IMDb-BEWERTUNG
7,1/10
1723
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuA widowed businessman becomes obsessed with one of his employees, the divorcée Betty Preisser.A widowed businessman becomes obsessed with one of his employees, the divorcée Betty Preisser.A widowed businessman becomes obsessed with one of his employees, the divorcée Betty Preisser.
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Gewinn & 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
while the theme has been done, certainly for its time this was a bit experimental. Fredric March portrays a 59 year old garment district manufacturer who, recently widowed, is tired of life. He has many friends, a successful business and all the accouterments, but something is missing.
Enter his employee, Betty Preisser (Kim Novak). Recently divorced from a sporadically employed musician, she is uncertain and depressed about her situation. March (Mr. Kingsley) tells her that she must make a decision in life, that it is a sign of maturity. It is not certain at this point whether he is self-serving, or actually trying to help the girl.
The relationship develops as they start to date. There are some amusing scenes with family members, as Novak's friend Marilyn (well-portrayed by Lee Grant) tells her that she should return to her first husband who is still "madly in love with her".
This is a good film for its era, in that there are no pat answers. March's dilemma is that he truly is in love with a young woman 30 years his junior. An interesting story, and well worth more than one viewing. 8/10.
Enter his employee, Betty Preisser (Kim Novak). Recently divorced from a sporadically employed musician, she is uncertain and depressed about her situation. March (Mr. Kingsley) tells her that she must make a decision in life, that it is a sign of maturity. It is not certain at this point whether he is self-serving, or actually trying to help the girl.
The relationship develops as they start to date. There are some amusing scenes with family members, as Novak's friend Marilyn (well-portrayed by Lee Grant) tells her that she should return to her first husband who is still "madly in love with her".
This is a good film for its era, in that there are no pat answers. March's dilemma is that he truly is in love with a young woman 30 years his junior. An interesting story, and well worth more than one viewing. 8/10.
Unlike a lot of soapy relationship dramas from the late '50s filmed in sturdy, widescreen Technicolor, this gruff little movie actually has a pulse that still resonates! The dialog, the real NYC settings, the no frills though excellent black & white photography, the energetically committed performances of Novak and March (and everyone else) are a revelation. Some of the characters could have stepped out of a movie from today with hardly a change of appearance or attitude, such as Lee Grant. The technical and creative side of the film is refreshing for the era--just watch the scene in what looks like natural, overcast winter light as Novak and March laugh and joke as they approach a cabin. Feels so alive and spontaneous, minus any glossy photography or stilted direction. This film really breathes! And if there's music (I actually didn't notice),it's very subtle and doesn't hammer away and distract. Novak is at her very best--previously she seemed rather held in and expressionless to me, but this completely explodes that perception. And though March had a tendency to overact in his career, his tormented emoting here seems understandable. We really feel his pain and anxiety. This movie deserves wider attention.
Screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky adapted his own play about an elderly workaholic (Fredric March, in a stupendous performance) who reaches out to a beautiful woman half his age...but she's got problems of her own, beginning with her shaky self-confidence. Their sometimes-rocky, sometimes-tender courtship provides the basis for this lovely film. As the sad beauty, Kim Novak has seldom been better (it's amazing that professional critics at the time failed to see the growth in Novak as an actress here, focusing all their attention on March, who indeed is terrific). Great N.Y.C. locations, fine support from the always-reliable Lee Grant. Well worth-seeing. *** from **** (Relatively forgotten for years, the movie made its DVD debut August 2010 as part of a Novak collection.)
that I taped years ago and watch every so often. It's a good thing I did as it is not yet available on either VHS or DVD. The first time I ever saw this movie on television was way back when I was a teenager and I was babysitting. It's one of those movies where each time I watch it I see things I missed before; either in someone's performance or in the way a scene is filmed or something else. Fredric March is just flawless as a self-made businessman and widower in his fifties and Kim Novak is edgy as the beautiful but damaged and insecure young woman working at his company. Everyone calls her somnambulistic, but in this movie I could feel her nerves jump right through her skin at times. I thought she was very good in the role. I have to mention that one of my favorite characters in it is the son-in-law, Jack, played by Martin Balsam--a fantastic actor, of course, but he is so great in this, that, although he's not in many scenes--he just knocks me over every time I watch it. The characters all sound so true to life, of course, because they were written by Paddy Chayefsky. I found the subject matter fascinating and believable and although the standout performance was definitely that of Fredric March, playing all facets of a mature man, all actors involved were right on the mark. When WILL they make this movie available on VHS or DVD? My home-made tape looks crummy, I admit it! (And the movie is hardly ever shown on television any more) Anyway, this is one of my favorite 100 films.
"Middle of the Night" was a surprise for me both before and after I saw it on Turner Classic Movies on a dreary Sunday morning. Before because the subject matter made me raise an eyebrow, and after, because I was genuinely shocked at how involved and absorbed I became in the story and how it made me feel a little guilty about my beforehand perceptions.
The movie stars two of the cinema's finest—Fredric March and Kim Novak—as lovers separated in age by thirty years. Novak is March's secretary. He owns a big business, his wife has died, and his children are all married and having families of their own. Novak, by contrast, has divorced her husband of three years and is still trying to recover from it as well as a feeling of not being wanted or loved. March comforts her as almost a father figure, they become friends, and then despite protests and age differences, become romantically involved.
Now the premise of this actually had me a little creeped out at beginning. And there were some parts in the first third of the movie that made me shudder a bit, but immediately after that, the story become involving and beautiful and sad and just the opposite of what I was expecting. Yes, Fredric March and Kim Novak aren't exactly like two peas in a pod in terms as a screen couple, but that was the psychology and genius of this movie. True, the idea of a man romancing a woman thirty years his junior seems a little off-putting, but the way the filmmakers and performers work it, it becomes genuinely powerful.
