Eric Stevenson I was surprised when I found out that Leonard Maltin gave this film a three stars rating. It's not one of the worst shown on MST3K, but it's still really bad. I admit that the premise isn't that terrible. I think this might have worked if it was just a short film. Like most movies of this time, it has the flaw of using too much of its length for exposition and not showing us interesting imagery. It's weird to see black and white movies decline at this point. It really looks dated.The most interesting part of the film is in fact when we learn more about the backstory, but even that seems to go on too long. It really is funny just watching this silly dummy walk around and attack people. Then again, that doesn't really show up until the very end of the movie. It's mostly pointless and there's not much to talk about. I'm surprised MST3K didn't make a joke about Maltin's review, but then again, they did already do that in "The Undead". I was hoping this would be in color. *1/2

VinnieRattolle I've never been particularly enamored by IMDb's ratings system (most of my favorite films rank a 5 or 6), but currently rated at 2.8, this one has me completely baffled. I have to wonder if the low ranking comes from people who've seen the "Mystery Science Theatre" version and decided the film was utter crap. Perhaps if you have idiots mocking the film, that could sway your perception of it (haven't seen that version and I don't intend to).Though it's not the first film to use the concept of a sinister living doll, it's one of the earliest and one of the best. The cinematography is absolutely exquisite, the story was fresh at the time, the acting is very good (despite the occasionally corny dialog), it's pretty well-paced and certainly involving. Perhaps most importantly, the titular doll is genuinely creepy. "Devil Doll" seems like it could have been an overlong episode of "The Twilight Zone" (which also had a few living doll stories) -- and by my logic, that's a huge compliment.I'm glad that I'm not swayed by popular opinion. And it just reinforces my theory that many of the people ranking films on this site are adolescents and buffoons.

HAWKEYE While watching this film you often have the feeling that this was supposed to be a longer, more fleshed out film. Vorelli re-gluing his beard back on is never really explained, among a few other open-ended events.The one thing that can be said is that this film is genuinely creepy at several points throughout. Watching it late at night in the dark when everyone else is asleep will lead to looks over one's shoulder! The fight scene at the end between Vorelli and Hugo is actually nightmare inducing! If you have the chance, do see it! Oh, how I long for the actually SCARY films of days gone by! Hey Hollywood take note... CGI doesn't scare anyone! A film like this one will definitely give you the heebies and the jeebies! If you want to see a creepy movie, get a hold of this one!

Greg Eichelberger Movie is an Associated Film Dist. Corp. release of a Galaworld Ldfilm-Gordon Films production, directed by Lindsey Shonteff, and tells the story of a ventriloquist who is outwitted by his dummy. This plot has been done better many times before including the "Twilight Zone's" version, "The Dummy," The Great Gabbo (1929)," and "Michael Redgrave's segment in the chilling, "Dead Of Night" from 1949. You know it's going to be bad, though, because picture takes place in England, and the headliner is the pale, gaunt, pock-mocked loser from "The Projected Man," Bryant Haliday, the poor man's Anthony Cardoza. Also on the menu is the pudgy, laconic William Sylvester, who has appeared "Riding With Death" and "Gorgo," as well as "2001: A Space Odyssey." Haliday plays "The Great Vorelli," a ventriloquist with a tacky beard and a dummy named Hugo that can perform amazing routines, such as walk towards the audience and eat ham. The act basically consists of Vorelli berating the dummy and arguing with it like a second-grader (saying things like "The sawdust in your stomach will explode," and "You're ugly."). Vorelli then ingratiates himself into a rich family with an above-average-looking daughter (for Britain), Marianne (Yvonne Romain). He hypnotizes her to fall in love with him, which makes her "boyfriend," reporter Sylvester, pout like a little baby. Here's my gripe with that. It seems in a lot of these films, the hero is someone who doesn't deserve it. Like the reporter is "Teenagers From Outer Space," among others. They get the girl with no effort, while the villain, or alien, in some cases, in much more interesting. Here, Vorelli is homely, deeply disturbed and psychotic, but he's light years more intriguing than the dullard Sylvester - which makes me wonder what a normal-looking woman would see in him in the first place. And as much pawing and groping as Vorelli does to his assistant, the brief make out scene between Sylvester and Romain is nauseating beyond description. Anyway, Sylvester, with the help of several pug-ugly Brits, discovers that Hugo is embodied with the spirit of a murder victim from Berlin. However, Sylvester's obsession with Hugo borders on the perverted and makes you want to slap him around, especially during the scene where he sneaks in a room to fondle it. A lame fight at the end (not unlike the one that concludes "Santa Claus Conquers The Martians"), however, causes Hugo to become "alive" and take Vorelli's place, while the audience is left feeling sad and empty, not unlike Vorelli's sex life or Hugo's cranium.