User reviews

"The Third Secret" from 1964 is a British film starring Stephen Boyd, Pamela Franklin, and Diane Cilento as well as a few stars in small roles: Richard Attenborough, Jack Hawkins, Rachel Kempson, and Nigel Davenport. Judi Dench has a small role -- she was just coming up the ladder.

Boyd plays a television journalist, Alex Stedman, who also happens to be the patient of psychiatrist Leo Whitset. When Whitset is found dead, it's an apparent suicide, as he tells his housekeeper that he is responsible. Everyone assumes he means responsible for his own death though no one checks it out.

Whitset's teenage daughter (Franklin) appeals to Boyd, stating that her father could not have killed himself. The suicide is devastating to Boyd, and he is desperate to learn whether or not it's true, because otherwise, he can never believe anything his doctor told him. Suicide was a direct contradiction of his work.

Stedman is able to get a list of Whitset's patients and starts visiting them to discern which one of them could be the killer. He develops a relationship with a beautiful woman (Diane Cilento) who was also a patient of the doctor's.

There are plenty of suspects, but who could it be? Whitset's daughter tells Alex that her father said there are three secrets everyone has: the one you won't tell anyone, the one you won't tell yourself, and one other.

I thought the acting was very good all around, with Franklin's young voice a little too high-pitched for me -- I had the same problem listening to Deanna Durbin as a child - after awhile, it becomes annoying.

My problem with the story is that it dragged. At 90 minutes or so, it felt like three hours. It was interesting, it is by no means a bad film or badly directed, but it was hard for me to get into for some reason. Others found much more to like in it - mine is just one opinion.

Stephen Boyd is a newscaster in London, with a gloomy view of his profession and audience. When his psychiatrist kills himself, he grows angry; if his doctor killed himself, how can he survive? Then the psychiatrist's daughter, Pamela Franklin, comes to him, saying that he was not a suicide. He was a murder victim. Boyd investigates the other patients and comes to suspect he is the murderer.

It's an interestingly written movie about mental illness, with some stellar talent in the supporting roles: Jack Hawkins, Richard Attenborough, Diane Cilento and a screen premiere by Judy Dench. Miss Franklin is superb. The problem is that, despite some beautiful camera work by Douglas Slocombe, there's a lot of talk, too much for a movie, and Stephen Boyd is the lead: a very handsome, very hard-working actor who has no real screen presence and who plays the low-affect depressive to a tee. Director Charles Crichton tries his hardest, but it's too slow and inert to be very interesting.

Does that sound redundant? It's not, you know. Think of all the 'mysteries' that show the murderer in the first few scenes ("The Big Clock", "Sleuth", etc.). "The Third Secret", on the other hand, waits until almost the last scene to reveal the murderer, which makes it a much more satisfying mystery.

But what sets "The Third Secret" apart is an exceptionally well-written script with some of the most intelligent dialogue to come down the pike in years. What a refreshing departure from the current fare, loaded with f-bombs and other obscenities. This picture is written for grown-ups by a grown-up. Couple this with flawless performances from all concerned, and you have a picture worth at least a seven in our rating system.

I can go no higher because this movie is a bit long-winded, with protracted scenes of very capable actors engaged in aforementioned dialogue to the point of tedium. You will, however, enjoy the overall premise - that the death of a well-known psychiatrist was a murder and not a suicide. Very cleverly handled with a twist ending. "The Third Secret" is well worth your time. It's just that it seems to last longer than it actually does.

Just to elaborate on certain comments about Pamela Franklin; she was born in 1950, and 'The Third Secret' was made in 1964, which made her... 14. Not 18, although she may have seemed precociously mature for her age - but then, that's very much part of the fabric of the film. Her scenes with Boyd carry a sexual tension that film-makers and society in general were brave enough to confront at that time. Indeed, don't films from the 60s and 70s (until Star Wars brought serious cinema crashing down) seem terribly grown up? Although Charles Crichton was an Ealing man, his work here is more reminiscent of the Woodfall school of British realism, and light years away from his comedic timing in 'The Battle of the Sexes'. It's hard to deny that the dialogue gets a bit stodgy at times - a pity, since the screenplay contains a great many sly clues to the solution which can get lost amidst the psycho-babble. This was made at a time when much of the UK's cinema was in the hands of serious craftsmen and women - their films are exemplary lessons in thoughtful, considered cinema. However, in this case, fine technique fails to overcome a wordy screenplay, although it's a close-run thing.

This is a far from perfect film and I am glad I stuck with it, as up until late in the movie I felt a little bored. That's because the film moves very slowly and is way too talky. So, bear with the glacial pace and you'll most likely enjoy the film overall.

