Is Trog Worth Watching?
Answer: Maybe not, Trog is likely a skip if you enjoy Horror movies.
It features a runtime of 91 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to mature audiences.

Verdict:Trog is a confirmed FLOP based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 4.4/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Horror, Science Fiction genre.
Answer: Maybe not, Trog is likely a skip if you enjoy Horror movies.
It features a runtime of 91 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to mature audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1970, Trog emerges as a significant entry in the Horror, Science Fiction domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of Anthropologist Dr Brockton unearths a primitive troglodyte — an Ice Age 'missing link': half-caveman, half-ape — in a local cave. Unlike standard genre fare, Trog attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Horror is often anchored by its ensemble, and Trog features a noteworthy lineup led by Joan Crawford . Supported by the likes of Michael Gough and Bernard Kay , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Trog (1970) is negative. With an audience rating of 4.4/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Trog is a Horror, Science Fiction film that crafts an atmosphere of dread and suspense, using psychological terror and visual scares. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: Trog attempts to tie together its various plot elements. The finale presents its approach to horror resolution.
The conclusion addresses the core thematic questions, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Trog reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Consider Watching If:








Amazon Video
Apple TV
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At Home
Amazon Video
Apple TV
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At HomeAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 4.4/10, and global collection metrics, Trog stands as a challenging project for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1970 cinematic year.
Trog is considered a flop based on audience ratings of 4.4/10 and lower collections.
Based on the low rating of 4.4/10, Trog may not be worth watching unless you are a die-hard fan.
Trog may be available for rent or purchase on digital platforms like Apple TV, Google Play, or Amazon Prime Video. Specific streaming availability can vary by country.
***Joan Crawford Analyzes the Missing Link; Plus Cutie Kim Braden*** This 1970 British flick mingles elements of "Planet of the Apes," "Frankenstein" and various Sasquatch tales. The scenes where Joan studies Trog are like an inversion of the scenes in "Planet of the Apes" where the female doctor chimp (Zira) analyzes Charlton Heston. "Frankenstein" comes to mind because of the fairly sympathetic portrayal of the half-man/half-ape and his gentle treatment of a little girl. Being a low-budget English film directed by Freddie Francis it has a decidedly Hammer-esque look and vibe. Some have mocked the film as "campy" but this simply isn't true; the story is played completely straight. Nothing about it is consciously artificial, exaggerated or self-parodying, like, say, Alan Rickman's performance in 1991's "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves." THAT's campy. The ape make-up is similar to that of "Planet of the Apes," albeit with a more protruding maw. In fact, it looks like someone dug the ape mask out of the trash from the set of 1968's "2001: A Space Odyssey" (which they probably did!) This was Joan Crawford's final film and has been heavily panned. I don't understand this because it's not really THAT bad. As a matter of fact, the material is taken serious by all involved as the story tackles the question: What would it be like if the so-called missing link was actually discovered ALIVE? Of course, you have to take into account that the perspective of the movie is 1969, when it was shot. Given the period and the low budget, the movie has its limitations, which can be witnessed in two glaring ways: (1) The overlong dinosaur sequence of stock stop-motion footage that I assume are images from Trog's memory; and (2) the appearance of Trog himself. In regards to the latter, the head and facial features of the ape-man look quite good for 1969, it's the rest that leaves much to be desired. Basically, Trog is just a small-ish white dude walking around in a loin cloth and fur "tennis shoes" with what looks like a short fur cape. This is the extent of the Trog costume and it looks lame, which is probably why people mock the film -- the "monster" is more laughable than fearsome. Upon reflection, though, since Trog is half-human and therefore mostly hairless, it makes sense that he would obtain furs to make rudimentary clothing for warmth warm. This assumes, of course, that he'd have to occasionally leave the caverns to kill animals for furs; and likely food as well (after all, what would he eat in the darkness of the caves?). Since he's half-human he would have the intelligence to do this. What makes "Trog" an essential purchase, besides being Crawford's last film, is the stunning Kim Braden, who plays Joan's daughter/assistant, Anne. Kim is fully clothed at all times, usually wearing cute short-skirt/dress outfits, proving that attractiveness is more than a matter of showing skin. What a cutie! Interestingly, Kim went on to play Captain Picard's wife in the Nexus in the outstanding 1994 film "Star Trek: Generations." The film runs 93 minutes and was shot in Berkshire and Buckinghamshire, England. GRADE: C+
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.