Night 2: ‘The Innocents’ (1961)
Some movies take longer for you to warm up to them; some never manage to seize you; and a few just grab you from the start. ‘The Innocents’ is a perfect example of the latter. With a spooky and intriguing start, the movie swiftly takes you on a wild, complex ride of apparitions, indecencies and doubts.
It tells the story of lovely and cheerful Miss Giddens (Deborah Kerr), whom fancies children and promptly accepts a position working as a Governess for two kids: the charming yet eerie Flora (Pamela Franklin) and the intriguing and well-spoken Miles (Martin Stephens). What seems to be the job of her dreams soon turns into a nightmare, as she begins to unwrap the shocking secrets that haunt the house, and most worryingly: the children, themselves.
One of the first hurdles that a movie like this must inevitably deal with is that so much depends on the acting. It is not a movie that relies on jump scares or gore to achieve its goal. Instead, it leans on a spellbinding yet impressively small cast, that makes you care for them and, sometimes, fear them as well.
The adults, mainly Giddens and Mrs. Grose (Megs Jenkins) deliver terrific performances, and they find their match in the fascinating, endearing, and most importantly, believable performances of the two children. They are truly the standouts in the film. From Flora’s tainted innocence to Miles’ unsettling wisdom, both kids simply manage to steal every scene they are in.
Another element that plays a huge role in the movie’s effectiveness is its ambiance. The spooky and claustrophobic nature of the house and the multiple rooms is perfectly conveyed through beautiful yet disturbing imagery (from uncomfortable frames to frenetic plays of shadow and light), plus an excellent sound design that makes you feel as if you are truly there, trapped in the endless corridors of that huge house.
Without a doubt, the movie achieves a perfectly constructed atmosphere of pure, basic horror.
Yet, the place is also beautiful, open, and the wide fields and gorgeous landscapes contrast flawlessly with the oppressive interior of the house. It’s a duality that reflects the overall ambiguity of the story in itself: is it really a possession? Is it just the fancy of overactive imaginations? Is it all the consequence of a pulsing sexuality, yearning to be set loose?
In this aspect, the story introduces the daring concept of infant sexuality and self-awareness seen through a supernatural lens. A concept, I believe, would cause a lot of shock, particularly in our modern world, where the preservation of innocence is such an important part of today’s morality.
The movie is scandalous and provocative. It juggles different concepts, and concludes with an ending that is vague enough to leave the answers up to us.
And here’s my only disappointment in the film: unfortunately, the conclusion felt a little abrupt and underwhelming. Although I rather enjoy the fact that we don’t get a definitive answer, it also seemed as if it was difficult to settle the entire thing, and the story simply halts there.
Yet, this doesn’t debilitate the rest of the movie, and it’s definitely a great example of what great horror can be.
Grade: 8/10. Not that innocent!
Scare Factor: mostly psychological, with a few scary images.
Gore/violence: none.
Nudity/sexual situations: implied, as well as some uncomfortable sexual innuendos and moments related to children.
Tomorrow: ‘Dead of Night’ (1945)
