but he does tune in a measured performance as the damaged General Marco.

MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE is one of those stories that detail the loss of innocence in America (with its killing of the more honest Senator Thomas Jordan and his almost pure daughter Josie, done without music, but in two long takes) and its transition to a super-power bent on political domination, and it chills to the bone to see it still today, 42 years later.
66 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Garden Party From Hell
frankwiener27 August 2017
While many cast members did an outstanding job in this disturbing and often violent political thriller, it is Angela Lansbury who stands out in her superb portrayal of a woman who not only dominates her son and husband but who wants to take over the entire country, if not the world! In the end, this is Angela's triumph, and I don't understand why she took second billing behind any of the other actors.

As much as I love Janet Leigh, she was handed a bizarre and somewhat minor role here which I believe only served as a deliberate distraction in that she never influenced Major Marco (Sinatra) as an agent working on either side. And don't get sidetracked by the fact that "Pinocchio" was playing at the Manhattan movie theater that she and Major Marco passed in the cab because that was probably a deliberate "red herring" too. Granted that Leigh and Tony Curtis, including their sensational divorce, were quite the rage at the time, but Angela deserved top billing here.

When I read that Lansbury has only appeared in 54 full length movies to date, it seemed like a number too small only because she leaves such a strong impression in so many of her performances dating back to Nancy, the maid, in "Gaslight" and Sybil in "The Picture of Dorian Grey". To this day, I am haunted by the memory of poor Sybil singing "Goodbye, Little Yellow Bird" in the latter. Lansbury masters a wide range of effective acting from the kindly, unassuming Miss Marple to the powerful, detestable Eleanor Shaw Iselin here.

In addition to a towering Lansbury, the excellent portrayals by Frank Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, Janet Leigh, John McIver, Henry Silva, and James Gregory as the annoying buffoon of a step-father contribute to the success of this political thriller. I think that director John Frankenheimer and screenplay writer George Axelrod should be commended for staying close to Richard Condon's original novel, and the stark black and white photography enhanced the gloomy and ominous atmosphere. The filming of the three separate interpretations of the brainwashing sequence alone was a unique and unforgettable cinematic experience.

What a dish like Jocelyn Jordan (Leslie Parrish) ever saw in Raymond Shaw is beyond me, and we have surely witnessed Harvey as the dark, brooding character before ("Room at the Top", "Butterfield Eight", etc.), but who else could play this morose character more accurately?

As to that newspaper headline "Violent Hurricane Sweeps Midwest", did you folks in the Midwest ever experience a direct hurricane? I know about the tornadoes and the floods, but a direct hurricane? Was that another subtle attempt at humor by the director? Anyway, I'll never look at another hydrangea without much trepidation and dread.
8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
All by itself it raises my opinion of everyone involved.
Spleen14 August 1999
Wow! I was expecting right wing propaganda, or possibly even (a distant outside chance) left wing propaganda: I certainly wasn't expecting THIS. It isn't propaganda at all. Deriving any kind of message at all from the film is difficult - one might be tempted to conclude that we ought to never trust people who cry cheap political insults like "communist!" or "fascist!" or "racist!" at the first opportunity, but that's just a thought. At any rate, in order to get a message we have to think about the story for ourselves, very carefully, which makes it the very opposite of propaganda.

Here's another bit of advice: don't make the mistake, as I did, of thinking now and then that Frankenheimer is drifting from the point. He knows exactly what he's doing at all times. Whenever it seems he's offering some interesting diversion from the main story he's really telling the main story by other means. How good the story is I cannot convey without saying too much. Probably the central conceit everyone knows already, which was why Frankenheimer was right to spill most of the beans as soon as possible - but he does has one or two in reserve. One great thing about the story is that it doesn't rely at all on us thinking it likely.

