Nice effects though.

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

I just want to say that I've seen this movie recently and I like it a lot. Niles and Holland (Chris Udvarnoky and Martin Udvarnoky) performance are just great. It's a pain these boys didn't continued with their acting career. Regards from Spain!

This little rural thriller is considered an unsung minor classic in some circles, but I had some problems with it - three, to be more specific: a) either my hearing is going bad, or the sound recording was poor, or some of the actors did not enunciate well enough, but I could not understand much of the dialogue (and my DVD has no subtitles, either) - like, at least half of it, b) nothing happens for nearly an hour, c) Uta Hagen gives a supremely irritating performance, with her overdone fake Russian accent and the overuse of expressions such as "Come, child". Apart from all that, director Robert Mulligan is successful at establishing a mood, there is a startling plot twist in the middle, and if you take the film as an allegory about the difficulty of a child to cope with loss, it is effective. But it should have been half as long. **1/2 out of 4.

"The Other" tells the story of two identical twins, Niles and Holland, during a summer in a 1930s farming community. Niles is a good natured and social, but Holland is quite the opposite. After his father's death, Niles spends a lot of time with his grandmother Ada, who teaches him what they call "the game" or "the great game", a spooky and mysterious pretend game that Niles exceeds at playing. But "the game" is not the only spooky thing happening the summer, and horrible happenings start to occur in the farm. I can see from the many reviews and its high ratings that "The Other" has quite a cult status. Roger Ebert wrote a glaring review (which you can find online), and, according to Wikipedia, the movies remained one of his darlings.Unfortunately, unless you fondly remember seeing this movie when it came out, it's hard to justify such a high rating. The fact is that the movie has not aged gracefully-- -not a bit. What could have been a jaw-dropping twist in the 70s can be guessed within five minutes by modern audiences. And, unfortunately, once you understand what is going on, most of the movie is ruined for you. The plot loses it pace, and the few red herrings stick out like a sore thumb (and make terribly little sense).Thanks to Mulligan's directorial choices and to a great photography, the movies still retains an eerie atmosphere and a Southern Gothic vibe. However, some of the acting and many editing choices look incredibly cheesy now.

Psychological horror at its best. No one who's seen The Other goes away unimpressed. As other reviews indicate, the movie has developed a strong cult following and deservedly so. Like so many low-key gems, this one too would likely fade into oblivion were it not for DVD and the internet, which can now build an audience from the grass-roots up. And this obscure little movie certainly merits revival.Director Mulligan worked against convention, filming his classic in bright open sunlight, instead of the creepy shadow and low-key stage lighting dictated by Gothic tradition. But the style works, thanks to a fluid and highly intelligent camera. Watch the opening scene, as the slow pan meanders its way toward the solitary boy revealed finally in dreamy soft focus. This reverie sets the perfect psychological tone for the story and is key to the over-arching plot device. There are other moments of slow, silent pans that lend both atmosphere and creepy suspense, and I particularly like the way Mulligan stays with Niles' little world in spellbinding fashion. That way, the surrounding mayhem is only glimpsed and not belabored, allowing our imagination room to take over. For fans of the genre, his technique is reminiscent of Peter Weir's 1970's co-classic, Picnic at Hanging Rock.Horror films rarely rely on acting for their impact. This one, however -- as other reviewers point out -- is a rarity. The performances are first-rate, particularly the astonishingly fine turn by the Udvarnoky twins. Chris who plays Niles achieves a naturalness and spontaneity that is itself almost scary. I don't think I've ever seen a farm boy portrayed more convincingly, nor has boyish exuberance been more expertly conveyed than in his spirited gallop to wherever he's going -- which makes the main plot device all the more sinister. Then too, there's Diana Muldaur's agonizing portrayal of the mother. It is only through her stricken eyes that the audience comes to realize the enormity of what's happening, while the shot of her wraith-like face framed by a dirty window pane is enough to haunt many a sleepless night. Moreover, the bustling farm family, always busy with this and that, appears straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting.Yes, the story unfolds in a complex manner, placing a bit of a burden on the audience. And there are a few holes, as when the elderly neighbor calls the magician Holland instead of Niles -- presumably she's close enough to the household to know better. Nonetheless, there's not an ounce of fat on Tom Tryon's screenplay, while the scattered parts come convincingly together by movie's close. For those fans max'ed out on slasher-gore and blood-fest, this exercise in implied horror is the perfect antidote -- and a worthy addition to the legendary tradition of Nosferatu, Vampyr, and Val Lewton's imaginative 1940's cycle of Cat People, I Walked with a Zombie, and The Seventh Victim. So don't miss it.