Rating: 
Summary: Hitchcock at his peak!
Review: I was driven to write a review of this film because I just finished reading the book by Patricia Highsmith. I was curious about the connection because I had not seen the film in some time. I viewed it today and what a treat! This is Hitchcock at top form,with all the small details, the little one liners, the unspoken tidbits the camera silently picks up. The plot entails two men who meet in a train club car. One (Bruno) is a sicko, the other (Guy) is weak, well- intentioned but normal and no criminal. Bruno fantasizes about "exchanging murders"-Guy's troublesome wife for Bruno's hateful father. They part (Guy without his cigarette lighter!) with two very different recollections about who agreed to do what and to whom. Then the fun begins. Farley Granger as Guy and Robert Walker as Bruno are outstanding. Walker's performance deserves special praise since his character is so repulsive. Ruth Roman turns an excellent performance as Guy's strong- minded but supportive girlfriend while Laura Elliott shines as Guy's unlikeable, unattractive wife who badly needs a new pair of glasses. The director's daughter sparkles as a precocious young girl with a crush on the detective tailing Guy. The director almost always portrays police officers with respect, unlike the authoress.The supporting cast is top notch. The camera work is very quick but first rate and speeds the film to its' conclusion, pardon the pun, like a fast moving train. With the possible exception of "Spellbound", which is a very serious movie, I believe this is the great director's best work! A final word:If you have read the book, approach the movie with a wide open mind. Hitchcock may (or may not) have altered Highsmith's ending. 5 stars!
Rating:
Summary: A very entertaining film.
Review: I really liked this film. It's very entertaining and well worth seeing.
Rating:
Summary: Ruth Roman is GORGEOUS!
Review: When people talk about Hitchcock's beautiful leading ladies, you often hear the names Tippi Hedren, Grace Kelly, Ingred Bergman, etc...and no wonder! But perhaps the most overlooked beauty of all time has got to be Ruth Roman, who plays Guy's fiance in this movie. Hubba Hubba!!! Not a lot of "chemistry" between her and Farley Granger, though. I wonder why... Robert Walker is excellent, of course. Did you notice the song "Babyface" playing in the amusement park? A joking reference to Walker's personal appearance? Laura Elliot is fantastic as Miriam!!! She's truly one of the most dispicable characters Hitchcock ever put to film...certainly more villainous than Bruno. I mean, come on, weren't you sorta HOPING Bruno would kill her?!? Though Elliot is probably an attractive lady under normal circumstances, the thick glasses were an excellent touch, giving her a beady-eyed, rodenty appearance. Pat Hitchcock was great in this, too. Very likable as she was in "Psycho," and she really does a great job of putting across the terror she feels when Bruno is playing the "strangling game." Two main problems with this flick, though: First is the tennis match. Could it go on just a little longer (sarcasm)? It does work really well when cutting back and forth to the lighter-dropped-in-drain sequence, but there's way too much tennis prior to that. This is a suspense thriller, not a sports reel! The other problem is the often mentioned gun shot into the carousel. It was ridiculous that the cop would shoot in the first place, and then REALLY ridiculous that the lever apparently had a "super dangerous" speed setting!!! So dangerous, in fact, that turning it off again would cause the whole thing to come crashing down!!! It is a really suspenseful sequence, but it takes a lot of disbelief suspension.
