User reviews

A brilliant movie that was a first in its time and so many movies built up their success on it. People know about hundreds of movies that are so similar to this one and don't know about it!

It really saddens me that good movies like this one with a skillful actor like Terence Stamp and the attractive Samantha Egger are not played enough on channels like other silly movies that they keep repeating so many times over the same day and week.

The movie has so few actors that can be counted on one hand and all the time you can watch without being bored for a second only the two main actors while filled with suspense and waiting anxiously to know what will happen next. The ending is pretty much what nobody would expect.

I started watching this movie by chance and the first few scenes were so captivating that I had to watch it till the end.. at that time I was not aware that its a movie by 'William Wyler' who's famous for movies like 'Ben-Hur', 'The Best Years of Our Lives', and 'Roman Holiday'.

A two hour drama focused mostly on only two characters (Freddie Clegg and Miranda Grey) with many long scenes with no dialog at all apparently seems a boring idea but screenplay is brilliant, editing is prefect and each moment is deliberate.. the element of suspense is heightened to the point of tension that just kept me hooked into watching more to know what will happen next.. and above all, the dark instability of Freddie's character and his gradually intimate series of arguments, conflicts, confrontations and negotiations with Miranda was more than enough to keep me on edge throughout..

Freddie Clegg, the shy and introvert bank clerk who got a chance to make true what had previously been only his fantasy.. there are so many shades in this character.. driven by obsession & regression.. one moment he seems harmless, eager to please, and dismal in his desire for love and care.. and next moment he is bitter, stubborn and self-centered to the point of becoming blind to anyone else's feelings and thoughts.. one is always uncertain of what to expect from him next.. Terence Stamp is just terrific as Freddie Clegg and portrayed each and every shade of Freddie's personality with utmost brilliance..

Miranda Grey, a young art student.. the object of Freddie's desire.. her real personality is of an extrovert, confident, independent and dynamic girl who want to do so much in life but owning to circumstances imposed on her, she has to become an obedient and submissive person.. Samantha Eggar played this character perfectly.. one can see how initially she's in anger and pain of denying her real personality but near end how she actually become the one..

Stories where characters are portrayed as black & white, evil & innocent, wrong & right seems boring to me.. I enjoy situations when both the right and wrong person are equally confident that they're right.. confident to that extent that you become doubtful that who is right in real.. or if both are right at the same time.. this movie certainly offer such experience.. throughout the movie viewers must try to understand both character's perspectives..

I love how the title of the film reflects the hobby of collecting butterflies and the subject of the film as two sides of the same coin.. smart, beautiful yet creepy.. dialogs are effective and kind of that stays in memory.. one that is on my mind is 'It's no good shouting. You can't be heard. And anyway, there's no one to hear.' and yes, 'They're looking for you, but nobody is looking for me.', and then that entire argument over the Picasso's painting.. so many scenes, dialogs are just stuck into mind and will stay here for long I guess..

This intensely creepy film showcases director William Wyler in his intimate, character-study mode, and features a superb performance from Terrence Stamp in the title role, as the "collector" of beauty. Stamp creates a portrait of sexual obsession that is every bit as unsettling in its way as the long legacy of serial killer movies in existence. Samantha Eggar, as one of Stamp's "specimens," is used more as a catalyst for driving the plot and less as a character for whom we have any great deal of interest. Is that a flaw of the material or the intention of Wyler and novelist John Fowles, on whose book this is based? If their intention was to make us sympathize with, and even relate to, the character with the obsession, they succeed brilliantly.

The ending genuinely surprised me, which happens all too infrequently in movies like this. The film feels like a product of independent cinema before independent cinema really existed.

Grade: A

Gorgeous in a rather creepy, uncomfortable way. Terence Stamp is superb and Samantha Eggar, extraordinary. The sexual tension is tangible even if it is one sided. That's were the sickness resides. He is convinced that she will eventually love him. Isn't that the definition of madness? But when that madness looks like Terence Stamp, everything becomes immediately more complicated. I sat hoping for both their hopes to be fulfilled. Absurd, right? Perhaps but I wanted her to escape and I wanted him to have a moment of real honest intimacy with her - Impossible I know but that's what makes The Collector so compelling. The scene where he takes her out of the bathtub is one of the most perverse sex scenes without sex I've ever seen. Samantha Eggar was nominated for an Oscar but not Terence Stamp. In my own wishful mind, he won, big time. He certainly deserved it.

