Faces in the Dark

The "roman de la victime" ("victim novel") pioneered by the writing team of Pierre Boileau & Thomas Narcejac - lovingly detailing the cruel gaslighting by others of a vulnerable victim - after providing the raw material for 'Les Diaboliques' and 'Vertigo' inspired many imitations during the early sixties, particularly by Hammer Films; although 'Faces in the Dark' is one of the few direct adaptations of their work. Had this been adapted for Hammer by Jimmy Sangster (who had been regularly providing them with 'psychological' scripts commencing with 'The Snorkel' in 1958) the result would probably have been much scarier.

Like most black & white features of the early 60's it looks good. But despite the occasionally gothic lighting, strange camera angles, the menacing presence of Mai Zetterling (who always looks guilty of something) and a cool title sequence aided by an eerie ondes Martenot score by Mikis Theodorakis it becomes very plodding and garrulous (although the ending is satisfactorily grim).

A similar subject concerning a blind patriarch made a much better film a few years earlier called 'Silent Dust' (1949). Catch that if you get the chance.

FACES IN THE DARK is a rather forgotten film in the British noir genre. The movie is a bit slow but totally worth hanging in there - the TWIST is quite staggering & very well done (no surprise it is based on a book by the writing team that also wrote the novels that VERTIGO, LES DIABOLIQUES and EYES WITHOUT A FACE were based on). John Gregson is very good as the rich successful man who is blinded in an industry accident. He is angry at the world with his fate and slowly begins to worry that he is losing his mind. Is he just paranoid or is his "loving" wife too good to be true? I watched this with a few friends and we all thoroughly enjoyed it.

Richard Hammond is injured badly in an accident at the company he owns. He is blinded and disfigured and isn't adapting to this well at all. He seems angry, on edge and is not a particularly noble blind man. So, it's easy not to like the man. However, over time you start to wonder if perhaps SOME of his anger is because something else is going on...something or someone is manipulating him...and what he seems to experience isn't exactly real...at least not what they tell him it is. What REALLY is going on here?!

This movie is unusual because an American actor, John Ireland is in it BUT doesn't play a very significant part. Now a lot of American actors went to Europe to make films during the 1950s and 60s....but they always starred in the films. This time, it seemed more like he was just working a day or two and that's all.

So is it any good? Generally yes...though the very end is a tad sloppy. You really have a hard time imagining the wife meeting her fate the way she did...it just seemed HIGHLY unlikely. Some might also dislike how vague parts of the ending is as well. Still, it is different...and I love different.

In terms of the number of votes for this movie (mine is the 10th), this could be the most obscure film I'm ever seen! Which of course means nothing to you, but it does get me wondering about how some films survive the decades and others just vanish. Certainly there are many much worse ways of spending 80 minutes than watching "Faces in the Dark". On the very slim chance that you might get to see this movie, I won't spoil what was for me the most enjoyable aspect of it, which was speculating as to what would happen next: is it a horror film? a psychological drama? or what? Anyway, the basic plot is that the main character goes blind after an accident; he and his wife plus sundry other relevant persons take a break at their holiday home; and then strange things appear to happen. There are a few things wrong with this film, primarily the rather dull direction (it's not all told from the main character's POV, which deflates some of the tension), and I found John Gregson a little too gruff at times (I only know him from comedies, including, by the way, a film called Genevieve which is one of the most thoroughly entertaining movies I know). Some of the other acting is occasionally dodgy too. Overall, though, it held my interest up to the end, which is, I think, a good enough recommendation for any obscure movie!

I was staggered to read some of the other reviews of this film, as I found it to be one of the best mystery thrillers it has been my pleasure to see. From start to finish, this is a film which does not flag, which remains taut and full of suspense throughout, and which keeps the viewer endlessly and tensely speculating about just what is going on : is the blinded Mr Hammond just paranoid, or is he really likely to be murdered ? That is perhaps the main question, but there are other related issues which keep the viewer on tenterhooks, and the overall result is an excellent hour and a half's viewing. All good things come to an end, as they say, and this film certainly comes to an end that one never could see coming !