Séance on
a Wet Afternoon (1964)
Directed
by: Bryan Forbes.
Written
by: Bryan Forbes based on the novel by Mark McShane.
Starring:
Kim Stanley (Myra Savage), Richard Attenborough (William
Henry 'Bill' Savage), Judith Donner (Amanda Clayton - The Child), Mark Eden (Mr.
Charles Clayton), Nanette Newman (Mrs. Clayton), Gerald Sim (Det. Sgt. Beedle),
Patrick Magee (Superintendent Walsh).
There are a pair of exceptional performances at the heart of
Bryan Forbes Séance on a Wet Afternoon. Kim Stanley and Richard Attenborough
play a married couple, who have responded to the death of their baby in
differing ways – for her, it has deepened whatever mental illness she has
already has, and for him, it has stricken him with grief. Stanley plays Myra,
who makes her living as a psychic, and she is the domineering and controlling
one in the relationship. Attenborough is William, her long-suffering husband,
who is better able to interact in the real world, but powerless to stand up to
his wife. She has an idea on how to advance her career. All he needs to do is
kidnap the child of a wealthy couple – Amanda Clayton (Judith Donner) – and she
can step in and “find” her, safe and sound, and become the famous psychic who
cracked the case. No one is going to get to hurt – at least, that is what Myra
assures William.
The film was directed by Bryan Forbes – not much remembered
today, but he certainly has a few gems on his filmography – none better than
this. This is a slow-burn thriller – it lacks the kind of action you often get
in these sorts of stories, because it doesn’t need them. It is all about the
psychology of these two damaged people. It all builds to that title séance –
which will, of course, bring everything crashing down.
Stanley received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for her role
here. Stanley was always a fine actress – but she often got her roles after
others turned them down – in this case Deborah Kerr, Anne Bancroft, Shelley
Winters and Simone Signoret all passed, before it fell to Stanley. Those are
all great actresses – you can argue all had better careers than Stanley – but
she was the right choice for this role. It is a role that is chilly,
domineering, and yet fragile – Myra is teetering on the edge of her own sanity,
any slight push will be too much for her. William knows this, of course, and he
goes along with what she wants. He has tried to leave her in the past – but
needs her. She is perhaps her only connection to anything. Attenborough was a
fine actor – and I’m not sure he’s ever been better than he is here. He is
quiet man, one who has mainly been beaten into submission. He will do anything
for Myra – but this may just be the push he needs to grow a spine.
Forbes shoots the film is chilly black and white – and the
action cuts between the countryside in England, where the couple live, and
London – where William travels to kidnap the child, and do other things involved
in the ransom, etc. His direction here isn’t flashy – he allows scenes to play
out minute by minute, and for Stanley and Attenborough to have stretches of
silence. Heightening the realism is the location shooting on the streets of
London. The closest thing the film has to an action set piece is the money
exchange, and the fallout, in a crowded subway platform.
For the most part, they don’t make thrillers like this
anymore. The film deliberately lacks action – there are no shootouts, no murder,
no blood, and really only that one chase in the subway. It is a thriller
grounded in the reality of its two leading characters – their psychological
underpinnings, their perverse attachment to each other – that co-dependence
deepening into something dangerous. It’s a movie you cannot look away from, for
fear of missing something subtle, dark and disturbing. And it is all the more
thrilling because of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment