Night of the Eagle (1962)

Very disappointing...

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Producer: Albert Fennell. Executive producers: Julian Wintle and Leslie Parkyn. An Independent Artists Production. (Available on a severely cut (to only 83 minutes) DVD from Optimum Home Entertainment).Copyright in the U.S.A. 10 March 1962 by Alta Vista Productions. Presented in the U.S.A. by James H. Nicholson and Samuel Z. Arkoff. U.S. release through American International: 25 April 1962. New York opening at neighborhood theaters on a double bill with "Tales of Terror": 4 July 1962. U.K. release through Anglo Amalgamated: 13 May 1962. Banned in Australia. 87 minutes in the U.K. 90 minutes in the U.S.A. U.S. release title: Burn, Witch, Burn.SYNOPSIS: Tansy Taylor, the wife of an English university professor, secretly practices witchcraft to further her husband Norman's career. When he accidentally discovers this, he destroys her instruments of magic. Following Tansy's warning that his action has left him vulnerable to evil forces, Norman's luck changes.NOTES: Location scenes filmed in Penzance, Cornwall.COMMENT: Directed with authority and style. The script, however, seems far-fetched, and the transformation of Professor Carr is a bit hard to take. One of the most telling points against the script's credibility is that Tansy (silly name!) makes no attempt to tell her husband that a member of the faculty is practicing voodoo. Instead, she talks vaguely for hours about protection. Why isn't she specific?The special effects are faultless, whilst photography, music, and especially Ralph Sheldon's sharp film editing contribute greatly to the picture's eerie atmosphere. Indeed, Gilbert Taylor's camera-work — both on location and in the studio — is astonishingly creative, considering the shoddy work he often turns out for quota quickies.Janet Blair walks off with the movie's acting honors. The other players, however, are never less than able.

Very much regarded as a minor classic of the genre, NIGHT OF THE EAGLE is a well-shot black and white chiller with plenty of spooky moments to enjoy. Made in an era when the best horror moments still came from subtlety and a brooding atmosphere, the film conjures up a nightmarish world of spells and powerful forces beyond our comprehension. Some fine acting from the distinguished cast help to make us care for the characters and believe the events that play out.The film kicks off happily enough, with teacher Norman Taylor, a resolute non-believer in the supernatural, lecturing his students on superstition and the like. Soon, however, he discovers that something is amiss at home and his house is filled with dead spiders, locks of hair, dirt from cemeteries and all sorts. He destroys all of these, much to his wife's horror, and then the real nightmare begins. Taylor's life begins to fall apart. He is accused of raping a female student at the school, and his wife suffers a nervous breakdown. Eventually he is forced to re-evaluate his opinion on the black arts when he realises that the misfortune he is suffering is the work of an emery masquerading as a close friend.Strong on atmosphere, NIGHT OF THE EAGLE is packed with suspense and tension as the horror of the situation escalates up until the finale. The trappings of a good score and nice photography make this easy on the eye and ear, and Wyngarde himself is very good as the lead who ends up being absolutely terrified and a broken man. Janet Blair, on the other hand, is a little irritating but mainly fine, unfortunately at this particular period in the cinema actresses who had to display fright had a tendency to overact (widening their eyes, screaming, etc.) which can look a little dated to me and can be embarrassing. The supporting cast are fine, with Margaret Johnston as a creepy, limping fellow teacher who has a few secrets to hide.Probably the best-remembered part of this film is the ending, which sees Wyngarde trying to save his wife from their burning home. Along the way, one of the stone eagles on the roof of the school comes to life and chases him through the corridors, until he is saved at the last moment. A simple effect, this, but a clever and memorable one. During this chase, Wyngarde rubs up against his blackboard and a phrase previously written on there - "I do not believe" becomes simply "I do believe". A lovely little touch in what is a very nice film indeed, not totally brilliant but providing enough thrills and chills to be an above average entry in the genre.

Attempting to get through to his hysterical wife that her use of charms and trinkets protecting against witchcraft are ludicrous, a man's life changes for the dreadful when he finds himself at the center of a series of strange supernatural hauntings after their destruction.This one turned out to be quite enjoyable for the most part, even though there's some pretty big flaws to this one. The biggest issue with this one that really hurts it is that the later half of the film doesn't really contain much in the way of horror, as what happens to them doesn't have a lot of scares, shocks or gruesome ideas that would turn this into a rather chilling, creepy tale. The threatening student and the resentful colleagues story lines go nowhere, and the rape charge does nothing that really marks this as a horror film, and then the fact that most of these segments are with her catatonic doesn't really offer up much, and with the film's British-like slow-burn pace it takes a while to get going. Still, though, there's a lot of good here in the rather impressive use of magical trinkets and their protective properties, there's some pretty intense scenes and the finale does inject some life into the proceedings by finally having something to do, which does overcome a couple of the flaws and makes it somewhat more enjoyable.Today's Rating/PG: Violence.

I saw "Night of the Eagle" last night, after watching it in 1962, and I was surprised again. No wonder I had not forgotten it after all these years. I could not remember details, but as I watched it (and judging it from 1962 standards) I realized how good it is: first it has quite a frightening tale to tell, frenetic rhythm, and more than a few remarkable dramatic scenes. All fits in its place, even Janet Blair's melodramatic performance (in contrast, for example, with Nancy Kelly's overacting in "The Bad Seed", that seriously affects the film, which seems dated today). By today's standards what may be the worst part of "Night of the Eagle" is the special effects, but on the positive side you have tension built from almost nothing (as in the scene Blair searches for a little doll after a bridge session), effective editing, a good score, fine performances, a sexual undercurrent all through the movie that today would be explicit, and raw sensuality from leading actor Peter Wyngarde, who had previously been cast as the servant who supposedly had involved children Flora and Miles in sexual activity in "The Innocents". There's even a homo-erotic feeling in the way his body is displayed (I have no idea if director Sidney Hayers or Wyngarde were homosexuals, or if they did it on purpose; this is just an impression I had, but it seemed logic to me since the man is accused of raping a student, and all women in the university should envy Blair, with those senior husbands of theirs.) Sometimes things seem illogic, like Wyngarde entering a cemetery, but as he has read in his wife's notes, that is a perfect place to perform a rite, what in fact he is going to do. I do not know how the novel ends, but the happy ending the film has, is a bit of a turn down... or maybe it's just a thought of our times, when pessimism is more common compared to the high hopes of the early 1960s. A very good film, which I recommend, always keeping it in its own space and time perspective.