User reviews

This is actually a pretty good thriller that benefits from the no-nonsense, fact-based dialogue and avoids sentimentality for the most part. Technically it's nothing remarkable and yes, the actors are largely undistinguished, but the story is developed in a pleasing and suspenseful way. Another reviewer's remark on this page that the film doesn't work because the child is unappealing is somewhat bizarre. The kid is on screen for all of two minutes and has but a few words of dialogue. And he's actually a cute little fella too, making you root for his rescue.

In summary then, this is a movie which had the likes of Hitchcock or another of the greats directed it, have been a classic. Instead it's an enjoyable way to spend an hour and a bit in front of the telly - especially if you, say, find yourself off work ill one afternoon.

This is a simple story of a boy who finds himself trapped in the vault at the bank where his father works and the race to get him out alive. It's Friday and the Bank is getting ready to close for the weekend. Stephen Walker (Winter) has just turned six and as a treat, his mom, Lucille (McDowall), takes him to meet his father, Colin (Patterson), out of work. His dad just has to close up the vault and then they can go and celebrate. However, while Colin and his boss, George Foster (Gifford), lock up the vault there's an automobile accident just outside the window, which takes their attention away for a couple of seconds. When they finally close the door and the time lock kicks in it's the teller, Evelyn (Francis), who alerts them to the child's predicament... now the race is on...

What I really liked about this was the simplicity of both the story and the location. You get a few outside shots, which only take up a couple of minutes, at most, and then the rest of the movie is set in two rooms. Though you never really notice as the Director, Thomas, keeps you involved in the unfolding story. As time passes, the question, "Will they be quick enough?" becomes more and more imperative... while the outlook grows bleaker and bleaker. Thomas uses the limited space well, moving the camera around to its best advantage.

Then there's the acting, which is above par. Every person involved in rescuing the boy has an urgency in their voice and in their movements. Robert Beatty really sells the self-assured and strong-minded Pete Dawson, the mind who is responsible for the banks' security. He is quick with a plan and quicker to rally the troops. Whereas, Gifford as the Bank Manager Foster hits all the right notes in portraying a man who feels accountable for the accident and the possible death of a child. One thing which got under my skin was how little the parents appeared in the film. It would have been better if these two characters had been stronger, then you would have had a near-perfect cast.

I'd recommend this film to all. It's a nice way to spend an afternoon on these cold winter days, while the central heating keeps you nice and cosy.

Before he directed what seemed like thirty-five billion "Carry On" burlesques, Gerald Thomas directed this film, a simple drama about what happens when a small boy gets locked in a bank vault with a time lock set for over sixty hours -- and about ten hours' worth of air. It's from a play written by Arthur Hailey, and considering what the director would do, and Hailey's admiration of the AIRPLANE! burlesques of AIRPORT, based on his novel, it makes you wonder what a Carry On this would have made.

As a straight drama, it's a pretty good, if minor picture, filled with the sort of situations and characters that would populate Hailey's big novels, the movies made from them and the Disaster Movie genre. Allen Gifford is particularly good as the bank manager who works hard to get the child out, and constantly blames himself.

If I had any complaint, it is that it is too focused. Everyone is too focused, everyone is too polite. This, however, is not THE BIG CARNIVAL, nor AIRPORT nor CARRY ON, KID STUCK IN A BANK VAULT. For the story it tries to tell, it tells it well.

Six year old Steven Walker is in the bank with his father near closing time he is in a playful mood and slips into the vault unseen just as it is shut. The problem is that for security reasons the vault is on a time lock and has been set to remain closed until after the weekend. With no more than half a day's air in the vault the race is on to try and get the boy out. The local vault expert is out of town for the weekend but, with no guarantee that he can be found in time, the parents are frantic to get him out.

The plot was more than enough to hook me into it because it sounded like one of those setups that will be tight and tense, set in a single location and, given the race against time, effortlessly engaging. Although there were no guarantees for this, I was surprised by just how flat the whole thing was and how much it failed to grip me. In terms of actions and narrative flow things are fine; the story follows a solid path that makes sense and isn't contrived or forced for the sake of falsely producing tension. However it is the delivery where it takes this and does nothing of interest with it. The main problem is with the script; where it is shouting urgently then things are fine but it regularly has horridly flat scenes of dialogue while the cutting etc is going on and none of them really work. Of course it doesn't help that the performances mostly put me in mind of my last time I was in a forest. Thomas does manage to produce some tension when the action is the focus but he totally undercuts this by his flaccid inability to bring out this tension in his characters and his actors – after all, if they don't seem bothered by the whole thing, why should I the viewer be?

