Whilst still a good film, I personally find this staple of 60s suspense to be somewhat overrated. Much of the praise the film has garnered is down to Mitchum's performance but I find him to be more of a depraved thug than a genuinly intimidating villain like Javier Bardem in "No Country For Old Men" for example.

What was Martin Scorcese thinking? It's been too many years for me to admit, but I should have seen this film much, much earlier. Robert Mitchum is even better in this than he was in Night of the Hunter. What doesn't work in Scorcese's version, works magnificently in this film. The atmosphere, acting and suspense are all top-knotch. What makes Max Cady menacing in this film is that Mitchum makes him believable, unlike the zealously religious caricature that DeNiro portrays in the remake.

Very nicely done thriller

Solid thriller

Great intense performance from Mitchum and the ending is very solid. A few things take away from the tension though, most notably the really overt music cues and the merely average supporting performances.

No one could seek to suggest that J. Lee Thompson was a better film director than Scorsese. Everyone can see that Scorsese's Cape Fear is a subtler film than the original, with far more complex character studies. But I will stick with the first film, because it is trash honestly done, whereas the Scorsese version is a tangled mess of violent urges and improving attitudes. Finally, I think that De Niro's Max Cady is a superb master class given by a great actor, whereas Mitchum's Cady is the Beast

BASED ON JOHN D MACDONALDS BOOK "THE EXECUTIONERS", I PREFER DENIRO AND NOLTE BETTER

One of the great stalker studies in classic cinema, as Mitchum spends most of his time only observing, staring until he finally strikes at the very heart of his enemy -- his wife and daughter. But most of its distinction comes from Lee Thompson's physical spaces merging with plants, furnitures -- and, yes, beds, since we're talking about a potential rapist. If this is a film about an hesitating but constant invasion, the camera also serves as an instrument of virtual but plausible fear.

Tense and moody, with Mitchum fitting the role of the snakey, villainous Max Cady like a glove. His performance is obviously the highlight here, though the film also sports a great Herrmann score, some shadowy cinematography and interesting thematic elements (justice, vengeance, etc.). On the downside, the film's several payoffs aren't so great and that kid actress is grating as hell. On the whole, still a very effective thriller.

great thriller. Mitchum is genuinely and effortlessly menacing. The fear feels so real. Too bad the end wasn't something more "evil".

Classic.

Cape Fear is what a thriller should be. Astonishing, mind-boggling, bewildering and it's most effectively sensible to a certain extant. Sagaciously powerful and one film to remember or see when you die.

This is basically the movie Night of the Hunter should have been, as Mitchum plays the same kind of self-righteous creep but there is more going on in the story to sustain the movie's flaws. Plus, not every actor outside of Mitchum BLOWS in this movie.

As a late period noir it's quite a bit more brutal and suggestive than the average, and makes for a harrowing experience, even when you know how things will turn out. Mitchum is incredibly menacing, Peck is kinda boring. He pretty much only does this one type of role, but at least he does it well. Fortunately his ho-hum performance is outweighed by the film's many assets, including its gripping tension and excellent Herrmann score (adding to the Hitchcockian feel). First-rate thriller.

Very suspenseful, with an incredibly evil villain. The filmwork is great, too.

I haven't seen the remake, but here's how I know it can't be nearly as good as the original: No. Robert. Mitchum. Wait, he's in that? Ok, well, No. Robert Mitchum As Max Cady. Bob M. is great as the ruthless and calculating, but law-abiding(!) citizen, biding his time until he can extract his revenge on HIS terms. Film asks many great questions such as "can you really convict a man based on what he is clearly GOING to do?" Future anti-stalker laws say "yes", but this was clearly a different era.