Excellent
Pros:
Walker, Hitchcock, cinematography, funny, script
Cons:
the GAY villain, not always suspenseful
The Bottom Line:
This is a terrific thriller, that becomes very suspenseful and features a great Robert Walker performance
|
|
Overall Rating:
|
 |
|
Author's Review
The Master of Suspense brings us a story that isnt quite as tense as some of his other works, but is very well done. It is classed as a thriller, but it is more of a drama until the last twenty minutes or so. It also has some huge laughs.
My one problem with the film is that it concentrates on Guy. This is understandable, but Bruno was the far more interesting character. This further leads to the problem that because we dont really know what makes Bruno tick (we only know that he hates his father, and that he is gay), we are shown someone who is insane, and gay. The film thus has a gay villain, rather than a villain who happens to be gay.
Robert Walker is amazing as Bruno. We dont know that he is insane at the beginning, only that he has a hyperactive imagination. That he is psychotic comes out slowly and subtly. Even though he is, we still feel pity for him, maybe because he tells us his father treats him badly (although we never really see evidence of it), or that he is soft-spoken, and seemingly gentle. He is also genuinely hurt when Guy refuses to murder his father, and we feel sorry for him, even though we fear him as well.
He is absolutely wonderful when following Miriam to kill her. He smiles, he does not look threatening or menacing. Miriam is scared of him, because he is there. When she dies, there is little pity for her, because she has committed the greatest sin in movies, cheating on her husband.
I also liked Patricia Hitchcock as Barbara. She had quite a few comedic moments, and was very funny, but also looked threatened and scared when necessary.
Another of the great aspects to the movie is the cinematography. It has some wonderful images, the best being when Miriam and the two guys are singing on the horses, and Bruno is watching over them. Its almost haunting. The murder itself is done through Miriams glasses so we see it twice in the one frame. Also, when Bruno and Guy are outside Guys house, it is terrific to see Bruno behind the bars, in darkness, while Guy stands in a comparatively bright area.
The only shots that did look bad were the fake setting sun after Bruno asks when it will get dark, and the sped up shots near the end.
The ending is magnificent, with the merry-go-round collapsing. A place of innocence connected with murder. It contains the films best joke as well, with the mother screaming out for her little boy, while hes having a great time.
Ive mentioned that this isnt as suspenseful as some of Hitchcocks other films, but when it does become tense, its wonderful. Its textbook stuff establish that something needs to be done before a certain time, and then throw obstacles in the way. Its amazing how suspenseful bouncing tennis balls can be, mixed with shots of worried faces, clocks, and Bruno.
One thing I wondered when watching this film was whether it, in 1951, had the first police officers commandeering someones car. I have no idea if it is, but it occurred to me that I hadnt seen it in any older films.
There is one thing in this film that I felt didnt add up. Guy had absolutely no grief for Miriam, which we understand. But the police would see that, and dont comment on it. Also, it would be totally understandable for the husband to stop playing tennis for however long following his wifes death. But Guy insists on playing. By showing no grief, doesnt he make himself look guilty?
I have to ask this, because whenever Ive read about Hitchcock, it has never been written about. Why is it that no one has asked if Hitchcock himself was in any way disturbed? Most of his films dealt in death, or espionage, or murder
not necessarily violence, but they were largely about the darker side of human nature. Today, when someone writes or reads too many books about death, people start to get worried. Hitchcock made his career out of it.
NOTE: I saw the British version of `Strangers on a Train. This version apparently has a more homoerotic display from Bruno when the two first meet, and omits the final scene of the film. Its apparently about two minutes longer. Please bear this in mind if commenting on the review.