Everyone, from composer to cameraman, did a fine job, and the cast does an even finer one. Angela Lansbury gives the performance of her life. Frank Sinatra I had never seen in a movie before, and I was surprised to discover that he can act - very well, too. It permeates down to the minor roles. Leslie Parrish as the charming innocent is certainly charming, but also subtle. "The Manchurian Candidate" would easily be the best of its kind even if it weren't the only of its kind.
60 out of 78 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Keep Your Eye on the Card, Keep Your Eye on the Card...
tfrizzell11 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Intense Cold War era masterpiece that seems to grow bolder and more intelligent with age. A group of U.S. soldiers are captured one night during the Korean War in 1952. Next thing the group remembers is arriving home with Laurence Harvey (one of the troops) being given the Medal of Honor for some unknown reason. He immediately decides to go to New York City to get away from his over-protective mother (Oscar nominee Angela Lansbury) and her senator husband (a solid turn by character actor James Gregory). But nothing is quite what it seems. Harvey, obviously with no experience in journalism, becomes involved with a publication that is sympathetic with Communist propaganda. Meanwhile several other soldiers from Harvey's battalion (commanding officer Frank Sinatra in particular) start to have disturbing dreams where the group is in a room during a dull women's meeting where the main topic of discussion is botany. Flashes occur however where the women actually become Korean and Russian delegates that are all listening to a crazed doctor (Khigh Dhiegh) who is discussing brainwashing techniques and total mind manipulation through various kinds of hypnosis. The dreams are rough and frightening. It seems that Sinatra has a rare form of war fatigue, but there is no way to explain how others are having similar night-time delusions. As he tries to cope he falls in love with the beautiful Janet Leigh and they start to have a relationship. Eventually Sinatra begins to put the jagged pieces together just as Harvey becomes serious with a beautiful young woman (Leslie Parrish) whose father (John McGiver) happens to be one of Gregory's main obstacles to a possible vice presidential nomination in the next national election. Who is really controlling everything from the inside and what is Harvey's main purpose for being brainwashed? Richard Condon's paranoid novel comes to life vividly in a truly outstanding motion picture. Screenwriter George Axelrod's adaptation keeps the momentum of the book at a fevered pitch throughout. Director John Frankenheimer (only 32 at the time) completed the one film that he would always be remembered for. His career honestly had a lot more lows than highs, but his full potential as a first-class film-maker is easy to recognize here. The performances are top-notch with Lansbury (actually only three years older than Harvey) doing the best work of her career (albeit in a somewhat small role). Laurence Harvey's tortured character is also a sight to behold. It is an immensely interesting role that keeps the whole production glued together. Harvey, an actor I really never thought had much talent, proves that when everything else is working well that he can be a reputable performer. And of course Sinatra is solid as he always was throughout a film career that hit its peak from about 1950 through 1965. Once again he adds a certain depth and an amazing complexity to an already rich role. Smart, stylish, at times nasty and always impressive, "The Manchurian Candidate" is one of those pictures that continues to be a fixture in the American cinema as time goes by. 5 stars out of 5.
42 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of the best thrillers ever made.
SmileysWorld8 October 2008
To know that the human mind can be manipulated so easily is indeed a scary thing.The Manchurian Candidate is a thriller so intense it can almost be considered a horror film.If,in fact,things such as those depicted here really did occur,I imagine it did step on some pretty sensitive toes.Bravo to all of those involved in front of the camera and behind it.In particular,Angela Lansbury,whose versatility as an actress is proved here as she plays against the nice lady type roles that we know her for.Among all the film's from the era of the 1960's that I have viewed,I would definitely place this in my top 5.One of the best thrillers ever.
23 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Timeless Thriller with a few glitches
BB-152 January 1999
There are parts of The Manchurian Candidate that are so perceptive and prophetic that it can be shocking. The satire of political campaigns and the influence of political wives feels very fresh. The film is also an excellent spy thriller and foretells the many political assassinations in the 60's. There are many fine performances in the film and Angela Lansbury plays one of the best film villains I have seen. Also, the directing, cinematography and editing are terrific.

My problems with the film mainly stem from its dialogue. The script repeats lines from the book the film was based upon. The result is that the actor's lines are very often stilted and not believable. Other less important problems involve Lawrence Harvey who while he gives a fine performance needed a dialogue coach. He begins the film with an American accent and slowly takes on a English one. The Janet Leigh character is also troubling. It seems she is a Soviet agent but this is not explained. Her character is too subtle and clashes with the very straight forward presentation of the rest of the film.

The flaws of The Manchurian Candidate would sink a lesser film. But when this movie hits its stride it is so powerful that it rises above its drawbacks and remains a classic spy thriller.
90 out of 129 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
For Paranoid People Everywhere
bkoganbing19 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I remember seeing The Manchurian Candidate as a teen back in the day in theaters. Good thing I saw it too because after the Kennedy assassination it was withdrawn from circulation. I then got to see it again in the theater when it got a re-premiere back in the late eighties.

For those who believe that conspiracies control the world, this film is for you. The ultra-right has a game plan to take over, the international communist conspiracy is given life and credence in this film and there's one character here who's got a conspiracy to beat all.

When The Manchurian Candidate first came out the theater owners were instructed not to seat anyone if they came after the first 10 minutes of the film. If you buy the video or DVD, fast forward it about 10 minutes and try to pick it up from there. It won't make any sense, I guarantee.

A platoon led by Captain Frank Sinatra and Sergeant Lawrence Harvey is betrayed by their Korean guide, Henry Silva, and captured by Chinese Communists. They are flown to Manchuria where Russian scientists from the Pavlov Institute experiment with revolutionary techniques in the newly developed science of brainwashing. Minus two men who are killed, the patrol is taken back to Korea where all of them have been implanted with a story about how Harvey saved the rest of them and led them back through enemy lines to UN lines.

As for Harvey, he's the one who actually killed the two soldiers and he is now a brainwashed assassin ready to do the bidding of his handlers.

Harvey is the son of Angela Lansbury who is in a role that's ten galaxies from Jessica Fletcher. She's the rich wife who is the brains and money behind her second husband James Gregory. Gregory is a Joe McCarthy like Senator who is forever yelling about Communists in every nook and cranny. He's a buffoon, but he's actually not aware of how right and how organized they are in The Manchurian Candidate.

Gregory and director John Frankenheimer caught one aspect of McCarthy's persona in his role. McCarthy never took any of this seriously. There are many stories about him performing for the TV cameras and the press and when they were away offering to buy a round of drinks for the same person he might have been denouncing as a traitor minutes earlier. The difference between McCarthy in real life and Gregory in this film is that McCarthy had no manager and no real ambitions other than to retain his Senate seat. Gregory if anything is managed.

Frank Sinatra in having The Manchurian Candidate withdrawn robbed fans of one of his best screen performances. Only in one scene when he refers to someone as a 'cat' does he slip into the hipster Rat Pack image. Sinatra is the one who starts to unravel everyone's plans because of the recurring dreams he's having about what really happened in Korea.

On the way to New York to question Harvey about it, Sinatra meets Janet Leigh who really doesn't have a role crucial to the story, but functions as an Alfred Hitchcock type cool blond. With what little she has to do, Leigh does well.

Lawrence Harvey is the key here. He's really a weakling and that's the key to the story. He was carefully chosen to be the manipulated assassin because of his inability to break from Mom's iron grip.

Of course there have been few screen moms as evil as Angela Lansbury. She and Gregory really own this film and Angela blows everyone else off the screen when she's on.

For her mesmerizing performance I recommend The Manchurian Candidate.
33 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Excellent Cinema
Hobbes_5123 July 2003
I went into "The Manchurian Candidate" without knowing too much about the movie itself. I knew about its critical acclaim, but I was unfamiliar with the plot. Regardless, when I rented and watched the film, I had high expectations. I was not disappointed either.

