MovieChat Forums > The Quatermass Xperiment (1956) Discussion > Nasty Mr Quatermass

Nasty Mr Quatermass

posted 15 years ago by screenman
17 replies | jump to latest

I was watching the `Xperiment' last night as I'm sure a lot of other Kneale fans were. But I can't help remarking what a thoroughly nasty piece of work Dunleavy's Quatermass is. He really is just a callous, arrogant, irresponsible self-opinionated snob. As a `hero' I can't think of his possessing any saving virtue.

The sole-surviving astronaut is no more than a scientific curiosity to him. He attempts to deny him hospital treatment because he will lose overall control. When he finally concedes it is only on the pretext that he will have exclusive access. He makes every attempt to bauk the wife, showing no regard for her distress than is politic.

When he confronts the police inspector he says something like `what he [the survivor] needs is scientific evaluation and that he himself is obviously best qualified to provide that'. Meaning that an ordinary copper isn't smart enough.

Towards the end he just stalks off saying that he's going to try again. And once more risk bringing calamity to all life on Earth whether we like it or not.
Andre Morell's was a much more likeable character, I believe.

Even `McCreedy' in Carpenter's similarly themed `The Thing' realised that it was better to die than let the geneii escape. I wonder what Dunleavy's Quatermass would have done under the same circumstances.

Any thoughts?

[–] chrisasiama 15 years ago

I also watched The Quatermass Experiment the other night. I really enjoyed watching it again despite the fact that Brian Donleavy's Quatermass is a despicable character. He's a cold, calculating and arrogant man indeed.

[–] peytonplace1 15 years ago

I totally agree with the comments on Quatermaass' character. The guy was an obnoxious control freak and his characterisation is the weakest link in this otherwise terrific movie. It's very implausible to modern viewers to think of this guy stomping around as an out-of-control scientist.

[–] bastasch8647 15 years ago

Or we could see Q as a darker type of hero, who does what he has to for science (defined as data gathering) and to hell with most other social considerations. Part of his bull-headedness is driven by his manic desire _to know_. Since he doesn't mellow much in the franchise, perhaps the producers/directors wanted to work with the idea of an anti-hero Q. I know that Kneale went on record as disliking Donlevy's Q. But maybe there is something to the "brilliant mind devoted only to data and ripping the veil from the unknown, social factors be damned." I loved Donlevy's Q when I first saw Enemy from Space on US TV when I was a kid. His vigor seemed almost like an intense burst of radiation or a toxic gas against which aliens would have to fight with utter savagery: a savagery that must match that of Donlevy's Q. These aliens were evil in the sense that they were utterly against us (consciously or not). I took comfort in the acidity of Donlevy's Q, who was just as utterly against the aliens, no excuses made.

[–] peytonplace1 15 years ago

Interesting post, bastasch8647. I didn't know anything about Kneale's view of the Q character. However, I thought the characterization was highly implausible. I don't think scientists would have been able to run riot even in the 1950's. Q barged around reading the Riot Act to everybody he encountered, including senior doctors, police officers and administrators. He wouldn't even allow the wife of the traumatized man to see her husband! Having said all that, an older relative of mine who saw this movie when he was very young didn't notice any of the pompous aspects of Q until he watched the movie a few weeks ago.

[–] bastasch8647 15 years ago

Yeah, Q could have been played differently, but still Donlevy was given lines inherently gruff and that was not his fault. I think it was in Enemy From Space that he barges into his lab blustering and raging... and then immediately apologizes to his staff. Maybe a little softening there...

[–] peytonplace1 15 years ago

I agree that Donlevy had to work with the hand he was dealt.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] melnar1 11 years ago

I am astounded at so many comments hypercritical about Brian Donlevy’s portrayal of Bernard Quatermass.

It must be remembered that it wasn’t Nigel Kneale who wrote the screenplay, it was Richard Landau and Val Guest who adapted Kneale’s original television play; they changed the Quatermass character somewhat and they wrote the dialogue which Donlevy, not a star but quite a competent actor, had to speak. Donlevy was not at fault – he was following directions by Guest as director.

From almost the beginning of the movie Quatermass was hounded, pounded and poked at by Blake (played by Lionel Jeffries), while firing non-stop questions at him to which he had no means of answering.

I ask you – in heaven’s name how would YOU react to such behavior? I’m quite sure you would also become aggravated to the point of exasperation in a very short time.

I think that, given the material dished out to him, Donlevy did a pretty good job in the role.

[–] Little Minx 15 years ago

To me,it seems as though the character was a representation of the reckless pursuit of something that is perceived as "progress"or "the greater good" at the expense of someone or something. Quatermass seemed to have been blinded by his own ambition and desire to achieve what he saw as a necessary quest for knowledge and the consequences be damned. In his mind,others,such as the inspector, were fools who failed to see his vision and were just impediments to his plans. He even seemed to show a startling lack of respect for Victor when,after the murder of the pharmacist,he sneers,-"He's an engineer,he doesn't know a thing about chemistry." Plainly,as he saw it,the doomed men were heroes,albeit necessary sacrifices. His character served as a warning to proceed with caution,especially in a world which was perched on the brink of both the nuclear and space age.

"When I count my blessings,I count my horse twice."

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Strazdamonas 13 years ago

And yet his reactions to what was happening in the movie were best of all characters.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

[–] srjow 10 years ago

I'm not sure about any hypocritical comments above. I watched the DvD last weekend and was struck by the brusqueness of Quatermass – he seemed to know more about heat than the fire chief, could order military officers about, give Inspector Lomax dressing downs and know better than any hospital.

These things come across as weaknesses of plot slightly, and they don’t quite work, but it is nothing major. Suchlike would not have even registered with me when watching this film as a kid. No film is perfect and a movie is not a documentary!

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" Carl Sagan

[–] Prismark10 10 years ago

The adaptation by the writer and director changed the character somewhat from the BBC tv serial.

Its that man again!!

[–] stevieboy499 10 years ago

Added to which Dunlevey was a predatory homosexual who was in the habit of drunkenly hitting on other members of the cast.
A while back I read an account of the making of Quatermass 2 where Brian Forbes said he spent more time dodging Donlevey than acting in the film.?.

[–] franzkabuki 10 years ago

"When he confronts the police inspector he says something like "what he (the survivor) needs is scientific evaluation and he himself is obviously best qualified to provide that". Meaning that an ordinary copper isn't smart enough".

Mmm... are you suggesting that some bobby on the beat IS smart enough to conduct scientific evaluations? Either way I found Donlevy's characterization quite refreshing - he was neither a hapless do-gooder nor a mad scientist running amok, but a driven, bullheaded, no-nonsense expert of his field. Tunnel visioned and sometimes kinda crass, but not evil. And wasn't it in fact irresponsible to park this specimen with an unknown, potentially contageous cosmic disease in a hospital, where he could prove a lethal danger to other patients?

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan