"In the Dark" Is Right
Today's review: They Met in the Dark.
I had reasonably high hopes for this movie. Not only is They Met in the Dark a great title, but James Mason was the star, and that’s always a draw for me (despite numerous occasions where he winds up not getting much to do). As it turns out, the movie went in a direction I wasn’t expecting, and I don’t think it was a particularly good direction.
Mason plays Richard Heritage, a naval commander in WWII who is dishonorably discharged after a ship he was on is attacked and sunk, and the evidence points to him having (purposely or inadvertently) given the information to German spies. Wanting to clear his name, Heritage starts retracing his steps, starting with a manicurist named Mary (Patricia Medina). She obligingly arranges a meeting with him, but when she doesn’t show up at the appointed time, he goes to a place she mentioned, Orchard Cottage, in search of her. Unbeknownst to him, the house is owned by two retired Navy men, and their niece, Laura Verity (Joyce Howard), is on her way there for a visit. The two of them bump into each other in the middle of the night (hence the title), which scares Verity and causes Heritage to run off. Things get even more complicated when Verity discovers Mary’s body in one of the bedrooms and suspects Heritage of being responsible*, only for the body to have disappeared when she contacts the police about it (Heritage is also present for this, having coincidentally arrived at the police station to give a missing person’s report just as Verity is reporting the murder). From there, Heritage and Verity conduct separate investigations, often winding up in the same place at the same time. And while you can probably guess how things turn out there, the truth behind Mary’s death and Heritage’s disgrace is probably not what you’d initially expect.
I’ll admit that part of my issues with the movie may stem from me being unable to shift into the right mindset once the movie revealed its intentions. Thanks to the title and the opening scenes, I was under the impression that this was going to be a noir-like movie, with sinister figures and dangerous situations. Some of those are present, but once Verity goes to report the body and then fingers Heritage as the murderer when he walks in, the movie shifts to a more comedic tone, which not only doesn’t jibe with what came before but also just doesn’t work. I blame all of this on Verity; while Howard’s acting isn’t bad, the character is called upon to make stupid decisions, constantly gets made a fool of, and suffers from inconsistent characterization. It’s fairly obvious that Verity will eventually start trusting Heritage and working with him, but instead of having her gradually build to that point, she just flips a switch from “suspicious” to “liking him”, even though she actually has a decent enough reason to be annoyed with him at that point. It makes it hard to root for her, especially if you’re like me and don’t particularly like cringe comedy. Making her character more believable absolutely would have gone a long way towards making this movie better. It could even have still been a comedy, with Verity playing straight woman to the increasingly bizarre plot. Alas, the filmmakers apparently thought this was the better way to go.
While the comedy’s the big sticking point, there’s also the fact that things get incredibly convoluted. There are a lot of characters with small but significant parts in this movie, and it can be hard to keep them all straight. Making matters worse, some of the characters are innocent pawns in the evil plot, but unless it’s explicitly spelled out, you aren’t entirely sure who’s good and who’s bad. Plus, even though you eventually figure out what’s going on, one set of characters who are apparently integral to the story don’t become players in the game until the third act. Maybe I missed something (a few of the characters are hard to tell apart), but that still speaks of poor writing and pacing. The movie could definitely have done with some streamlining, and if that eliminated some of the “comedy”, so much the better.
There are a few other little things worth noting. One is that the opening credits do something I’ve never seen before and put “etc., etc., etc.…” at the end of a page listing the supporting actors. We know that wouldn’t happen today, but even for 1943, that seems odd. There’s also, of all things, a jumpscare in this movie, featuring a scarecrow. I’m sure jumpscares existed before they really took off here in the modern day, but you just don’t expect to see them in older movies, especially ones that aren’t horror movies. And finally, Mason is perfectly fine in his role (it helps that he gets to be a straight man to the ridiculousness), but doesn’t really have any standout moments. Well, except for the terrible beard he wears in his early scenes. Thankfully, he gets it shaved off fairly quickly, so I didn’t spend too long distracted by how weird it looked. Though perhaps it might have made me less aware of the bad comedy…
While I wouldn’t recommend the movie, I’ll also admit that it’s not as bad as I’ve probably made it sound. It’s just that the bad elements are elements that annoy me, and thus stick out in my mind more. Still, I’d leave this one alone and look for other movies with similar premises. “Wronged man must clear his name” is a staple of noir, after all…
*I feel like I should note here that she never suspects her uncles; in fact, the uncles actually don’t appear in the story. Their existence is just a contrivance to get Verity involved.
