STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, based on the Patricia Highsmith novel, quickly became one of Alfred Hitchcock's most successful thrillers and remains one of his most popular films. En route from Washington, D.C., champion tennis player Guy Haines (Farley Granger) meets pushy playboy Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker). What begins as a chance .. Read more
| Starring | Farley Granger, Ruth Roman, Robert Walker, Leo G. Carroll |
|---|---|
| Director | Alfred Hitchcock |
| Genres | Thriller |
loading...
This splendid thriller is testimony to Alfred Hitchcock's mastery of technique and his ability to transform even the most unpromising start into a gripping movie. After nearly a dozen writers had turned down the chance to adapt Patricia Highsmith's novel, Raymond Chandler stepped into the breach, only to disagree with Hitch on several key scenes and suffer the ignominy of having his dialogue polished by Czenzi Ormonde, a staff writer. Hitchcock was also underwhelmed by Farley Granger in a role he felt cried out for William Holden. Nevertheless, he turns the murderous proposal of eccentric playboy Robert Walker to tennis champ Granger into a veritable nail-biter, with the two fairground scenes outstanding. He approved of one casting decision, however — his daughter Patricia plays Ruth Roman's suspicious sister.
This quirky melodrama has the director at his best, sequence by sequence, but the story is basically unsatisfactory. It makes superior suspense entertainment, however.
"...STRANGERS ON A TRAIN remains a timeless treat, a marvelous display of Hitchcock's absolute mastery of his medium and a deliciously dark comedy as well..."
There are very few who would deny the genius of Hitchcock, and whilst Strangers on a Train may not rank among his best, any Hitchcock film is worth the paces you go through.
Suppose two people wanted somebody they knew dead. These people then meet each other on a train, and they agreed to perform each other's murders. This way neither crime could be traced back to the perpetrator. But what happens if one party doesn't keep up their side of the bargain...? This is the premise of Hitchcock's film.
Though the cast are fairly unfamiliar, the acting is top notch, but the genius lies with the camerawork, the dialogue itself, and, as always, the music. Hitchcock is not to be recommended to those who cannot cope with talky expositions or character-based actions rather than thrills for the sake of thrills, and the situation is no different here. The fairground climax seems a little dated compared to say the cliff-face at the end of North by Northwest, but makes for a satisfying conclusion.
Heartily recommended!
I can only add `hear hear? to John Farnham?s review.
Well acted, and directed, worth a hire if you prefer a more subtle thoughtful film.
The book "Strangers on a Train" was penned by Patricia Highsmith, who also wrote the book "The Talented Mr. Ripley." In this movie, then, we get a glorious marriage between the strangeness of Highsmith and the precision of Hitchcock's direction. We see our everyman, Guy, as he bumps into, converses with, and becomes entangled in the warped world of Bruno - an emotionally unstable, rich dilletant. It's a perfect Hitchcock set up, (I don't even want to ruin the opening), and it plays out like clockwork.
"Strangers" is a minor, middle Hitchcock film - there are no big stars to be seen. No Jimmy Stewart, no Cary Grant, but this one is definitely worth a viewing. It's a textbook example of solid photography and storytelling, and it has lost nothing over the years. If you've already seen "Rear Window" "Psycho" "Notorious" and "North by Northwest" this is a solid pick.
The book "Strangers on a Train" was penned by Patricia Highsmith, who also wrote the book "The Talented Mr. Ripley." In this movie, then, we get a glorious marriage between the strangeness of Highsmith and the precision of Hitchcock's direction. We see our everyman, Guy, as he bumps into, converses with, and becomes entangled in the warped world of Bruno - an emotionally unstable, rich dilletant. It's a perfect Hitchcock set up, (I don't even want to ruin the opening), and it plays out like clockwork.
"Strangers" is a minor, middle Hitchcock film - there are no big stars to be seen. No Jimmy Stewart, no Cary Grant, but this one is definitely worth a viewing. It's a textbook example of solid photography and storytelling, and it has lost nothing over the years. If you've already seen "Rear Window" "Psycho" "Notorious" and "North by Northwest" this is a solid pick.
There are very few who would deny the genius of Hitchcock, and whilst Strangers on a Train may not rank among his best, any Hitchcock film is worth the paces you go through.
Suppose two people wanted somebody they knew dead. These people then meet each other on a train, and they agreed to perform each other's murders. This way neither crime could be traced back to the perpetrator. But what happens if one party doesn't keep up their side of the bargain...? This is the premise of Hitchcock's film.
Though the cast are fairly unfamiliar, the acting is top notch, but the genius lies with the camerawork, the dialogue itself, and, as always, the music. Hitchcock is not to be recommended to those who cannot cope with talky expositions or character-based actions rather than thrills for the sake of thrills, and the situation is no different here. The fairground climax seems a little dated compared to say the cliff-face at the end of North by Northwest, but makes for a satisfying conclusion.
Heartily recommended!
There are very few who would deny the genius of Hitchcock, and whilst Strangers on a Train may not rank among his best, any Hitchcock film is worth the paces you go through.
