Curtis Harrington directed 'How Awful About Allan' and given the constraints of the budget, it's effectively made. Without Anthony Perkins and Julie Harris in the lead roles, it would be nothing. Casting them as brother and sister is inspired since they both specialize in highly neurotic characters. Joan Hackett is also on hand as an ex-girlfriend who gets involved in Perkins' life again. I knew Harris was setting her brother up right from the beginning, but I did think she was in cahoots with Hackett, though that was not really the case.
I like how Harrington uses the camera to give us insights into what Perkins is experiencing. We are given many blurry point-of-view shots where he hears things but can't quite see it all clearly due his hysterical blindness. This could easily have become an overused trick, but it works because of the mystery involving the renter, whom we are as anxious to see as he is.
The sequence near the end where he regains his eyesight and his sister is revealed as the culprit is truly suspenseful. But I don't think her wearing a fake scar was necessary. Her scars should have been real. If he was blind what was the point of her putting on a fake scar, since he would never have seen it?
If Hitchcock had expanded this and made it a feature film, I think we would have seen more people come to the house, with a few more red herrings. And there would have been more humor. In a way Harrington and his scriptwriter present this all a little too seriously. When you have an intense actor like Perkins in the lead role, and someone like Harris supporting him, it helps to add a few bits of business to lighten things up. Otherwise it starts to feel too foreboding.
I like how Harrington uses the camera to give us insights into what Perkins is experiencing. We are given many blurry point-of-view shots where he hears things but can't quite see it all clearly due his hysterical blindness. This could easily have become an overused trick, but it works because of the mystery involving the renter, whom we are as anxious to see as he is.
The sequence near the end where he regains his eyesight and his sister is revealed as the culprit is truly suspenseful. But I don't think her wearing a fake scar was necessary. Her scars should have been real. If he was blind what was the point of her putting on a fake scar, since he would never have seen it?
If Hitchcock had expanded this and made it a feature film, I think we would have seen more people come to the house, with a few more red herrings. And there would have been more humor. In a way Harrington and his scriptwriter present this all a little too seriously. When you have an intense actor like Perkins in the lead role, and someone like Harris supporting him, it helps to add a few bits of business to lighten things up. Otherwise it starts to feel too foreboding.