Review: The Blob (1958)

There's an inherent danger in reviewing an older movie, especially one from an era completed foreign to the person doing the review.  How do I, who grew up in the 90s, judge a drive-in movie from the late 50s?  I can do some research into the film to provide context - it was in color when this sort of film getting a color treatment was uncommon, and it was the second billed film of a drive-in double feature (the top billed movie being I Married a Monster from Outer Space).  It launched the career of its lead - a 28-year-old Steve McQueen in his second-ever film - and rose above its trappings to eventually be selected for the Criterion Collection.  And nothing in watching the films screams at me that it deserves its many laurels.

Now, that's not to say it is a bad film.  It's good, and I'd daresay that it was several steps better than similar-type films of its era (which no doubt helped it become such a hit that it became the headline film of its double feature after a certain point).  But it's also fairly generic, and I'd venture a guess that the same criticism could've been lobbed at it during its original run in 1958.

To wit, my belief is that the monster - the titular Blob - is the main reason it stood out.  While the effects aren't anything to write home about, a large gelatin-like creature that absorbs people without thought is certainly an unnerving monster to deal with, and I can think of precious few movie villains of such grotesque simplicity.

One would think that Steve McQueen would've given a Star is Born performance in this film also, but I'm not sure I'd call it that.  It is certainly better than anyone else in the film, and you can see his natural screen charisma, but even a veteran actor would struggle with expanding on the paint-by-numbers role.  I will note that McQueen doesn't look anything like a high schooler (none of the speaking teens look anywhere near the age the are portraying), but given the long history of 20somethings playing high schools in cinema, I hardly consider it a strike against him.

The movie also comes down firmly on the side of its teen characters - moreso than you'd expect for a film in this era.  At no point are you supposed to role your eyes at the kids, and instead the frustration stims from adults who just won't listen.  Again, it certainly wouldn't be something a modern audience wouldn't have seen before, but it certainly helped its appeal in 1958.

Would I recommend this movie?  I'd probably point most people to the 1988 remake instead, but there's a charm to this one that makes it worth watching - if only to see an older movie that set a trend for latter movies.

7 out of 10