Some things I liked some I did not.

The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

This solid chillfest presents what happens when two ordinary men take an unlucky road trip and meet up with the title character, a merciless killer with a taste for sadism.Collins (Edmond O'Brien) and Bowen (Frank Lovejoy) are war buddies who take off for a planned fishing trip to Mexico when they pick up Emmett Myers (William Talman), standing beside a stopped car. But Myers isn't the owner of the car, whom he murdered some distance away. He's a serial killer who sees Collins and Bowen as his next victims, as soon as he gets clear of the U. S. He wastes no time pulling his revolver and telling them the score:"You guys are gonna die, that's all. It's just a question of when."Director/co-writer Ida Lupino puts you in the car with the two doomed men, making every pit stop into a nail-biting exploration of how people deal with madness-induced pressure.There are three enjoyable anomalies worth considering along the ride. Two of them are much commented upon: the fact a glamorous film actress is at the helm of such a hard film, with no female speaking parts in English and informed throughout by a kind of Hemingway tough-guy sensibility; and the fact the heavy is played so absorbingly by Talman, that future law-and-order foil to TV's Perry Mason.The third: Of the two actors playing the prisoners, the one with the biggest name, O'Brien, who made such an impression three years prior as a similarly put-upon innocent in "D. O. A.", is something of a second banana here. Lovejoy's character is the one who employs patience and courage. He's got a wife and children, and as Myers taunts, "Just keep thinking' how nice it'll be to see 'em again."Lovejoy and Talman, not to mention Lupino, deserved more chances to stretch themselves as effectively as they do here. All three put up stellar work.Lupino and husband co-writer Collier Young set a quick tempo, punctuated by Myers' sneering jibes at his fellow travelers. No attempt is made at making him sympathetic, yet his terse, flat commands keep you riveted.When he relaxes, he's even more unlikable. He mocks Collins and Bowen for being "soft" and even brags later on how one of them might have gotten away if they weren't that way."You kept thinking' about each other, so you missed some chances," he says.You get the feeling Myers enjoys torturing the pair even more than he does the prospect of killing them. His fleering eyes, even with his right eyelid always half-closed, tell all you want to know about him.The film moves even more quickly than its 71-minute running time suggests. Occasionally there are breaks in the action while we see an American fed talk strategy with a Mexican police commander (Jean Del Val, recognizable as the first actor seen speaking in "Casablanca.") This feels a bit canned, though, as do the radio bulletins telling of Myers' progress whenever he tunes in. The climax comes off a bit flat, too.But "The Hitch-Hiker" entertains with its strong tension and its lack of gushiness or fat. This is a man's movie, no less manly for being the product of a woman who knew what men like, and how to deliver same.

This is one of the earliest film portrayals of a spree killer and the first film directed by Ida Lupino. Hence it has some historical interest. However, it is by no stretch of the imagination in the "film noir" genre, as many suggest. Classic film noir involves urban settings, a motley crew of criminals and their associates, a double and preferably a triple cross, a femme fatale, lots of rain and dark shadows, and a hero who enters into the underworld reluctantly and inadvisedly. Although no "film noir" classic has all of these conventions, most have a great many. This film has none. It does have great film noir cinematographer Nicholas Musuraca ( "Stranger on the 3rd Floor", "Cat People", "Out of the Past", "They Clash By Night", "The Blue Gardenia") and he does use some of his sharp black and white photography to make this a very watchable film.Don't expect film noir, nor will you get much psychological analysis of the spree killer. The performances are good and the direction is taut, but there are far better films from this era, and certainly people like Edmond O'Brien and Frank Lovejoy did far better jobs in far better films.

I never understand the whole concept of hitch hiking. If you are the hitcher, you run the risk of getting some crazy driver.Or, like this movie, if you are the driver, you run the risk of getting some crazy hitcher.This is a classic case of terror at the wheel.It's a relatively tight and well done movie that has been re made though out the years.Yes, part of it are not believable but overall it's a very very satisfying film.The Plot. Two friends on a fishing trip pick up a stranded motorist who turns out to be a psychotic escaped convict. This sociopath has already murdered other good Samaritans in his efforts to evade authorities. He sadistically taunts and threatens the two men and perversely delights in telling them that he has them both marked for death sometime before the end of the trip. His destination is a ferryboat in Baja, California, which he hopes will help him get to the mainland. The hostages hope to stay alive long enough to escape or be rescued by Mexican authorities.

Two carefree young travelers make the mistake of their lives when they pick up a mysterious, and slightly psychotic, hitch-hiker who never closes his right eye -- even when he sleeps!Film Noir...why don't they make these kinds of flicks today. They are so cool.Anyway, supposedly based upon a true story.It's a relatively well done foray into film noir, with one major flaw that draws the film down half way through.If there are two strong guys and another guy with a gun and the guy with the gun tells you he's going to kill you no matter what, but not telling you when, then you really have nothing left to lose.So at some point don't you try to jump him? They have numerous opportunities. And related to this -- why does the bad guy even want the two of them around? Pleasant conversation? They are a weight to him and represent the possibility of doom for him, so why not put an end to them and go it alone?If you can put this lack of logic aside, it's a fun film.