Suppose two people wanted somebody they knew dead. These people then meet each other on a train, and they agreed to perform each other's murders. This way neither crime could be traced back to the perpetrator. But what happens if one party doesn't keep up their side of the bargain...? This is the premise of Hitchcock's film.
Though the cast are fairly unfamiliar, the acting is top notch, but the genius lies with the camerawork, the dialogue itself, and, as always, the music. Hitchcock is not to be recommended to those who cannot cope with talky expositions or character-based actions rather than thrills for the sake of thrills, and the situation is no different here. The fairground climax seems a little dated compared to say the cliff-face at the end of North by Northwest, but makes for a satisfying conclusion.
Heartily recommended!
I can only add `hear hear? to John Farnham?s review.
Well acted, and directed, worth a hire if you prefer a more subtle thoughtful film.
The book "Strangers on a Train" was penned by Patricia Highsmith, who also wrote the book "The Talented Mr. Ripley." In this movie, then, we get a glorious marriage between the strangeness of Highsmith and the precision of Hitchcock's direction. We see our everyman, Guy, as he bumps into, converses with, and becomes entangled in the warped world of Bruno - an emotionally unstable, rich dilletant. It's a perfect Hitchcock set up, (I don't even want to ruin the opening), and it plays out like clockwork.
"Strangers" is a minor, middle Hitchcock film - there are no big stars to be seen. No Jimmy Stewart, no Cary Grant, but this one is definitely worth a viewing. It's a textbook example of solid photography and storytelling, and it has lost nothing over the years. If you've already seen "Rear Window" "Psycho" "Notorious" and "North by Northwest" this is a solid pick.
excellent film. i had watched it many years ago but it took nothing away from the enjoyment of watching this time. Query why have I been sent Disc 2 which seems exactly the same, did i did to rent both? surely not!
Usual brilliant shots and visuals that you would expect from Albert H. (the auto-editor thinks the Master's name is "offensive"!), but something just falls flat, especially compared to some of his really great works, like North by Northwest and The Birds.
A nice story plot, but the ending though was to predictable.
A slightly unsatisfactory outing from the Master of Suspense, although with some great moments. The film's opening 50 minutes, culminating in the two protagonists meeting for the second time, is a masterclass in gripping psychological suspense. Dennis Hopper clearly owes a whole lexicon of pscyhotics to Robert Walker's portrayal in this movie.
Shot with a powerful sense of menace, this section also raises questions about whether Walker is a real third person, or some manifestation of Farley Granger's character's innermost self - the evil within all of us which is normally kept under control.
Unfortunately, the film runs out of steam as the plot mechanics come laboriously into the frame, and it does not fulfill its early promise. But still an interesting and innovative work, with a powerful set piece at the end, and intimations of homosexuality in the Walker role (also interesting to note that, hitherto, Walker had played clean-cut young American roles only. He was to die during his next film at a young age).
As often with the lesser works of Hitchcock, the beauty is in the unfolding of the plot elements. When the plot takes over, interest flags.
Alfred Hitchcock, is, in my opinion, the greatest director to have ever lived. Simply put, no other director has ever come close to matching the sheer number of masterpieces Hitch reeled out- Rear Window, Psycho, Vertigo, The Birds, North By Northwest and Rebecca to name but a few.
This dark, complex film is among his best. It's brilliantly made, with a priceless premise and a roster of superbly sinister performances, topped by Robert Walker's stalker.
FANTASTIC, put bluntly. Put it at the top of your list.
And any Hitch fan or fan of suspense who hasn't seen this should be ashamed.
A very unbelievable plot. Not the best acting in the world either. Maybe it looked different when it was released but it just comes across as very camp and very improbable. One for Hitchcock fans I think.
Subtle psycological thriller. Interesting characters and story.
This splendid thriller is testimony to Alfred Hitchcock's mastery of technique and his ability to transform even the most unpromising start into a gripping movie. After nearly a dozen writers had turned down the chance to adapt Patricia Highsmith's novel, Raymond Chandler stepped into the breach, only to disagree with Hitch on several key scenes and suffer the ignominy of having his dialogue polished by Czenzi Ormonde, a staff writer. Hitchcock was also underwhelmed by Farley Granger in a role he felt cried out for William Holden. Nevertheless, he turns the murderous proposal of eccentric playboy Robert Walker to tennis champ Granger into a veritable nail-biter, with the two fairground scenes outstanding. He approved of one casting decision, however — his daughter Patricia plays Ruth Roman's suspicious sister.
This quirky melodrama has the director at his best, sequence by sequence, but the story is basically unsatisfactory. It makes superior suspense entertainment, however.
"...STRANGERS ON A TRAIN remains a timeless treat, a marvelous display of Hitchcock's absolute mastery of his medium and a deliciously dark comedy as well..."
* The Amazon.co.uk prices on our site are updated every 24 hours and may not be up to date at the time you view this page.
To see the current new and "new and used" Amazon.co.uk prices, please click on the Buy button.