The Beast of Hollow Mountain is an example of genre mixing that must have made little boys and little boys in grown up suits clap with glee upon its release in 1956. The premise is one that excited me when I read about it in the thousand -and-one monster movie guides I devoured in my youth. It still excited me when I saw it on the viewer's guide last week. I recorded it whilst at work and hunkered down to savor the cowboys versus T-Rex flavor.

Yeah, that's right. What kid wouldn't want to see that? What 1950's kid especially wouldn't want to see that? The possibilities for wrapping cliches of the western around a monster movie are so lip smacking!

I envisioned shoot outs with bad guys interrupted by a raging Rex. In this scenerio, the two factions would have to join forces to battle him. I imagined the hero and the main baddie charging heroically at the creature in a suicidal attempt to save a beaten down village. Alas, I imagined more than the filmmakers did.

Instead we get an American rancher in Mexico (played in the finest Oak tradition by Guy Madison) butting heads with a wealthy and spiteful native cattleman (portayed by a barely engaged Eduardo Noriega). There appears to be a love triangle that never really gels involving Noriega's character's fiancee played, as best as can be expected, by Patricia Medina. There is also some business with a father and son named Pancho and Panchito that is really just a means to bring the T-Rex into direct conflict with our main characters.

So, it's a western with a dinosaur thrown into the mix. We get it. That means there are thrills-a-plenty, right? Well, you can thrill to guys struggling to escape muddy water-cum-quicksand. The hair on your neck will stand on end when the American rancher is refused credit in the marketplace. Your blood will run cold when little Panchito is offered tortillas.

Not much happens in The Beast of Hollow Mountain, and it actually reminds me of an episode of The Wonderful World of Disney with its colorful appropriation of another culture to liven up its standard issue story.

Wait. Did I mention there was a T-Rex mixed in with the tepid triangle and the exciting wedding scene? Yes, there is. However, do not expect non-stop MONSTER! carnage. The film only has forty minutes left when the Rex's shadow is seen, and its roar is heard. With twenty-three minutes left, we finally see him and what a beast he is! He wobbles appropriately, and I think he'd better sue Gene Simmons for stealing his tongue.

He is a charming guy, but hardly worth the wait, especially since his first onscreen act is to kill two campaneros by stampeding the livestock. Then, for the remainder of the movie, he stalks two or three characters in the wilderness. This is definitely one antisocial monster.

This isn't a terrible film; it's just pedestrian and unimaginative. The monster himself has some charm, but too little is done with him. When he does finally receive extended screen time, the film is fun, but until that time, be patient.

RIDDLE ME THIS (Questions That Haunt Me.)

Is it the T-Rex's deadly touch that seems to turn every creature he picks up to plastic or clay?

What happened to his shadow?

How come no one hears this big sucker walking?

Does all quicksand look like dirty water with corn stalks thrown in it?

Why doesn't Panchito take the tasty tortillas?

Why do fools fall in love?



It would be fun to heckle and you'll want to go to the pound and adopt a cute Gene Simmons-style T-Rex yourself.

This one is pretty bad, but it isn't without enjoyment. It is also of historical importance because the story was credited partially to Willis O'Brien. Plus, it is pretty, and you like pretty things, don't you?