The Flying Saucer

I can't really add much more to what's already been said about this Alaska travelogue, but I will offer some praise to the unknown actress Pat Garrison, who plays the phony nurse Vee Langley. There is one sequence in which she goes swimming in a one-piece bathing suit, displaying an admittedly fine figure (she gets my choice for Anatomy Award Winner). There are some notable actors involved, all of them totally wasted (especially Denver Pyle and Earle Lyon), but veteran Frank Darien (Uncle John in "The Grapes of Wrath") has a better than usual role. Mikel Conrad is a total failure as a dramatic director, the action scenes are ineptly staged in what seems to come across as slow motion, and his own failings as an actor are maximized. He plays a two-fisted drinker who smokes constantly throughout the film (have to ward off boredom somehow), and the success of his secret mission (and the leading lady falling in love with him) boggles the mind; upon meeting the suspicious Russian caretaker for the first time, he blithely inquires as to whether or not he's noticed any Russian spies in the area! "The Flying Saucer" (1949) remains nothing more than a publicity stunt and vanity film for director-producer-star Mikel Conrad, notable chiefly as an historical footnote (being the first saucer movie), but effective only as a showcase for the Alaskan wilderness (I wonder if Sarah Palin ever saw this?)

Whenever I think about this movie, the scene that comes to mind is when the head bad-guy machine-guns one of his own henchmen to get the hero who is using the poor sap as a shield, figuring that the Evil Russian won't kill his own lackey. The E.R. than proceeds to pump about fifty rounds into the poor chump, but the hero is not hit once. Anyone with military or police experience knows that a human body will not serve as protection against a Thompson sub-machine gun shot from less than ten feet away. In real life, the hero would have been a sieve.

Now, the fact that this is what stuck with me about this movie is actually too bad. The shots of Alaskan scenery are terrific and the basic story was not too badly conceived. The plot as it is played out and dialog however are in the poor to horrid range. Not bad enough to be funny, disjointed and entirely unacceptable as to the actions of the hero and heroine who are supposed to be high level secret operatives, the abrupt ending typifies the entire movie.

This film was a disappointment simply because I expected that it would be all about aliens. After all, with a title like "The Flying Saucer" you'd THINK it would be sci-fi...but it isn't. I LOVE cheesy 50s sci-fi. What you have instead is a Cold War Commie film- --which is interesting just because so many people have talked about how the sci-fi films of the day were actually metaphors for the West's paranoia and struggle with communism.

Mike is begged to become a special agent for the US government. However, he's very apprehensive to go and seems like a loser--and their picking him because he's a native Alaskan seemed silly. There MUST have been some other Alaskans who were more qualified than this drip! Eventually he goes and is assisted by an agent posing as his nurse. The reason they're going? Well, the Russians MIGHT have developed some top secret UFO and Mike and Vee (an odd name for a lady) are there to investigate covertly.

I was surprised that the film actually WAS filmed, in part, in Alaska. I expected lots of crappy stock footage but they really went places in this 49th state and I recognized the glacier in Juneau which was the backdrop for many scenes. It actually is a really lovely film despite being in black & white.

Unfortunately, the story itself is cheesy. Much of it consists of voice-over narration and the story is amazingly slow and dull considering it's about the Red menace! Other 50s anti-Commie films were certainly more exciting than this one. The leading man, Mike (Mikel Conrad) isn't exactly Mr. Charisma and having much of the story rest on his shoulders wasn't a good idea in hindsight. James Bond he wasn't! Perhaps he's all they could afford after blowing most of the budget getting everyone to Alaska! Overall it's a terribly dull thing that only gets a 2 because of the nice scenery. Probably not worth your time unless you are (like me) incredibly lame.

Folks, there are no words; hyperbole fails us. This movie is so incredibly bad, so stultifyingly boring, that it has to be seen to be believed. Granted, it was made in 1950, and, granted, there obviously wasn't much of a budget, but really. . .! Yes, we will allow that it was, after all, one of the first films to deal with the subject of UFOs (and CIA cover-ups, and Russian hoaxes, and a Canadian connection) but, after a mildly promising start, the film plays largely as if it were funded by the Alaska Board of Tourism - ENDLESS tableaux of glaciers, and wildlife, and rivers, and more glaciers, but precious little action, and even less in the way of FX. The saucer, when FINALLY seen, looks like something out of "Killers From Space." The fact that this cowflop of a film was made in 1950 doesn't really save it, either: both "The Thing" and "The Man from Planet X" were made right around the same time, and are far better efforts. In the case of "The Man from Planet X", that one was made for around $50,000.00 and was shot in six days on borrowed sets, and it was still better! In short, "The Flying Saucer" isn't just crummier than you think, it's crummier than you CAN think! If you really want to see early UFO films, see the above mentioned pair; don't - repeat, DON'T - waste your time with "The Flying Saucer".

I've seen this film a few times, I must confess, and I like it. My favorite part is Mike Trent's bender in the bars of the Juneau waterfront. For my money, it is the centerpiece of the film and also where Denver Pyle appears. I love McCarthy era portrayals of Soviet operatives. Hantz is a first class strange character with voyeuristic and other kinky tendencies. The official-type Americanos are very fifties. People often expect all films to be realistic and can't seem to appreciate the interesting little views we can get into the past from off beat, low budget stuff like "The Flying Saucer".