The Second Face

Extremely Low Budget Movie that is somewhat Off-Beat as it Tries to paint a Picture of a Flaw in the Human Condition. The Unhealthy and Harmful Emphasis on"Surface Beauty" with a lack of Regard for "Inner Beauty". A Heavy load to take on in a Poverty Row Picture.

Heavy Handed to be sure, on the Surface its most Glaring Ineptitude is the Script that Sledgehammers Home the most Obvious Conceits again and again. Ella Raines does Her Best with what amounts to a Dual Role.

Plain and a bit Homely, Her Talented Fashion Designer is Denied Access to the Male Dominated Business World because She is Not a "Looker".

The Final Act is Rushed, even more Heavy Handed, and it Drags to a Hollywood Conclusion of Optimism that was the Beginning of the Death March for Film-Noir. Overall, Not Bad for a Cheaply made "Quickie". Bruce Bennett is Miscast as a sort of Background White Knight.

Worth a Watch but Overwritten and Overwrought so much that the Message becomes Laborious and the Short Movie seems a Lot Longer than it is.

I agree with at least one reviewer here, Ella Raines was the most beautiful and talented actress of the 40s and 50s. It seems criminal that by the early 50s she was appearing in Poverty Row films like The Second Face. The question is probably not what did she do that was wrong, but probably what did she not do that was wrong. In other words, given studio sexual harassment and whatnot in this period, she probably didn't go along. Which might explain why after such a luminous performance in films like Phantom Lady and Impact, her career took a nosedive and she turned to television. What a waste. Other actresses of this era, like Nancy Guild from Somewhere in the Night, had even shorter careers, perhaps for the same reasons.

I watched this because I am an Ella Raines fan. This movie was made near the end of her career. I was very hopeful, but it turned out to be a disappointment, waste of time. It's a relatively low budget (I guess a B picture) film with a decent cast. The main problem with the movie is that it was one-note. Every scene honed in on the basic situation with no deviation: that the pre-plastic surgery Raines (about 85% of the movie) was rejected because of her plain looks, that she was depressed over her plain looks, and all the characters never stopped talking/philosophizing about her situation. And then there was a little bit about her first employer, who had been divorced, afraid of being dumped again. A very old-fashioned movie, offering nothing special. In the end all the loose ends are tied up and all the shallow characters get their just desserts. I don't mind a "woman's picture;" it's just that this was a mediocre one.

The plight of plain women in a beauty-centered culture has powerful potential— for example, The Enchanted Cottage (1945), The Heiress (1949). I just wish the screenplay here were a stronger one. As another reviewer points out, the script is basically a one-note narrative. On the downswing, it's just one rejection after another for the plain Phyllis (Raines), while on the upswing, with a new face, it's just the opposite. Too bad the point is belabored without much subtlety, as though otherwise the audience won't get the point. Speaking of subtlety, the first 10-minutes does manage a nice bit of subtlety as Paul (Bennett) eases Phyllis out of his employ so that her romantic hopes won't be dashed. Too bad the remainder becomes so tediously obvious. (One wise script point—putting poor Phyllis in the fashion industry where beauty is a commodity and the main topic. That way it's not average folks rejecting her.)

Now I like Ella Raines as well as the next fan. However, the role calls for a performer who specializes in soul (e.g. Ida Lupino, Olivia deHaviland, Sylvia Sydney). Raines does a good job of smiling through adversity, but projects little beyond what's in the script. Inner depth would have added a lot. Clearly, the casting calls for a beautiful woman, which Raines is, so that the transformation can be convincing. But, all in all, the actress is more persuasive as a vamp than a rejected plain-Jane. Then too, Bennett appears miscast. He's just too hunky for a recessive role. Maybe the producers figured the ending could only be justified by using a hunky guy to balance out the re-born Phyllis.

Anyway, the sensitive topic is an important one, and one that old Hollywood usually shied away from. I'm just sorry it didn't get more memorable treatment here, with a bigger budget, a better script, and more astute casting.

Ella was one of the most beautiful women in Hollywood,but in most of this movie she wears "ugly duckling" makeup.It doesnt matter her inner winning personality shines through,and one even wonders why male characters in the movie are so mean to her,she is still so charismatic with fake face and all.Ella does a great job portraying what some women have to go through life when they are called "ugly".She is really heartbreaking because she plays a character who is an intelligent and beautiful person judged only on looks.I loved the movie and Ella is so great in anything she was in.