Night Must Fall

This project was done in a hurry when a proposal to make a film of Ned Kelly was axed by MGM due to budget worries (at this time Tom Jones had been filmed but not released).

It is not clear why Riesz decided to make a film of this play. Clearly, the part of Danny is tailor made for some show-off acting and Finney grabs the bull by the horns here. His only real mistake is to put on a silly 'boyo Welsh accent. True, the character was Welsh in the play but that's because the part was written by the playwright to play himself. Otherwise, there is no dramatic need for Danny to have a Welsh accent and Robert Montgomery didn't bother in the 1937 version.

The main difference between the film and the play is that the film reveals its hand in the first minute that Danny is a psycho killer. In the play, its not clear until near the end and much of the dialogue are cat n'mouse exchanges between Danny and Olivia.

The result of this is to create a somewhat boring film; you know who the killer is and thus spend an hour and a hour waiting for him to explode. When he does, it has little logic and, to an audience used to the likes of Psycho and its rip-offs like Homicidal, seeing Finney deliver one blow to an off-screen body that you never get to see was always going to be a serious let-down. His retreat into gibberish at the end I thought was uncharacteristic and a cop-out. You never find out who the real Danny is and why he has acted like he has done. I did enjoy the 'hangbags' between Sheila Hancock and Susan Hampshire on the high street of an authentically 60s wet Hertfordshire town.

The remake of the 1937 film was slaughtered both by critics and audience at the time it premiered and there was mainly one reason for it:the crazed fans of Albert Finney were absolutely shocked,as he daringly chose the role of the psychotic ''killer with the angelic face'', following his all-time favorite roles of ''Saturday night and Sunday morning''and, particularly, ''Tom Jones''.As many historians mention, the ''MGM wives'' who were few of the first to see the film, turned violently against the gifted director, Karel Reisz, shouting ''what have you done to that beautiful boy?''!But this is not a serious reason to dismiss an, overall, very good film, which, however, has some serious flaws.The use of music is exaggerated and some times irritating and, only in the first part of the film, Finney doesn't quite know how to tackle with his disturbed character. But the photography is great, Mona Washbourne gives a superb performance and Karel Reisz does a great job, not only updating the old text and bringing it within the ''realism'' of the British Free Cinema movement, but also with his masterful camera movements and his use of editing and abruptly cutting to different scenes, he creates an imposing psychological thriller, where what you don't see is more disturbing than what you do. Being one of the greatest actors EVER, Finney soon finds a convincing attitude for his character and the last part of the film is absolutely brilliant as a whole.It should be re-examined and re-appreciated, that's why it has to come out on VHS and DVD a.s.a.p.! 7.5/10

Just watched this film on TCM. Quite enjoyable and not as bad as I'd heard from reviews I'd read over the years. My only problem was that I was expecting to understand more about Finney's character by the end of the film (ie: what lead to his psychotic behaviour, what had gone wrong in his childhood...that kind of thing), but never got any deep insight at all. Which for me made him rather a 1 dimensional screen psycho - and therefore the film was not as interesting as it should have been. And the end of the movie was a ..."so what?" affair.

Did I miss something?

Or was I expecting a movie with more depth than it actually had?

I've heard about this British gem, and I was stoked to see that it was on TCM (UK) the other night. Albert Finney is superb as Danny, well the entire cast is very strong. I'd heard about it from the Freddie Francis link (he was Director of Photography)and I wasn't disappointed, it just has his unique stamp all over it.

For most of the film, the audience is waiting for something to happen as the tension is kept to a maximum throughout the film. The final payoff is superb and shows just why Finney is one of Britains best actors. I thought it was a lot like that other British twisted family oddity 'Girly' (US title) but with fewer sexual undertones.

It's a shame Night Must Fall isn't more well known as it's a true gem of 60's British cinema.

I loved this film, but it's not for everybody. There are many experimental aspects (music, camera angles, the performances) that reflect the time period in which it was filmed. Think Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolfe, Dr. Strangelove, Psycho, etc, and you'll be more prepared. It came the year after Tom Jones and was co-produced by Finney, and as a result, was not the kind of film Finney fans were expecting. I suspect that is why the film is not more well known.

A couple of IMDb viewers were rather harsh concerning Finney's performance, but I have to disagree. I was completely mesmerized and I highly recommend it.

Probably not a good movie to watch on a dark stormy night by yourself. At the same time, don't expect a typical horror film--I was thrown off by the very beginning and halfway through, I was questioning what I had seen--I think this was deliberate, and has a lot to do with Danny's character. I think this is a cautionary tale more than anything else. You'll understand what I mean if you've seen it.