I had reasonably high hopes for this movie. Not only is They Met in the Dark a great title, but James Mason was the star, and that’s always a draw for me (despite numerous occasions where he winds up not getting much to do). As it turns out, the movie went in a direction I wasn’t expecting, and I don’t think it was a particularly good direction.
Mason plays Richard Heritage, a naval commander in WWII who is dishonorably discharged after a ship he was on is attacked and sunk, and the evidence points to him having (purposely or inadvertently) given the information to German spies. Wanting to clear his name, Heritage starts retracing his steps, starting with a manicurist named Mary (Patricia Medina). She obligingly arranges a meeting with him, but when she doesn’t show up at the appointed time, he goes to a place she mentioned, Orchard Cottage, in search of her. Unbeknownst to him, the house is owned by two retired Navy men, and their niece, Laura Verity (Joyce Howard), is on her way there for a visit. The two of them bump into each other in the middle of the night (hence the title), which scares Verity and causes Heritage to run off. Things get even more complicated when Verity discovers Mary’s body in one of the bedrooms and suspects Heritage of being responsible*, only for the body to have disappeared when she contacts the police about it (Heritage is also present for this, having coincidentally arrived at the police station to give a missing person’s report just as Verity is reporting the murder). From there, Heritage and Verity conduct separate investigations, often winding up in the same place at the same time. And while you can probably guess how things turn out there, the truth behind Mary’s death and Heritage’s disgrace is probably not what you’d initially expect.
I’ll admit that part of my issues with the movie may stem from me being unable to shift into the right mindset once the movie revealed its intentions. Thanks to the title and the opening scenes, I was under the impression that this was going to be a noir-like movie, with sinister figures and dangerous situations. Some of those are present, but once Verity goes to report the body and then fingers Heritage as the murderer when he walks in, the movie shifts to a more comedic tone, which not only doesn’t jibe with what came before but also just doesn’t work. I blame all of this on Verity; while Howard’s acting isn’t bad, the character is called upon to make stupid decisions, constantly gets made a fool of, and suffers from inconsistent characterization. It’s fairly obvious that Verity will eventually start trusting Heritage and working with him, but instead of having her gradually build to that point, she just flips a switch from “suspicious” to “liking him”, even though she actually has a decent enough reason to be annoyed with him at that point. It makes it hard to root for her, especially if you’re like me and don’t particularly like cringe comedy. Making her character more believable absolutely would have gone a long way towards making this movie better. It could even have still been a comedy, with Verity playing straight woman to the increasingly bizarre plot. Alas, the filmmakers apparently thought this was the better way to go.
While the comedy’s the big sticking point, there’s also the fact that things get incredibly convoluted. There are a lot of characters with small but significant parts in this movie, and it can be hard to keep them all straight. Making matters worse, some of the characters are innocent pawns in the evil plot, but unless it’s explicitly spelled out, you aren’t entirely sure who’s good and who’s bad. Plus, even though you eventually figure out what’s going on, one set of characters who are apparently integral to the story don’t become players in the game until the third act. Maybe I missed something (a few of the characters are hard to tell apart), but that still speaks of poor writing and pacing. The movie could definitely have done with some streamlining, and if that eliminated some of the “comedy”, so much the better.
There are a few other little things worth noting. One is that the opening credits do something I’ve never seen before and put “etc., etc., etc.…” at the end of a page listing the supporting actors. We know that wouldn’t happen today, but even for 1943, that seems odd. There’s also, of all things, a jumpscare in this movie, featuring a scarecrow. I’m sure jumpscares existed before they really took off here in the modern day, but you just don’t expect to see them in older movies, especially ones that aren’t horror movies. And finally, Mason is perfectly fine in his role (it helps that he gets to be a straight man to the ridiculousness), but doesn’t really have any standout moments. Well, except for the terrible beard he wears in his early scenes. Thankfully, he gets it shaved off fairly quickly, so I didn’t spend too long distracted by how weird it looked. Though perhaps it might have made me less aware of the bad comedy…
While I wouldn’t recommend the movie, I’ll also admit that it’s not as bad as I’ve probably made it sound. It’s just that the bad elements are elements that annoy me, and thus stick out in my mind more. Still, I’d leave this one alone and look for other movies with similar premises. “Wronged man must clear his name” is a staple of noir, after all…
*I feel like I should note here that she never suspects her uncles; in fact, the uncles actually don’t appear in the story. Their existence is just a contrivance to get Verity involved.