MovieChat Forums > Night of the Eagle (1962) Discussion > Great Film, But The Husband Was a Jerk (...

Great Film, But The Husband Was a Jerk (Spoilers)


Perhaps it's a reflection on the times, but watching it, I felt very little sympathy for the husband. He spies on his wife, steals her private possessions, and then mocks (and forbids!) her to keep on working her magic. His childish demands that she cease her witchcraft, and his would-be "rational" approach, come across as heavy handed and borderline abusive. I would have liked it much better had she told him to mind his own business, and stay out of her things; after all, she doesn't tell him how to act or what to believe. The twist, of course, is that the wife is right.....the magic DOES work, and his foolish meddling very nearly gets both of them killed.

An interesting film in that the women are the ones with the power here. The husband rants and raves and tries to literally destroy things he doesn't understand, but he succeeds only in causing disaster. Still, I would much rather have seen Tansy stand up to her husband more; I do not think she should have allowed him to order her about like a child, especially as she knew what would happen if she destroyed her magical supplies. The only real mis-step in the film is the much talked about "eagle" scene, which comes across as unintentionally hilarious due to poor special effects and an overall silly concept.

reply

Yeah, he didn't seem to deserve her.

reply

They made a TV series out of this movie, you know.

Only...in the TV series, they made the husband a goon...and had him played by two different actors...

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

reply

Actually, "Bewitched" is much more like "I Married a Witch". I don't see the likeness with this film, especially because the other is a comedy, too, with witchly antics AND a witch father for her and budding witch daughter for them.

*** The trouble with reality is there is no background music. ***

reply

The only real mis-step in the film is the much talked about "eagle" scene, which comes across as unintentionally hilarious due to poor special effects and an overall silly concept.


It's more how it was filmed than the actual concept or the special effects (I thought the imagery was composited together pretty well, actually). The problem is really in the filmmakers' inability to direct the eagle in a way that would have its interactions with its surroundings come off as natural.

Standing there, on a road that leads to anywhere ...

reply

I don't know why anyone is complaining about the effects with the eagle, it looked perfect, and as you stated, the only issue is you can't get an eagle to act. Even at that, people saying that it was hilarious...........wtf is hilarious about it? It's not even remotely funny or comical in the least.

reply

I don't know why anyone is complaining about the effects with the eagle, it looked perfect, and as you stated, the only issue is you can't het an eagle to act. Even at that, people saying that it was "hilarious"...........wtf is hilarious about it? It's not even remotely funny or comical in the least.


I agree. The eagle was fine. It's a product of the era it was made in and the limits of the effects for the day. Besides, it is all happening in his head. A spell that would end with his death. In reality, he would have been found dead of a heart attack or something. I have no clue why anyone would complain about it other than not knowing how to appreciate films for the era they were made in.

- - - - - - -
I am not a fan. I just happen to enjoy movies. Fans are embarrassing.

reply

I thought the effect was startlingly realistic - it really surprised the hell out of me! That door bursting in was the last thing I was expecting. Then they cut to the hawk chasing him down the hall, unbelievable how huge, monstrous, and real it made the thing look.

Why is the husband a jerk? Avoiding opening umbrellas in the house is one thing, but stashing 20 various voodoo-like, black magic items around the house (tucked into corners, camouflaged into lamp shades, SEWN into his clothing) ... is quite another, and definitely doesn't seem like the healthiest obsession. His reaction is this: It's either real, which is of course an impossibility, or it isn't real. It not being real means his wife has obviously been building upon this unhealthy delusion for some time, her thinking that everything good in their life is a product of her sustained labors in black magic. But the idea of it being real (though impossible) spooks him too. He doesn't like the possibility that he's been coddled his whole adult life, and that everything good, which seems so abundant, comes only because the occult provides it.

I think this was an awesome premise, and the movie did a good job of carrying through on it. I like how the wife was right about her battling other forces, namely that one colleague of his, but it would've been supremely sweeter if it turned out ALL of his fellow instructors were closet witches, and that life ended up being nothing but a tug of war between innumerable witches. The end of the movie would show class back as usual, but he's now the teacher the students hate/ridicule the most. He seems a little slower/scattered in the head, and he doesn't look as strong, healthy, or young as he used to. By contrast the other teachers seem lit; very intelligent, attractive and OH so popular among the students. We follow him home to subtly reveal that his wife died a while back as a consequence of him bursting their protective bubble, and he's all alone ... with very shabby surroundings. The movie ends with him desperately, yet hopelessly, fumbling with tarot cards and match sticks, dirt, and other materials, showing that he has finally lost all the dignified reservation marked by his former self.

His happiness was sacrificed in place of a conviction, now we see him attempt to trade conviction for happiness .. any happiness.

reply

In this day and age, the scene does not hold up well. But the scary laughs are similar to the Hitchcock phenomenon of screaming followed by laughing. Only in this movie there is more laughing today. But in the 60's I bet there was suspense and terror. The ending is great because you don't know how it happened.

If we can save humanity, we become the caretakers of the world

reply

I just watched this movie for the first time, having seen the previous version of it ('Weird Woman') a number of times before. This is far superior to that film, so the long wait I went through before seeing it was well worth it. Great film, I think.

I haven't read Fritz Leiber's original story that this is based on, that being 'Conjure Wife', so others that have read it may and should correct me if I'm wrong, but I did read a review of this film a while back before I saw it in which the reviewer stated that the husband being a bit of a jerk very much is a part of how the character was written by Leiber. Even in 'Weird Woman' he's a bit of a pompous ass, so that very well may be.

reply

Norman (the husband) is a dominant type, but some people like that in a man. Or in a woman. Or so I've heard. *ahem*.

Anyway, I think his being overbearing about Tansy's beliefs is part of the point. It makes the events later in the film all the more shocking for him and entertaining for the audience.

Besides, I think most people would be pretty shocked to find out that their spouse was a practicing witch. How else could he have reacted? The other option was for him to be patronizing, patting his wife on the head and saying something like, "you go ahead with your little hobby if it pleases you, darling." That would have been obnoxious. And to shrug it off or be accepting would have weakened the final revelations. So ... yes, perhaps he was a bit overbearing, but Norman's reaction was natural and necessary to the plot.

reply

I think Norman took the right action. Obviously his wife had a unhealthy obsession with witchcraft.

And of course he lives in a fictional world where his actions ended up hurting them.

reply

I would much rather have seen Tansy stand up to her husband more;

Adding to that that this is her RELIGIOUS belief....which is traditionally a private matter. Would he have pillaged and confronted her with all her bibles and rosary beads etc. had she been Xtian?

The sexism does get pretty ridiculous when Tansy then switches into "Oh, let ME die in HIS place!" mode.


.

reply

The sexism does get pretty ridiculous when Tansy then switches into "Oh, let ME die in HIS place!" mode.


Only ridiculous in terms of hyper-sensitive politically correct pansies these days who look to take offense in anything they look at. It was a film made in 1962. Get over it already.

- - - - - - -
I am not a fan. I just happen to enjoy movies. Fans are embarrassing.

reply

[deleted]

I actually think the film falls away and becomes a lot less interesting in the second half when Tansy, the most interesting character in the movie is relegated to the background and the focus is well and truly on Norman.🐭

reply

The husband shows a patriarchal, chauvinistic and pompous feeling towards his wife and her beliefs. This got me thinking how during medieval times, women in general were viewed as witches.






















reply

Films like this "hold up" just fine. It's modern audiences that have failed to hold up.



reply