Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Zlatica One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Martin Bradley You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out who the nut job is in "The Nanny". This is Bette Davis in post "Baby Jane/Sweet Charlotte" mode. She's nanny to disturbed little Joey, (an excellent William Dix), who may or may not have drowned his little sister in the bathtub. Joey is a sulky little sod given to rather extreme practical jokes, (little pretending to hang himself), but one look at Mary Poppins Davis and you might be inclined to run a mile. That fine and underrated director Seth Holt directed his excellent psychological chiller well adapted by producer Jimmy Sangster from Evelyn Piper's novel. Davis is superb but so too are Wendy Craig and Jill Bennett as Dix's mother and aunt. It has now built up something of a cult reputation.

preppy-3 A 10 year old boy is being sent home from an institution after two years. It seems when he was 8 his younger sister drowned in the bath tub. He blames their nanny (Bette Davis). She blames him. After two years they believe he's cured. Back home he hates the nanny and makes sure she knows it. She treats him with respect. We slowly find out what happened back then.An unknown Hammer horror movie. It is slow-moving and I saw the ending coming from a mile away but I was never bored. There are quite a few chilling moments especially at the end. It's shot in moody black and white and well-directed by Seth Holt (who HATED working with Davis). All the acting is great--especially by Davis. For once she nicely underplays the role and is very effective. She's superb at the end. A pretty unknown Hammer thriller that's well worth seeing.

gavin6942 There is just something not quite right when Bette Davis stars as an English nanny. And is her 10 year-old charge (William Dix) an emotionally disturbed murderer or just an insolent brat? When it comes to Hammer, I am not terribly familiar with director Seth Holt. Aside from "Blood From the Mummy's Tomb" (1971), he seemed to steer clear of the horror stuff. Even "Nanny" is not horror in the truest sense, leaning more towards suspense or thriller territory.Whereas Holt is not well known to me, writer-producer Jimmy Sangster is something of a legend. Dracula? Frankenstein? Mummy? "The Snorkel"? All Sangster. And he does not disappoint us here, presently a complex psychological tale where each and every character seems to have something wrong with them.The real gem of the picture? Not Bette Davis (who does alright, but I have personally never cared for her). Of course, it would be Pamela Franklin. Probably best known for "Legend of Hell House", she shines here as the teenage neighbor who may be up to no good... though nothing more than harmless trouble. I could watch anything with Franklin in it, which makes it all the more unfortunate that she has not acted in over thirty years.Definitely a better than average film, and a great Hammer film -- even without mad scientists or vampires! (As far as 1965 goes, however, I did prefer "A Study in Terror". But two good films again this month!)

orbitsville-1 A creepy nanny and a precocious kid butt heads, while a mother seems to be heading for a nervous breakdown, and the father simply leaves town. Of course it's more than it seems; we meet the bratty boy being taken home from a sort of lock-up for troubled kids and the doctor is out on the porch saying stuff like "Darn, never did manage to cure that little blighter.". Mom has refused to go, dad's attitude (before dashing away) seems to be punish-punish-punish, and only Bette Davis, as the Nanny, seems nice. No she doesn't. She doesn't seem nice. There was something I didn't like about this smiling old girl right from the get-go, Pamela Franklin eyes--sorry, Bette Davis eyes--or no Bette Davis eyes.Speaking of Pamela Franklin, she's the one spot of good cheer in the film, playing the young upstairs neighbor to the little fellow brought home, and actually managing to have a few normal conversations with said terror-tyke, once they've met on the fire-escape of the building. These are the moments of calm, though the boy is always fast with a sassy remark. Yes, he's non-stop detestable. He's got nothing but horrid accusations against that poor nanny, and even before we get an idea of why he loathes the sweet cheery old helper of the household, he's razed the entire premises with nothing but antagonistic, vile behavior. No wonder they packed him off years ago. Mother constantly multi-tasking crying and headaches, with breaks only for zoning out in bed. Visiting auntie--somewhat cooler than the mother but slowed down by a bad heart--not quite able to soothe all the never-ending tension.Of course the power of Bette Davis is such that no matter how unrelentingly bratty and vile the kid is, the smiling persecuted Nanny is scarier. I didn't care how nice and tolerant she was being; it's Bette Davis, so that kid's onto something. And when the cracks start to appear in this Nanny's outer shell of humility, one wonders if her apron should be checked for knives or throwing-axes. Is any kid with an unreasonable fear of Bette Davis really so maladjusted?And we learn what happened to get the boy shooed off to a home for boys who elevate naughty to a fine art, all those years ago. And we find out why family pictures have a sweet little girl in the frame--but, funny, there's no little girl running around the house anywhere. And it all goes from unsettling to panic-inducing, before you can say poison, or smothering, or heart medicine, or head-pushed-under, or noose, or Boy who Cried Wolf, or not.Terrific film for those who like highly stressed-out households where murder accusations pile up faster than the wastebaskets, and there's an implicit guarantee that someone living there has a bullseye on his or her back. It seems like the sort of family where a band of sadists perpetrating a home-invasion one night might bust in there only to find that the inhabitants have all finished each other off before the invaders even got in...or if still alive, were so busy tearing pieces out of one another that the home-invaders felt ignored and sort of fifth-wheelish.I leave it to you to sample this nasty scrap of psychological horror, and find out if the nanny in question is a nice, loyal, cheery old soul harassed by a heinous little bugger of a child, or, well, kind of a bad nanny as nannies go. I confess she seemed like someone who could lose it and go ballistic at any moment, but it's Bette Davis, and strange thoughts can enter one's head in that case.Recommended to me by: Fangoria Magazine # 300, featuring a List of the "300 Best" Horror films (2011). Write-up on THE NANNY done by Michael Gingold/MG (fine pick for the List, MG, especially amongst the non-gory yet admirably distressing entries).