» » Walk the Angry Beach (1968)

Walk the Angry Beach (1968) Online

Walk the Angry Beach (1968) Online
Original Title :
Walk the Angry Beach
Genre :
Movie / Drama
Year :
Directror :
John Hayes
Cast :
Tony Vorno,Paul Bruce,Ernest Macias
Writer :
John Hayes
Type :
Time :
1h 14min
Rating :
Walk the Angry Beach (1968) Online

Hollywood scrapyard owner Tony is invited by the owner of a strip club to take part in the heist of an armored car. At the man's establishment, Tony meets Sandy, who's stripping to make ends meet while she tries to get her career as an actress off the ground. Tony and Sandy fall in love, but Tony worries that Sandy will fall prey to the seedy side of Hollywood, and decides to take the hold-up job so that he can use his share to help Sandy. But in Hollywood, nothing is ever that easy.
Complete credited cast:
Tony Vorno Tony Vorno - Tony (as Anthony Vorno)
Paul Bruce Paul Bruce - Nick
Ernest Macias Ernest Macias - Ernest (as Ernest Macías)
John Barrick John Barrick - Tom
Doug Rideout Doug Rideout - Fitz
Leslie Moorhouse Leslie Moorhouse - Shakespearean
Joanne Stewart Joanne Stewart - Patti
Lea Marmer Lea Marmer - Mrs. McVea
Rue McClanahan Rue McClanahan - Sandy

User reviews



It's no wonder Rue McClanahan usually leaves this little number off of her official resume. Worse than the worst cinematic trainwrecks, Hollywood After Dark is a messterpiece of a movie. The only word that can really, truly describe this film is "bad." Plain and simple. I did not expect an Oscar-worthy work of art, but this defied even my lowest of expectations. Everything about Hollywood After Dark is absolutely awful, from the editing (or lack thereof), plot (what plot?) and cinematography to the lighting and music (which is quite annoying and blares loudly throughout the entire seventy-four minute film). Labeled as a sleazy exploiter, the only thing sleazy about this movie is some awful burlesque dancing, which I suppose was considered rather raunchy when Hollywood After Dark was made in 1961. As for Rue's performance- considering what she was given to work with, it really was not bad. Not an award-winning performance by any means but her's was by far the most promising in the entire film. All in all, Hollywood After Dark is likely one of the worst films I've ever seen. I think the best way to sum it up is just to say that Mystery Science Theater 3000 would have had a field day.


A junkyard owner is approached by two hoods to help them with an armored car heist they have planned. Although hesitant at first, he agrees after meeting and falling for a stripper trying to break into acting. He wants the money to help her get away from the seedier side of Hollywood. The robbery goes off as planned, but the would-be criminals turn on each other with disastrous consequences.

I've seen a lot of bad movies over the years, but only a handful fall into the I-want-to-gouge-my-eyes-out category. Hollywood After Dark is one such movie. It's bottom of the barrel in every respect. The acting is horrendous; the plot is a disaster; the direction is Coleman Francis-ish; the stripper scenes are mind-numbingly awful; and on it goes. Hollywood After Dark is a tawdry, dirty, and depressing mess of a movie. I wasn't sure when the movie ended if I should take a shower or slit my wrists. It's that bad!

And if the movie wasn't already wretched enough, just wait until Rue McClanahan takes the stage for her burlesque number. That's right – Golden Girl Rue McClanahan is a stripper! It's one of those moments that I could have gone all my life without seeing. Now that I've got that visual back in my head, add retching to my list of things I thought about doing after watching the movie!


This is a movie about stripping with three vignettes of stripping that make the whole thing seem very unappealing. Maybe that was on purpose; the movie is obviously ANTI-stripping in every other regard.

Much has been said about Rue's performance, and from what I could see, she was misdirected in virtually everything she was supposed to do, as was the male lead. Both were obviously capable of better performances, and it is a shame in particular that the male lead never made it to better films. Rue's make-up is flat and chalky; I kept expecting this to become a vampire film at any time. But her performance is far better than the director evidently wanted.

The director; ah, the director. Possibly the stodgiest, most agoraphobic person ever to lens a film. I still have no idea how he made the beach and the OCEAN look confining and bleak; he makes the boating scenes in "The Skydivers" look like a ad of an amusement park. The director and writer put together a depressing, impotent world in which no one is really worth redemption or really even wants it.

This film is recommended as a textbook for what NOT to when making a movie.


