User reviews

This film contains a surprisingly high level of violence; in particular the kidnapping scene where the boy's grandmother is beaten up. Even nowadays when gory violence seems to be the norm, it mainly happens to men and I think most film producers would hesitate before depicting a helpless old lady being beaten senseless in prolonged and graphic detail, in this case made more realistic and believable by good acting from Barbara Mullen. The same thug who beat her is later arrested in his bedroom by the police sending in a dog followed by three heavies who give him a savage beating before driving him to the station where he is threatened with more unless he gives the location of the boy. Whether her acting is good or bad the producers probably wanted Jayne Mansfield as added glamour which she provides by looking stunning particularly towards the end when she sings in her club. Overall this is an exciting and entertaining thriller.

One of the better London-based crime films of the 1950s/1960s to appear on the Talking Pictures channel. It was interesting to see Anthony Quayle as something of an underdog, and I always puzzle about Edward Judd's transformation as an actor. In "The Challenge", he looks a bit seedy, not helped by unflattering baldness, whereas after some 50 years I can still recall his screen presence in some TV series or other - helped by a toupee, a bit of burliness and a smart suit.

I have a feeling that, as with so many films, the regional railway stock and the London terminus didn't match. (And even in those days did drivers really leave ignition keys in their cars?) Despite what others have said, I thought that Jayne Mansfield was adequate, though I fast-forwarded through her song.

The poster for the film shown here on IMDb titillates misleadingly. I'm not sure who the cavorting lady is - Billy before she went blonde or the stripper whose act we never got to see completely?

When you watch a British crime film from the 1950s you expect that the gang boss will be played by Herbert Lom,or Martin Benson or maybe Eric Pohlman,but Jayne Mansfield!\whereas Joan Crawford is a tigress when she is a gang boss,Eg Johnny Notorious,Mansfield is a pussycat.She has all the toughness of a rotten tomato.Once the going gets tough she gets going and Carl Mohne takes over.The best she can do is simper in a variety of wigs and a different outfit for every scene.She simpers a song in a sort of Monroe imitation.She is in short dreadful.Quayle plays against type as her crook lover who went to prison but kept the loot.If you were to take Monroe out of this film you would have a good film.Nevertheless when Mansfield is off the screen the film is quite entertaining.

"The Challenge" (or if you prefer "It Takes a Thief"), may not be "Rififi" or "The Killing" but this John Gilling directed crime movie isn't nearly as bad as people would have you believe. In fact, it's a consistently fast-moving, surprisingly tough picture with a decent cast that includes Anthony Quale and Carl Mohner as crooks under the thumb of unlikely crime boss Jayne Mansfield. Yes, that's right - Jayne Mansfield, who isn't just miscast here but is perfectly dreadful and was probably the main reason the movie bombed, (was casting her really such a good idea in the first place?). Still, she turns almost every line she utters into a howler and is just one of the reasons the movie is so damned entertaining. Nice black and white photography, too, by Gordon Dines and a good use of locations.

It is sometimes said that the age of film noir was over by the end of the fifties; Orson Welles's "Touch of Evil" from 1958 is sometimes regarded as marking the end of the line. This may be true of America, the genre's original home, but in Britain noir survived into the sixties. This may be because we were slower than America to adopt colour television, meaning that there was still a market for black-and-white films here. "The Challenge" from 1960 is an example of later British noir. (In America it was shown as "It Takes a Thief", but I will use the original British title).

Jim Maxton, a lorry driver and petty criminal, is persuaded by his gang leader lover Billy to take part in a big robbery. (And no, this isn't a rare example of a film from the early sixties with a gay theme. Although the cast-list spells her name as "Billy" rather than "Billie", she is a woman). He is betrayed to the police, arrested, convicted and sentenced to eight years in jail, of which he serves five, while the rest of the gang remain at liberty. Upon release, Maxton tries to go straight and resumes his career as a lorry driver, but it turns out that he is the only one of the gang who knows where the loot from the robbery is buried. In an attempt to force him to reveal its whereabouts, his former partners in crime kidnap his young son Joey and threaten the boy's life.