A psychiatrist is found dying by his housekeeper. He's babbling incoherently and based on what he says and the type of gunshot he's received, the police rule his death a suicide. However, his young daughter (Pamela Franklin) insists that he was murdered and enlists Stephen Boyd to help her investigate--though this aspect of the film was very hard to believe. Through the course of the film, Boyd tracks down the doctor's patients until he ultimately discovers the perpetrator in a nice twist. While the psychiatric aspects of the film are a bit dubious and, as I said before, it's SLOW, the film ultimately is interesting if flawed. Worth seeing but certainly NOT a film to rush to see.

A few notes. First, I noticed someone saying that Boyd was well-cast. This is true if her were playing an Irishman who is trying (in vain) to put on an American accent! The fact is to most Americans watching, they can spot his accent as a phony. Also, speaking of voices, it's sad to hear Jack Hawkins in the film as his voice is very gruff compared to his earlier films. That is because he was suffering from throat cancer. It would soon be diagnosed and his larynx would be removed. In an interesting twist, he was so appreciated as an actor (and as a person) that he continued acting and his voice was dubbed in all these post-surgery films. Hawkins voice Boyd

Charles Crichron had already succeeded in the difficult task of having an adult and a child perform together :"the hunting" was one of the most moving British movies of the fifties as well as Dirk Bogarde's first important role .

The Stephen -Messala-Boyd/Pamela Franklin pairing may seem strange first but this girl was really a wiz kid for she had already proved it in such works as Clayton's "the innocents" and "our mother's house" .Some kind of Jodie Foster of the sixties,she didn't make the career she deserved.

A shrink has been murdered and his patients are all suspects;Boyd portrays one of them,investigating the others 'life and meeting his daughter (Franklin) ,a disturbed girl who writes strange lines on a wall and who seems to know things better left unsaid.Many scenes take place by the sea on a lugubrious beach children forgot a long time ago.

Intriguing.

In an era obsessed with 'mental health issues', this film about deeply damaged personalities probably has more resonance now than when first released. The 'madness' element was much reduced by 20th Century Fox and Patricia Neal's role as one of the psychiatric patients consigned to the cutting-room floor. Most critics at the time gave it the thumbs down but over half a century on it remains an engrossing if not entirely convincing piece, the strength of which lies in the splendid and in some cases immensely touching performances from a first-rate cast under Charles Crichton's sensitive direction whilst Douglas Slocombe's superb cinematography accentuates the gloom and Richard Arnell's atonal score underlines the derangement.

Listening to the film's obligatory psychobabble brought to mind playwright Jerome Lawrence's observation: "A neurotic builds a castle in the air, a psychotic lives in it and a psychiatrist collects the rent."

I was the edge of my seat! A suspenseful Who Done It with compelling performances by Pamela Franklin and Stephen Boyd in challengingly complex roles. The plot is fairly progressive for its time - the topic of mental illness still somewhat taboo in our society. I read somewhere that Stephen Boyd was so taken with the story and the character, he took a sizeable pay cut to play the role of Alex. Versatile actor that he was, he seemed to most enjoy those demanding and unusual character roles with substance and depth that really challenge an actor and in which he performed so notably well. And Pamela Franklin, at the age of 14, is an incredible actress taking on a role that veterans would not have managed nearly as well.

Great story - great film - great acting!

Although it has been quite awhile since I've watched this movie, I do recommend it. I thought the suspense was well done. I also thought the storyline was pretty good for 1964 and it would be interesting to see a WELL DONE, modern remake.

The director was Charles Crichton, the starry cast included Stephen Boyd, Richard Attenborough, Jack Hawkins, (terrific and walking off with the movie), Diane Cilento, Paul Rogers, a fourteen year old Pamela Franklin and a certain Judi Dench in her film debut while Douglas Slocombe did the superb cinematography in black and white Cinemascope so why was "The Third Secret" such a load of old codswallop for most of its length. Easy; the script by Producer Robert L Joseph was a stinker.

It's a whodunit but given the material it's hard to care which of psychiatrist Peter Copley's patients bumped him off. The police have it down as suicide but his daughter, (a precocious Miss Franklin), believes it was murder and asks television journalist Boyd, (himself a patient), to play sleuth. Given the funereal pace of his investigation, (and the movie), it's difficult to see what audience the producers thought they might have. Perhaps they felt the cast alone would bring them in but the film has largely disappeared and is now of interest only for its use of London locations and for Judi Dench completists. Otherwise something of a folly.