The plot revolves around the strange case of Raymond Shaw, a sergeant who wins the Congressional Medal of Honor for his bravery in the cold war. Two of the men in his company, however, have strange nightmares that suggest Raymond is not as deserving of the award as he seems. One of these men, Major Bennet Marco, led on by these recurring nightmares, unravels a sinister Communist plot. Set against the cold war paranoia of the sixties and McCarthyism, "The Manchurian Candidate" does an excellent job of recreating the intense suspense and tension of the time.

The acting in this film is superb. A great script is heightened by excellent acting in this movie. It's hard not to like Frank Sinatra in his role as Marco, who is the protagonist. Laurence Harvey as Raymond does a good job showing us a character that is wholly unlikable and snobby, yet pathetic and sad at the same time. And of course, Angela Lansbury in her role as Raymond's malicious and plotting mother is excellent.

Some stand-out scenes in the film were the nightmare sequences that brilliantly interlaced dream and reality, the all-queen solitaire game with Marco and Raymond, and the supremely tense climax at the political convention. The cinematography in the movie was very well done as action, romance, and tension all mixed together smoothly. All the scenes managed to keep my attention and kept me wondering what was going to happen next. As a thriller, the film works remarkably well, and it is quite easily the best political thriller I've seen to date.

Keeping me from giving the movie a perfect ten are one or two little nagging problems. I wasn't a big fan of the music for the movie, and it even disrupted the mood for me at one point in the film. It was okay, just not great. Also, the whole plot is sort of unlikely. I wont go into it here, but I don't think that the Communist plan for world domination would fall into the hands of one relatively uncontrolled person, no matter how well trained his mind was. That's just my opinion, however.

The movie is sort of long, and isn't exactly action packed, but it is very interesting, insightful, and even chilling. I had a great time watching it, and I definitely recommend it if you are interested at all in seeing a gripping Cold War era political thriller. Besides, the cultural relevance of the film alone is enough to see it.

52 out of 81 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Could it really happen?
Lee Eisenberg16 May 2005
During the Korean War, an American platoon is kidnapped by the North Koreans. When they return, one of them (Laurence Harvey) appears to be acting strangely. As the story progresses, it becomes clear that the enemy did something to him, possibly to the point where they might still be in complete control of him.

Admittedly, "The Manchurian Candidate" is basically a Red Scare movie, but it's different in that it doesn't simply follow the silly story of the Commies invading a Norman Rockwell-style town. The movie's focus is what the audience doesn't know. Not to mention the top-notch performances from Harvey, Frank Sinatra, Janet Leigh, Angela Lansbury and John McGiver. Interestingly, the 2004 remake actually managed to be as good as the original. Ten out of ten.
21 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Belongs in Top 50 Dramas
emilysmom15 January 2000
Manchurian Candidate is, quite simply, the best political thriller of all time. I can't think of another that keeps me on the edge of my seat, even on the tenth viewing. The incredible script, Angela Lansbury's Dearest Mommy, the effective use of black & white film for a movie about issues that were anything but black & white--I could go on and on.

I know that most people rave about Ms. Lansbury above all the other cast members, but--for me--Frank Sinatra wins the prize hands down. His disbelief, and then his disillusionment, and then his despair are perfectly portrayed. There were really two Sinatras, the singer AND the great actor.

In watching The Manchurian Candidate again and again, I never cease to be amazed at its prescient theme, the danger of the combination of fanaticism and patriotic fervor. Goldwater's famous quote comes to mind, "Extremism in the defense of virtue is no vice". In my opinion, this film just gets better with age.
30 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The "Candidate" Is Still Strong At 55
Matthew Kresal27 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
There are works of fiction whose very name can conjure up images and meaning for people who have never even experienced them. The Manchurian Candidate, the 1962 film based on Richard Condon's 1959 novel, is one such example. The film's title has entered into the public consciousness, a term for brainwashing and seemingly incomprehensible betrayal in common use. Yet how many of those who use the term have seen the film and experienced what is likely to be one of the best thrillers of its era or any other?