Contrary to what one reviewer states, Jayne Mansfield was not a starlet at the start of her career when she made this film. Her career as a Hollywood leading lady was a relatively short one, largely because she was seen as a sort of poor man's Marilyn Monroe. She was not without acting talent, but producers preferred to cast her in undemanding roles in light comedies which showcased her voluptuous figure. (Something similar happened with Diana Dors in Britain). By 1960 her popularity in America was waning, and she tried to reinvent herself in Europe. This was her only British film, but she was also to appear in Italian, German and Greek ones.

Mansfield is not particularly convincing as a female London gang boss, especially as her accent seems stuck halfway across the Atlantic, and we are never sure whether Billy is supposed to be completely ruthless or whether she is partly redeemed by a softer side to her nature. There are better performances from the actors playing two other members of the gang, Carl Möhner as Kristy and Peter Reynolds as Buddy. Kristy, who definitely has no softer side to his nature, is Maxton's rival for Billy's affections and probably the man who informed on Maxton to the police. As for Buddy he is not so much ruthless as psychopathic; he has responsibility for guarding the kidnapped Joey and devises a sadistic scheme to bring about the boy's death and make it look like an accident.

The best acting, however, comes from Anthony Quayle as Maxton. Quayle was a leading light in the British theatre, both as actor and director, but never had quite the same success in the cinema, possibly because (unlike, say, Olivier or Burton) he never really had the looks to be a matinee idol. Most of his films were British- he never attempted to conquer Hollywood- and he mostly appeared in supporting roles. In "The Challenge", however, he had a chance to play a leading role, and made the most of it. His Maxton, despite his criminal past, is a man with a certain decency, far more so than the other members of his gang, and the nearest thing the film has to a hero. In some ways the film is a standard crime thriller, but Quayle's performance, together with a well-written script and a suspenseful ending, is the main reason why it deserves an above-average mark. 6/10.

The setup for "It Takes A Thief" really doesn't make a lot of sense--and that is a huge problem. It begins with Jim (Anthony Quayle) falling for Billy (Jayne Mansfield). He doesn't realize that Billy is a cold and calculating sort--and she is setting him up. She convinces him to join in on a heist and he agrees. Now here is the part that makes no sense at all--Jim is responsible for hiding the money and then someone in the gang lets the cops know he was in on the crime and he's sent to prison. Why turn Jim in to the police? Jim would either return the money to the authorities OR he'd sit on it until after he's out of prison--and that could be years. It simply makes little sense. And for some time you aren't sure if Billy did this or perhaps Kristy--the brooding gang member who appears to have an extremely close relationship with Billy.

Regardless, several years pass and Jim has now done his time--and the money is still hidden. He has no intention of returning to his life of crime--even though the old gang is pressuring him to do so because they want the loot. When he refuses to cooperate with them, the gang turns up the pressure by kidnapping Jim's son. At the same time, the police are keeping an eye on Jim because they, too, want the money as well. With all this pressure on him, what is he to do?

Aside from a main plot idea that makes little sense, "It Takes a Thief" has several other things working against it. The big one is the odd casting of Mansfield considering the film is set in England. Plus, the pairing of the distinguished actor, Anthony Quayle with Jayne Mansfield is just plain weird. Finally, the DVD print is pretty bad--making the viewing experience less than stellar. It's really sad because apart from the weird casting strange plot about Jim being turned it, it's a very good noir sort of film. The film has a lot of tension and the scenes involving the search for the kid late in the film were awfully good.

There are many really good British noir films that exploit the seediness of post-war London, set around Soho and involving realistic underground criminality and making very watchable drama out of 1950's London low-life.

But this isn't that kind of film.

For some reason, the producers decided to make a Hollywood type noir - ignoring the excellent genre work done by other British producers and creating a totally unbelievable poor-mans version of a movie that should have had Bogart and Raft in it but instead had a collection of totally out-of-place British actors - and - Jayne Mansfield.

Mansfield whispers - Marilyn Monroe style - her way through the part and it is obvious that her attempt at a sultry voice has to be overdubbed for many of her scenes. The rest of the cast try their best to be American gangsters (at one point Anthony Quayle actually calls somebody a "dirty-rat") and betray their true acting ability in a poor attempt to be something they aren't.

