Psyche 59

Allison Crawford (Patricia Neal) is a happy mother of two. She is blind. She lost her memory of the incident and the blindness may be all in her head. Her husband Eric Crawford (Curd Jürgens) seems supportive. Her younger sister Robin (Samantha Eggar) comes for a visit.

I like the opening premise. I really like Robin flirting with Eric right in front of Allison. I wouldn't mind them stuck together and cook like a simmering stew. Instead, they get split up and that energy dissipates. Patricia Neal tries. Samantha Eggar does her sex kitten best. Curd Jürgens gets pairs up with a dud. The nice simmering stew becomes a boring mess as the filmmaker keeps stirring and adding poor ingredients. By the time they reunite with a couple of other characters, the movie has lost the intensity and it could not regain it.

As had so often been the case in the past the best thing about Alexander Singer's "Psyche '59" is Walter Lassally's luminous cinematography. This British drama revolves around Patricia Neal, blinded in an accident but aware that her blindness is psychosomatic and not physical. She's married to Curd Jurgens and has a flightly younger sister, (Samantha Eggar), who comes to stay. There's a fourth character played by Ian Bannen who wanders in and out of their lives.

The movie wasn't a success despite its excellent cast and has virtually disappeared. Singer came to the film fresh from his cult classic "A Cold Wind in August" and perhaps more was expected of him than he delivered. It doesn't really work as a thriller; plot-wise it's something of a one-trick pony and outside of its cast of four there is no-one to latch on to and consequently few red herrings. It might have worked as a tale of sisterly rivalry if it wasn't so banal and what almost amounts to a subplot involving Bannen's character almost proves more interesting.

It's not really a bad film, (though the ending is gob-smackingly awful), just a very strange one and it's easy to see why it flopped. It's the kind of film that might appeal to the so-called intelligensia looking for meanings that aren't really there. See it by all means; just don't expect too much.

This film came on Turner Classic Movies recently, with the host mentioning that it was the film's debut on that channel, and the first film Patricia Neal made after winning the Oscar for Hud.

The story concerns a privileged upper-class blind woman named Alison (Neal), her husband Eric (Jurgens) and her younger sister, Robin (Eggar). At first all seems perfectly OK, given the circumstances, but bits of conversation are dropped here and there, darting looks are thrown here and there, and soon we realize that there is something lurking beneath the veneer of a privileged life. Alison, in the final stages of her second pregnancy, suffered a fall in her home that rendered her blind, though as she states early on, it's not that her corneas don't function, it's that her brain won't permit her to see images (paraphrasing here). Apparently this happened in 1959, hence the "'59" in the title: The story then takes place in 1964, five years after this fact, over a time period that seems to be about a month, or maybe two, when Robin re-arrives back into the lives of Eric and Alison after what appears to be a 5-year absence.

The black-and-white cinematography adds much to this film, such that I believe if it were in color, it would not be as effective. The language, dialogue and subject matter covered was ahead of its time, at least by U.S. standards, but stylistically, this matches a number of thrillers and socially-conscious dramas that came out of England in the early- to mid-1960s (e.g., Victim, Pumpkin Eater, etc.).

The first part of the film, set in London, sets up the story beautifully, and it isn't long before we start to realize that something's "up" - the carefully-worded dialogue, with certain key words and phrases omitted, or the glances of the blind Alison behind her sunglasses, to the beat of her words...you see that all that glitters is not gold, so to speak.

The second part of the film takes place at the characters' country house, located near a coastline; It is here that the set-up for what could be a riveting tale, as depicted in the first part of the film, loses steam and slows to a crawl, such that the conclusion is neither climactic nor satisfying; this is a shame, because it could have been done much better. Besides that, I do agree with the comments made by a previous observer, including that the grandmother doesn't seem quite grandmotherly (and actually, I'm sort of confused as to why this character is even in the picture).

Nonetheless, the acting is superb by all the leads, and particularly by Neal, who carries the film, in my opinion. Pay attention to every movement she makes, whether it's with her eyes, her head or her hands; listen intently to every syllable she utters, for it is through her character that we understand the real story of what has happened, or is happening, to these three people.

The movie is based on a book by the same name by Francoise des Ligneris, which is available online.

Allison Crawford is blind, though there's nothing physically wrong with her eyes. What did Allison see that was so shocking it mentally snapped her vision closed?

This concept alone opens up lots of possibility doors and windows. However, the screenplay writer Julian Zimet decided to go for the weakest of the scenarios available. When the mystery is revealed, though you've probably worked it out well before then, you may feel a little letdown... I know I did.

I don't know if this is the same climax the Francoise Des Ligneris novel has, not having read it, but it could have been a little stronger and believable. This, however, is a small point as the direction and the acting should have you hooked before you get close to the ending.

Alexander Singer uses his cast well and isn't adverse to use them to create a few iconic shots. Some nice close-ups are stronger thanks to the casts acting skills. You can see the worry, the concern, the cunning, and the realisation on their faces. I have to admit I still believe both Patricia Neal and Ian Bannen are miss-cast. They are both good in their portrayals but don't quite hit the mark. It's Samantha Eggar who steals the show as the cunning and oh-so-sexy and sensual sister, Robin. I have to say I even loved the sci-fi reading Grandma played brilliantly by Beatrix Lehmann. Though it's Curd Jurgens as Eric Crawford who surprised me the most. Being the crux of the story, you would have thought it strange for him to be cast as this type of character. But he comes across as strong and reassured that I could believe the notion thoroughly.

This is a good film that verges on greatness. If the story had been reworked a little tighter and the Neal and Bannen characters had been better cast, well, who knows? As it stands though, I would gladly recommend the film to all lovers of mysteries, thrillers, and dramas alike. This is a nice way to spend a wet Sunday afternoon. Along with with your beloved, a warm fire, and a tipple of one kind or another.

Psyche 59 is directed by Alexander Singer and adapted to screenplay by Julian Zimet from the novel written by Francoise des Ligneris. It stars Patricia Neal, Curd Jurgens, Samantha Eggar, Ian Bannen and Beatrix Lehmann. Music is by Kenneth V. Jones and cinematography by Walter Lassally.

Blind Alison Crawford (Neal) lives with her husband Eric (Jurgens) and finds the equilibrium of life upset when her young sister Robin (Eggar) comes to stay. It seems there are secrets to will out, both with Robin and the matter of how Alison came to be blind.

A strange, almost hypnotic type of movie, Psyche 59 aims to be a Freudian thriller but just misses the mark of being great. The set up is intriguing, the twists risqué and the photography suitably moody. Neal gives a fine performance as the afflicted Alison, both physically and emotionally, Eggar is super sultry and raises the temperatures considerably, while both Bannen and Jurgens are fine considering the former is under written and the latter gets a character arc that's a bit of a stretch. Unfortunately the pay off is hopelessly weak, the whole build up holds the attention, you sense we are heading for great dramatic denouement, but sadly that's not the case and it leaves a disappointing taste in the mouth. 6/10