Rating: 
Summary: For completists only... (and spoilers, spoilers, spoilers)
Review: I've read a lot of reviews trying to rehabilitate this mid-60's Hitchcock film from the dustbin into which history has thrown it. The film has all the elements that go into a Hitchcock classic: that high-toned gloss that he perfected in such 50s films as "Vertigo" and "Rear Window"; a servicable plot that allows for potential suspense set pieces; and the sure use of location which made "Psycho", "North by Northwest" and "Vertigo" so intriguing.But the film is like soda pop left open too long: all the ingredients, no fizz. Hitch's staging is way off here - the film is slow at the start and it never shakes this lethargy. Paul Newman plays an American scientist defecting, supposedly, to East Berlin and Julie Andrews, his financee, follows him there. There's no banter or rapport between these two, unlike say Robert Donat and Madeline Carroll in "The 39 Steps" or Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint in "North by Northwest." Newman looks miserable here; he's drawn-in and remote; naturally, his character has to remain guarded but Newman closes the audience off too. It was rumored that he and Hitchcock frequently fought on the set and Newman, who can be sly and witty, is defensive throughout. He seemed a lot happier working on a prison farm in his subsequent film, "Cool Hand Luke." As for Julie Andrews, she has nothing to do. Hitch sets us up to believe that her pursuing Newman into East Germany will trigger the action but its really an event totally unrelated to her - the murder of Gromek - that sets the story off. While Janet Leigh was cleverly set up as a MacGuffin in "Psycho"; here this strange enervation of Julie Andrews' role seems like poor plotting (and the interview scene at Leipzig Univ. a paltry attempt to correct this). Hitchcock piles up the bad calls throughout. In his best films, you may have seen how Hitchcock was manipulating the story (and your emotions) but his style made it a perverse pleasure - witness Grace Kelly's breaking into Raymond Burr's apartment in "Rear Window." Here the wit and style are missing so the suspense mechanisms are laid bare. When Newman is racing against the clock to obtain a secret formula from an East German scientist, you know your heart should be pounding. But all I was thinking was... you mean that's it? Two actors writing mathematical formulas on a blackboard? And in the big escape from Leipzig, Hitchcock shows that it would take another 28 years, with "Speed", for a bus to be used as a dramatic intensifer. Despite what its defenders claim, "Torn Curtain" is a failure; only the incomprehensible "Topaz" is worse. Its not just that this Cold War story seems especially moldly today; but what really kills it is the lack of any apparent conviction by anyone involved. A couple mildly suspensful scenes - and I'm sorry, the murder of Gromek is *not* the masterly set-piece that its often claimed to be - do not compensate for this thin gruel. Buy it if you're a Hitchcock completist but you're money would be better spent buying a second copy of "North by Northwest" (or "The Rules of the Game.")
Rating: 
Summary: If ever there was a movie you had to see...
Review: If the cold war, the iron curtain or spy novels is your thing, then this is a movie for you. If not, you still might enjoy the plot.
Rating:
Summary: Great Hitchcock film
Review: Many people think that Torn Curtain is a bad Hitchcock movie.It's not.It is a great film.It is verry supencefull.Highly recamended for a Hitchcock fan.On a scale from 1 to 10 Torn Curtain gets a 10.
Rating:
Summary: "Star Wars" technology ahead of its time
Review: Most amusing aspect is that Paul Newman, as a professor pretending to defect to East Germany, is out to steal Communist missile secrets -- anti-missile missile technology, in fact, that would eliminate the threat of nuclear war. Must have been one of Reagan's favorite movies.
Rating:
Summary: Another of Hitch's deadly best
Review: Paul Newman plays the intelligent Prof. Michael Armstrong. On a scientific trip to Norway with his girl friend, Sarah Sherman (Julie Andrews) he leaves her in Norway and flies to East Germany (this in the cold war) to steal there secrets. Sarah, knowing something is up follows him. It turns out one of the biggest adventure movies ever. Excellent movie, music is beautiful, and an excellent story board. Hitch is never at his worst only at his best.
Rating: 
Summary: Torn Curtain
Review: Sure, the chemistry with Paul and Julie isn't the best (nor is her wardrobe)but I enjoy this movie every time I watch it. Especially exciting is the bus sequence towards the end of the movie. Great suspense. This movie improves upon each viewing.
Rating:
Summary: Torn Curtain
Review: Sure, the chemistry with Paul and Julie isn't the best (nor is her wardrobe)but I enjoy this movie every time I watch it. Especially exciting is the bus sequence towards the end of the movie. Great suspense. This movie improves upon each viewing.
Rating:
Summary: Another Hitchcock classic
Review: The first time I saw this movie I didn't know that Hitchcock directed it, but I kept telling myself during the movie that someone was sure copying from the master! Turns out this was a late Hitchcock film, and while it doesn't rate in his top three, it's still a suspenseful thriller to be enjoyed. Julie Andrews never looked better and we get to see the All-American Paul Newman in a role which appears to put him in quite a different light. The characters are all memorable and the desperate struggle at the farm will have you on the edge of your seat. If you haven't seen this one then by all means give it a try. Just because 'Torn Curtain' isn't a masterpiece doesn't mean that it isn't a Hitchcock classic.
Rating:
Summary: The best hitchcock movie made!
Review: The handsome Professor Michael Armstrong (Paul Newman) and his gorgeous fiancee Sarah Sherman (Julie Andrews) are on a conference of physics in copenhagen, Denmark. Their relationship troubled when Sherman accidently finds out Michael is planning to work behind the "iron curtain" of communist Germany. She follows him to East Berlin where he totally rejects her staying. He wants her to leave, but Sherman doesn't know what to do or what is really going on. As a result, the couple is torn apart. The whole story is thrilling and quite romantic, and it does have a happy ending.
Rating: 
Summary: Film marred by...
Review: There is one name that jars in this film, and a person who bears that name and marred the film for Hitchcock -in my view-, and it is Paul Newman. Those "actor's studio" guys know anything else apart from looking "tormented"? Apartently, not. Why a method actor -or whatever they call o called themselves- couldn't act straight like Cary Grant, for example? Of course, an anti-communist film in the mid-sixties, so "revolucionary" (mmm...) couldn't fare well with the critics. But Newman is the name, he is out of place, and where he is in place, I'm usually not interested.
| 