As another review has stated the worst performance is mercifully the shortest – that of the boy Winter. Christ but he could not be less convincing, natural or sympathetic. It is rare for me to be shocked by the ineptitude of a performance but Winter achieved that with very few lines. I know he was a child but are you telling me he was the best child available to the casting director? Of the rest of the cast only Beatty stands out and that is mostly because his dialogue consists of being in charge and tough. Conversely all those blessed with flat lines give bland performances; the list is long but includes Patterson, Mannering, McDowall, Ayres and so on. Connery is only memorable for who he is rather than anything else.

Overall a semi-engaging film that sadly has more weakness than strength. The simple premise should have allowed for great tension but the script and delivery let this fall down badly. Deserves a low-budget but intense remake – perhaps not of the detail but certainly using a similar premise.

Although the plot feels rather forced and awfully predictable, this is a surprisingly quite intense film that is able to keep one always interested all the time, due to the presentation of all the scientific evidence in an interesting manner, as well as an appropriately short running time. It feels well researched, the music used is applied well, and for Sean Connery fans it has the bonus of his presence in a brief supporting role as a welder. Still, the film does have quite a tendency for unnecessary melodrama; in particular McDowall overacts whenever she is on screen. But in spite of the film's flaws, the overall picture stands strong, and while it might not be everyone's cup of tea, I would highly recommend it if the film has even the slightest appeal to one's taste.

I remember seeing this movie on TV in the USA in 1961 when I was a nipper, it's always stuck in my mind, I have no idea why. Watched it again recently on TV, probably in the small hours, must've had insomnia. Not the worst 1950s B feature I've ever seen.

Reference the helicopter, as the film was made in the UK I'm pretty sure it was G-AKFB, with the registration crudely altered to a Canadian one. There were only 3 Bell 47s around in the forties/fifties according to the UK register, the only one apparently airworthy in 1957 was this one, which was then owned by BEA Helicopters. It was built in 1947 and was finally withdrawn from use in 1967, not a bad age for an early helicopter. I must get out more!

One type of movie we Brits used to do really well was the 'B' movie. In the '50's and '60's, British studios churned out dozens of supporting features, inexpensively produced, often featuring actors of whom no-one had ever heard, and while being far from masterpieces they proved very enjoyable. 'Time Lock' was one such picture. Based on a play by Arthur Hailey ( author of 'Airport' ), it tells the story of a little boy who accidentally gets trapped in a bank vault, and of the numerous attempts to rescue him. Robert Beatty heads the cast, which features a young Sean Connery as one of the would-be rescuers. What's surprising is that the picture was directed by Gerald Thomas, future 'Carry On' director. He brings a Hitchcock-like feel to the story, and one wishes he'd made a few more films in this vein. 'Time Lock' is above average, and worth catching if it comes round on television. The person who likened the film to 'Plan 9 From Outer Space' deserves to be locked in a vault himself. The only thing they have in common is they are both in black and white!

Economically shot on a low budget by Beaconsfield Studios this film has curiosity value for two small reasons; it was the first speaking role by Sean Connery and one of the earliest films to feature a helicopter (Bell 47 CF-AKL). Interestingly one of the stars of the film (Robert Beatty) also shared a plot featuring a later version of the same helicopter type in the film "Where Eagles Dare".

It is a mildly atmospheric B movie which due to it's venerable age (it reaches it's half centenary in 2007) provides an interesting and nostalgic look at Canadian/British class values and aside from the aforementioned flying object is refreshingly free of UFO's, little green men or giant spiders as was the fashion in 1950 b-movies.

I didn't expect Sean Connery to have any dialogue for this little known "B" picture but to my surprise, he does have quite a few lines to act with. His character has no depth or significance however and isn't even given a name. He is one of many cast members involved in a simple story about a young boy who's accidentally locked inside a bank vault. The usual scenario follows: a race against time, the need to find a particular person who can help with the situation in hand, panicking characters etc. No one in the cast is well known apart from Connery and he hadn't appeared in many films before this one. The production moves along at a reasonable pace, dialogue is standard but the last few minutes includes a tense moment or two.

I remember seeing this film on TV when I was a teenager. I have just seen it again 20 years on and like me it has aged. As one reviewer says the characters are a microcosm of society and it is a world I wouldn't want to live in. The cop, the expert, the bank manager are unbelievably rude, bullying, and cruelly insensitive. The acting is poor and hardly credible. Even Sean Connery chews his dialogue (on this showing it seems a marvel that he reinvented himself as James Bond only four years later). The boy is as wooden as a barn door with his repeated "Yes, Daddy." He even grins at the camera at one point. Surely they could have found someone of Dean Stockwell's or Pamela Franklin's abilities. The parents are predictably bland, the mother plays the hysterical part as usual. Beatty is OK as the main star and dominates as he should but his bullying of the volunteers is over the top and uncalled for. Someone ought to have given him a bloody nose after all the fuss was over. As for the bank manager his forelock was hanging down more or less from the start.

The situation was promising and there is no doubt that the film is exciting, especially the use of statistics to heighten the tension. Unfortunately the performances let it down and the dialogue is at times laughable (perhaps the future "Carry On" director was getting some practice in). Also it doesn't seem credible that when the radio man said he wanted to put the story on the news that it didn't occur to the cop or the bank manager to tell him to use the stations to locate the expert. Instead this idea came from the journalist about three minutes later. Again the cop calculates the car journey time for the expert to get to the bank when my first thought would have been to get him on a helicopter. Again someone else suggested this. The selection for the hammering is like something out of the keystone cops. When the priest turned up, I thought, who next, the one-armed bandit? Why is the film based in North America, when it was made at Beaconsfield? The time bomb plot is usually handled better and the director makes a real mess of the tension. The film has sadly dated - but it is always watchable, even allowing for the shoddy direction and acting.

A British movie that tries very hard to fool its audience into believing it's American with decidedly mixed results. For a start, the film feels neither British or American, and the writing of Peter Rogers (who would go on to produce the quintessentially British Carry On movies) fails to take the difference in national characters into account, so that the American characters display typically British reserve. In fact, the reactions of all involved are incredibly subdued even for a British movie - as if, like us, they can't believe it's all such an anti-climax.

A very simple story of a young boy accidentally locked in a bank vault with no way of getting out until the time lock is released some 60 hours later, well after the air will have run out. No way except, of course, breaking in. And that's it. Together with an average cast and fairly wooden performances from some of them this should, by rights, have been no more than an average fifties film. Its strength, however, is its script. This kept the story very tight with very little embellishment and a great deal of intelligence. Usually with this type of story there are many gaps where one cannot help but feel that a truck could be driven through the errors made or the ridiculous twists. With Time Lock, however, the script covers virtually everything that the viewer would consider. Details such as the thinking and methodology of how to get into the vault, organising the people required and even such items as the possible medical effects on the boy and how to calculate the amount of air left to breathe. All this had a great effect on building the tension and I had to watch it until the end. One of the most enjoyable films that I have seen in a while.

An out of the ordinary plot by Arthur Hailey is turned into a tedious 'b' film by the Carry on team of Peter Rogers and Gerald Thomas. The actors are second rate, apart from Sean Connery in an early role, and can only offer below standard histrionics. The scenario is a small boy is locked in a bank safe, will he be rescued before he suffocates? The problem is that child actor Vincent Winter is such an unappealing performer that you don't care about him, thus ruining any suspense that the film attempts to create. Even if you are stuck in Warrington on a wet weekend, this is one to steer clear of.

Happened to (accidently) see this travesty on UK TV a few days ago. It might have been better if the audiences had been locked in the bank vault and the actors (I use the word actor in its loosest context) left outside to get on with it. This film can be bracketed with 'Plan B from outer space ' as the joint worst films of all time. Their is no aspect of this film (even allowing for its age) for which (search as I may) I can find any redeeming feature. Ghastly dialogue,, wooden acting and risible photography all vie with each other to win the prize of supreme awfulness. A story line which defies belief and a child 'star' of somewhat limited intelligence and mind-numbing mediocrity, not to mention a character which qualifies as an irritant of the first magnitude - see it at your peril, there is no known antidote !