Critics reviews

We are left open-mouthed with disbelief and, in default of immediate explanation, terror. As we begin to process the violence, the film sends us hurtling back to reality, piling a different kind of horror onto the first. Diabolique cannot date because the grubby, shabby evil it depicts will never go away

Diabolique is tense and atmospheric, relying on the passage of time and movement of characters through space for its thrills. Great performances really sell this, as the film relies heavily on the duplicitous nature of the characters to work.

The point's supposed to be one of suspense: is he going to get so mad that he's gonna go upstairs and see S. Signoret and V. Clouzot with a dead guy in the filled tub? Instead Clouzot lets Nöel Roquevert make a full-fledged "comedy" routine out of it. Hitchcock would have never allowed such a thing, which is one reason Hitchcock's a consistently/demonstrably better director than Clouzot. Still. There's some pretty strong stuff here. What are you gonna do.

While Clouzot rivaled with Hitchcock for critical and commercial success, he in fact anticipated the tactics of the better-known English director. Famously acknowledged as a model for PSYCHO (1960), LES DIABOLIQUES may act as Clouzot's greatest influence upon Hitchcock, including its morbid humor, plot elements, and suspense devices. Instead of a French Hitchcock, why not an English Clouzot?