Coming Soon from Hammer Films: The Man in Black
It’s recently been announced that the next title to be restored and released by Hammer Films will be The Man in Black (1950), a thriller directed by Francis Searle and starring Betty Ann Davies, Sheila Burrell and Sidney James, with a cameo from Valentine Dyall as ‘Your Storyteller’.
We caught up with Hammer’s Steve Rogers, who, as one of the people leading the project, was in an ideal position to tell us all about the film, its background and what we can expect from the release…
Hammer News: Before we start, can I flag that I’d like to keep the first part of our conversation spoiler-free, if that’s okay? With that in mind, for anyone who isn’t familiar with The Man in Black, could you tell us what the film’s about?
Steve Rogers: I can do no better than quote a Film Industry magazine article written during filming in the summer of 1949 that described it as “[...] a non-violent thriller with occult leanings”. I think that sums it up better than I ever could – though there is actually a little bit of violence in it.
HN: It’s obviously part of the ongoing restoration programme we spoke about recently, but why did Hammer choose to release The Man in Black at this point? What makes it special?
SR: This is all part of our ongoing release strategy that mixes rarities and classics – this time around it’s a rarity from the late 1940s, an era where Hammer (after more than a decade on hiatus) rose again as a brand when post-war conditions made investment in British films attractive. What makes this one special is several things: it’s the first film Hammer shot at Oakley Court, it has electrifying cinematography, it features some superbly melodramatic acting and it’s Hammer’s first brush with what might be loosely termed the supernatural.
Sheila Burrell, Anthony Forwood and Betty Ann Davies in The Man in Black.
HN: The film features Sid James who’s always an absolute pleasure to watch in his Hammer outings. You talked about him for the release of Quatermass 2, and I’d like to focus on the women in this picture, because they do a sensational job. Betty Ann Davies is so compelling and haunting. (Her reactions in the scene where the will is read are worth the price of admission alone!) I know she was a very highly regarded star of the stage, but could you tell us a little about her and what she brings to The Man in Black?
SR: Betty Ann Davies earned her spurs in the West End, but clocked up more than forty films and TV series between 1934 and her death in 1955 at the extremely young age of 44. At the time of filming she was 39, which you’d never guess as her performance adds twenty years to that, easily. The character she plays is outwardly caring while being inwardly vicious and grasping. It’s a memorable performance.
Sheila Burrell (l) alongside Hazel Penwarden.
HN: Would I be right in saying this was Sheila Burrell’s first movie? Again, she’s terrific in The Man in Black and Hammer swiftly got her back for more parts. Would you say she’s not as well-remembered as she should be?
SR: Sheila Burrell is one of those faces where you watch the film and think “I know her from somewhere..?” as she would pop up on things like Emmerdale or Heartbeat in cameo roles. Her character in the film is an irredeemable grasper, completely acid in both aspect and outlook – and quite hilarious in places, too. Most people will probably remember her as the slightly tonto Aunt Harriet in Hammer’s Paranoiac.
Sheila Burrell (far right in the poster’s main image) appeared in a number of Hammer movies including Paranoiac (1963), directed by Freddie Francis.
HN: What’s the deal with Valentine Dyall? In the movie’s marketing, he’s given a huge amount of prominence and he’s the eponymous character (isn’t he?), but he’s barely in it!
SR: He is the eponymous character – and he is Your Storyteller. As such, he’s invasive throughout the story – you don’t need to see him to feel his presence. This may be lost on modern audiences until they watch the additional content on the set and understand the context. The film was inspired by a massively popular BBC radio series of the time, and, at the point of this film’s release, The Man in Black had been part of the British cultural zeitgeist since 1943 and the viewing public knew exactly who he was. And now a new audience gets the chance to make his acquaintance, too.
HN: Francis Searle was at the helm for this and many other Hammer titles of the late 40s and 50s. He does a superb job with The Man in Black. Could you describe his directorial style, and give some idea of why he was such a favourite with the studio?
SR: Searle’s style is very unshowy – you would never say that this is an auteur’s work – but at this early point in his career, he had a knack for catching both the energy and the subtext of a scene with skill and economy. This film, with one or two notable exceptions, is heavily dialogue-led, and yet no scene drags, and there’s an unsettling, arguably supernatural undercurrent pervasive to the entire film thanks to Searle’s direction and Cedric Williams’ luminous cinematography.
‘…I felt instinctively that the girl standing near me was Clavering’s daughter, Joan. And in that moment… my curiosity as a storyteller was aroused.’ – The Man in Black
HN: We recently looked at the various makeshift studios used by Hammer during this period, and The Man in Black was the first production shot at Oakley Court… Could you give us an insight into filming conditions?
