Seance on a Wet Afternoon (1964)

That was an excellent one.

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Cuckold husband of a London medium gets himself involved in the kidnapping of a child for publicity purposes. Well-crafted British drama, adapted from Mark McShane's novel by director Bryan Forbes, features acclaimed performances by Kim Stanley (Oscar-nominated) and Richard Attenborough (also the producer), and yet none of these ingredients is enough to make the plot palpable--it's dreary instead of darkly comic or macabre. Stanley's visit to the little girl's worried parents should have been a high-point in the narrative, but Forbes drags the scene out until the overall effect becomes melodramatic (it goes limp). The classy filmmakers do not have the knack for pulpy suspense; their combined sophistication and intelligence work against them in this regard, turning the film into a precisely-mounted, anticlimactic downer. ** from ****

This is SOOOOO 1960s. Stark monochrome, visually crafted; intelligent, suspenseful dialogue, a modestly paced intense build up of the characters and plot, clever musical accents; the psychological twists, the interaction of the characters - the dark sociopath, the compliant and ineffective hen-pecked husband accomplice. Marvellous. This is a modest budget film, yet very intense, very sinister with all sorts of taboos explored in the medium (pardon the pun) of a séance. No CGI, no mega explosions every five minutes, no car chases or corny catch phrases, and definitely no expensive sets. Just a house in Wimbledon, a seedy lounge set and a penurious David Attenborough reduced to running a motorbike and sidecar for their mastermind crime..... complete with old duffer motorbike helmet and gauntlets Great performances. These characters are the stuff that serial killers are made of, and they scared the sh*t out of me!

SEANCE ON A WET AFTERNOON is a well thought-of British crime film which adopts a psychological angle to tell an offbeat and well-crafted story. The tale is about a down-and-out couple who are struggling to make ends meet. The lily-livered husband is an asthmatic whose condition sees him constantly out of work. The overbearing wife works as a fraudulent medium to gain money from her clients. Together the pair come up with a sinister scheme to kidnap the daughter of a rich businessman and use the wife's first-hand knowledge of the kidnapping to bring her fame and fortune as a medium.It's a decent story for sure and director Bryan Forbes goes for an intensely realistic approach through. The film is extremely well done when it depicts the psychology of the opposing leads. Kim Stanley is a Lady Macbeth-style control freak undergoing a mental breakdown and her acting is quietly harrowing. Richard Attenborough is the focus of the camera's attention and does very well as the henpecked husband at the mercy of his dominating wife.Sadly, the rest of the film just isn't very exciting. It seems the more a critic likes a film the more I'm likely to hate it. SEANCE ON A WET AFTERNOON is dreary when it should be exciting and the overlong running time means that there are lots of long stretches when not much really happens. It's a pity as both the opening and closing scenes are sufficiently dramatic, it's just in the middle part that the pace really flags. Compare this to something much more up my street like the similarly-plotted Robert Shaw thriller TOMORROW AT TEN and SEANCE ON A WET AFTERNOON comes off by far the worse; even the quality acting can't save it.

A psychotic psychic and her meek husband kidnap the daughter of a wealthy family in an elaborate plan to generate publicity for her séance business. Stanley creates an interesting character, but her background as a stage actress is evident in fits of over-emoting. Attenborough is likable as her weak-willed husband. The small roles are well acted. The film takes too long establishing the relationship between Stanley and Attenborough. Forbes creates a creepy atmosphere in the old mansion in which the couple resides, but is letdown by an uneven script. Some of the plot elements are highly implausible and the conclusion is rather abrupt and unsatisfying.