After winning a large amount in the pool in Reading, the outcast bank clerk and entomologist Freddie Clegg (Terence Stamp) buys an isolated house in the countryside. He stalks the art student Miranda Grey (Samantha Eggar) in London and uses chloroform to kidnap and bring her in his van to his house. The sociopath Freddie locks Miranda in the cellar and she discovers that he has had an unrequited crush on her since they were teenagers. Freddie promises to respect Miranda with his platonic love and to release her in a month on June, 11th. He shows also his collection of butterflies carefully kept in a room. However, Miranda feels that she is another collectible species only for the deranged man that feels power and control with the situation and he has no intention to let her go.

"The Collector" is another masterpiece of William Wyler that has been copycatted along the years by filmmakers that presently add violence, torture and gore to the plot. The performances of Terence Stamp and Samantha Eggar are top-notch in this theatrical film and they succeed to carry alone the whole story. I can not precisely tell how many times I have watched this film, but the last time I had seen it was on 07 October 2000. Surprisingly "The Collector" has only been released in Brazil in a rare VHS, a pride and joy of my collection. My vote is ten.

Title (Brazil): "O Colecionador" ("The Collector")

Note: On 03 May 2013, I saw this movie again, now on an imported Blu- Ray.

I should have commented on this excellent film long ago. I first saw it in the late 1970s on television and was immediately entranced by both Stamp and Eggar whose performances are are simply riveting. It is an almost "Hitchcockian" film, in that tension and suggestion are used to maximum effect keeping the viewer on the edge of their chair. This is a film that I'd love to see re-made or re-discovered, but again like Hitchcock's best, it owes a great deal of its impact to the time in which it was made and would likely suffer at the hands of a lesser director than Wyler. Fowles work is captured (like Miranda) and viewed with microscopic clarity through Freddy's watchful eye. It has also inspired a song called "Chastity" from The Raves CD, "Past Perfect Tense" which relates the whole of the story. SEE THIS FILM.

I do not consider this book of John Fowles to be impressive, and film does not improve on the book by cutting out a character in the book. And Fowles, has written more impressive novels.

The film is important as it is belongs to the last phase of William Wyler's career. The only impressive bits of the film are the lead performances of Terence Stamp and Samantha Eggar, both of whom won the acting honors at Cannes for this film.

A butterfly collector finds a Camberwell Beauty and then sets his sights on a larger specimen ( i.e. a human whom he had been secretly admiring for some while ) to add to his collection ! Despite that this film has a limited number of characters, two to be precise, it is very good and captivating indeed, thanks to some excellent camera work and a semi-Hitchcockian sound track ! Naturally, and even more so with this type of film, it's the first viewing which leaves the lasting impression ! Now where could that lovely old house have been situated ? ? The picture quality is absolutely excellent and whilst viewing it recently it suddenly seemed to me that the 1960's were only yesterday and that the forty years that have elapsed since the making of the film had all been condensed into a form of black hole.

Films using a limited number of characters and a pretty basic plot are a bit of a risk but this one passes the test with flying colours and there are little if any dull moments. Both characters perform excellently and the viewer can sympathize with both, especially at the outset ; only as the film advances does one become aware of the underlying horror and this indeed makes the film far more effective than any old blood-and-gore horror movie.

First-time viewings are sure to wear down the edges of most of the viewers' seats ! To be recommended to all those who privilege suspense over special effects !

First of all, let me say I'm a William Wyler fan -- while not being a "genius", he worked in a great variety of genres with passion, boldness and superior craftsmanship. He got us used to expecting first-rate films; because of that, "The Collector" is ultimately rather unsatisfying. It's not bad, of course – but it's a long shot from WW's huis clos masterpieces like "These Three", "The Letter", "The Little Foxes", "The Heiress" or "Desperate Hours".

"The Collector" is at least half an hour overlong. The plot has become predictable after 40 years of so many films about psychopath serial killers and the screenplay is underdeveloped in terms of potential conflicts and twists. The music here is crucial due to the little amount of dialogue and the building of a growingly desperate atmosphere and Maurice Jarre's music simply lacks inventiveness and thrilling power, it's just ineffective -- the film asked for a score in the line of Bernard Herrmann to fill up the action. The cinematography of masters Krasker and Surtees is luxurious instead of stifling. The clash between Stamp's and Eggar's acting styles doesn't help their characters: Stamp goes "Method" while Eggar stays realistic, though they both look extremely attractive in their mid-20s.

