Review: The Mind Benders

A research scientist at Oxford jumps off a moving train to his death, a whole lot of money is also found. An agent named Maj. Hall (John Clements) investigates the man and finds that he was apparently researching sensory deprivation. When Maj. Hall suspects the late scientist of being a Communist traitor passing secrets to the Soviets, colleague Dr. Longman (Dirk Bogarde) volunteers to go under sensory deprivation in an isolation tank, to prove that it was the sensory deprivation tank that caused the scientist to break. Dr. Longman’s last stint in the tank apparently left him greatly uneasy about such practices, and although this second stint does indeed have rather numbing effects, Maj. Hall still needs more proof. In order to prove Dr. Longman’s theory right, Maj. Hall and research assistant Dr. Tate (Michael Bryant) resort to using Longman’s wife (Mary Ure) to utterly shatter any beliefs he holds, to brainwash him into thinking she is both unstable and untrustworthy.

 

Sometimes interesting, mostly dated and extremely dry 1963 look at sensory deprivation and mind control from director Basil Dearden (“The Ship That Died of Shame”, “Victim”, “Khartoum”) and screenwriter James Kennaway (the abysmal “Brotherly Love” with Peter O’Toole) is just OK. The intermittent narration is particularly unnecessary and although Dirk Bogarde and Mary Ure are terrific the film is just too dry to become invested in their plight outside of fits and starts. As a result I think this one will have a small (if devoted) audience who are inherently fascinated with the subject matter and don’t mind the somewhat sterile, ‘kitchen sink’ realist treatment. I can’t say I overly liked the rather corny, schmaltzy ending either.

 

The cast mostly holds up its end. Bogarde is sometimes unbearably convincing here, and Mary Ure is terrific as well. There’s an interesting, disturbing cameo by Roger Delgado early on and Michael Bryant is quite solid too as the colleague who secretly fancies Bogarde’s wife.

 

I can see why someone out there might like this film. I found it a very dry, rather dull treatment of some potentially involving themes. I thought it too hit and miss.

 

Rating: C+

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Review: Hellraiser (2022)

Review: Cinderella (1950)

Review: Eugenie de Sade