SR: They were challenging! Hammer – and other film companies, though Hammer used it to best effect – would rent a succession of stately homes and shoot their films in situ as it was far cheaper to do that than film in a studio. Though there were numerous practical restrictions on how the production team could film in, say, a bedroom or on the staircase, this fostered a creative environment that encouraged everyone to adapt and overcome. As you’ll see from the film, they used Oakley Court to superb effect as both a “studio” and as a location.
Ernest Lytton Leslie Forwood, better known as Anthony Forwood, seen here with Sheila Burrell.
HN: Some questions come with spoiler alerts. This one is prefaced by a geek alert. A few sources state this is a 1949 film, and I’d always assumed that was because it was shot in the summer of ‘49. Other reviewers give it as a 1950 work, presumably because it was first shown in cinemas early in that year. But different sources give different dates and even different years for its initial release. Can you clear up when the film premiered? I’m trying to establish whether it was Hammer’s first film of the 50s, or whether that distinction goes to The Adventures of PC 49 (1950).
SR: The Man in Black was shot in August and September of 1949 and trade-shown on 17 January 1950 – it didn’t go on general release, however, until 6 March. The Adventures of PC49 was shot much earlier in 1949 (February and March) and trade-shown in the October (according to the distribution card), but didn’t go on release until 2 January 1950. So both were made in 1949 and released in 1950 and, unless there was a Hammer film that premiered on New Year’s Day, it looks like PC49 was Hammer’s first general release of the 1950s.
The Man in Black… beaten to the distinction of being Hammer’s first 50s release by PC 49!
HN: Thanks for clearing that up! The Man in Black will be released in 4K. Could you tell us a little about the restoration process? Also, was there ever any discussion about whether Hammer would colourise this and other pre-1957 titles?
SR: In this case, thanks to the BFI keeping the reels safe for 70+ years, the original nitrate negative still existed and that was scanned before going through the usual process of clean-up and grading. The audio was also cleaned-up at the same time and, due to some clever technical wizardry, a 5.1 sound mix was created from the original mono. Both audios, of course, are available on the release. There has never been any discussion about colourising this or other black and white films.
HN: Before we sail into spoilerific waters, could you tell us what we’ve got to look forward to with this release? The restored film, of course, but what material be alongside it?
Your Storyteller in deep thought… Valentine Dyall as ‘The Man in Black’.
SR: Alongside the film itself, we’ve got new content covering writer John Dickson Carr (who created the BBC radio series and worked on the preceding US series), horror anthology dramas on radio, Valentine Dyall, an archive interview with Francis Searle, three episodes of the US radio series on which the BBC radio series was based, a brace of new commentaries and the usual 120-page booklet on the film itself and other contextual material.
Spoilers ahead!
HN: Before I knew there was a glorious 4K version heading our way, I recently watched the film with a friend who treats anything shot in black and white with suspicion. She enjoyed it (honestly!) and described it as ‘cosy’. As so-called ‘cosy crime’ is popular right now, I suppose that’s no bad thing. But when I rewatched The Man in Black I was struck me how modern it is. We’re essentially looking at a young woman who’s the victim of a very ruthless gaslighting ploy. How would you position the movie? Light crime or psychological suspense? And what’s your take on that central, horribly cruel plan that drives the narrative?
SR: It’s definitely more psychological than criminal – though that’s there, obviously. It’s hardly cosy, though! I would argue that gaslighting (the act) has existed since we came down from the trees but has only latterly gained a name thanks to the success of Patrick Hamilton’s pre-war play and its two film adaptations, so it’s eternal rather than just modern. Any new audience watching it today will immediately recognise it for what it is, though a 1950s audience may not have been as socially aware.
Bless this household – Henry (Sid James) with (l-r) loving wife Bertha (Betty Ann Davies) and Janice (Sheila Burrell).
HN: Let’s address the Sid James in the room. Is his disguise obvious? Some recent critics have claimed it’s transparent, but I’d contend it’s better than say, Rathbone’s disguises in his Sherlock Holmes pictures, or even the masquerades in the original Sleuth (1972). What are your thoughts?
SR: It’s unlikely anyone in the audience would have been fooled – the game was usually given away in trailers, adverts and reviews, anyway – but I don’t think that’s the point. We are being told a story (quite literally) and so we have to take it at face value. Plus, it’s not always a disguise – it’s two separate characters who just happen to look like Sid James. It doesn’t matter whether we see this as viewers or not – it’s what the characters see and how they react that counts.
HN: What’s your favourite moment in the film?
SR: Probably the final reveal. It’s high melodrama done in a low-key and almost undramatic way. Outstanding performances, aghast faces, very memorable!
HN: And finally, what do you think will surprise people about The Man in Black?
SR: How superb a film that was made four years after World War 2 can look when it’s restored from the best possible materials with care and skill.
Many thanks to Steve Rogers for his time and insider knowledge!
We’ll be bringing you more info on The Man in Black very soon, and you can stay completely up-to-date by signing up to receive Hammer’s regular newsletter. In the meantime, you can check out recent releases and much more over at Hammer’s online shop.