This is a beautiful looking film. It's in B/W but also in Cinemascope. At the time audiences were often disappointed when a film was in B/W, colour had well and truly arrived, B/W seemed a throwback. But now we can see what a unique art form it was.

After a prominent psychiatrist Dr Leo Whitset commits suicide, his daughter Catherine (Pamela Franklin), convinced it was murder, enlists one of her fathers' patients, well-known investigative reporter Alex Stedman (Stephen Boyd), to find the killer.

Although Whitset only had four active cases, one of them was a paranoid schizophrenic unaware of their condition. Alex, who also has issues, visits each of the patients although the killer could very well be himself.

The camera loved Stephen Boyd. The well-built Irishman had a hard time covering his Irish brogue whether playing a chariot-racing Roman, a Mongol warrior or an American as he does here, but he sure had presence.

It was the penultimate film of director Charles Crichton who together with cinematographer Douglas Slocombe made some iconic British films including "The lavender Hill Mob" and "The Titfield Thunderbolt". They knew how to compose a shot.

When Cinemascope arrived many Hollywood directors said they didn't know how to compose for the letterbox shape. Not so Crichton and Slocombe. They shot from above or below and used horizontals to balance the composition. It could be a lake, a long wall or even the rails on a park bench. Inside it was the lines of the ceiling, wooden beading or the slats on a window. It wasn't accidental.

"The Third Secret" has a superior score by Richard Arnell. British film music had broken away from the distinctive, but often repetitious Muir Mathieson, Malcolm Arnold era. Arnell, admired by none other than Bernard Herrmann, only did a small number of film scores. He gave thoughtful shadings here. Gentle flute precedes warm orchestral colours and then gives way to atonal textures that suit the nature of the story.

Of course most don't watch a film for the technical aspects, but the attractive stars of this psychological mystery enhance a story that still holds attention after 60 years of movies and countless TV shows.

Don't know what was happening in 1964 but this film gave the vibe that it was revealing a great truth of the time,very melodramatic at the start but then has a quite pointless and tedious middle.and then a melodramatic and over the top ending I was amazed that Pamela Franklyn was only 14 when this was made she was certainly the best thing about it.

I first saw this as a kid, in 1970, on tv, and thought the nightmare sequence at Diane Cilento's home to be one of the scariest scenes I'd ever seen on film. After 29 years the impact is somewhat diluted, but overall the film holds together pretty well. Take a look at the extraordinary Douglas Slocombe panavision cinematography, the driven performances of Franklin and Boyd - an underrated actor if there ever was one - the striking set pieces on the Thames riverbank. It should be restored and re-issued on a VERY big screen. Scorsese, where art thou?

The screenplay may seem patchy ,disjointed, and the secondary characters ( "guests " the cast and credits read)underwritten ;they often repeat the same words ; of course it's pleasant to see Boyd (who was actually Irish,not American) playing opposite Jack Hawkins after "Ben Hur" in which they did not ) share a single scene though.But the scenes with the supporting actors drag on.

But all is forgotten when miss Franklin appears:she was really a wunderkind ,a gifted child ;her career featured brilliant parts : she had already played in Jack Clayton 's "the innocents " and she was to star in "our mother's house" (Clayton 1967),and "the prime of miss Jean Brodie " (Neame ,1970 ,where she hold out on first-class actress Dame Maggie Smith in her last scene ,not a small feat ).

The rapport she has with Boyd is the gist of the movie ;their meetings down by the river or under HC Andersen 's statue ("he ended his life a lunatic"); Franklin's part is complex :may there be something Freudian between her murdered dad,a shrink ,and her a teenager ?Could the reporter -a patient of her late father- be a substitute ?Strange messages are written on the walls with chalk ; there's an impressive nightmare scene which in a way predates the denouement .An ending which leaves many question unanswered .

Gifted children are not always happy : they cannot relate to people their age (see the only scene which features teenage girls ) ; and against all odds,they may get a raw deal.

A psychiatrist shot himself to death leaving his daughter alone. One of his ex-patients and his daughter are after the truth behind his death.

One of the slowest movies ever. Otherwise could have been better. There is a twist at the very end. A deep secret to un unfolded.

Recommended 65%.

By the way, the daughter, Pamela Franklin is really very beautiful.

This movie involves the child of a prominent London Psychoanalyst who has allegedly committed suicide. His daughter enlists the help of an American television commentator who also happens to be a former patient of the Doctor. The proceedings move a little slowly, but the last 30 minutes make up for this.

