The Power (1968)

--psychokinesis, of which TK is a manifestation. Very well, I quibble...I can't quite call this film a guilty pleasure. I review only because it made an impression on me when first broadcast Stateside in prime time, making me feel obliged nearly 40 years later to view it uncut and without commercial interruption when the opportunity arose.It has not aged well at all. It has a Sixties look that tries only a little to not look Sixties, given it opens with the title-card reminder that it happens "Tomorrow." It plods...and plods...until the action, which at times...plods. And when it stays perfectly still to lend itself to exposition it can't quite decide if it wants to be a character study as the characters ponder the core Imponderable: What to do when a superman-in-hiding wants YOU.That's not a fair statement about George Pal and Byron Haskin, who were not known for their subtlety and full well knew how to exploit the magic medium. I can't even blame the casting or acting. I can only blame the attempt to adapt a nearly unfilmable novel. If you want to imagine what Pal and the rest likely wanted to do, read the novel, though be sure it's the original edition (ca. 1956) and not the author's later revision.And though I agree with other users that this film predated many other (and some worse) treatments of "The Power" (Terrestrial Edition) put to not-so-nice use, it is not the first cinematic treatment. Treat yourself to The Man Who Could Work Miracles and both the Village AND Children of the Damned. Throw in Forbidden Planet for contrast...So why did I feel obliged after all these years to view it again? One of Miklos Rozsa's finest musical scores, guaranteed to make you reach for sweet paprika and a recording of Kodaly's Hary Janos Suite. Arthur O'Connell making a funny face. Nehemiah Persoff's chain-smoking and novel use of a dishwasher. Earl Holliman trying just a little too hard to overcome the dialogue. George Hamilton trying not hard enough to look harried but succeeding only when he makes a puss. Suzanne Pleshette and Yvonne De Carlo...well, given the chance the ladies could act too.And all-too-brief homages to Pal's Oscar-winning Puppetoonery with the truly inspired artistry of Wah Ming Chang and William Tuttle in one of the very few films that make you want less exposition and more magic.

The positive reviews for this film at this site have me baffled. Really baffled. We see here a cast full of familiar character actors and people who were leads in some good movies. None of them comes off well here. They give Hamilton and Pleshette top billing and then list the rest alphabetically, giving you the impression that there will be an ensemble cast delivering something of significance. Unfortunately, that can be and is a danger sign. When you get middling actors at the top and an ensemble of supporters who could, when at their best, steal their scenes, it often means that the supporters are instead lowered to the level of the leads or worse. George Hamilton in particular just delivers lines and in no way gives us a character we can care about. Suzanne Pleshette is likewise flatted out and must have suffered under that hairspray and make-up (albeit that was typical of 64-66 when this was likely filmed). Earl Holliman attempts to be psycho-philosophical and it goes nowhere. (The shame is that scene could have built up the context and plot well if handled better.) Michael Rennie's character is only discovering and using his capabilities at that age??? And then we have poor Miiko Taka, wasted again trying to make something of a bit part way below her ability. I think you are getting the idea. And what is this "power" anyway? Well, we do figure it out sort-of but it is not actually developed as a concept. Instead we get vague hints and a lot of strangeness just happens. So we get no characters, acting talent wasted badly, and conceptual development that falls flat. What special effects that there are, don't add up to much. So, be prepared to be disappointed.

George Pal's/Byron Haskin's version of "The Power" (based on the good novel by Frank Robinson, not the baseball player) is actually pretty entertaining and thrilling despite the relatively poor production values - quite a bit of 1960s cheesiness - but still the cast of stalwarts gives it all and it is probably the best George Pal film after 1960's "The Time Machine." Acting kudos go to Michael Rennie, Aldo Ray (!!!) and even, who would have thought it, star George Hamilton. This is one of those films whose concept far exceeds its execution but I still feel somewhat generous as I remembered it fondly from my youth and seeing it about 30 years later found out that it held up pretty well.And a great score by Miklos Rozsa too.

I loved this movie as a kid and an adult.I thought it was well done and for the negative reviewers who said it was confusing, I understood it as a child. Are you dense or something?Good acting, subtle death scenes, great action, albeit slow, but worth viewing. A nice build up and to the reviewer who said he knew who the bad guy was: Duh!I'm so tired of you losers not taking into account when a movie was made. What movie about telekinesis compared to this then. Um, none. Enjoy a movie for when it was made and take in the effects as well. So many people say laughable effects in old movies. I hate this. They worked with what they had and did good with them.I loved it in '68 and still love it!