Reviews & Ratings for
Seance on a Wet Afternoon More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Index

47 reviews in total

---

61 out of 75 people found the following review useful:
One of the Academy Awards Most Baffling Choices, 10 December 2004

Author: dglink from Alexandria, VA

Over the years, the Oscars have often gone to performers and films that seemed to make little sense at the time and subsequently failed to stand the test of time. While Julie Andrews was certainly marked for stardom, her singing nanny did not hold a candle to Kim Stanley's tour-de-force as Myra in "Seance on a Wet Afternoon," either in 1964 or in 2004. One wonders in retrospect if any of the voters actually saw this brilliant, minor masterwork. If they had, how did Richard Attenborough's performance get overlooked? His subtle underplaying as the passive husband is in perfect sync to Stanley's showy turn as the medium and deserved Academy recognition as much as and perhaps more than his direction of "Gandhi." The taut screenplay and direction by Bryan Forbes, the fine black and white cinematography by Gerry Turpin, and John Barry's music also deserved recognition. Unfortunately, Hollywood was into big musicals in 1964, and the Academy's nominations were showered on "My Fair Lady" and "Mary Poppins," while more serious fare such as this film was overlooked. While "Lady" clunks along today as a leaden stage-bound adaptation and "Poppins" does not seem quite as charming as it did, "Seance on a Wet Afternoon" and the two brilliant performances at its center remain as riveting as they were 40 years ago. Fortunately, the Academy has shown some maturity in recent years, and films such as this are more often recognized, which raises their profiles and brings them to the attention of viewers who might otherwise miss them. Without any recognition other than recommendations from those few who have seen this character-driven suspense gem, "Seance" has been little seen and remains a cinematic jewel that awaits discovery and its deserved place among British film classics.

---

45 out of 47 people found the following review useful:
Truly, Madly, Deeply, 5 March 2007

Author: M. J Arocena from New Zealand

The first hour is one of the most riveting pieces of film ever to hit the screen. The pace, the mood, Attenborough and, of course, Kim Stanley! Then, something happens on the second half, it feels rushed, at least, that's what it felt to me. Once that aside, what a treat! Bryan Forbes signed some startling British movies of that period but you hardly hear his name mentioned. I mean, "Whistle Down The Wind", "The Wrong Box", "The L Shapped Room", "King Rat". Here he touches some kind of zenith. I heard that originally, Forbes and producer Richard Attenborough, had toyed with the idea of making the couple a "queer" one. Alec Guinness and Tom Courtenay. As fun as the idea may sound I'm glad they didn't go ahead with that. It would have deprive us of Kim Stanley and of Richard Attenborough in what could be, arguably, his best performance. He made of Billy's weakness a separate entity. Painful, creepy. Stanley is, goes without saying, sublime. Another superlative characterization in her far too brief film gallery. We can actually see what she's feeling and what she's feeling is so all consuming so strong and so fragile that we feel she's about to fall at any moment and we will too, with her. For those of us who love great acting - This is unmissable.

---

33 out of 35 people found the following review useful:
Powerful Performances in an Unexpected Story, 24 April 2005

Author: gftbiloxi (gftbiloxi@yahoo.com) from Biloxi, Mississippi

An unsuccessful psychic and spiritualist has grown frustrated with her lack of celebrity--and so devises a plan to bring herself the fame she craves. She and her husband will kidnap a child. When the police are baffled and press coverage has reached a fevered pitch, she will have a "vision" that will lead to the child's recovery and the reap the rewards of publicity. But no sooner is the plan underway than there are complications--and in this instance the complications are the characters themselves.

Everything about Brian Forbes' SEANCE ON A WET AFTERNOON is understated yet oddly moody. The story, although unusual, is told in a direct sort of way; although it offers an occasional twist, the plot avoids tricky devices. The script is very natural sounding, the black and white cinematography avoids undue cleverness, and the background music is discreet. This throws all attention on the characters--and Kim Stanley and Richard Attenborough offer amazing performances, with Stanley the very personification of rising madness and Attenborough painfully accurate as her emotionally dependent husband.

The interplay between Stanley and Attenborough is justly famous, and the two stars are well supported, most particularly by Judith Donner as the kidnapped child and Nanette Newman as her distracted mother. The film has a dreamy, claustrophobic quality that many will find fascinating; some, however, may consider it a bit talky and its conclusion an anticlimax. But if you are in the mood for a psychological thriller that really is psychological, you couldn't pick a better choice for rainy day viewing. Recommended.

Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer

---

35 out of 39 people found the following review useful:
Kim Stanley is a knock-off and this film a masterpiece., 5 April 2002

Author: (imdbdata@web.de) from Berlin, Germany

This is an almost forgotten masterpiece by British director Bryan Forbes in which everything is unique.

The sound track is macabre and chilling, the story and setting: simply adorable (the atmosphere of the old house is comparable to the one in Wise's "The Haunting"), the cinematography is great, and the editing almost perfect.

The greatest plus, whatsoever, is Kim Stanley's acting. Perfection would be the right word to describe it. Regarded as being "America's finest actress", she proves what Method acting can be like in this stunning, electric performance. It's so sad that her filmography is that short! Equally good is Richard Attenborough as Stanley's weak husband. Both actors deliver a tour-de-force duel in acting -- it's great to watch!

I highly recommend this film which still -- in times of "Hannibal", and "Scream" -- gives us chills. It's the best entertainment you can get!

