How Awful About Allan

For some inexplicable reason, this telefeature is but rarely accorded the respect it merits. In point of fact, it is a most accomplished, gripping, and well acted affair, from the days when a "made for TV" movie, could still boast performers, writing, and technical credentials of the first water.

The story is an intense, psychological study of a young man suffering from hysterical blindness following the death of his professor father in a fire. Set in a large, shadowy, Victorian house, this very Gothic story hinges on the sibling rivalry between the young man and his spinster sister, both of whom blame themselves, in different ways, for their father's demise. Eventually, the young man's sanity begins to give way, in the face of a series of inexplicable hauntings, which may, or may not be supernatural. Only the denouement will tell.

With its pronounced subtext of repressed, family guilt, the film has literary antecedents in the work of Shirley Jackson, Walter De La Mare, and Nathanial Hawthorne.

Starring a cast of major (big screen) movie and stage actors, this film has everything that is conspicuously absent in current television: an excellent musical score, evocative photography, muted lighting, accomplished art direction, an interesting premise and script, intelligent dialogue, (gasp!)and a very good sense of pacing.

Add to that, a baseline story that improves on the novel upon which it was based, (yes I read it) and you have a viewing experience very different from the "made for TV's" of today, which are,(I'm told--since I don't watch them) an endless stream of tedious, politically correct, AIDS,Anorexia, and spouse abuse victim propaganda studies--I believe the catch phrase is "victim of the week" stories.)

All in all, "How Awful About Allan" serves as a sad reminder of what was still artistically possible in the world of commercial television, in the not too distant past.

Generally I don't crib, but I've seen absolute gibberish being rated pretty highly if it comes out of a big studio with a big cast. Now this movie here is not that special, but it is well directed, has great acting by the cast and some decent camera work. The story seems slightly predictable but it is credible and works for this kind of movie. The reveal at the end does come across as a surprise.

Anthony Perkins live up to the role and shows his range as an actor here. This is a very good movie, albeit a short one. Full marks the the director and his crew.

Atmospheric psychological thriller has Perkins ideally cast as the brooding music lecturer, left psychosomatically blinded after he witnesses his father perish in a house fire, which also disfigures his elder sister (Harris). After spending eight months in a mental hospital he returns to the house and is cared for by his sister, but his recovery is hampered by the presence of a suspicious boarder who comes and goes under cloak of darkness, and who Perkins is convinced, is trying to kill him.

It's sometimes tense and gripping, though the small-scale TV treatment confines the plot to strictly minor status. Hackett co-stars as the kindly neighbour, keen to help Perkins emerge from his deteriorating psychosis, while Kent Smith has a bit part as the once-feared patriarch, favoured by Harris but with whom Perkins' relationship was strained.

Provokes an occasional shiver, but it's still a very timid tale that relies too much on the wind machines and 'dark, stormy night' routine, a consequence (but not necessarily an excuse) perhaps of the TV budget. There's a throwback moment to "Psycho" at the film's climax which might bring a smile to your face if you know what to look for, while the distinguished cast deliver their dialogue with stage-born professionalism and the overall result is a modest time-filler with potential.

Effective psychological "thriller" about a man that has subconsciously lost his sight due to a tragedy that befell him and his family when a child. Little Alan blames himself for setting a fire that kills his mean and nasty father and scars his sister whose bigger loss is her much beloved father. Anthony Perkins gives a pretty good performance of a man torn apart from his past and now lives with his sister after years of being institutionalized. Perkins obviously has experience playing psychotic individuals, and his Alan is not overdone at all. In fact I thought Perkins gave a very restrained performance. Julie Harris is equally up to task as his sister who must deal with her returning brother, her life such as it is, and economic issues. Money is so tight that she must let a room to a boarder...and then things begin to cave in for Alan and his life still only seeing things through a blur. This movie was made for television and it shows. There is not a lot of action and really no performers of any note outside the leads and Joan Hackett as an old flame for Alan. The film was directed by Curtis Harrington, veteran of some older genre films and later What's the Matter with Helen? and Whoever Slew Aunite Roo?. Harrington is always steady behind the lens and ably creates some tension and suspense even though his obvious budgetary restraints shine. All in all, How Awful About Alan delivers a taut examination of how we sometimes internalize the pain that we live with and what must happen to it to cleanse our souls.

Allan (Anthony Perkins) is blamed for an accidental fire that killed his father (Kent Smith), disfigured his sister (Julie Harris, who wears a plastic device over part of her face) and landed him in an institution. Eight months later, partially blind and guilt-stricken, he's let out of an institution and rents a room from his estranged sibling in an effort to put his life back together, but someone is out for revenge and wants to drive him crazy. Is it his darling sis? Friendly neighbor/ex-girlfriend Olive (Joan Hackett)? The creepy new boarder? The father back from the grave? Or is it just in Allan's mind?

Perkins can do the paranoid/fragile/slipping-sanity act in sleep and Harris and Hackett offer good support, but this telepic is dull, light on plot and fizzles out way before the finale. Blurry POV shots and murky photography make for a pretty oppressive viewing experience. Henry Farrell adapted his novel of the same name. Aaron Spelling was the executive producer.