A British psychologist has apparently committed suicide, but his teenage daughter is convinced it was murder and asks one of his patients (Stephen Boyd, as an expatriate American journalist) to investigate. Somber, brooding, introspective tale, with Boyd well-cast in the lead; elegantly written (worthwhile just for the dialogue), and moodily shot in black and white. Regrettably, the film is inaccurate in its portrayal of psychiatry; despite what the script says, people suffering from paranoid schizophrenia are no more likely to be murderers than anyone else, and people with schizophrenia cannot hide their illness as though they were undercover spies. That small suspension of disbelief aside, the film ruminates on all sorts of interesting ideas that fit together like inlaid wood.

The film is enhanced by an excellent cast, including Jack Hawkins, Richard Attenborough, and Diane Cilento as the three suspects, the now-legendary Judi Dench in her first credited role, and the much under-rated child actress, Pamela Franklin, as the psychologist's daughter. In particular, though, Attenborough's performance as an awkward, insecure art dealer stands out as a remarkable contrast to his performance in another film of 1964--"Guns at Batasi," in which he plays a tough, almost indestructible British Army sergeant.

The premise seemed interesting and overall is well acted especially the young girl playing Catherine. I was quite impressed with her performance overall as well when she was searching the house for Alex, good twist midway. There were a few scenes that offered great atmosphere and the pov chase in the alley, and the ending is well executed. I did find the middle section during Alex's investigation to have too much dialogue and moved at a snails pace in certain parts. Multiple guesses as to who the killer would be, overall a decent film, though I would say Straightjacket was better, look for a color copy. My dvd was supposed to be color but was b&w. 3/5.

The final fifteen minutes are quite interesting. But getting there is something of a chore. "The Third Secret" is the story of a famous psychoanalyst who suffers a gunshot wound. His maid finds him and, as he lay dying, he mumbles something to her. The ensuing headline reads: "Is it suicide?" How could a renowned psychiatrist take his own life? His 14-year-old daughter, Catherine (Pamela Franklin), goes to a famous TV reporter named Alex (Stephen Boyd), claiming it was murder, and insists that the killer must have been one of his patients.

Sleepy elevator music at the film's beginning tips you off that what we have here is not a suspense film. It could be construed as a mystery. But mostly it is a drama. With a British setting and British actors, we can correctly describe this film as a British drama. A lot of the scenes take place indoors, on sets. There's a ton of dialogue. Actors recite pages of dramatic lines. I kept waiting for Katharine Hepburn to emerge, to render a ten-minute soliloquy.

Characters trend bland and boring. The dialogue for Catherine is way too precocious for a 14-year-old girl.

Still, the story's theme is deep. At one point, Alex asks an associate of the dead doctor: "Would it be possible for a (paranoid schizophrenic) to murder (the doctor) and make it look like a suicide?" Heavy stuff. The ending is fairly easy to predict.

B&W cinematography is adequate if unremarkable. The camera is mostly static. There are some shadowy scenes toward the end. But overall, the visuals do not lend themselves to suspense. Casting and acting are acceptable.

Stuffy and lacking humor, "The Third Secret" is an actor's film; all the players get to show off their dramatic skills. But as a viewer, I was mostly bored. I had hoped for more suspense. What I got was a slow-paced, old-fashioned British drama set mostly indoors, with a script that had too much dialogue. The film could easily have been set in the 1940s.

Pamela Franklin is at her precocious best in this tale of "psychoanalytical" intrigue with boundary-crossing sexual overtones. Precocity often took her into territory it's now fashionable to call "inappropriate," such as the schoolgirl love interest she played with a randy old artist in "The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie." Though understated and implicit in "The Third Secret," her emotionally-troubled character's relationship with Stephen Boyd's character is in this same vein. All of 18 when I saw this in theatrical release, I was captivated. The movie is still a guilty pleasure, though you have to suspend a lot of disbelief to get back in that naive early-60s groove when sexuality was still portrayed indirectly through characters who were not exactly the Free Spirits that populated such films later in the decade.

Look for a spooky cinematic trick toward the end of the film, when Stephen Boyd's character is just starting to unravel the big Secret. Pamela makes a statement about how many patients her father had-- Stephen thinks he misheard her, and asks her to repeat what she said. Watch carefully for the "subliminal" trick, which could easily go unnoticed-- it made the hair on my arms stand up.

Hokey in parts, and based on some then-commonplace misconceptions about psychiatric disorders, the movie still works if you can accept it on its own terms. At the very least its understatement is a refreshing change from the noise-saturated frantic bombast of today's not-so-spooky films, with their mindless reliance on sensory overload and oh-so-special effects.

Even though this film has a terrific cast and excellent cinematography it just cannot overcome a talky and plodding screenplay which make it difficult to keep the viewers attention. Richard Attenborough rather resembles his character of murderer Reginald Christie.