4 out of 5

Director: Michael Powell

The description of this movie tells you all the plot details you really need to know – an off-kilter would-be documentary maker is apparently killing girls with the very camera with which he films them. However, there are many character and dialogue surprises in this film, including layers of meaning to how the film is presented… These layers are what give it value over similarly themed films that would follow (…up through this era). Many people have written at length about how director Michael Powell uses many transition shots that break the barrier between viewer and film, making us complicit in his crimes. While the violence is tame compared to prime time TV, in its day the film was shocking, and the creepiness factor still carries over, mostly because we actually like our killer. But even beyond the visual complexities are the treasures buried in the dialogue, offering not only a study of parents and children, but expanding, again, on the nature of how film acts upon us. The film slips up here and there, only slightly, and though the final scene is gripping, its almost too quick of a conclusion for the slow build (after the initial un-slow intro, that is.) Now, lastly, and may I be crucified for saying so, but I present that Peeping Tom is better than Psycho, the film to which it is typically compared. Judge for yourself, but Psycho feels like a director taking a stab at a profitable film medium (…horror), and while shocking on many levels, it requires context of the era to truly be amazing. Whereas Peeping Tom has a timelessness to it, and seems made for deeper purposes than profit. Laslty, as stated, it remains pretty creepy to this day. But judge for yourself.