IMDb RATING
6.2/10
2.3K
YOUR RATING
After an enigmatic, self-described pathologist rents the attic room of a Victorian house, his landlady begins to suspect her lodger is Jack the Ripper.After an enigmatic, self-described pathologist rents the attic room of a Victorian house, his landlady begins to suspect her lodger is Jack the Ripper.After an enigmatic, self-described pathologist rents the attic room of a Victorian house, his landlady begins to suspect her lodger is Jack the Ripper.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Lester Matthews
- Chief Insp. Melville
- (as Lester Mathews)
John Alban
- Theatre Patron
- (uncredited)
Brandon Beach
- Theatre Patron
- (uncredited)
Audrey Betz
- Theatre Patron
- (uncredited)
Paul Bradley
- Theatre Patron
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
6.22.2K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
Aunt Bea Does London
This is a remake of the 1944 "The Lodger", which was a remake of the early Hitchock silent "The Lodger". This one isn't bad but uses most of the dialogue from the 1944 version. Jack Palance gives an excellent portrayal of the lodger who may or may not be Jack the Ripper. Palance has a certain menace here but yet you feel some sympathy for him. That voice should be trademarked!! Constance Smith plays the part of his object of affection/hatred and there is a good performance from Rhys Williams, a long time character actor, as her uncle. It's a little tough getting by Frances Bavier as Smith's aunt since to most TV viewers she will forever be Aunt Bea from Mayberry. Frankly, she can't hold a candle to Sara Allgood in the 1944 version but she passes muster. I found the 1944 version superior to this film due to the presence of Laird Cregar and George Saunders but this remake is worth watching, especially if you are a Jack Palance fan.
Jackie's back and Aunt Bea's got him
Good, atmospheric story of Jack the Ripper, in the person of a Mr. Slade, renting a sitting room and an attic room in a London home. Jack Palance, with his unusual looks and soft voice, is perfectly cast as the man who falls under suspicion of being the Ripper. He finds himself to attracted to the flirtatious, beautiful, and kind-hearted niece of the owner of the home, Lily, played by Constance Smith. Smith was an Irish actress who was under contract to Fox for a time, after which she made films in Italy, retiring apparently in 1959. As a risqué entertainer and beauty, Lily has also attracted the attentions of a Scotland Yard inspector. It proves an odd triangle. Frances Bavier of Andy Griffith Show fame plays Lily's aunt. Very interesting, small film that manages to have a British feel despite the variety of accents and non-accents of the major actors.
Not as good as Hitchcock's version
This is a frustrating movie although worth a watch if you have the time to spare and the subject interests you. For me it isn't a patch on Hitchcock's early The Lodger which also starred the divine Ivor Novello and is thrilling let alone Novello is a feast to the eyes and so is the charming heroine and the whole movie is compulsive viewing. I very much want to see the slightly different talkie version that Novello made a few years later but it seems unobtainable.
Palance does a good take on the Lodger in Man in the Attic and is far nearer to the original book than Hitchcock's movie, but Palance has a hard time with the general lack of excitement in the movie. It lacks tension and drama although it tries hard. Difficult to say where the problem lies but making the heroine a successful and famous vaudeville star admired by the Prince of Wales really is a disaster, it doesn't work at all, let alone the original heroine Daisy has become just a parlourmaid and there's a new heroine, niece Lilly. The heroine's musical numbers really jar - they are completely irrelevant, and worse, they are rather vulgar, being can-can style dance - great fun in the right kind of movie but quite unsuitable for this one and I fastfowarded through those scenes. The policeman who fancies Lilly isn't as good as he should be somehow.
Given that this movie seems to have been made in Hollywood - the confusion of accents - it does indeed have a good East London feel about it. So worth watching but better if you haven't already seen Hitchcock's excellent and famous movie.
By the way, the book by Marie Belloc-Lowndes is very good reading.