It's easy to blame Rue McClanahan for the fact that this movie sucks, and in fact she is no help to it at all. She goes through the entire movie with a face frozen into a permanent grimace, as if someone is waving a small, fragrant turd under her nose. But she knows her lines, her blocking and movement are better than anyone else in the movie, and she is obviously trying to give her performance some weight and direction, as does the poor sap who plays her romantic interest.

But the real problem is the dreary, turgid screenplay and the aimless direction that tries for "Playhouse 90" but can't even manage "PeeWee's Playhouse." The movie tries so hard for profundity and existential weariness that it almost gives itself a hernia, but the dialog clunks like a lead washer in a drying machine and the actors just can't make the lines work.

Not to mention that, well, nothing much happens, and it takes 90 minutes of screen time to do it. There's a mildly interesting hold up sequence, performed without dialog, that is probably the highlight of the movie. There are three "stripper" sequences that have all the erotic appeal of a off balance washing machine in the "spin" cycle. There's a tepid romance between the two leads who come together because, well, the screenplay tells them to, and there aren't any other characters in the movie except the crooks and a sleazy producer.The ending is an exercise in pathos, but you can't be bothered to care because your interest has been bludgeoned into a coma.

In short, don't bother unless you are the world's biggest fan of Rue the Golden Girl. Maybe not even then, because it sure makes her look bad.


I think the only reason I am about to say what I am about to say is that Miss McClanahan recently died, as I would hate to have her read this. The idea of having this actress play a stripper isn't much more realistic than having Phyllis Diller or Hattie McDaniel play the role. Now I am not saying she was unattractive but she looked like a very ordinary housewife in her 30s--and NOT a lady to bump and grind in a burlesque house. Now she was not the only inappropriately cast lady, as the strippers they did have perform in the film (often for absolutely no reason) were among the least attractive strippers ever filmed--and fortunately the kept on their clothes in this far from titillating film.

Aside from showing a lot of strippers (to the detriment of the plot), the film is about a scum-bag who is planning on a robbery--and Rue (here playing an 'innocent stripper' named Sandy) gets pulled into this big score. Along the way, she does some exotic dancing and is also molested. This is a VERY creepy part of the film and I truly doubt if this was really her in the scene. That's because the entire time the creep gropes her and whips out her breast, her face is covered--like they added this scene (possibly years later) to 'spice up the film'. In addition, because the strippers DON'T take off their clothes or turn their backs to the camera when their tops are off, you really have to assume that the brief nude scene was added later as it just didn't fit the overall film. And, it's not the least bit sexy--just very, very creepy--with the same recording of a guy saying 'yes...yes' again and again and again (uggh!).

As for the armored car robbery, it was interesting enough to watch but done on a shoestring budget. There is absolutely no dialog--just a cheap jazz score and it seems to go on and on for a very long period of time--like filler. Following the robbery, the guy offers to take her away with him. What is she to do? He seems like a nice guy and she likes him...but he's also a thief. What will happen next and will anyone really care?

Overall, there isn't a lot going for this film other than a chance to see McClanahan embarrass herself in a grade-Z film (and that might just be enough for some viewers). The production values are very low, the film is heavily padded and it has the look of an Ed Wood production and no better. While it's not the worst film I've seen in recent weeks, this is hardly a glowing endorsement.

By the way, while the release date is 1968, the clothes, hairstyles and cars look early to mid-1960s--though McClanahan still looks to be about 35 in the film. My assumption is that this sat on the shelf for a few years and then was finally released in '68.
black coffe

black coffe

Shockingly, appallingly bad. Execrable. Odiferous. Offensive.

Lame script. Lame acting. Lame "action." It fails even as lame porn. In fact, the striptease scenes made me want to change my sexual orientation.

Rest assured, IMDb spoiler police, it would be impossible to give away the plot of this movie because... there really isn't one.

And I'm still trying to figure out why they needed a former Navy diver for that "heist."

Well, I have to write at least 10 lines of text, so let me add some adjectives about this horrific afterbirth of a film: it's absurd, confusing, anti-erotic, insulting, smelly, crappy, cruddy, gross, disturbing, and stupid.


Rue McClanahan stars as Sandy, a stripper with designs on getting acting gigs, hopefully the appropriate way, and becomes linked with a shabby, miserly junkyard owner, Tony(Jack Vorno)when the two meet at the dance club she works. Tony saddles up with two hoods planning to take money from an armor car delivery. Things go awry as greed splits those involved with the heist, leading to violence and murder. Meanwhile, the film shows the devastated results of Sandy's lurid night with a wretched movie producer over a screenplay reading set up so he could bed her after getting her wasted on drink.