All that said, this movie will be a nice choice for a rainy evening, although one has, through the years, been given the right to expect more from champ Wyler. My vote: 6 out of 10.

Based on John Fowles' influential novel of the same title, The Collector is a dark and pioneering film that presents us with a character unlike most other cinematic psychopaths and a situation ripe with gripping tension. Helmed by experienced director William Wyler - man who turned his hand to, and was mostly successful with, a number of genres throughout his illustrious career, The Collector is an exercise in classy, high quality horror and is an obvious front runner to films like The Silence of the Lambs. Incidentally, The Collector probably stands up better today than it did upon its release over forty years ago. The story focuses on Freddie Clegg, a wealthy but lonely man who lives in solitude in an old Tudor style mansion out in the country. His hobby is collecting and mounting butterflies, and one day he decides to apply what he knows about his hobby to the world of romance, and proceeds to deck out his basement so that a human can live there, and then goes and captures himself a 'girlfriend'. The unlucky lady is Miranda Grey, a woman who isn't too happy to oblige the collector's strange purpose for kidnapping her.

The book that this film was based on not only went on to influence other works of fiction, but also apparently became an influence for real life serial killers. The Collector's influence has allegedly inspired at least five actual serial killers; and if that isn't a harrowing fact about this story; I don't know what is! The story itself never delves into the realms of impossibility, and manages to stay realistic throughout, which lends the film an effective edge. The main focus is always on the relationship between the collector and his captive, and director William Wyler is keen to keep this at the forefront of the film. The conversations they have and the actions between the two represents compulsive viewing, and that is definitely where the true greatness of this film shines through; the scene involving the Catcher in the Eye and Picasso is this film at it's best. The style of the movie is very British, and this is complimented by the central performers. Terence Stamp is wonderfully understated, but still impressively insane, while Samantha Eggar makes a mark as the unfortunate victim. Overall, I guess that the reason why this film isn't too well respected today is down to the fact that it was so ahead of it's time. However, if you want a thriller that offers some brilliant suspense and a realistic story - The Collector is a must see!

This film is pretty well scripted. Despite the fact that essentially there're only two people that appears in the film, plot development is fairly smooth and natural. The plot is somewhat like the "Vanishing" but this movie was made in the '60s when the world didn't know much about brutal serial killers, so the villain soft pedals his hostility quite a bit towards the victim Miranda Gray (Samantha Eggar). Terence Stamp fits the part of the serial killer to a "T" in this movie. He is totally ruthless and self absorbed in the way he treats Gray, yet, his vanity refuses to admit this to himself. He thinks he's on some kind of a noble quest to collect the woman of his infatuation, and believes that he's actually treating them well. This character is really evil - and Terence plays it up to the hilt. A depiction of a sociopath '60s style. This must have been a pretty shocking film back then and even now it hasn't lost it's bite after over 40 years.

A man (Terence Stamp) kidnaps a woman (Samantha Eggar) and holds her hostage just for the pleasure of having her there.

In his autobiography, Stamp confessed surprise as being chosen for the role, expecting Anthony Perkins or John Hurt to play Clegg. Having been chosen, he assumed (as had most others) that Julie Christie — regarded at that time as the best young actress of the era — would be given the role of Miranda, but Wyler chose Eggar because he thought it would introduce the correct air of sexual tension and awkwardness between the two protagonists. Wyler also knew Eggar had turned Stamp down when they both were studying together at Webber Douglas Academy of Dramatic Art.

I think this casting is both devious and brilliant. I don't think of Wyler as one of "those" directors, but maybe I should. Casting a woman to make Stamp uncomfortable, and then torturing Eggar on the set... he may be much more of the mean-spirited and exacting type than he comes across from his earlier films.

Allegedly, the original cut ran over an hour longer. Most of the time I don't really want movies to be longer than 90 minutes to two hours. But this is a film I could use more of. It was perfect, and at the risk of ruining that perfection, I would like to see what more was filmed.