Part of what makes the film so successful is, perhaps paradoxically, the fact its based on a novel. Having read Condon's original novel a couple of years ago and then coming back to the film a couple of times subsequently, it is amazing to see how much of it makes its way into the film. It's not just brushstrokes that make their way in but entire scenes with large portions of dialogue presented with little edits made to them (the much discussed first scene between Marco and Rosie is a prime example). Even some of the costuming choices are drawn straight from Condon's novel. Scriptwriter George Axelrod is able to take the dark comedy of Condon's novel and put it into what is essentially a thriller that satirizes the McCarthyism of the previous decade and makes it all work together. Not everything makes it into the film of course but much of what makes the film memorable (the plot and dialogue especially) is owed to its source material and the wise decision of Axelrod in keeping as much of it as possible.

Axelrod's script is only part of what makes The Manchurian Candidate the film that it is. Part of it is, of course, the cast. Frank Sinatra was a solid choice for the role of Major Marco who finds himself first facing a potential phantom from his past before realizing that he, and the country he serves, is facing a much larger threat. Laurence Harvey was likewise a good choice for the always odd and never quiet normal Raymond Shaw whom is at the center of the film's plot. Though given a top credit, Janet Leigh's Eugenie Rose Chaney actually doesn't have much to do in the film except perhaps be a romantic foil for Sinatra and a bit of a red herring but Leigh shines in what scenes she does have thanks to her chemistry with Sinatra. The supporting cast is solid as well from James Gregory as the bombastic McCarthy like Senator Iselin to John McGiver as his rival Senator Jordan with Henry Silva, Khigh Dheigh, and Albert Paulsen in roles of varying villainy. There is one other name that needs to be mentioned though.

Because, perhaps oddly, the real star of the film is credited fourth in the film's title sequence. Angela Lansbury's performance as Raymond's mother has become something legendary and not without good reason. Despite being not much older than Harvey was when the film was made and made to look the part thanks to what must have been some excellent make-up, Lansbury was perfect casting for the role. For those who only know her from Murder, She Wrote will be in for a shock as they see the same often quiet determination give in to bouts of conniving manipulation across much of the film's running time. Mrs. Iselin is the power behind the throne, quietly moving pieces around while those around her (namely her senator husband and son Raymond) take the credit. Yet few things will prepare the unsuspecting viewer for the revelations that pile up towards the end of the film including a scene that is every bit as recoiling now as it must have been in 1962. It is no surprise that she was nominated for an Oscar for her performance as it still stands as one of cinema's greatest villains.

Last but definitely not least, are those behind the camera. The stark black and white cinematography of Lionel Lindon serves the film well with its neo-noir feel that uses shadows and interesting angles to suggest how 'off' things often are. That is especially true when combined with the editing of Ferris Webster and when the two are combined during the film's lecture scenes or with the climactic sequence at the convention, the results are truly stunning. Director John Frankenheimer brought together a fine team to help him bring Condon's novel to the screen and his work on the film stands as among the best of his long career and there is little doubt that it stands up so well as a result of his work.