March is not made over into being some kind of a creepy middle-aged sexual predator. And Novak is not presented as a freeloader or a sex object. Rather, these two characters are worked into being completely sentimental and sympathetic human beings and well into the story, I could actually believe they were in love and I feared for the outcome of their relationship. Now those creepy feelings I had? That was personified by the supporting characters. Novak's family saw March as a middle-aged sexual predator and March's saw Novak as a slattern out to get herself into a big home. The supporting characters essentially represent what the audience—including me—thought about the movie at the beginning and about the premise. And believe me, I felt guilty when I realized this. The movie works because it's not about lust or sex, but about love and affection and the irresistible longing for companionship. And that's why the relationship between March and Novak becomes moving. They say "I love you" to each other and we believe they are saying it from the deepest regions of their hearts and souls. They don't want each other for their physical appearances, they want each other for something that lies beneath the surface. And that is what love is.
Performances all around are excellent. Fredric March, one of the screen's legends, is excellent at creating a character portrait of a grieving, lonely man. And Kim Novak is even better at generating sympathy with her portrayal of a woman seeking love for who she is. These are typically the roles that Kim Novak was given during her golden era in the 1950s (other roles include "Picnic", "Pal Joey", and of course, her best film "Vertigo") and she played them well, partially because she was able, more in some cases and less than others, play herself and what she wanted people to see of her: a human being and not just something pretty to look at and to want lustily. Kim Novak is my personal favorite actress and one of the most underrated actresses who ever lived.
In the end, although I was at first unsure if I could approve of a movie like "Middle of the Night", I am not afraid to admit at the end, having seen it in its entirety, that I was amazed and absorbed by the story. I believed in the romance between the two characters, I was not uneasy looking at them together, and by the end, I felt really sick in my stomach from all of the sympathy that my heart had generated in the past two hours. The movie is rare and hard to find, perhaps because its subject matter isn't that all appealing *on the surface*, but the movie is well worth your time if you ever have the opportunity to see it.
The movie stars two of the cinema's finest—Fredric March and Kim Novak—as lovers separated in age by thirty years. Novak is March's secretary. He owns a big business, his wife has died, and his children are all married and having families of their own. Novak, by contrast, has divorced her husband of three years and is still trying to recover from it as well as a feeling of not being wanted or loved. March comforts her as almost a father figure, they become friends, and then despite protests and age differences, become romantically involved.
Now the premise of this actually had me a little creeped out at beginning. And there were some parts in the first third of the movie that made me shudder a bit, but immediately after that, the story become involving and beautiful and sad and just the opposite of what I was expecting. Yes, Fredric March and Kim Novak aren't exactly like two peas in a pod in terms as a screen couple, but that was the psychology and genius of this movie. True, the idea of a man romancing a woman thirty years his junior seems a little off-putting, but the way the filmmakers and performers work it, it becomes genuinely powerful.
March is not made over into being some kind of a creepy middle-aged sexual predator. And Novak is not presented as a freeloader or a sex object. Rather, these two characters are worked into being completely sentimental and sympathetic human beings and well into the story, I could actually believe they were in love and I feared for the outcome of their relationship. Now those creepy feelings I had? That was personified by the supporting characters. Novak's family saw March as a middle-aged sexual predator and March's saw Novak as a slattern out to get herself into a big home. The supporting characters essentially represent what the audience—including me—thought about the movie at the beginning and about the premise. And believe me, I felt guilty when I realized this. The movie works because it's not about lust or sex, but about love and affection and the irresistible longing for companionship. And that's why the relationship between March and Novak becomes moving. They say "I love you" to each other and we believe they are saying it from the deepest regions of their hearts and souls. They don't want each other for their physical appearances, they want each other for something that lies beneath the surface. And that is what love is.
Performances all around are excellent. Fredric March, one of the screen's legends, is excellent at creating a character portrait of a grieving, lonely man. And Kim Novak is even better at generating sympathy with her portrayal of a woman seeking love for who she is. These are typically the roles that Kim Novak was given during her golden era in the 1950s (other roles include "Picnic", "Pal Joey", and of course, her best film "Vertigo") and she played them well, partially because she was able, more in some cases and less than others, play herself and what she wanted people to see of her: a human being and not just something pretty to look at and to want lustily. Kim Novak is my personal favorite actress and one of the most underrated actresses who ever lived.
In the end, although I was at first unsure if I could approve of a movie like "Middle of the Night", I am not afraid to admit at the end, having seen it in its entirety, that I was amazed and absorbed by the story. I believed in the romance between the two characters, I was not uneasy looking at them together, and by the end, I felt really sick in my stomach from all of the sympathy that my heart had generated in the past two hours. The movie is rare and hard to find, perhaps because its subject matter isn't that all appealing *on the surface*, but the movie is well worth your time if you ever have the opportunity to see it.
WUSSTEST DU SCHON:
- WissenswertesKim Novak considers this her best performance.
- PatzerIn the last scene in Jerry's apartment, the camera pulls too far back; several pieces of tape, indicating marks for the actors and furniture, are clearly visible on the carpet.
- Zitate
Walter Lockman: And when they bury me, they can put on the gravestone, 'His was a big waste of time.'
- VerbindungenFeatured in Kim Novak: Live from the TCM Classic Film Festival (2013)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Middle of the Night?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- En mitad de la noche
- Drehorte
- 218 West 37th Street, Manhattan, New York City, New York, USA(exterior location of Jerry's business)
- Produktionsfirma
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 1.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 58 Minuten
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Mitten in der Nacht (1959) officially released in India in English?
Antwort