The cinematography is good - lots of moody lighting, clever angles and the direction is sharp, closely cut with some good set scenes. But you always feel that this is a British attempt at making a film that is totally un-British.

The film gets better as it progresses as the story takes over and Quayle's excellent performance lifts the film out of its misery into something that is finally worth watching. But you always feel that Quayle is on a damage reduction exercise trying his best to rescue the awful script and Mansfield's execrable acting and try and create something worthwhile. Regrettably, the forces of mediocrity win out.

Aka..."The Challenge"

Exceptional Psychological and Physical Violence Permeate this Picture from Britain.

Cutting-Edge Presentation of Child in Peril, Violence to Women, and Abnormal Psychology Wrap Around a Good Jayne Mansfield Performance.

The Film also Offers Thrills Filmed with Dutch Angles and Tight-Tension Scenarios with Nail-Biting Brutality and High-Speed Chases.

Anthony Quayle Gives a Solid, Grim Outing as a Gang-Member who Does Time and is Released only to Find His Gang Turns on Him for the "Buried Treasure".

They Not Only Turn on Him but His 6 Year Old Son and His Aging Mom.

The Film Contains some of the Most Gut-Wrenching Violence Seen on the Screen Before the Code Broke Down.

It's a Fantastic Gang-Land Crime Thriller that is Virtually Unknown and Deserves more Attention and Praise.

Jayne, Quayle, and Director Gillian Made this an Atypical "Times-are-Changing" Introduction, to the Turbulent, Paradigm Shattering Decade.

A Hidden Gem.

'The Challenge' (1960) is a stylishly mounted, frequently volatile, jazzy-cool early 60s Brit-Noir by extremely versatile Hammer Horror alumnus John Gilling, who consistently proved himself to be equally adept at crafting exciting, flint-edged pot-boilers along with his bravura, bodice-ripping, blood-chilling Gothic shockers! This compelling, well above average crime thriller has a cracking cast of agreeably familiar genre faces, with super charismatic screen icons Jayne Mansfield & Anthony Quayle making for an attractive, if somewhat tempestuous pair of ill-fated lovers. And it might be a fair assessment to claim that maestro John Gilling's shadow-steeped, cult crime caper The Challenge's more demonstrative charms are not so much hard-boiled, as fabulously full-bodied!!!

The circuitously double-dealing, gun-powdered plot is mesmerically matched by the no less fascinating twists and turns of The Challenge's preternaturally pulchritudinous star! This bracing, sporadically violent, action-packed B-Thriller finds the affable, hard luck Jim Maxton (Anthony Quayle) in shtook, having being used as a Patsy by an especially duplicitous, grubby-looking mob of scheming blaggers, glamorously led by deliciously Machiavellian matriarch Billy (Jayne Mansfield). Dynamically paced, competently written, 'The Challenge' percolates potently until its locomotive climax which delivers a deadly kick like a strychnine-laced espresso! The brooding, commanding actor Anthony Quayle is a seething ball of repressed anger, with the high-voltage, bra-burstingly buxom B-Movie bombshell Mansfield providing some welcome luminosity to this crepuscular crime caper!

The only good thing about this film is the performance of Anthony Quayle. He gives his character some depth and humanity. No wonder he was soon off to great films such as Laurence of Arabia. If you want a truly great performance by this actor watch Anne of the Thousand Days. His role in that film earned him an Academy Award nomination. The good thing about THIS film is that the plot was a great idea and the flow was pretty quick and kept you interested. What was awful was the quality of the picture and the sound. The actors were blurry and the voices did not match the lip movements. Why was so much wasted on what could have been a really decent movie? Perhaps age and a lack of good DVD quality is the problem? The movie will only be bearable to Anthony Quayle fans, Jayne Mansfield fans, or crime drama fans.

