Don't miss the train
"Strangers on a Train"
Overall Rating: ****
As both a train buff and a Hitchcock fan, let me start off with this disclaimer: the title is not the reason why I like "Strangers on a Train." It has more to do with the director--or, to be precise, the director's craft.
Guy Haines (Farley Granger) is a tennis star who desperately wants a divorce so he can marry another woman. While on his way to see his wife, Miriam (Laura Elliot), he has a chance encounter with Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker) on the train. In their conversation, Bruno mentions one of his ideas: two strangers swap murders. The example Bruno gives: Guy would kill Bruno's overbearing father, and Bruno would kill Guy's wife. Guy dismisses Bruno as slightly crazy. Bruno is more than slightly crazy, however: Bruno kills Miriam--then threatens to frame Guy if he doesn't hold up his end of the "bargain."
Robert Walker is wonderful as Bruno. From murderous to just plain mean, Bruno is an odious villain throughout. The difficulty of the role is that he must look normal; Walker manages to be charming and suave on the surface, but a psychotic killer beneath.
The story is also generally well written. The story keeps you in suspense: once Bruno kills Miriam, what will he do next? Building the tension is important--and effectively done--in "Strangers on a Train." The film also has a sharp wit--the episode with Bruno's mother's painting is a wonderful example.
The real secret to the film's success is the Hitchcock touch. The obvious example is the frequent shifting between Guy's tennis match, and Bruno's trip to the murder scene; the constant shifts between a fast paced tennis match and Bruno's return to the crime scene heighten the tension very effectively. While this is the classic example, it is far from the only example. For instance, there's the scene outside Guy's home where Bruno is shown behind bars, albeit the bars of a fence; Guy, too, is behind bars once the possibility of a frame-up is mentioned. More subtle touches, such as frequent scenes where Bruno and Guy appear together, but wear opposite color clothes add to the effect. The climactic fight between Guy and Bruno is a master stroke. Another nice flourish is how often the Bruno's face is in shadow. Indeed, Hitchcock uses shadow very well, but manages to keep all the scenes adequately lit in "Strangers on a Train"--avoiding a problem that plagues many movies. Overall, the film is extremely well presented.
The main problem with "Strangers on a Train" is the ending. Without giving anything away, I'd say, the ending seems unconvincing. Things happen too smoothly. There is also some geographical confusion with the fictional town of Metcalf; it seems to be near Baltimore, but the film is a little vague on the subject. The problem is worsened in a sequence where someone coming from New York seems to get there much faster than someone coming from Washington, D.C. (though the characters don't travel simultaneously, so it only seems that way).
For a thriller, "Strangers on a Train" is unusually safe for kids. There are sequences depicting Miriam's and Guy's adulterous affairs--though, as one would expect for a film from the '50s, there isn't any nudity. There is also a fight scene where a child is in danger, and the scene where Bruno murders Miriam takes place in full view of the audience. By today's standards, it would probably earn a PG rating.
"Strangers on a Train" is not Hitchcock's best film--"North by Northwest," is much better. It's fairer to call it typical Hitchcock. Typical Hitchcock, however, is much better than many other directors' best, and "Strangers on a Train" is definitely worth seeing.
Title: "Strangers on a Train"
Release date: 1951
Overall Rating: ****
As both a train buff and a Hitchcock fan, let me start off with this disclaimer: the title is not the reason why I like "Strangers on a Train." It has more to do with the director--or, to be precise, the director's craft.
Guy Haines (Farley Granger) is a tennis star who desperately wants a divorce so he can marry another woman. While on his way to see his wife, Miriam (Laura Elliot), he has a chance encounter with Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker) on the train. In their conversation, Bruno mentions one of his ideas: two strangers swap murders. The example Bruno gives: Guy would kill Bruno's overbearing father, and Bruno would kill Guy's wife. Guy dismisses Bruno as slightly crazy. Bruno is more than slightly crazy, however: Bruno kills Miriam--then threatens to frame Guy if he doesn't hold up his end of the "bargain."
Robert Walker is wonderful as Bruno. From murderous to just plain mean, Bruno is an odious villain throughout. The difficulty of the role is that he must look normal; Walker manages to be charming and suave on the surface, but a psychotic killer beneath.
The story is also generally well written. The story keeps you in suspense: once Bruno kills Miriam, what will he do next? Building the tension is important--and effectively done--in "Strangers on a Train." The film also has a sharp wit--the episode with Bruno's mother's painting is a wonderful example.
The real secret to the film's success is the Hitchcock touch. The obvious example is the frequent shifting between Guy's tennis match, and Bruno's trip to the murder scene; the constant shifts between a fast paced tennis match and Bruno's return to the crime scene heighten the tension very effectively. While this is the classic example, it is far from the only example. For instance, there's the scene outside Guy's home where Bruno is shown behind bars, albeit the bars of a fence; Guy, too, is behind bars once the possibility of a frame-up is mentioned. More subtle touches, such as frequent scenes where Bruno and Guy appear together, but wear opposite color clothes add to the effect. The climactic fight between Guy and Bruno is a master stroke. Another nice flourish is how often the Bruno's face is in shadow. Indeed, Hitchcock uses shadow very well, but manages to keep all the scenes adequately lit in "Strangers on a Train"--avoiding a problem that plagues many movies. Overall, the film is extremely well presented.
The main problem with "Strangers on a Train" is the ending. Without giving anything away, I'd say, the ending seems unconvincing. Things happen too smoothly. There is also some geographical confusion with the fictional town of Metcalf; it seems to be near Baltimore, but the film is a little vague on the subject. The problem is worsened in a sequence where someone coming from New York seems to get there much faster than someone coming from Washington, D.C. (though the characters don't travel simultaneously, so it only seems that way).
For a thriller, "Strangers on a Train" is unusually safe for kids. There are sequences depicting Miriam's and Guy's adulterous affairs--though, as one would expect for a film from the '50s, there isn't any nudity. There is also a fight scene where a child is in danger, and the scene where Bruno murders Miriam takes place in full view of the audience. By today's standards, it would probably earn a PG rating.
"Strangers on a Train" is not Hitchcock's best film--"North by Northwest," is much better. It's fairer to call it typical Hitchcock. Typical Hitchcock, however, is much better than many other directors' best, and "Strangers on a Train" is definitely worth seeing.
Title: "Strangers on a Train"
Release date: 1951
Not MPAA rated; Hays Code compliant
Overall rating: ****
Overall rating: ****
Aprox. run time: 101 min.
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: Raymond Chandler, Czenzi Ormonde, Whitfield Cook, Patricia Highsmith (original novel)
Stars: Farley Granger, Robert Walker
Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/StrngTrn.htm
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: Raymond Chandler, Czenzi Ormonde, Whitfield Cook, Patricia Highsmith (original novel)
Stars: Farley Granger, Robert Walker
Original URL: http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Mansion/7045/StrngTrn.htm
Added to blog site: 8/5/09
Labels: Movie review, ReviewsbyJohn
posted by John at 8/13/1999 12:17:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home