This is a good play that someone tried to turn into a move and failed miserably. It is just an awful movie - the Audrey Hepburn movie that she didn't want anyone to see. It could have been very good, with the right director and producer, but it completely misses the mark. Alan Arkin is not a versatile actor and his attempt at it fails. (And his costume changes are rather silly.) Not one of the bad guys is believable and within fifteen minutes you know the ending and the rest is just people messing around. The only one with star quality is Hepburn. Everyone else comes off like they are in community theatre or on a struggling TV show. I'm certain that she couldn't wait to finish this film. I know I couldn't. I suffered all the way to the end.

The year is 2017.No question about it. I saw this movie this movie starring Audrey Hepburn in 1967 entitled "Wait Until Dark"50 years too late.This film was based on a Broadway play tells a story of a blind housewife that is being trolled and harassed by three criminals in search for a doll that contains drugs.Alan Arkin, Richard Crenna, Efrem Zimbalist Jr.,Jack Weston and Samantha Jones co-star with Hepburn in a film directed by Terence Young.No question that I saw this film too late as it made no impression that it was indeed a 50-year-old movie.The plot was definitely contrived and weak as it lacked realism especially on how the blind housewife Susy was able to overcome a criminal as well as how the criminals were totally obsessed with just a few grams of drugs contained in a small doll.Added to that,the movie started slow and there are too many unnecessary parts particularly the criminals in a discussion at the blind housewife's house at the start of the movie as well as the introduction of Hepburn's character where it required too many scenes to establish that she was indeed blind before it got going to tell the story.Despite of what I have stated previously about the slow pace and the contrived story, the movie would still managed to entertain the viewer at present for many reasons. First, the acting was definitely extraordinary in the story.Hepburn was definitely credible as a blind woman.Added to that,the criminals - Crenna and Arkin - were definitely great to complement Hepburn.Second was the music by Henry Mancini which was definitely extraordinary.Third,the direction by Terence Young was good as he was able to provide tension and thrills through the mood and atmosphere of the film.That is why it still managed to get a perfect rating.Overall,acting,music and tension overcame the weaknesses of the story.

I had great expectations from this movie, especially seeing the high rating and the actors' names. What I got instead proved to be an extremely naive "thriller/mystery" that left me with more questions than answers. For example, why wouldn't she just give them the damn doll?!! Or why send the little girl in the park to look for her husband so that he can come with the police instead of just sending her directly to the police station? Even the way the criminals tried to convince her to give up the doll is not at all convincing? What happened to good old physical methods that are so common in today's movies? And so on and so forth, I could just go on and on forever. Disappointed, that's what sums it.

Terence Young's Wait until Dark, based on Frederick Knott's gimmicky stage play, is as an exceptional suspense drama - a perfect example of how mood, atmosphere, music, and direction can overcome plot contrivances.The plot lurks around Suzy Hendrix (Audrey Hepburn, in a superior performance), a recently blinded NYC housewife whose husband Sam is determined to make "the world's champion blind lady" out of her. Although she can handle most of her daily chores alone, she still requires some help from Gloria, the dorky pre-teen girl who lives upstairs. Unbeknownst to her, Sam has accidentally played into the hands of heroin-smuggling mole who plants a dope-loaded doll in his possession. It doesn't take long for Suzy to get herself in trouble when a group of con men grease their way into her apartment in an elaborate plot to locate the doll. Two of them are merely petty con-men, but their employer Harry Roat (Alan Arkin who is unbelievably creepy) is a sinister monster. From there on, the movie ruthlessly tightens the screws of tension, all leading up to the nail-biting climax, as Roat and Suzy come face to face in her pitch-dark apartment.The film makes little effort to overcome its origins as a play, as the majority of the action takes place in Suzy's apartment. Though some of the more contrived elements of Knott's play are still intact here, Terence Young's presentation of Suzy's cloistered surroundings trumps the script's far-fetched tendencies as he manages to create a paradoxical environment of civilization devoid of human life. Also, Young makes the smart decision of setting his thriller inside a basement apartment, the cave-like arches of which have the unsettling effect of positioning Hepburn in a nondescript underground (the windows only look out on the feet of passersby, emphasizing Suzy's disconnect from her neighborhood). Terence Young's remarkable ability to create a believable oppressive locality in Wait until Dark obscures plot holes and irrationalities right up to the film's extended final showdown. By the time Suzy realizes she's completely and hopelessly alone in her apartment, the cumulative effect of Hepburn's palpable desolation and Arkin's ruthlessness, combined with Henry Mancini's overpoweringly harrowing score, bring the film to a justly celebrated climactic bacchanalia, complete with one of suspense cinema's first and most effective shock leaps.Once seen, Wait until Dark will never be forgotten. But be wary if you watch it alone. In fact, watch it with someone who likes to scream!