Vengeance en différé

For some inexplicable reason, this telefeature is but rarely accorded the respect it merits. In point of fact, it is a most accomplished, gripping, and well acted affair, from the days when a "made for TV" movie, could still boast performers, writing, and technical credentials of the first water.

The story is an intense, psychological study of a young man suffering from hysterical blindness following the death of his professor father in a fire. Set in a large, shadowy, Victorian house, this very Gothic story hinges on the sibling rivalry between the young man and his spinster sister, both of whom blame themselves, in different ways, for their father's demise. Eventually, the young man's sanity begins to give way, in the face of a series of inexplicable hauntings, which may, or may not be supernatural. Only the denouement will tell.

With its pronounced subtext of repressed, family guilt, the film has literary antecedents in the work of Shirley Jackson, Walter De La Mare, and Nathanial Hawthorne.

Starring a cast of major (big screen) movie and stage actors, this film has everything that is conspicuously absent in current television: an excellent musical score, evocative photography, muted lighting, accomplished art direction, an interesting premise and script, intelligent dialogue, (gasp!)and a very good sense of pacing.

Add to that, a baseline story that improves on the novel upon which it was based, (yes I read it) and you have a viewing experience very different from the "made for TV's" of today, which are,(I'm told--since I don't watch them) an endless stream of tedious, politically correct, AIDS,Anorexia, and spouse abuse victim propaganda studies--I believe the catch phrase is "victim of the week" stories.)

All in all, "How Awful About Allan" serves as a sad reminder of what was still artistically possible in the world of commercial television, in the not too distant past.

Right from the start of this film I was captivated. This is one of those family drama films where one of them or someone else near the family is off their rocker - but who and why? It's a film that builds suspenseful steam towards it's climax with a stare at the end that only Anthony Perkins could pull off so well.

There are a couple of moments in the film where you will think of Psycho like when Allan or Anthony Perkins picks up a photo and says "Mother?" and that stare at the end. BUT the character of Allan is not like Norman Bates, you would have to watch "Allan" to see the clear differences in the two characters - which Perkins pulls both off well.

I have seen this film before - it's a vague memory - but was very pleased to see this one again. Well worth watching if you like GOOD made-for-TV films, Anthony Perkins and intense, dramatic psychological thrillers. They don't make 'em like this anymore folks.

9/10

Within the limitations of television, this was a tidy little entertainment. How Awful About Allan transcended the crummy cheapness that marred Made-for-TV movies from their historical onset. This pleasantly scary story was better than average because of its workmanlike performances, its unnerving story, and the fact that its main character, Tony Perkins, is not totally sympathetic.

Even if you peg the reasons that Perkins has hysterical blindness (and it's wonderfully frustrating seeing the blurred images he's seeing) from the start, the movie accomplishes what it must do right from the start--it causes you to give a damn. You watch because you must.

Finally, there's a special place in my heart for "Olive," played by the late, great Joan Hackett. She was a lovely woman whose quirky, passionate performances always seemed to lift the quality of a film an extra notch.

Anthony Perkins and Julie Harris are just fine, too.

So, get to a dollar store or the Wal-Mart dollar DVD kiosk, grab a copy of How Awful About Allan and swing by the warm blankey department--you're gonna need it.

Generally I don't crib, but I've seen absolute gibberish being rated pretty highly if it comes out of a big studio with a big cast. Now this movie here is not that special, but it is well directed, has great acting by the cast and some decent camera work. The story seems slightly predictable but it is credible and works for this kind of movie. The reveal at the end does come across as a surprise.

Anthony Perkins live up to the role and shows his range as an actor here. This is a very good movie, albeit a short one. Full marks the the director and his crew.

Effective psychological "thriller" about a man that has subconsciously lost his sight due to a tragedy that befell him and his family when a child. Little Alan blames himself for setting a fire that kills his mean and nasty father and scars his sister whose bigger loss is her much beloved father. Anthony Perkins gives a pretty good performance of a man torn apart from his past and now lives with his sister after years of being institutionalized. Perkins obviously has experience playing psychotic individuals, and his Alan is not overdone at all. In fact I thought Perkins gave a very restrained performance. Julie Harris is equally up to task as his sister who must deal with her returning brother, her life such as it is, and economic issues. Money is so tight that she must let a room to a boarder...and then things begin to cave in for Alan and his life still only seeing things through a blur. This movie was made for television and it shows. There is not a lot of action and really no performers of any note outside the leads and Joan Hackett as an old flame for Alan. The film was directed by Curtis Harrington, veteran of some older genre films and later What's the Matter with Helen? and Whoever Slew Aunite Roo?. Harrington is always steady behind the lens and ably creates some tension and suspense even though his obvious budgetary restraints shine. All in all, How Awful About Alan delivers a taut examination of how we sometimes internalize the pain that we live with and what must happen to it to cleanse our souls.