The Third Secret (1964)

What makes it different from others?

Sadly Over-hyped

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

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.

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

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.

It was not that Stephen Boyd was a second stringer performer. He did do splendidly in those films that were written well, such as "Messala" in "Ben-Hur", or as the Irish agent for the Nazis in "The Man Who Never Was". He is an admirable foil for Tyrone Power in "Abandon Ship!" But much of his work was in second rate films. His last movie was called "Graf Dracula", and he played the Count.But in 1964 he turned in what may have been his saddest, most poignant performance as "Alex Stedman". He is one of several patients being treated by a psychiatrist named Dr. Whitset. He is roused by the police one day - his psychiatrist was murdered. The patients of Dr. Whitset are the ones who are the suspects, because in his private files Whitset mentions one of them as having a dangerous twist of their personality. The ill-fated Doctor felt he could control this twist and save the patient. The problem is that the patient remains unnamed, so the Doctor's patients are all under suspicion.They are a mixed bag and Stedman begins his own investigation. He does this because he discovers the Doctor had a daughter named Catherine (Pamela Franklin) who is apparently upset but not letting out her emotions. They form a close attachment, and Stedman discusses his investigations with her. He sees (among others) a high court justice ( Jack Hawkins); a woman's clothing dealer (Richard Attenborough); and Diane Cilento. In the end he gradually finds out who was the killer - and it destroys the stability he has been creating by his investigation. A little knowledge proves dangerous to Boyd in more than one way. The conclusion of this, his best movie role, is unforgettably sad and bleak.