Rating:
Summary: Suspense, black humor, homosexuality combined in masterpiece
Review: This movie was taken from Patricia Highsmith's book: 'Strangers on a Train'. Something curious is that this book has a resemblance with another Patricia's famous book that became a movie, "The Talented Mr. Ripley" (in cinema: 'Purple Noon' and that new remake by Minghella). In both stories there is an "hidden" homosexual attraction mixed with homicidal tendencies between the main characters - scenes like the one in the tennis court with Bruno on the stands and the scene in the white stairs when Guy passes in a car, nicely capture Bruno's obsession with Guy. Anyway, Hitchcock's film is a major improvement over the book. I would say it's a good example of how cinema has it's unique possibilities. We could say that Hitchcock was one of the directors that knew very well how to vastly use cinema language to tell a story with his point of view. He understood the purity of cinema as an art and never (not that I remember) confused it with literature, theater or poetry like many others directors, that are known by people (who don't understand cinema) as "genius", do. Hitchcock's dark comedy was way ahead of it's time and is very present in this movie. He always knew how to combine tension, suspense and sinister with comedy, irony; that's something really difficult and is beautifully executed in this film and in others (The Trouble With Harry, Frenzy, etc) by the master that dominated people's reaction. A good example of the humor in 'Strangers of a Train' can be found at the scene where Bruno blows some kid's balloon just for fun. And because of this kind of humor two versions of the movie were released, with two different endings. The British ending is more serious, nothing special happens, but the American ending is ironic, revealing Hitchcock's black comedy. It amuses me that there is a paradox between the two main characters as well between the actors. Bruno (Robert Walker): the villain ' a rich and spoiled by his mother gentleman that has an urge to kill ' and Guy (Farley Granger): the good guy ' a very correct and famous tennis player, naive and with no evil inside him. Robert Walker (Bruno) had a great, amazing performance; actually, the performance of his career ' he died during "My Son John", 51. Farley Granger (Guy) had a weak performance, like always. But even the fact that Granger's weak performance contributes to the whole greatness of the film, it makes the contrast even bigger. Still, the villain is not a classical one, we agonize with suspense when Bruno stretches for the cigarette lighter that felt in the storm drain, hoping for his success just as much as we hope Guy wins the match in time. Allow me to finish this review quoting another reviewer (Jo Henshaw) that very well said: "The power of this film is in the presentation of human beings as having a murderous side to their nature - and this Hitchcock does to perfection". This movie improves with each new viewing, believe me.
Rating:
Summary: Creepy and suspenseful...Way ahead of its time
Review: One of Hitchcock's best, this is a fascinating motion picture...the nail biting finale on the carousel is more than enough for one to see this film...Hitchock has truly done it again...brilliant camera work, a bravura script, and wonderful performances, not to mention actual atmosphere and beautiful locations...this is a classic, so what are you waiting for???
Rating:
Summary: Walker should have gotten an Oscar
Review: This excellent suspense-thriller holds up extremely well after fifty years. Robert Walker was never better and should have received an Academy Award nomination. I recently screened the film for ten 7th Graders and ten 10th Graders--the 10th Graders had seen it two years ago at our family's Friday Night Movie Nights and couldn't be barred from seeing it again! All twenty kids thought it was GREAT and applauded enthusiastically at the end! If you thought modern-day kids wouldn't go for anything this old in black and white, well, you should have seen this group! Highly recommended--Hitchcock at his best!
Rating:
Summary: THE ORIGINAL STALKER
Review: ROBERT WALKER AND FARLEY GRANGER KEEP YOU CAPTIVATED AND INTRIGUED ALL THROUGHOUT THE MOVIE. WILL GUY COMMIT THE MURDER OR NOT? SUSPENSE ROLLERCOASTER RIDE OF YOUR LIFE!!!
Rating:
Summary: Seen 5 Times or More and Always Find It Superb
Review: This may be Alfred Hithcock's masterwork. It is seamlessly perfect from start to finish. The brilliant character actor Robert Walker, who specialized in villainous roles before his own early death, played Bruno Antony, the villain of this piece. I've read that it is the villain that makes a movie like this work and that is certainly true here. His is the loose cannon of a character throughout the film. One question that is never answered that is worth thinking about is whether Bruno has arranged to meet Guy Haines (Farley Granger), the tennis star, on the train or whether it is the coincidence that it appears to be. The more times I've seen it, the more I'm convinced that Bruno set it up. I don't think anything just happens with Bruno. The two men meet on the train and Bruno proposes that each of them kill the problem person in the other's life. In Guy's case, this is his wife so he can go forward and marry a US senator's daughter and in Bruno's case this is his wealthy father who would like to institutionalize him. Guy "sort of" turns Bruno's proposal down but there may be a Freudian desire to accept Bruno that he also communicates. It is clear that Bruno would also like to propose more to Guy, that he is homoerotically attracted to Guy. Guy, in turn, may be attracted to Bruno too but his homoerotic tendencies are more ruthlessly sublimated and repressed by him (yet watch him tenderly straighten Bruno's tie and jacket after Bruno passes out at a party). Certainly Bruno is a more fascinating, mesmerizing person than either Guy's sluttish wife or vapid girlfriend. Bruno proceeds to cement their "deal" and Guy finds himself with Bruno on his hands as a nightmare that only keeps escalating. There are so many great scenes in this movie, so many great bit parts, that a viewer could get dizzy listing all of them. Suffice to say that some fabulous moments include the following. (1) Bruno's viewing his mother's "outsider" painting and equating it to his father, when she sees St. Francis as the subject(it is clear that the acorn did not fall far from the tree in this family); (2) the carousel scene which is the climax of the movie, including the old duffer who crawls underneath it to stop it; (3) The woman whose car is taken over by the police to chase Guy, who rather than being frightened is absolutely thrilled to be chasing a desperate man. (4) The little boy who comes up to pester Bruno at the amusement park who Bruno sets down instead by puncturing his balloon with his cigar. I could keep going, the scenes are that good. Notice the use of hands throughout this film too, from the strangulation they use as a killing method to lighting cigarettes with the crucial lighter to playing tennis to pulling valuables out of grates. If you haven't seen this movie yet, you are missing one of the all time great film thrillers. That it contained the novelistic skills of Patricia Highsmith, the screenwriting skills of Raymond Chandler and the directing/storytelling skills of Alfred Hitchcock virtually guaranteed its becoming an instant classic.
