Fear in the Night (1972)
It took Peggy Heller a long time to recover from the trauma of a brutal physical assault, suffered in her youth. When she married Robert, he provided her with the love and reassurance she craved for and the two settled down in a pretty house in the grounds of the public school where Robert was a master. But the headmaster of the school is not what he seems and Peggy is convinced he means to harm her - is her fear a figment of her tortured imagination or are there forces at work that intend to manipulate her anxieties with fatal consequences?
- Jimmy Sangster
- Jimmy Sangster
- Michael Syson
Rating: 5.972/10 by 54 users
Alternative Title:
Nachts kommt die Angst - DE
Furcht in der Nacht - DE
午夜驚魂 - HK
Das Haus des Schreckens - DE
Terror hora cero - ES
Country:
United Kingdom
Language:
English
Runtime: 01 hour 34 minutes
Budget: $0
Revenue: $0
Plot Keyword: murder, psychological thriller, nervous breakdown, newlywed, schoolhouse
Brainstorm! One of Hammer Films' ventures into the psychological horror realm, Fear in the Night is more fun than frightening. Plot has Judy Geeson as a young woman recovering from a nervous breakdown who moves with her husband to a boys' school. Once there she appears to be once again terrorized by a man with an artificial arm, but nobody believes her. Peter Cushing, Ralph Bates and Joan Collins also star, in what has to be a candidate for weakest of the Hammer psychological series of films. Things are not helped by it coming off as a cheap knock off of Hammer's own superlative "Taste of Fear 1961", a picture that firmly delivered on its promise. Fear in the Night starts off promisingly, with a genuinely scary set-up, and once Geeson and Bates arrive at the boys school it's ripe for chills and suggestion. Unfortunately, the premise of Geeson being menaced in what is essentially a four character piece quickly wears thin - with Cushing badly under used in the process. Atmosphere is fine, director and co-writer Jimmy Sangster always had a good eye and ear for uneasy dread. While the small cast give it a good whirl to make the modest intentions shine brighter. But ultimately it's only a diversion piece that homages better films of its type instead of making its own mark. 5/10
