This movie rather takes its good ol' time to go anywhere; pacing and plot development can perhaps best be described as meandering for much of the length. In a runtime of under 90 minutes, it's within only the last 20-25 minutes that an especial air of tension rockets to the fore. The payoff is that the advancement of the narrative feels very natural and fluid, and as suspense rears up its head, it's all the more meaningful. This isn't the most gripping and essential of thrillers, but 'The upturned glass' is suitably enjoyable.
It also strikes me that while this feature fits the bill after a sort as a psychological thriller, it's quite unlike many of its brethren insofar as it's not particularly bothered about its central focus. The narrative is more or less built around emphasis on Michael's thoughts, and increasingly on his mental state. However, like the plot development and general atmosphere, it doesn't seem like this core conceit is specifically drawn forth in the writing until the last quarter or so of the movie. To be sure, it's present throughout, but mostly with a distinct nonchalance as a mention rather than an intrinsic trait - "Oh, yah, we got that, it's right over there abouts!" I don't think the casual approach to this aspect of the movie works as well as the other bits, but that's a question of personal preference.
Maybe it seems like I'm more down on 'The upturned glass' than not; in fairness, out of exhaustion I did pause and pass out for about 40 minutes when I was only partway through, and upon rousing debated how much I cared about resuming. Take that as you will. But I do like it, really I do; I think it's duly entertaining. I think the screenplay could stand to be more actively engaging, but it's solid in the broad strokes, and is marked with like intelligence in some of the finer points. The then-married stars, James Mason and Pamela Kellino, give strong, nuanced performances that are the chief highlights of the picture, and I relish the idea of seeing them both in more titles. All the contributions of those behind the scenes are swell, including Lawrence Huntington's direction, Alan Osbiston's editing, and Reginald H. Wyer's cinematography.
I guess I'm just in the position of thinking that the potential isn't fully borne out, and 'The upturned glass' doesn't readily stand tall next to its contemporaries. There are elements of this that are super, or at least highly enticing, yet when all is said and done I don't feel fully satisfied and I'm left wanting more. It's worth a look if you come across it, and is a decently good way to spend 80-90 minutes, with the reflection that there are plenty other films that are more deserving and rewarding.
It also strikes me that while this feature fits the bill after a sort as a psychological thriller, it's quite unlike many of its brethren insofar as it's not particularly bothered about its central focus. The narrative is more or less built around emphasis on Michael's thoughts, and increasingly on his mental state. However, like the plot development and general atmosphere, it doesn't seem like this core conceit is specifically drawn forth in the writing until the last quarter or so of the movie. To be sure, it's present throughout, but mostly with a distinct nonchalance as a mention rather than an intrinsic trait - "Oh, yah, we got that, it's right over there abouts!" I don't think the casual approach to this aspect of the movie works as well as the other bits, but that's a question of personal preference.
Maybe it seems like I'm more down on 'The upturned glass' than not; in fairness, out of exhaustion I did pause and pass out for about 40 minutes when I was only partway through, and upon rousing debated how much I cared about resuming. Take that as you will. But I do like it, really I do; I think it's duly entertaining. I think the screenplay could stand to be more actively engaging, but it's solid in the broad strokes, and is marked with like intelligence in some of the finer points. The then-married stars, James Mason and Pamela Kellino, give strong, nuanced performances that are the chief highlights of the picture, and I relish the idea of seeing them both in more titles. All the contributions of those behind the scenes are swell, including Lawrence Huntington's direction, Alan Osbiston's editing, and Reginald H. Wyer's cinematography.
I guess I'm just in the position of thinking that the potential isn't fully borne out, and 'The upturned glass' doesn't readily stand tall next to its contemporaries. There are elements of this that are super, or at least highly enticing, yet when all is said and done I don't feel fully satisfied and I'm left wanting more. It's worth a look if you come across it, and is a decently good way to spend 80-90 minutes, with the reflection that there are plenty other films that are more deserving and rewarding.