Magnificent and unusual thriller which is surprisingly effective despite its rather cosy foundations. I first saw this movie on TV late one night with my Nan and we were absolutely gripped and jumped out of our seats a good few times. I watched it again yesterday afternoon and found it to be even better than I thought despite a few minor quibbles.
Firstly, I agree that a few teabags of heroin didn't warrant all this fuss, but the idea of a cute/ creepy kid's doll stuffed with it is a malevolent image all the same. What puzzles me more is why on earth Susy risks her life for it when she has absolutely no idea what's in it. She even at one point says "I'm saving my husband's life aren't I?" which is completely out of nowhere. She suspects for as while it is evidence of her husband's implication in a murder or perhaps adultery plot, but she doesn't have any idea what is going on and yet risks her life for it. If it was me, even if I did know what was in the doll, I'd still hand it over to Roat!
The other slight flaw in the film comes in its origins as a stage play. While the claustrophobia is a great asset, the problem lies in the adaptation not taking into account the reactions of a cinema audience are different to a theatre audience. Take for example the scene early on when Susy enters the flat while the three villains are meeting there. Why doesn't Roat tell them she is blind, he has time to? Because on stage one of the plays most effective moments was having Susy enter and face the villains and then the penny drops for the audience that she cannot see. This "shared reaction" of an audience is something pretty unique to theatre and needs heightening considerably to work on film.
Additionally, the sequence where Susy realises the operator is still hanging on the phone line is a crowd pleasing laugh on stage but is not an effective gag in a movie.
Minor quibbles though in a marvelous film. Very creepy music, wonderful acting, tension building very effectively (a particularly powerful moment being Susy's gasp as she realises Mike is one of the gang)and isn't Samantha Jones gorgeous?
Firstly, I agree that a few teabags of heroin didn't warrant all this fuss, but the idea of a cute/ creepy kid's doll stuffed with it is a malevolent image all the same. What puzzles me more is why on earth Susy risks her life for it when she has absolutely no idea what's in it. She even at one point says "I'm saving my husband's life aren't I?" which is completely out of nowhere. She suspects for as while it is evidence of her husband's implication in a murder or perhaps adultery plot, but she doesn't have any idea what is going on and yet risks her life for it. If it was me, even if I did know what was in the doll, I'd still hand it over to Roat!
The other slight flaw in the film comes in its origins as a stage play. While the claustrophobia is a great asset, the problem lies in the adaptation not taking into account the reactions of a cinema audience are different to a theatre audience. Take for example the scene early on when Susy enters the flat while the three villains are meeting there. Why doesn't Roat tell them she is blind, he has time to? Because on stage one of the plays most effective moments was having Susy enter and face the villains and then the penny drops for the audience that she cannot see. This "shared reaction" of an audience is something pretty unique to theatre and needs heightening considerably to work on film.
Additionally, the sequence where Susy realises the operator is still hanging on the phone line is a crowd pleasing laugh on stage but is not an effective gag in a movie.
Minor quibbles though in a marvelous film. Very creepy music, wonderful acting, tension building very effectively (a particularly powerful moment being Susy's gasp as she realises Mike is one of the gang)and isn't Samantha Jones gorgeous?