We often forget that director John Gilling was not only a horror film specialist, but also a crime and adventure yarns provider. This one THE CHALLENGE, PICK UP ALLEY, THE MAN INSIDE, TIGER BY THE TAIL...and I don't even speak of his first thrillers, are the best proof. This one shows Anthony Quayle, for once, in a lead character, and Carl Möhnner in a supporting one, seven years after RIFIFI. And in RIFIFI, Carl Möhner's son was kidnapped, and a jewels' ransom was asked against the child's release. Here Carl Moehner's character kidnaps a little boy, for the same purpose !!! The total contrary... Beware, this film is not as gritty nor terrific as the Jules Dassin's movie, far far tougher. But it remains a pretty good British crime actioner, in a period where UK film industry still made good stuff, unlike now, in 2024, where most of the crime and gangster movies are made for straight to DVD or streaming platforms market.

If someone else played Billy instead of Jayne Mansfield it could've been better. Lots of good characters actors here to keep it going and quite violent considering. Anthony Quayle was as good as usual.

Contains some big names and character actors. I wish though sometimes the music could be re-edited? I found the production values quite high and the directing good and yet it lacks something? Perhaps the characters are a bit flat and yet to describe the actors as wooden does the "team" of actors a disservice.

The boy playing "chicken" was actually very convincing and the run by Quayle through a busy train station has been copied since and famously! (Think Bourne Ultimatum here.)

So what's not to like? Well I think the film deserves a better edit? There is a completely odd scenario played out around 70% into the film, that contrives to make the story lose the plot as it were. So maybe one day we might get to see a remake? That would be worth the time and money insofar the plot and the 1950s is worthy of a return?

I enjoyed it to be honest but I was up early doors as couldn't sleep. The chase at the end captivates.

Well-made minor UK film noir, featuring a strong cast. Superb Anthony Quayle plays Jim, an ordinary guy who goes along with a heist and pays a big price. When Jim is alone fingered for the crime he ends up in prison for five years. He knows where the money was hidden, but he's not telling, so the rest of the gang look him up when he's released and they mean business. That gang is led by none other than Jayne Mansfield. She could have been the weak link in the movie, based on her awful opening scene, but she turns out to be pretty effective, using her famed 'charm' to make men do what she wants. This highly dramatic and exciting film is highlighted by a ton of London location shooting. Peter Reynolds and Peter Bennett, regulars in British film of the time, add realism with their performances, while Carl Mohner, five years after RIFIFI, stands out as a trigger-tempered thug. Nice dubbed singing for Mansfield by Joan Small. The film's conclusion is somewhat contrived, but it's a good payoff.

Anthony Quayle is the only member of the gang the police catch and convict. He's also the only one who knows where the money is. It takes five years before he gets out. Police detective Dermot Walsh wants to track him to find out who's in the rest of the gang. The gang isn't so circuitous. They want the money. When Quayle says he can wait until they're not looking, they kidnap his son.

I happened to look at the 1971 GET CARTER this morning, and so this seems to be a movie about the same themes. The difference lies in this movie's comparative softness. Everyone treats the boy well. When these people say "It's only business", they mean it. Other things are more important. So while there are moments of excitement and suspense, this movie winds up being another competent potboiler, with a far too ornate score.

From this lamentable opus three certainties emerge: the ill-fated Jayne Mansfield could neither act nor sing her way out of a paper bag; John Gilling could not direct traffic and the British could not do Film Noir.

'Un point' represents a sympathy vote for the ludicrously wasted Anthony Quayle.

I watched this film whilst being engaged in another task. That may indicate my appreciation of it. No matter.

Toward the end of the film the train caught my attention. As they invariably do. The carriages bore the logo ' LMR '. Which puzzled me.

It could mean the London Midland region during the time of British railways.

But to my knowledge they never permanently assigned stock to one particular region or other.

On examining the locomotive all became clear to me.

The filmmakers used the Longmoor Military Railway for the railway scenes.

There they would be able to start and stop the train at will as they required. Which they could not possibly have done on the British Railway system for considerations of rail safety.

I believe the locomotive to be ROD 2-10-0 ' Gordon '. Which is now in the possession of the Severn Valley Railway in Worcestershire.

Had I been permitted to enjoy a railway career. I would have been the sixth generation of a railway man. In my extended family.

Instead I had to settle for a long career in the army.