Gaslight

I had read the book -- The Psychopath Next Door by Martha Stout -- and I thought it might be time to see the movie -- Gaslight (the earlier 1940 version, a.k.a. Angel Street). OMG! With an ending faintly like something out of Unholy Hungers. In black and white, appropriately enough.

I had to keep reminding myself that it was a "wartime" movie, which helps explain both the story and the musical accompaniment. The plot, however, is straight from everyday psychopathy. It parallels so many real-life situations that I could barely stand to watch it. It creeped me out. I can only wonder if audiences of the day sensed parallels with the psychopathy underlying WW II.

Unfortunately, most victims probably don't have a guardian Detective watching over them but, as the story suggests, with the right knowledge you don't have to be a victim. Having somebody/something watching over you certainly could help too.

Here's a free view from British National Films -clocks in at about 83 minutes. Going to watch shortly. :)

http://www.archive.org/details/Gaslight_1940

FWIW - I have both the 1940 version and the 1944 version with Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman. I must say that whle I like the original, the 1944 version is much darker. Boyer is amazing in it (as is, of course, Ingrid Bergman).

From IMDB:

The 1944 version reveals that the Charles Boyer character has sinister intentions much sooner than the 1940 version, when Boyer reacts furiously to the letter that Bergman has found. This does not happen in the earlier version, in which much of the events are left unexplained until late in the film, when the detective reveals himself to the wife.Overall, they are both really very good though.

Click to expand...

Megan said:

It parallels so many real-life situations that I could barely stand to watch it. It creeped me out. I can only wonder if audiences of the day sensed parallels with the psychopathy underlying WW II.

Click to expand...

I agree. I find it the hardest film to watch of all ive ever seen.

I also have both versions although I thought the psychopath in the 1940 version was more evil and immersed in the role. The ending was certainly more dramatic. The detective in the 1944 version was probably better than the detective in the original, but hey, its all subjective.

I just finished watching this movie, (original version aka Angel Street in the US) & it was a difficult watch. After seeing it referenced in McGregor & McGregor's "The Empathy Trap" i decided to have a look. The intense interaction between the couple really showed it's roots as a stage play - if you have prior knowledge of it. Diane Wynyard plays the wife (Bella) & Anton Walbrook plays the husband ("Paul Mallen") & Walbrook is quite dark in his performance. Wynyard doesn't seem right for the role at first, but when she starts to really believe that she's going mad her performance rises. A tough watch if you've been at the receiving end of "gaslighting", but seeing this just drives home (along with some of the recommended reading books) just how bad these these pathological techniques are.

Some have said that this 1940 version is over the top but i disagree, both leads are strong, though the detective is a bit "wet." The 1944 version might reveal the sinister intentions of the husband quicker but i caught on to the hubby (only having prior knowledge of the basic premise) early, which is due to Walbrook's performance. The way he was speaking to his wife in the beginning gave me a "hmm..." moment & some other clues. The parlourmaid was annoying too, McGregor & McGregor would call her an "apath" i think. I might check out the 1944 version with Boyer & Bergman at another time.

H-kqge said:

I just finished watching this movie, (original version aka Angel Street in the US) & it was a difficult watch. [...]

Some have said that this 1940 version is over the top but i disagree, both leads are strong, though the detective is a bit "wet." The 1944 version might reveal the sinister intentions of the husband quicker but i caught on to the hubby (only having prior knowledge of the basic premise) early, which is due to Walbrook's performance. The way he was speaking to his wife in the beginning gave me a "hmm..." moment & some other clues. The parlourmaid was annoying too, McGregor & McGregor would call her an "apath" i think. I might check out the 1944 version with Boyer & Bergman at another time.

Click to expand...

I agree. I have both 1940 & 1944 versions. They are both well worth watching.

1984 said:

H-kqge said:

I just finished watching this movie, (original version aka Angel Street in the US) & it was a difficult watch. [...]

Some have said that this 1940 version is over the top but i disagree, both leads are strong, though the detective is a bit "wet." The 1944 version might reveal the sinister intentions of the husband quicker but i caught on to the hubby (only having prior knowledge of the basic premise) early, which is due to Walbrook's performance. The way he was speaking to his wife in the beginning gave me a "hmm..." moment & some other clues. The parlourmaid was annoying too, McGregor & McGregor would call her an "apath" i think. I might check out the 1944 version with Boyer & Bergman at another time.

Click to expand...

I agree. I have both 1940 & 1944 versions. They are both well worth watching.

Click to expand...

I'm currently reading Stout's The Sociopath Next Door & this film caught my attention - both there & a few other places, such as The Empathy Trap. It's one I'd like to watch sometime.

The 1940 version is a chilling movie. The characters develop well as it progresses.

Nowadays it's easier for psychopaths to hide, there are more avenues for exploitation & increase in pathology, osit. Can't say for sure. The dynamics however are similar; worth watching! It would be nice to see the 1944 version for comparisons.

Thanks treesparrow for the link.