Endless Night

The last film made by the illustrious Launder & Gilliat team is a psycho-thriller that desperately wants to be praised as "Hitchcockian" and even recruits Bernard Herrmann, Hitch's favourite composer, to write the score. Perhaps the Hitchcock film it most resembles, however, is "Frenzy" – both seem to be the work of ageing filmmakers trying to get "with it".

"Endless Night" is extremely faithful to Agatha Christie's source novel (it may be the closest-ever filming of one of her novels) but neither of the two protagonists seem to come across with the same conviction that they do in the book. Hayley Mills struggles with a difficult part (Ellie is a fairly insipid character) while Hywel Bennett somehow never convinces as the enigmatic Michael.

There's lots of fun spotting familiar faces in the supporting cast, including an uncredited Nicholas Courtney (the Brigadier from "Doctor Who") as the auctioneer. Per Oscarsson is good as the insightful architect Santonix, who guesses something of what is going on, although our admiration for him is lessened by the hideously vulgar house he builds (which all the characters acclaim as a masterpiece!) I can't help wondering what Dame Agatha's loyal fans made of this film; the setting in an idyllic corner of rural England is traditional enough but the atmosphere is a great deal darker than usual. The novel, written in 1967, represented quite a bold departure for the writer (and a successful one) but the film at times descends into banality. Having said that, the twee nature of Ellie and Michael's romance gives the conclusion much more impact and the final images are startling.

Around 45 years ago, when I was just a young lad, Hayley Mills was my favorite actress, and her 1962 film "In Search of the Castaways" was my favorite film, but between this and that, I don't think I've seen Hayley in anything since 1965's "That Darn Cat." How nice, then, to see her, the other night, at age 26 in the 1972 British film "Endless Night," and to realize what a nubile nymph my old flame had turned into later in life! In this adaptation of a 1967 Agatha Christie novel, Hayley plays Ellie Thomsen, the 6th richest girl in the world, who, after one date with pretty-boy chauffeur Michael (excellently portrayed by Welsh actor Hywel Bennett), elopes with him and builds his dream house in the Herts countryside. It is hard to figure out what words best describe "Endless Night." It is not really a horror movie, or a love story, or a thriller, but certainly does have elements of all these types. The picture IS remarkably atmospheric, in no small measure due to yet another wonderfully evocative score by the great Bernard Herrmann, and should manage to baffle most viewers who are trying to figure out just where the story line is going. Besides the fine work by its two leads, veterans George Sanders (here in one of his last roles, and playing what his character self-describes as a "desiccated old poop") and Lois Maxwell add sterling support, and even Britt Ekland turns in a convincing performance as Ellie's tutor/companion. Throw in some gorgeous scenery in the Herts and Positano countrysides, a surprise final quarter hour that manages to subvert everything we thought we knew, and two or three mild scares and you've got yourself one very interesting entertainment. Kudos, indeed, to writer/director Sidney Gilliat! I just hope that I'm not foolish enough to wait another 40 years before watching Hayley Mills in another picture. Perhaps it's time for me to finally check out Hayley and Hywel in 1968's "Twisted Nerve"...IF it ever gets released on DVD!

Endless Night is one of those movies that is hugely flawed, and yet it sticks in the mind unlike many more polished movies. Extremely slow paced for much of it's length and with several sequences that feel almost unnecessary, and even a few which just seem wierd, the film than delivers a true knock out of a twist which makes one realise how well the story has been constructed. For this reason, in some respect it's more satisfying to watch the second time even if one is no longer surprised, because one can notice all the little clues that have been put in ,and many of the previously mentioned unnecessary or wierd bits seem more essential. There is, though, one huge red herring that seems rather pointless.

This was the last of the Hywell Bennett/Hayley Mills collaborations for the Boulting Brothers and it is possibly their most interesting. Cast are all excellent ,including George Sanders in one of his final roles, and this is just as well since the film is indeed extremely talky. The alternately eerie and romantic Bernard Herrmann score is very memorable, although they could have made sure Mills' singing voice [obviously dubbed] sounded like her normal voice.

Many will be unsatisfied with this film ,but try it if you fancy a somewhat different kind of thriller, even it's only really a thriller in the final half hour!

I won't say it's a bad film, but I have to believe the liberties taken with the adaptation of the story go well beyond the nudity and modern setting. (I will say that the house with the remote-controlled indoor swimming pool in the living room was a bit over the top.)

I will confess that I did not guess the direction the plot would take, but what was so disappointing was the profusion of loose ends and entirely pointless characters. Agatha didn't usually write them that way - everyone ended up with a role in the outcome of the story. Here we are presented with in-laws, neighbors, family friends, and a mysterious old woman --- all of whom have nothing at all to do with the resolution of the story. Most of them could have been omitted entirely and the story would have been essentially unchanged.

My DVD even featured an editing error: about 10 seconds of the film repeat precisely (when the girl's parents are observed getting back into their car to leave.)

There is also a broken window that is never explained, a ghostly appearance that is never accounted for or revisited, a car is observed to take an unusually long to get somewhere - but we are never given the significance. An architect seems to know things the audience does not -- yet no explanation is offered of how he knows them.

Like Agatha's best writing, characters and clues and complications pile up... but then they are inexplicably thrown away in favor of an unexpected, yet rather anticlimactic resolution.

I just watched Julia McKenzie in the recent adaptation of the Christie novel, inserting Miss Marple where she was originally absent. I clicked on the IMDb and Amazon to learn more about the production and found that there had been a 1971 movie which hewed more closely to the original. A purchase of a used DVD gave me pleasure for my money. It's interesting to see how different script writers turned and twisted the basic story lines and how the movies surprised and shocked the viewer. I won't repeat the comments that have already been said on this forum about this '71 film, but I will emphasize the value of seeing the opening minutes again to pick up fat clues that might be missed on first viewing -- the footsteps heard in the Van Gogh museum and the statement of the mother later that her son had experienced something significant. The movie just seems to sail along making one wonder what the mystery is, what the crime was, until the revelations that suddenly come toward the end. Talk about the technique of the unreliable narrator in mystery stories! By the way, Jon Tuska in his great critical work THE DETECTIVE IN Hollywood casually dismisses this movie as not very good. He's wrong.