The Strange Awakening (1960)

Peter Chance (Lex Barker) is attacked and left out cold by a hitchhiker while driving in the south of France. He awakes and finds that he has amnesia and cannot remember who he is nor anything about his past. He finds himself in a palatial villa with three woman, Mrs Friend (Norma Swinburne), Selina (Carol Matthews) and Marnie (Lisa Gastoni) who claim to be his mother, wife and sister. They tell him that he is the son of meat packing tycoon and poet Charles Renton-Friend who recently died and has left him his estate worth $2,000,000. In reality, the son was a drunk who ran away when his father died of a suspected heart attack. It transpires that the father left strict conditions in his will that must be met before his estate can be passed over to his son. Selina and her lover, Dr Normand, saw the opportunity to prey on Chance's amnesia and pass him off as the missing heir to trick the executors of the will and get the money for themselves. However, when the police suspect that the father was murdered - the ensuing autopsy reveals digitalis poisoning - Chance becomes their chief suspect since it is believed he is the son. With Marnie's help, Chance sets out to clear his name by finding the real Charles Renton-Friend Jnr...A second feature murder mystery drama with an ingenious plot, which is sadly rendered a complete dud by its completely lacklustre treatment both in direction and writing. Most of the action unravels on a single the set (the villa) so all the twists and turns of the plot are revealed in words by the actors in the manner of a dreary play with no dramatic flashbacks or action. The screenplay by J McClaren Ross, while undoubtedly having some good ideas, is far fetched and some of the plot's twists do not seem at all credible. The cast do what they can to salvage it (former Tarzan star Lex Barker is confined to a wheelchair for most of the film), but that they fail is no fault of their own. Only Philip Grindrod's camera-work and Wilfred Arnold's set design emerges with any credit with the villa giving the proceedings an elegant, exotic feel and, it must be said, more than what was necessary for a run of the mill picture like this. Director Montgomery Tully, a real stalwart of featurettes, co-features and b-pics throughout the fifties and sixties, did some impressive work with such films as the William Hartnell thriller Murder In Reverse (1945) and the excellent The Third Alibi (1960), but he could do nothing to lift this from poor to even average. Don't be fooled by the film's alternative title, Female Fiends, it is nowhere near as exciting.

Like Gordon or rather Peter says: "There was only one fiend after all." - and it's almost too late when he discovers the truth. In retrospect it feels like she's been setting this up from the very first moment she meets him and executes it with cold precision. Definitely a wonderful little thriller even with some satirical barbs against teetotalers.

A British B or quota movie. Some of these are not too bad but this one rates a Z rather than a B.The acting was atrocious it was wordy there were holes every where in the plot. Production values couldn't have been cheaper except for the burning house at the end which was kind of neat.A man with amnesia is spirited out of hospital with fake casts to take the place of an alcoholic playboy so 3 women can inherit a share of their teetotaler father's 2 million dollars.I can't think of any thing good about this thing... but as another reviewer stated it wasn't bad enough to be funny it was just boring dull and irritating. Combine bad acting and talkiness and you've got a real lemon.DO NOT RECOMMEND

The idea behind "Female Fiends" is pretty good, but unfortunately it's not nearly as good as it could be because of poor writing. Good idea--poorly written. That's pretty much the film.Lex Barker plays a man who awakens to find he has no idea who he is. He's told that he's the rich heir to an estate and his memory lapse and injuries (he's in a cast) are the result of an accident. However, it's pretty obvious to the viewer that this is not true. But why?! Why would a bunch of people suddenly try to convince a guy he's a member of their family?! After a bit, Barker is suspicious and begins to dig. It's a nice idea--but it resolved almost immediately after Barker begins to dig!! The film is 68 minutes long and should have been at least 80 minutes. It seems quick--rushed even. And, as a result, it's only a time-passer and no more. Sad...as the idea was pretty good. Unfortunately, the film just doesn't do much with the idea.