Five Steps to Danger
Five Steps to Danger
NR | 30 January 1957 (USA)
Five Steps to Danger Trailers

Can a couple keep important secrets from Communist spies?

Reviews
Scanialara

You won't be disappointed!

... View More
Ensofter

Overrated and overhyped

... View More
Phonearl

Good start, but then it gets ruined

... View More
Jenni Devyn

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

... View More
albertayler1

Let's get this out of the way. IMDb and the film itself do not credit a young Jack Elam as the thug Harry, who fails to do away with the principal characters. One of the spies later refers to him as "Harry". Elam looks almost ruggedly handsome here, not the messy, bugeyed, snaggletoothed psychotic he often portrayed in later years.The real problem with this noirish road film is that the script is severely weakened from the plot and dialog of the novel "The Steel Mirror" by Donald Hamilton. The original novel had a very intricate plot that included psychological amnesia, guilt as a result of betrayal of resistance fighters in France in World WAr II, more fleshed out characters and motivations, etc. Kessler, the producer, director, and screenwriter failed to make anything of his material leaving the actors trying to salvage a dull script. Had this film been done by one of the noir specialists of the 40s it probably would have been a different film. If you can hunt down Hamilton's original version it is a fine read. I salute Sterling Hayden, Ruth Roman, and Werner Klemperer for their efforts.

... View More
jjnxn-1

Entertaining chase drama with a cold war twist. Ruth Roman, one of the more under appreciated actresses of the fifties, gives an excellent portrait of a woman pursued. Intelligent and capable with an underlying edge of hysteria since she's never completely sure of what's happening. Made just as the Cold War was starting to really make an impact on public consciousness the film uses that to it's advantage. The requisite romantic subplot is the weakest part of the story but part of that is due to having that stolid block of wood Sterling Hayden in the lead. A stronger actor would have made this even better.A minor spy film but one that keeps the tension taut and is strengthened by the strong work of its leading lady.

... View More
MartinHafer

I read through the other reviews and was shocked that one of the reviewers compared this film favorably to a Hitchcock film and another gave it a 9. While I could see some parallels to "The 39 Steps", apart from that there isn't anything Hitchcockian about it...it's just a badly written espionage film.Nice-guy Sterling Hayden is traveling cross-country when his car falls apart. He is soon met by a lady (a poorly cast Ruth Roman) who asks if he'll accompany her to Santa Fe--helping her drive in order to get there faster. On the way, and this is goofy, cops try to take Roman into custody. So what would you do in this situation? Yep, slug the cops and run like mad!! Hayden doesn't even know this lady, yet he does this?! While these cops did act a big like jerks, why didn't they then go directly to the nearest police station AFTER they crossed the state line only minutes later?! This is especially puzzling when she tells Sterling about her past and how she might be mixed up in some sort of espionage. Any SANE person would immediately go to the police, FBI or CIA--not keep pressing on to Santa Fe! This sort of brainless writing continues throughout the film (such as Hayden then marrying this lady he barely knows) and it irritated the life out of me that the film was so poorly written. Frankly, both Roman and Hayden deserved better material than this and I was annoyed that I wasted my time on this silly film. With a little re-write, it would have been a dandy film. As it was, it's a boring and silly mess. Comparing this to Hitchcock is like comparing a Cracker Jack prize to the Hope Diamond!!The only positive thing this confusing film has going for it is seeing Werner Klemperer playing an evil guy--that was a bit cool.

... View More
Alonzo Church

Sterling Hayden, a guy stuck in the middle of the desert with a broken down car, agrees to help drive Ruth Roman, a nervous woman in a hurry, to Santa Fe. In doing so, he takes the first of FIVE STEPS TO DANGER.A lot of movies made in the 40s and 50s, intentionally or not, end up celebrating the glories of the American Road, presumably because filming on the highway was cheaper and easier than building a set. This one, featuring views of mid 50s cars, gas stations, roadside dives, vacation lodges and hotel lobbies, is better than most at showing the real look of roadside America, 1955. Additionally, for the first half of the movie, the plot is pretty good, too, as the filmmaker does a decent job of sowing doubt as to whether female lead Ruth Roman is just a gal with a case of nerves, or a dangerous femme fatale. Unfortunately, as is the case with a lot of B films, the premise is better than the execution, and the ultimate implausibility and banality of the goings on makes the second half of the film less interesting. But the rather good start to the movie will probably keep you interested enough to stay to the end, where all is explained by the good-hearted CIA agent.If you are a sucker for midcentury cool or low budget crime dramas, this one is for you. But don't expect a brilliant ending, or a good performance from Werner (Col. Clink) Klemperer.

... View More