The Collector is one of the best movies I've ever seen with regards to suspense. This 1965 movie sent chills down my spine several times. Terence Stamp (Freddie Clegg) is exceptional. At first the movie appears a bit silly, but horror soon steps in. Freddie Clegg collects butterflies and then he collects a woman. Literally. He keeps her locked in his basement. Definitely not for children, but this movie is a must for horror fans. I recommend it highly.

A well directed, cleverly captivating film allegory about the psychological impact of inhibition, it is not at all very faithful to the book, but as a film independent of the novel it stands quite strong. The use of flashbacks works well, Stamp is a very good choice for the lead, easy doing a lot better with his role than Eggar (in spite of her receiving an Oscar nomination and not him). The material nevertheless is not handled as well by the screenwriters as by Fowles, with shallower characters and only a small psychological grip. The film has a lot in it to admire, but it is not all that potent, and it could have been quite improved, but it is good nonetheless.

Classic psychological suspense. The Collector creates sympathy and understanding for Clegg,a shy,impotent bank clerk who wins a fortune in a football pool that enables him to carry out his plan to kidnap Miranda, an art student. Miranda becomes his prisoner, and Clegg believes his captive will fall in love with him once she gets to know him. Miranda comes to realize that she has become an object to be collected,like Clegg's butterflies. Ironically, Miranda matures in her prison. It becomes a struggle between life(art/Miranda) and death(the collection/Clegg). Wyler's film is a true tour de force. He sustains the film with basically 2 characters;no gimmicks or diversions. Excellent performances. Stamp and Eggar are beautifully matched. And the ending is genuinely chilling. Though overused,the music is effective. 9/10

Director William Wyler's adaptation of a novel by John Fowles concerning a disturbed young man's obsession with a beautiful woman who he eventually kidnaps and places in a basement room. The film is solidly made and acted and while it is interesting to watch, it is never gripping or compelling. It doesn't have any of the sordid messiness that the material requires and would have given it the edge it needs. Wyler's solid direction is at odds with the material. It's too neat and tidy. Samantha Eggar is a standout despite the fact that the ending feels like a cop out.

I was interested in seeing "The Collector" only because it was directed by William Wyler who was one of the top directors in Hollywood from the 1930's through the 1950s. "The Collector" is fascinating because the story itself is a bit perverted and falls into the realm of Hitchcock, not Wyler (I kept thinking about Hitchcock's "Psycho" throughout). Why would Wyler, a solid veteran of Hollywood Movie Workhorses, be drawn to a dark film about an egotistical "head-case" who collects butterflies and decides that he wants to collect a beautiful woman he has long admired and keep her to himself? I have not found anything about his reasons but his involvement makes "The Collector" worth a look. Certainly, nothing about the story makes it worthy. What might have seemed daring and cutting edge back in 1965 now seems tame and has been done numerous times and better (the film is like "Misery" with the gender roles reversed). Nothing about what happens between the beautiful Miranda (a painfully beautiful and likable Samantha Eggar) and creepy Freddy (Terence Stamp) is really unique or even very interesting. But "The Collector" does hold your interest. The movie's opening moments are confusing. Wyler's attempts to establish Freddie as a character does not work completely enough to substantiate the act of kidnapping. Once Freddie has kidnapped Miranda and places her in a dungeon like setting, "The Collector" starts to come together. It becomes a character study of a demented, delusional loser who still pines for love and his prisoner's attempt to some how get out of the situation alive. In the scenes between Miranda and Freddie, Wyler's strength shines and Eggar is particularly good. She's lovely to look at and you can certainly understand why Freddie is attracted to her. Eggar's eyes show us how she is trying to assess the situation for an escape while Freddie keeps changing his methods and reasons for holding her captive. Without Eggar or a comparable actress, "The Collector" wouldn't work at all. It is too bad that what limited success the film does achieve falls squarely on Eggar's shoulders because Terence Stamp's Freddie is the reason the film fails to compel. It's not necessarily Stamp's fault. He is a great actor and though he is playing a stiff (or a demented dork), Stamp is never stiff or dull. "The Collector" simply does not establish how we are meant to feel toward Freddie until the very end when a piece of throwaway narration finally lets us know that he is psychotic (probably a sociopath). I doubt the intention by Wyler's was to create this ambiguity. If the film had made Freddie's character clear, then we would feel more peril for Miranda and her situation. As it plays out, we are confused by him and never really know if he is dangerous or just a bit of a lonely nut looking for love. This confusion elicited some seemingly contradictory and expected reactions. Take for example the scene where Miranda is tied up in the bathroom while the neighbor visits Freddie. When Miranda turns the bathtub water on so it overflows I found myself actually not wanting the neighbor to notice. I was actually on Freddie's side for some reason. If Hitchcock had made "The Collector" then I could see him doing something like this. He's the type of director who would have loved to have the audience side with the psycho but he would have made Miranda somehow unlikeable. In Wyler's film, he has not convinced us of Stamp's true nature (the upbeat, chirpy music that underscores many of Stamp's scenes certainly does not help). Therefore, the film feels uncertain and unfocused and it kills any tension.