All of this combines to make The Manchurian Candidate both an excellent thriller and a fine film. From Axelrod's adaptation of Condon's idiosyncratic novel right down to its dialogue, the performances of the entire cast, and the direction of Frankenheimer, the film is a masterclass on how to adapt a novel to the screen faithfully and yet tell a tense and utterly enthralling story at the same time. It's no wonder that it has become not just a touchstone for films but in the culture at large for it is simply a well made and enjoyable piece of work ever after fifty-five years.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Best political thriller ever
Ross62227 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
John Frankenheimer's The Manchurian Candidate is the first and best political thriller ever made, and a movie that will never take it's place. The movie tells a story I would never would have known that was put onto film and that was the story of a former Korean War POW (played by Laurence Harvey.) who gets brainwashed by communists and becomes an assassin when his fellow officer Major Bennett Marco (played by Frank Sinatra). Frankenheimer is very interesting with his visions that he wanted to put onto the screen during his career as a director one of them including this masterpiece. For this movie I really thought that the movie deserved more Oscar nominations than the only two it got especially for Sinatra and Harvey for their equally wonderful work, which this is Sinatra's best work since his Oscar winning turn for From here to Eternity. This is certainly one of the greatest movie i have seen in a long time and i am completely looking forward to seeing this masterwork again cause of it's greatness.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A mind-blowing conspiracy movie
Max_cinefilo893 December 2005
I recently saw this movie on TV after reading various enthusiastic reviews and trying to find the DVD for over a year. I have to say it was worth waiting a year to see this particular, amazing film. John Frankenheimer made what is with no doubt one of the finest thrillers in cinema history: Ben Marco (Frank Sinatra) has recurring nightmares about a mission in Korea two years earlier. But what happened during that mission? And what's all that got to do with war hero Raymond Shaw (Laurence Harvey), his mother (Angela Lansbury) and some political murders?

Like Alfred Hitchcock, Frankenheimer manages to create tension with everyday stuff (a solitaire game has never looked so unsettling), depicting a bizarre yet utterly realistic conspiracy (the nightmare sequence and the shocking climax are breathtaking and impossible to forget). He also directs an amazing actor-threesome: Sinatra is perfectly convincing as Marco, and Angela Lansbury is... well, just perfect! But it's Harvey who deserves more attention: he's chillingly superb as the conflicted, almost android-like Raymond...

New to Frankenheimer, conspiracy flicks or great '60s thrillers? The Manchurian Candidate is an excellent way to begin the acquaintance.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A perfect suspense film
MartinHafer8 August 2007
I cannot comment about the similarities or dissimilarities between this film and its recent remake. That's because the original film was so perfect, so exciting, so well acted and written, there was no reason for a remake and there is no conceivable way any remake could have improved on the original story--it was THAT good!

The story begins in a Chinese Communist indoctrination camp as an officer demonstrates how thoroughly he has indoctrinated a group of American POWs from the Korean War. Then, suddenly, the scene changes to America years later. The brainwashed prisoners are now home and have no idea that their minds were changed. I'd say more, but don't want to ruin the suspense. All I really want to say is that Angela Lansbury does NOT play a nice character like "Mrs. Potts" in this film. In fact, she is at her most evil and amazing. Additionally, Frank Sinatra has one of his finest on-screen performances in this amazing film. It's a must-see--it's THAT good!

This is yet another amazing drama from director John Frankenheimer. See this and try some of his other brilliant films such as SEVEN DAYS IN MAY and SECONDS.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Politics Aside, A Riveting Film
ccthemovieman-119 May 2006
The first time I saw this film, about 10 years ago, I thought it was really fascinating. One year later, I still enjoyed but was a bit perplexed: was this the usual Liberal Hollywood taking shots at right-wingers or is this actually the reverse with the left-wingers, the Communists really being shown as the "bad guys?" After a third and final viewing a few years later, I felt it was both but the leaned toward Liberal, which is par for the course. The general plot had left wingers brainwashing an influential American family into looking like extreme right wingers and gaining access to the White House through political influence and assassination. Most of the movie featured a Joe McCarthy-ish senator (James Gregory) and his conniving wife (Angela Lansbury) as the villains. They were portrayed as right wingers, of course, but were really just dupes of the Communists (left wing)! Got that??!

Suffice to say the movie had messages from both the Right and Left but politics aside, the film boasts an involving story that keeps your interest for most of the two hours and six minutes, and had some very interesting characters who are fascinating to watch. That includes the supporting roles. It didn't hurt to have John Frankenheimer direct, either. His films usually were outstanding.