A drab work, with stripper sequences that are unappealing and go on forever. Rue's number is rather laughable(..despite removing her top, the camera shoots her backside as Rue jiggles her butt in embarrassing fashion)and Vorno's work(..he attempts woefully to evoke Brando-type levels of anguish and sorrow to no avail)is rather hard to tolerate over any length of time. This movie may have the single most uneventful heist sequence in the history of cinema.

There is a legitimate, sincere attempt to show the seedier underbelly of Hollywood and the effects it has on those unfortunates with little hope of escaping it's evil grip, but "Hollywood After Dark" is simply too badly made to succeed in such lofty goals. The way it's shot and acted, how the movie moves at an unexciting pace, and the ugly locations chosen, sink this one.


You don't have to know why Rue McClanahan left this off her resume, the film is quite tame in comparisons to films today. There is nudity even by their standards with the striptease. By today's comparison, the film is quite tame. Hollywood is seedy with strippers and robberies. Rue steals the film as Sandy. Tony Vorno played her boyfriend. The film is a low budget obviously. It's entertaining to see at least once.!


Unless you have ever thought about what it would be like to see your grandmother in her prime, wearing a bikini or less, don't bother watching this. The only remarkable thing about this film is Rue McClanahan and the possibility that she took this role because she saw something of herself in the character. Don't eat a heavy meal before or any meal while you watch this, as it can prove to be a choking risk.

Locations: A Hollywood junkyard, a Hollywood beach, a Hollywood highway, and a Hollywood set made to resemble your typical international burlesque house & LA lofts.

Plot: Jack Webb lookalike attempts to recruit an ex-navy & hyper-cynical underwater demolition expert, named Tony (the hairy Jack Vorno), for a heist.

Subplot: Rue McClanahan is an aspiring actress who works at Jack Webb's brother's burlesque, to pay the bills. After a confusing transition and conversation with Tony in which Rue explains that there are limits to her stripping, Tony expresses his stark cynicism. Stripping at the burlesque, by the way, is down to underwear and pasties. The only nudity here is Rue's sweaty, bare back (literally, back). Then the date at the beach.

Conflict: Rue meets with a "writer" at his "office"(apartment) to do a "reading." After what seems to be hours, Rue has been drugged(or not) or very drunk(or not) and the writer either makes out with her(or not) or rapes her(or not). Insert fisticuffs. Keep the audience confused.

Conflict resolution: Rue descends into hell as she bares her top for the lascivious W. Hollywood mob. Show Rue's sweaty, back. In the midst of his guilt, Tony agrees to the heist; his share to go to Rue, so they can start over.

Twist: 15 minutes of dialog free "action" followed by double-cross.

Morale: Hollywood will destroy you, first morally and then physically. Don't bother coming here.

-Celluloid Rehab


Walk the Angry Beach (1968)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

Sandy (Rue McClanahan) is a woman working as a stripper but she has much bigger plans as she is trying to get some acting jobs and make it in Hollywood. She ends up meeting Tony who promises her a lot of things but he's got his mind set on a robbery.

WALK THE ANGRY BEACH comes from director John Hayes who will probably be best remembered for his strange picture GRAVE OF THE VAMPIRE. Earlier in his career he made a few films with McClanahan who of course would later become famous for her role on The Golden Girls. This film, also known as Hollywood AFTER DARK, isn't anything special but it does contain a few mildly entertaining moments.

I think the worst thing with the picture are the various scenes with the strippers that appeared to be thrown in sometime after the movie was first made to try and spice it up a bit. These scenes basically have a variety of women doing dances around the camera and it adds very little to the film. It certainly takes away from the central story and helps drag the film out some more. The running time is only 68-minutes so these scenes were probably added to make the time longer.

For the most part McClanahan is decent enough in her role as is Tony Vorno as the man in her life. There's a scene with a bit of nudity in it but I'm going to guess that it wasn't McClanahan due to us never actually seeing her face. Fans of hers or the director might want to check this out but others can stay clear of it.


I had the honour and pleasure to see miss. Rue McLanahan in one of her early pictures. she reminded me of Marilyn Monroe, she was sensuous, and sultry. i can't understand why she wasn't more successful in movies. Why she didn't win an award i do not know!!

She was very beautiful and very talented. She looked very young, even though she was over 30! This film is no longer available, which is a shame. It was very good.

Many people didn't see the film, but i was able to catch it years ago. I felt it could have been Rue's big break, but she didn't get noticed until she appeared on television in the 1970's. She is still talented and i enjoyed this film.