Rating:
Summary: REALLY GOOD
Review: I'm not into black and white, but it was so engrossing. But of course any movie from the master of suspense is bound to be good and that's why this one is at classic status now-a-days. Warner should come out with a special edition dvd since its been 50 years since this movie came out (1951)
Rating: 
Summary: "Oh...elegant."
Review: This is Bruno Anthony's response on seeing Guy Haines' cigarette lighter as they talk in the lounge car of the train. Then, a little later, Bruno orders lamb chops, french fries, and chocolate ice cream for lunch...hilarious juxtaposition.... There is very much to like about this film...and some of the reviews here have pointed out the flaws. One reviewer pointed out the most glaring unbelievability...but it is the one which throws the carousel into chaos and that non-stop churning action scene. Guy Haines runs onto the carousel at the end of the film to catch Bruno, and one of the policemen fires a gun at him (is Guy at that point a deadly threat?), but the bullet hits the carousel attendant holding the lever which controls the speed of the carousel...he falls over...taking the lever downward...thus throwing the carousel into over-drive. But there is so much visually and psychologically to like about this film. The three best visuals for me -- for their composition and style -- are of Guy arriving outside his up-scale apartment house at night in a cab...there is a tree beside the curb... and a street light...the tree and the street and the building are wonderfully haunting in the position of the camera and the light and shadow effect. The second visual follows shortly thereafter...Bruno is waiting in the shadows across the street...he calls to Guy from out of the dark...Guy crosses the street and finds Bruno lurking near an iron fence and gate... Guy winds up on one side of the gate with Bruno on the other...the camera looks into Guy's face between the iron bars...this is the time in the film when the actor Farley Granger's face is at its maximum of good looks...the effect of light and shadow on his attractive face is very pleasing... the third visual occurs when Guy goes into Bruno's mansion at night on the supposed errand of killing Bruno's father...the dark interior of the mansion...the pacing...the slow climb up the stairs...the silent, enigmatic great Dane dog waiting at the top of the stairs...oh, what the heck, why not also throw in the night scenes of the lights and the lake at the carnival in Metcalf... Since I am a strong fan of the visual beauty and style (if not the themes) of the film version of "The Talented Mr. Ripley", it is instructive to watch that film and this one in sequence...much of the similarities will come through the novelist's writing of course, since they were written by the same author...but the visual similarities and executions in the two films are extremely interesting to study as well... "Strangers on a Train" is a film I can watch over and over again...only the tennis match, I think, would become possibly tedious to rewatch multiple times... Dimitri Tiomkin's musical score is haunting, but I detect some very similar themes in it which remind me of pieces from "The Thing From Another World", also released in 1951 with a Dimitri Tiomkin score... The things which repel me about the film are the beginning with Bruno's "loud" shoes getting out of the cab...and the music with its jazzy hint of mockery at the implied gay character...just like that mocking scene in "The Maltese Falcon" when Spade and his secretary smirk over the gardenia scent on Cairo's card...Guy's wife, of course, is as repellent in her abrasive manipulation and plotting maliciousness as Frankie is in "The Talented Mr. Ripley" with his smirking, sarcastic mockery of Tom... The clarity of the images on this DVD is excellent... and the black and white imagery is liquid and lucious...of all the actors and actresses in the film, only Ruth Roman seems somehow visually not right for the role of Guy's fiancee...all in all, this is an excellent film for repeated viewing, close scrutiny, and multiple enjoyment...
|