I thought Lansbury and Laurence Harvey had the best parts of the film. The only really stupid and/or annoying character in the movie was played by Janet Leigh. Her romance scenes with Frank Sinatra added nothing to this riveting film. Eliminated, it would have made for a tighter, even better movie. Also, Sinatra found out too easily where Harvey was hiding in Madison Square Garden. Nobody could figure it out that fast! Nonetheless, the ending was a bit surprising and I won't spoil it for anyone who has not seen this.

The movie has endured the test of time and, from what I hear, would have been best left on its own instead of watering down the name of this film with an insipid re-make. This is "The Manchurian Candidate" version you want to see.
28 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Horribly dated (spoilers)
Jack Malvern1 September 2004
There is a reverence surrounding this film that is difficult for the casual viewer to comprehend. It might have been revolutionary for its time, but IMDb users who describe it as timeless seem to have undergone a brainwashing scheme themselves.

The plot holes are large and plentiful and some of the acting is diabolical. The story, of a soldier transformed by hypnosis into a murderous automaton, is interesting enough in a B-movie kind of way, but the sheer volume of narrative leaps would test the patience of any modern viewer.

Several key scenes are literally incredible. Frank Sinatra meets Janet Leigh on a train and five minutes later, without any warmth on Frank's side, she decides that she is going to leave her fiancé for him.

Leslie Parrish, playing the leading character's lover, chooses to wear a fancy dress costume that, by sheer coincidence, is the hypnotic trigger to send him into a trance. The likelihood of her wearing a Queen of Diamonds costume is so low that I assumed she must be in on the hypnotist's conspiracy, but it was just a bizarre red herring.

Other irritations include the buffoonery of John Yerkes Iselin, the main character's stepfather, who wins the nomination for the vice presidency despite being a hopeless drunk. What was presumably intended as satire merely undermines the plot.

And in the final scene, the security at the auditorium where the climactic assassination is due to take place is so lax that any old hit-man could have done it. The evil communists' scheme to groom someone who could get near the presidential candidate was unnecessary, if not counterproductive. If a presidential candidate were to be killed, would the public really support the vice-presidential co-runner if they knew his stepson was the assassin?

As for the innovative fight scene, it is terribly unconvincing by today's standards and can't have been that good even in 1962. Henry Silva, Sinatra's kung fu adversary, is downright awful, but even his acting looks Oscar-worthy compared to James Edwards's wooden turn as a spooked GI.

The good news, however, is that Jonathan Demme's remake is excellent. The 1962 version is an interesting historical document, but it doesn't work as a thriller.
34 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Overblown hype
TMoyer-21 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
I don't understand the swooning adoration of this movie. I picked it up last night on the sole basis of it being a cultural iconic movie - one which everyone has seen and is universally acclaimed as great. I had no familiarity with the plot other than the description on the DVD box, but I wanted a sure fire movie that I wasn't going to regret renting.

Well I can't say I regret renting it, but is this movie hokey or what?

*** Spoilers below ? ***

The dream sequence was unquestionably great. I loved it and was entirely willing to suspend my disbelief to allow the movie to tell it's story.

Where it started to fall apart for me is when Sinatra is ordered to take sick leave. Give me a break with the train scene and Janet Leigh. Here we see a sweaty, vacant eyed, spastic middle-aged man, who can't even light a cigarette in front of a pretty girl. Now I never tried that ploy before, but it apparently worked for Janet because she can't wait to follow Franky out of the car and give him her home address, telephone number and where she works. Maybe guys who sweat, shake and talk without looking you in the eye once during the conversation appeal to some women, but I doubt that the technique would work well today.

Equally as inane as the train scene is cab scene after the police station pickup. Janet explains to Sinatra that as soon as she got home after meeting sweaty Frank, the first thing she did was to tell her Fiance that their engagement was over. The girl was obviously smitten.

Almost as unbelievable is the snakebite sequence where Lesley Parrish fortunately has brought along a supply of razor blades during her bike ride, so as to come to the aid of Harvey after his incident. I have no problem however with her removing her blouse to fashion an improvised tourniquet.

