From the 1940s: Gaslight

1944 Psychological Thriller

From MGM

Directed by George Cukor

Starring

Charles Boyer

Ingrid Bergman

Joseph Cotten

Angela Lansbury

May Whitty

Barbara Everest

The term gaslight refers to the psychological manipulation of someone so that they question their memories, perception or sanity.  This film brought the definition into existence.

I've probably seen it a half dozen times but not at all in the past 25 years or so until two days ago.  So with renewed awareness let me get it out there right away... this is a very good movie.  Whether it's a great one or not, we'll leave that for you to determine but it's a very good movie.  I realized when it ended that I had been so absorbed that I lost some awareness of the world around me.  And I'll tell you, I like that in watching a good film.  I like it a lot.  Doesn't happen all that often.

Boyer's character is so manipulative and without conscience that I see his type, the gaslighter, as one of the lowest types of human beings... flotsam in a dressing gown... a most compelling character.

Never in question, of course, is who the villain is.  And in American movies in the 40s, bad guys got their comeuppance by the final frame so while there may be a little intrigue there, it's still pretty much a given he's going down.  But all that story in the middle and all those good actors telling it to us is what has kept this an acclaimed film all these years.  I've heard some call it dated and perhaps there's some truth to that but I've not paid it any mind.

The drama opens in London in 1875 and a famous prima donna has been murdered in her townhouse.  We come to find out that the young girl we see leaving is her teenage niece (Bergman, looking remarkably young) who is going to stay with a music teacher and family friend who lives in Italy.  The murderer has not been apprehended.

A scene later a few years have elapsed and Bergman is singing for her instructor and Boyer is playing piano.  Her teacher thinks she has little future.  She bids him farewell and outside, Boyer, two weeks into the relationship, says he wants to marry her and she agrees.  He tells her that he has always loved the idea of living in one of those old townhouses in London and is there any chance she would like to do that?  She says that an aunt left such a home to her.  She says the home is unchanged due to being boarded up the entire time.

An early torment

The day they move in Bergman has an eerie feeling about being there and good-natured Boyer says that they should move all of the furniture in the attic and get something new so that his love won't be so bothered.  He then barricades the door at the top of the third story.

One day he casually asks Bergman what happened to the jewels that her aunt had.  Bergman claims to have no knowledge of them.

They hire an older cook (Everest) and then a young maid (Lansbury).  Boyer tells Lansbury to avoid Bergman and to handle all matters directly with him.  Bergman finds that Lansbury looks at her very strangely and she forms an immediate dislike for the sassy young woman.  Bergman also thinks she flirts with Boyer.

And then it starts.  Boyer gives Bergman a cameo brooch, says the clasp isn't very strong and puts it in her purse.  Later in the evening when he asks about it, she looks in the purse and it is gone.  He is not pleased and talks to her about carelessness.

At another point he asks where his watch is, which, of course, she doesn't know.  Because of the former purse incident, he looks in hers and there it is.  A picture is soon missing from a wall.  She hears footsteps in the attic.  He tells her at various times that she's not well, she misplaces too many things, she's too suspicious, she imagines things.  He gets fiercely angry with her and when she breaks down, he comforts her with an oh-Darling-do-calm-down and as they hug, with her back to the screen, we see his face looking menacing. 

Frightened wife suspicious of new maid

She, of course, is being worn down, certainly no longer the vivacious and loving young woman he married.  At some point she is no longer denying things and instead offering a well-I-don't-remember.  She looks beaten down, dark circles under her eyes.  He keeps her housebound unless he's with her, saying it's better for her frayed nerves.  No one visits.

Cotten, a neighbor and a police inspector, sees the couple visiting the Tower of London and realizes that he recognizes her.  She half-heartedly smiles at him and Boyer doesn't like it, forming an immediate dislike of Cotten.  When Cotten notices Bergman the next couple of times, he notices how wan she seems and he is determined to find out why.  Cotten meets up with another neighbor, a nosy one (Whitty) and she thinks something is amiss with that husband.  That's all he needs to hear.

Cotten revives his own interest in the aunt's unsolved murder case and begins to wonder if Boyer is involved.  Cotten is also aware of the jewels that were never found.  His snooping finally reveals that Boyer spends most late evenings in his own attic but does so by entering a vacant home next door and then accessing a skylight to enter his attic.

There's a good scene where Cotten tells Bergman all he knows and all he suspects.  She's not easy to convince but by the time she confronts Boyer, she's mad as hell... and suddenly stronger.

Beware the avenging wife

What's in that attic and what happens there takes us right to the finale.  I found it a little theatrical but it didn't diminish my admiration for this well-written film.

