Faces in the Dark

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!

Like the preceding comment by JimShine illustrates, this movie is only half-good : an average-to-good acting job; and indeed the direction lacks energy and tension.

The strength that remains in this movie comes basically from its clever story, its suspenseful plot. The explanation is simple : it is adapted from a novel by Boileau-Narcejac! Voilà ! Of course ! For the sake of anecdote, let's remind the reader that the British publishers of Faces in the Dark / Les Visages de l'ombre (that was in the early 60s) asked Pierre Boileau and Thomas Narcejac if they couldn't, by any chance, change the conclusive chapter because it was too dark. Well, if they called it 'Faces in the Dark', it must have been for some reason, bozo ! Like many people in the same trade, Boileau-Narcejac wrote and published too much. As a result, let's say MOST of their novels are at least enjoyable, SOME are pretty boring - especially the late ones, as often happens with thriller/suspense writers - and a solid DOZEN are masterpieces of suspense, atmospheric and chilling to the bone ! They also wrote an adorable jewel of the pastiche, 'Arsène Lupin : Le Secret d'Eunerville' which is a full-fledged Arsène Lupin novel better than some of the original ones written by Maurice Leblanc.

In fact, lots of people may know very well a couple of their stories without realizing it : H.G. Clouzot's Les Diaboliques and Alfred Hitchock's Vertigo were both adapted from a Boileau-Narcejac novel.

They also can be counted are among the rare true INVENTORS of the genre, because in the immediate postwar years, they decided to escape from both the whodunit (written from the point of view of the detective) and the noir (written from the point of view of the criminal) and decided instead to write their novels - a genuine breakthrough - from the point of view of the victim. And it is the case with Faces in the Dark, which could well be their most efficient suspense ever - but to know that, you have to read the book, for this movie adaptation, though acceptable, doesn't really do it justice. Reading 'Les Visages de l'ombre' is a really frightening experience (especially the conclusive chapter!), while watching this movie is at best intriguing.

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.

This taut little gem was on British television last night - January 23rd 2010 - on the Film 24 channel, which has been treating old movie fans to some really obscure titles recently including two other John Gregson films ' To Dorothy A Son ' and ' SOS Pacific '.

I have now recorded it in case it's another 50 years before it turns up! It's got a very dark, disturbing ending for a British film made in 1959, no doubt because of it's French literary origins.

While it's definitely worth thriller & mystery lovers spending 90 minutes of their time, the sudden disappearance of John Ireland ( who adopts a pretty good English accent as Gregsons ner-do-well brother ) mid-way through the film, is the biggest mystery of all.

I believe he was making the TV action series " The Cheaters " in London at the same time so maybe he had to bow out of " Faces In The Dark " because of other work commitments.

He didn't even have a dramatic death scene...suddenly he was gone and referred to as being dead! All these years later, we'll never know why an actor of his stature had such a minor role in the film,

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 !