In the end, it comes down to the direction. As good as Wyler is, material like this is not something that is within his expertise. Perhaps he was, in his late career, trying to do something new. Having been a long time film maker, he might have sensed the changing times and tried to stay relevant. It's a worthy effort. "The Collector" required a director with a vision to create a sense of constant menace. The material should not have been smartened up the way Wyler does it but played for it's pulpy, scary aspects. Hitchcock could have done it. Certainly Polanski could have too and his "Rosemary's Baby" just three years later managed to be lot of what "The Collector" could have been.

This is the ultimate compulsive/obsessive film ever made for the big screen. Wyler does a magnificent job of direction here; every bit as good as Hitchcock in Psycho, and in some instances, even better. Psycho, of course, was the ultimate Hitchcock thriller, and was a great film in its own right. But this film goes much deeper into the psyche of one of the primary characters, and it absolutely pulls no punches. A bank clerk wins a fortune in a football (soccer) pool and collects butterflies. He graduates to human beings. It is a relentless study of a sick mind done to perfection by Wyler and company. Terrance Stamp is outstanding; as is Samantha Eggar. Both deserved nominations, but only Eggar got one and lost to Julie Christie for Darling. Eggar was better. But the real travesty was Wyler losing to Robert Wise for The Sound of Music. I could see an award for best choreography, but not for best director. Please. Catch this masterpiece.

The second time I've seen this film. Pity Terence Stamp did not go on to make more really decent films. Well, I should say that at least I have not found any of them. Suffice to say, albeit very much in the 60s style, here is a character drama based on two characters, well played by both Stamp and the lovely Samantha Eggar. Whereas I could not stop feeling sorry for her, I rather fancy I might have been tempted to do the same as Stamp: kidnap her and hide her away in an old farmhouse deep in the English countryside.

Nicely directed, beautifully filmed and credible performances by both, add up to what is nearly a `collector's item' or even a period piece. A far cry from the great `Ben Hur', but Wyler shows he was capable of this kind of drama, almost a piece for live theatre.

Maurice Jarre's music obviously had its mind on other things: influences from his themes to `Dr. Zhivago' are clearly evident: the two films came out in the same year.

Upon second viewing about 40 years apart, this holds up beautifully. Samantha Eggar (as Miranda) and Terence Stamp (as Freddy) are ideally cast in their respective roles as an art student and the psychopath who kidnaps her. The book is more interesting, with more layers to it (i.e a love story that Miranda has with an older artist)but had to be altered for the screen to include dialogue which the book lacks. Terence Stamp is downright creepy, always trying to fit his obsessive requirements to the object of his desire. His mannerisms and slouch make his character completely believable. Trivia buffs will be interested to know that Kenneth More's part, as Miranda's lover, was completely eliminated from the final cut, here he is seen in only one scene and it is in semi-profile. The ending is terrifying and set me to thinking of how many of these crimes are committed while the rest of the world remains unaware forever. 8 out 10. Fabulous film.

"The Collector" was an OK movie. The story idea was good but the execution was somewhat uneven. Terence Stamp's performance was at times wooden and calculated and at other times overly emoting. Samantha Eggar was good in her role. I thought the setting was confining, more suited for a stage production than a movie. They wasted the interesting cellar setting. I felt none of the dampness or closeness that would be typical of that space. In fact it seemed rather open and comfortable. Still the idea behind the movie is good and it would probably be worth redoing. I think a live play based on the story would be fun.