One of my favorite parts of the movie was what must have been one of the first movie Kung-Fu action scenes ever filmed, when Frank takes on the yellow peril with oriental fighting techniques he obviously picked up in Korea.

Aside from a few highlights in the movie: the dream sequence, blouse removal and kung-fu segments, I seldom found myself 'riveted to my seat'. It was pretty obvious to me WHO Harvey was going to kill and when - well ahead of the actual killings. Trite and hokey - yes. Suspenseful? Nah.

*** Spoilers over ***

I can't say this was a terrible movie, but for me it sure wasn't a great one. It made me think of a Sinatra version of an Elvis movie - where the star vehicle is more important than any significant plot or character development.
24 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Brilliant, Brilliant, Brilliant
penfever5 February 2006
How good is this movie? You do not have words for how good this movie is. No, no, you do not. However, for your benefit I will run down a brief list of what makes this movie kick 59,042 @sses.

1. SINATRA DOES KARATE!!! - Everyone who sees this for the first time winces. It's surprisingly intense. But also, somehow hilarious.

2. SHAMEFULLY RACIST!!! - I mean, not for nothing, but "Smiling like Fu Manchu"? "Ching Chong Chow or whatever your name is?" Still, this does an amazing job of putting the film in historical context, which is what it's all about. Plus one of the best characters in the film is the Manchurian 'trainer'.

3. 360 DEGREE SHOT!!! - And then the set changes! How do they do it?! Watch and marvel!

4. FREUDIAN PSYCHOLOGY!!! - You thought it was dead. You thought it was debunked. Well, not in Hollywood, baby! Hypnotism, subconscious and unconscious minds, and of course, obsessive hatred of one's mother and its psychological implications.

5. AWESOME DOCUMENTARY STYLE!!! - This film's photographic style is super! Watch the scene where John Iselin first confronts the senator. Tell me that's not AWESOME! Oh, right, you can't, because if you did I would KARATE-CHOP you Sinatra style! Tiger paw, Frank.

6. SINATRA ONLY DOES ONE TAKE!!! - So everything is out of focus and crazy! So very cool!


8. THE SCORE!!! - David Amram writes a simply great classical/modern score for this film, which you can't stop humming in all its atonal glory.

In conclusion. this film is FREAKIN AWESOME! Get a copy! Or five! Send John Frankenheimer a thank-you letter!
21 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Doesn't get my vote
simonrosenbaum30 March 2003
After reading so much about this film, how it was as relevant today as when it was made, how it was an intelligent exciting politcal thriller and one of the best films of the 60's. Then I watched it and after a few minutes I thought I must have the wrong film. What I was watching was a movie with an silly and unbelievable story, some truly terrible dialogue badly acted and told in a slow moving rather tedious and predictable way. I'll admit Angela Lansbury was good but nearly everyone else wasn't. I can't believe this was considered good even forty years ago! Far from the classic I thought it was supposed to be, it's one of the worst films I've seen for a long time. (1/10)
21 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Over-hyped Cold War baloney
David Allison31 July 2001
Having heard so much about this film, I was delighted to receive a DVD copy as a birthday present. Imagine my horror when myself and four friends sat down to watch a noir classic, only to discover it was a badly-written and overwrought piece of froth.

Time and time again, I've seen 'Candidate' in best of lists. I cannot imagine why, unless, a la Citizen Kane, the myth about the film becomes greater than the film itself. It is ponderous, long, stifling, claustrophobic and unpleasant. It's an obvious product of the Cold War, but as a complete antithesis to say the wonderful 'Dr Strangelove', it has nothing to say about the period and serves only to reinforce the awful anti-Communist prejudice of that dark era.

Sinatra gives a heroic performance but is let down by a ham-fisted script and some hyperbolic direction. The only nomination I'd give this candidate is 'Most Over-rated Film of All Time'.
24 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews