46 out of 46 people found this review helpful.
A lesson in obsession and moral fortitude...
Date of Review: Dec 12, 2001
The Bottom Line: A look into a battle of moral fortitude with the fear of reprisal. Performed by the master of suspense and great observer of the human psyche and its fears.
When someone mentions the name Alfred Hitchcock, what usually comes to people's minds is a fairly overweight man who made some movies that a lot of people really liked, usually in the thriller and horror genre.[1] He has been lauded by many (myself included) as a genius and people have been trying to emulate his style for years.
Because he is so popular, many people have tried to duplicate his style and use it to their own devices. It never fails that there is always something missing from these movies, one is really never able to tell exactly what it is, but I've often referred to it as the "Hithcock insight", and it is simply that extra little insight into the human psyche to know what emotion to tap at what time in order to instill a certain feeling. Many people have tried to use this ability, but nobody was able to do it quite like Hitchcock.
From what I've been able to tell, when Hitchcock made Strangers on a Train he was actually in a slump, at least commercially. He had to come up big with this movie and really show what he was made of. In my personal opinion, he succeeded beautifully and he left us with a movie that is wonderful in its presentation, and yet frightening to behold completely with the mind.
The Good
The best part of this movie, in my not so humble opinion, is Robert Walker and his portrayal of Bruno Antony (one of the two main characters in the film). Not only was his acting superb in the manner of his ability to not stumble over lines, but he goes beyond covering the simple basics of his character to develop Bruno fully into the monster that he is. Bruno is all at once quite friendly and quite evil, a little out of touch, a little insane, but still able to talk his way into and out of just about any situation. After watching this movie, I immediately hit up the IMDB[2] and looked for other movies that he did, but alas he passed away rather early in his career and we have been robbed of a truly great actor.
Another factor which made this movie great was the cinematography, which is something that happens quite often in Hitchcock films. Hitchcock has always had a way of having at least one shot in every movie that just makes you stop for a second and appreciate it for what it is: pure artistry. In this movie, I can think of two shots which gave me pause, the first one being a murder shot as a reflection of a pair of glasses laying on the ground (not only great technically, but great in imagination as well). The second shot was that of a crowd watching a tennis game with their heads moving back and forth while Bruno intently stares at the camera with a smile.
The Bad
The first thing that I didn't find all that appealing was the acting of Farley Granger, who played Guy Haines, the tennis-star and other main character of the story. His delivery always seemed rather deadpan and beyond an occasional change in the volume of his voice, I didn't see much emotion in anything that he was doing. However, he happened to look like someone who could be a tennis star, and thus I think they were looking for the good looking leading man here, and just happened to pick the wrong person.
The second point that I really didn't like about this film was the pace. In many, many places the movie moved rather slow to my MTV warped attention span. I can't think of particulars at this point, but the overall feel of the movie was not that of something fast paced, but rather a brewing thriller that culminated in a few scenes which moved a lot faster.
The Ugly
In lighter circles, this could just be known as my conclusions, but I wanted to keep up with the theme
If you can't tell by this point in the review, I completely loved this movie. It had me spellbound from the moment that Bruno started to talk to Guy on the train. The personality of Bruno burst forth into your consciousness and completely enveloped your perception of the movie. Even though most of the movie is told through the eyes of Guy Haines, the most important facet of the movie is simply the character of Bruno Antony. He is so lovable and evil at the same time you just can't pull your eyes away.
Footnotes
[1] I'm of the opinion that Hitchock reached that level where nothing he did could have been deemed bad. He could have released a series of stickmen animations and people would have lauded it for its brilliance.
[2] The internet movie database is exactly what it says, and contains much information for the avid movie watcher (http://www.imdb.com)