---

28 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
Should Kim Stanley have won the Oscar?, 16 January 2007

Author: axsmashcrushallthree

One of the best British films of the 1960's, "Seance on a Wet Afternoon" is now available on DVD through general distribution. This should help the film to gain the wider appeal that it deserves.

This succeeds on all levels - extraordinary direction with riveting tracking shots, evocative cinematography, great set pieces, a winding plot, and amazing acting from the two leads. The showy yet introspective role of Myra Savage might be one to elicit histrionics and stern looks in the wrong hands, but the character is immensely deepened and supplemented by Kim Stanley's superbly rich "Method" performance. Stanley is matched by Richard Attenborough's Bill Savage, attenuated and subordinated by his wife's unstable, grasping personality.

Much has been said about Stanley's performance as a deserving Academy Award winner. This is difficult to judge. Most of the awards presented in 1965 were for lighter films, and it is difficult to find fault with Julie Andrew's now legendary performance as "Mary Poppins". Deeper inspection of past Awards shows a predilection toward films of an escapist nature during certain times, such as "Going My Way" during the dark, uncertain days of World War II 1943/1944. Could the same be said of the tumultuous aftermath of Kennedy's assassination and other upheavals? Under any circumstance, this film is a masterpiece with no small debt to the acting of Stanley and Attenborough. Seek this out and you will be richly rewarded - 10 out of 10.

---

17 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
Excellent psychological horror, 6 April 2001
Author: thomandybish from Weaverville, NC

This great, seldom-scene movie stars Kim Stanley as an unbalanced woman who holds seances in her home and concocts a plot to gain celebrity with her so-called "powers". With the help of her husband, she plans to kidnap the daughter of a wealthy couple, then use her "powers"to reveal the girl's whereabouts. As the story unfolds, the audience is shown the reasons behind the woman's emotional problems and the growing inevitability of disaster that her plan holds. Richard Attenborough gives a great performance as he teeters between the desire to fulfill his unhappy wife's scheme and the knowledge that the deed they are doing is wrong. Reccommended for those who want a shiver without the gore. Thought provoking.

---

17 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
Lies bring forth the Truth, 17 October 2002

Author: Michael Zeleny (zeleny) from Los Angeles, U.S.A.

A deeply conventional moral emerges from a denaturalized plot involving a phony psychic, her meek husband, and a manipulative police superintendent. While Kim Stanley and Richard Attenborough acquit themselves spectacularly as the couple undone by overweening ambition of a childless wife, the film is indelibly marked by an all too brief final appearance of Patrick Magee, a stage actor seen to fair advantage on film only infrequently, and nearly always in supporting parts. Watch this favorite actor of Samuel Beckett, the originally intended performer of Krapp's Last Tape, in a performance of trenchant subtlety, enforcing Law through measured duplicity and chilling subterfuge.

---

22 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
Some Really Good Acting Here, 25 April 2004

Author: Lechuguilla from Dallas, Texas

Assisted by her reluctant husband, a delusional but clever "psychic", with a fondness for opera, carries out a child kidnapping scheme, to help boost her mysticism business. The film's premise is interesting, but the plot is slow and tedious. Many scenes, especially those shot outdoors, could have been shortened, or even deleted. Blatant plot holes and a sputtering finale further weaken the screen story.

If the plot is weak, the acting assuredly is not. Richard Attenborough (as the meek husband) is excellent. Even better is Kim Stanley (as the psychotic psychic). Indeed, Stanley's performance, which earned her an Oscar nomination, is the main reason to watch the film. Her method acting is perfect for the role. At times almost whispering her lines, she gives an instinctive and highly mannered performance that reminds me of another method actress, the brilliant Geraldine Page.

Mercifully, the film is shot in B&W. The best scenes are interior scenes wherein the stark contrast in lighting combines with minimal dialogue, and at times only the ticking of a clock in lieu of dialogue, to bring about the kind of brooding and dreary atmosphere one would expect, for a psychological thriller.

The best approach to this film is to ignore the details of the flawed plot, and focus instead on the psychology and motivation of Kim Stanley's character.

---

12 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
An original chiller., 29 August 2002
Author: cmyklefty from Philadelphia

I remember seeing Seance on a Wet Afternoon, before I was teenager. And then seeing it again five or six years later. It still had the same impact watching the movie as I was young child. If this playing on TV tomorrow, I would watch Seance before any TV show. It is an excellent study of characters in story. This is one the movies made me interested in older films. I did not care if the movie was in black and white or color as long as the film is made well. I enjoy for the mysterious atmosphere the movie is set and creativity that the actors bring to their roles. The plot had been copied many of times on film and TV but never can duplicated. Kim Stanley plays the strong controlling wife who does the seances and Richard Attenborough as her weak husband. If like the Others and Sixth Sense, you might like this film.

---

10 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Kim Stanley is fantastic!, 18 June 2004
Author: Brett Walter (StreepFan126@cs.com) from Santa Clarita, CA

This little seen film stars one of America's greatest actresses in one of Britian's greatest thrillers. Kim Stanley was an excellent Method actress. I agree that she very much reminds me of Geraldine Page, another brilliant actress. The way she says her lines, or uses her hands and face is very much like Page. (Ironically, Page turned down this role!)

I'm not going to get too much into the plot because I don't want to give too much away. If you want to know more about the plot, then check out some of the other comments. Let's just say great acting by the entire cast, and a good tense story, make for a night of suspense. So turn out the lights and enjoy!

PS: If you're looking for a copy of this video don't forget to check your public library.

---

---

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	Awards
External reviews	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user reviews	Your vote history