Palance does a good take on the Lodger in Man in the Attic and is far nearer to the original book than Hitchcock's movie, but Palance has a hard time with the general lack of excitement in the movie. It lacks tension and drama although it tries hard. Difficult to say where the problem lies but making the heroine a successful and famous vaudeville star admired by the Prince of Wales really is a disaster, it doesn't work at all, let alone the original heroine Daisy has become just a parlourmaid and there's a new heroine, niece Lilly. The heroine's musical numbers really jar - they are completely irrelevant, and worse, they are rather vulgar, being can-can style dance - great fun in the right kind of movie but quite unsuitable for this one and I fastfowarded through those scenes. The policeman who fancies Lilly isn't as good as he should be somehow.
Given that this movie seems to have been made in Hollywood - the confusion of accents - it does indeed have a good East London feel about it. So worth watching but better if you haven't already seen Hitchcock's excellent and famous movie.
By the way, the book by Marie Belloc-Lowndes is very good reading.
Rather pedestrian revisiting of The Lodger
Not a very unique nor special film in any way, and very typical early 1950s Hollywood fare with a back-lot version of London, and plenty of French can-can style dancing for titillation.
Not boring either, and Jack Palance is fine as the mysterious lodger who may or may not be Jack the Ripper. But he's done better, and is not a good enough reason to pick up this film. In fact, the only particularly good reason to pick it up is if you wish to collect all varieties of Jack the Ripper films available, or if you want the double-feature Midnight Movie release of it because it also has the superior thriller, A Blueprint for Murder.
Not boring either, and Jack Palance is fine as the mysterious lodger who may or may not be Jack the Ripper. But he's done better, and is not a good enough reason to pick up this film. In fact, the only particularly good reason to pick it up is if you wish to collect all varieties of Jack the Ripper films available, or if you want the double-feature Midnight Movie release of it because it also has the superior thriller, A Blueprint for Murder.
Decent Jack the Ripper yarn
There is no shortage of films based on London's most notorious serial killer, Jack the Ripper, but in spite of this fact: Man in the Attic is a welcome addition to the list of films concerning The Ripper. It can't be said that Man in the Attic is a great film, but it's certainly a good one and did everything I had hoped it would do. The plot here is basically the same one featured in Hitchcock's silent classic 'The Lodger', as well as a whole host of other films. We follow the plot as a mysterious man moves into a house owned by an elderly coupled and co-habited by their actress niece. The Jack the Ripper murders are happening around the same time, and it's not long before the lodger's strange nature leads the lady of the couple to believe that they may be renting their spare room to a serial killer! Director Hugo Fregonese gives the film a great atmosphere; the smoky streets of London look superb and really give this story a good place to take place in. There's also a great score that helps to add to the atmosphere. The film focuses more on Jack the Ripper himself and his situation, and there are very little details of the actual killings, and certainly no gore...which is something of a shame, but the way that the film sets its focus and sticks to it is to its advantage. The plot moves fairly slowly and the mystery is never overly exciting; but it's not too much of a problem because the characters are interesting and Jack Palance is spot on as the reclusive killer. Overall, Man in the Attic is a wholly satisfying yarn that entertains despite not being brilliant.
Did you know
- TriviaThe movie is a remake of 20th Century Fox's previous film, The Lodger (1944), starring Laird Cregar as Slade. It was released under Fox's Panoramic Productions label. Barré Lyndon's screenplay for the earlier film was updated for the remake by Robert Presnell Jr., and Hugo Friedhofer's music score from the earlier film is also reused. The movie was shot on the same sets, and reuses footage from the earlier film of the police pursuing Jack the Ripper through the streets and over the rooftops of London.
- GoofsIn the opening and closing shots which include London Bridge at night, anachronistic cars and buses clearly can be seen crossing the Thames.
- Quotes
Lily Bonner: It's at night that interesting things happen. What kind of work do you do at night, Mr. Slade?
Slade: I doubt if you'd be interested.
Lily Bonner: Do you just work?
Slade: Sometimes I walk close by the river. The river is like liquid night flowing peacefully out to infinity.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Horror Hotel: Man in the Attic (2015)
- SoundtracksYOU'RE IN LOVE
(uncredited)
Music by Lionel Newman
Lyrics by Eliot Daniel
Sung and danced by Constance Smith and chorus
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Covek u potkrovlju
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $500,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 22m(82 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content