Gaslight is based on a 1938 play which was first made into a British film two years later.  Apparently that film was a success in England and Europe and MGM was so concerned that its version might suffer by comparison that the studio attempted to buy up every copy they could of the prior film.  How peculiar is that?  They needn't have worried.

Vincente Minnelli was first considered as director but when he was not able to free himself from another project in time, Cukor was brought on board.  This was an unusual kind of picture for him, except for his other baroque murder mystery of the same period, A Double Life.  Most of Cukor's fare is lighter.  Bergman was not a big fan (neither she nor Boyer had worked for him earlier or afterward) because she thought Cukor over-intellectualized his concerns and he would talk for so long she forgot why they were talking at all.

The director had Bergman visit a mental institution to study patients who had suffered nervous breakdowns and she came away from the experience learning exactly what she had hoped.  She was grateful for Cukor's encouragement.

When Bergman's (and Cotten's) boss, David O. Selznick, told her that MGM wanted her for Gaslight, he told her that he had turned  down the offer because Boyer's had an iron-clad contract guaranteeing him first billing.  Bergman felt sick because she wanted the part so badly she could taste it and Selznick knew it.  She said she didn't care about the bloody billing.  Eventually she wore him down.

Boyer and Bergman became fast friends on this set and it lasted a lifetime.  She said he was the most intelligent actor with whom I have ever worked and one of the nicest.  He was well read and highly educated and so different.  This would be the first of three movies they would make together and the only successful one.  Four years later they made Arch of Triumph and in 1976 A Matter of Time. 

Encouragement from Joseph Cotten

 

Something happened between the pair that Bergman never forgot.  The first scene she filmed was a kissing scene with Boyer.  She said she didn't know him at all and was uncomfortable kissing a stranger.  In the future she had it built into her various contracts that she would not do any kissing as part of filming the initial scene.  To make matters worse Bergman was an inch taller than Boyer so he stood on a box. 

Boyer, as I've said earlier, was not a favorite actor of mine but he was never as good up on that screen as he is in this role.  With ice water apparently running through his veins but still oozing with his usual elegance he is creepy in his treachery and menace.  He rightly received one of the films seven Oscar nominations.

It was during the making of the film that Boyer's wife was expecting their first (and only) child.  While the birth wasn't expected during the filming it was close and Boyer was forever calling home to see how things were.  One day he hadn't made the call yet when one came for him.  She'd given birth early.  He was beside himself and too happy and excited to work so after some champagne for everyone, he was sent home.

Bergman said the role was one of her greatest acting challenges because the character is so fragile and she was not.  She clearly succeeded as I see it because I regard it as one of her very greatest roles and she would win the first of her three Oscars.  It was expected that Barbara Stanwyck would win for Double Indemnity (I think she should have) but when that didn't happen, she sweetly countered with I am a member of the Ingrid Bergman Fan Club. 

One is never quite sure what Lansbury's cocky Cockney maid is up to although one's mind was busy thinking of the possibilities.  It was her movie debut and a good one.  She, too, got an Oscar nomination. 

The character of the police inspection was a squat fellow in the play but the screenwriters thought it would be nice to suggest that character would serve as a possible love interest for Bergman.  So

Cotten came on board.  He doesn't suggest for a moment that he works for Scotland Yard nor is his acting up to par with the others.  He must have known it, too, because he mentions the film only in passing in his autobiography.  Five years later he would work with Bergman again in Hitchcock's Under Capricorn.

From L:  Boyer, Bergman, Cukor

In addition to Bergman's Oscar win, the statuette was also awarded for art direction.  Besides Boyer's and Lansbury's nominations, cinematography and screenplay were nominated as was the picture itself.  Notably absent was a director nod of Cukor.

Cukor, however, made a brilliant little film... moody, atmospheric, almost hypnotic with how it descends on the viewer and holds on for dear life.  Of course Cukor is aided by an outstanding cast and sharp, fearless writing by personal friends John Van Druten and Walter Reisch. 

There is something so wonderfully notable to me about this film.  I love the mystery-thriller genre and have seen so many of them in my lifetime and there is one trait most of them share... they're disappointing.  Too many absurdities arise is my general complaint.  I can deal with someone wanting to kill one or more in a big, dank house but could they tell it well?  Don't cop out to cheap scares and thrills to sell your piece.  Consider writing it well.  Get good people.  This movie is a very good movie.

 

In 2019 Gaslight was selected for preservation in the United States Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being culturally, historically or aesthetically significant.

Here's the trailer:

Next posting:

A European Oscar winner