Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
137 of 164 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Widescreen vs. 35mm for Strangers on a Train, January 21, 2000
It's important to note two things about this edition of "Strangers on a Train." First off, the description on Amazon.com's page is incorrect. This DVD is not in widescreen. The second thing is, to you widescreen buffs out there (including myself) -- Relax! This film was never shot in widescreen. In fact, prior to 1953 (The Robe), there was never anything bigger than 35mm! This is why this film (and you'll be surprised to hear), many, many classic films will never be produced in widescreen. They don't exist. You should buy this DVD because of the video quality and the extra "goodies." Gone with the Wind in widescreen? Nope, never was, even though it was blown up to 70mm and cropped horribly in the 1968 re-issue. What's out there on DVD on Gone with the Wind is standard 35mm "TV semi-square" framing, because that's the way it was shot. Wizard of Oz, Casablanca, Citizen Kane? Nope, never shot in anything greater than 35mm. It's a Wonderful Life? No again. Widescreen is limited to theatrical films issued for the most part, after 1953, when competition with television forced studios to come up with the "panoramic" gimmicks to bring people back into the theaters. This is period (1953-1963) when Cinemascope, Todd-AO, VistaVision, Super Panavision 70 and other widescreen formats were born -- and the most extreme example was Cinerama, which used three cameras and is used to best effect in the DVD version of How the West Was Won. So don't fret, this DVD is good, crisp and clean and formatted as Alfred Hitchcock intended! Tomorrow's movies will be in IMAX (see Fantasia 2000, in selected theaters now).
|
|
|
22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Hitchcock on the right track, July 11, 2000
"Strangers on a Train" is that rarity, an Alfred Hitchcock film concerning which one talks about an actor's performance almost as much as the director's. The actor, of course, is Robert Walker, presenting his remarkable portrayal of Bruno Anthony, the rich, unstable man who offers the hero Guy Haines a deadly proposition: he'll kill Guy's wife Miriam (played by the interesting Laura Elliott) if Guy will kill Bruno's father. Because they are strangers on a train who do not know their intended victims, there will be no motives, therefore perfect alibis. Guy doesn't take Bruno seriously, which turns out to be a fatal mistake. Bruno is a complicated part. Although he is obssessed with his own superiority, he can be incredibly petty (popping a little boy's balloon just for the meanness of it), not to mention prissy ("I'm afraid I don't know what a `smoocher' is!"). The character seems to overshadow the entire movie, which is appropriate, because Bruno casts a shadow over the easy, affluent world in which he lives. When he crashes the senator's cocktail party, it's like Satan has arrived, striding through polite society. And, no, Walker was not nominated for an Oscar. Neither was Joseph Cotten for "Shadow of a Doubt". Neither was Anthony Perkins for "Psycho". The Academy evidently had difficulty with Hitchcock's anti-heroes. Hitchcock originally wanted William Holden for the role of Guy Haines, but I think Holden was so savvy and macho, it would have been difficult to accept him as a psycopath's pawn. Farley Granger is atheletic enough to be convincing as a tennis champ, but he has a boyishness which makes the vulnerable aspects of the character believable. The film is filled with the touches one associates with Hitchcock. Some are obvious, like Miriam's strangulation reflected in her eyeglasses. Others are more subtle: After the murder, Bruno approaches Guy outside Guy's apartment house. At first Guy cannot tell who is calling his name in the dark. Bruno is standing near a large gate with wrought-iron bars; and, as Guy comes near him, he steps behind the gate -- in other words, he's behind bars. Then, after he has told Guy about Miriam's death and Guy is absorbing the shock, a police car pulls up in front of Guy's apartment house and Guy himself ducks behind the gate. Now they're BOTH behind bars. Hitchcock was a genius, no doubt about it.I wonder how many viewers have noticed the odd discrepency near the end. Bruno has stepped off the train at Metcalf, holding the incriminating cigarette lighter he hopes to plant on the amusement park island, thus framing Guy. A pedestrian brushes by him and the lighter falls into a storm drain in the street. Bruno, frantic, tries to enlist the aid of passersby. However, he says (not once but twice) "I dropped my cigarette CASE in the drain!" Walker, of course, was in the process of drinking himself to death; but the mistake could easily have been corrected with a little dubbing. It's bothered me for years why it wasn't.Director of Photography Robert Burks began his long association with Hitchcock on this picture. He must have worked night and day to satisfy Hitchcock's demands, but his loveliest effect is the amusement park's neon lights against a glowing black-and-white sunset.The film's mood is enhanced by Dimitri Tiomkin's romantically mysterious score. It's particularly striking in the movie's"coda" when Guy is trying desperately to finish a tennis game (allegro) and Bruno is desperately trying to reach that damn lighter (adagio). Hitchcock and Tiomkin worked a couple of more times together but never more effectively than in thisdazzling masterpiece.
|
|
|
18 of 20 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Hitchcock's Best!, August 14, 1999
"Strangers On A Train" should be rated as Hitchcock's absolute best.To begin with, it features a perfect performance by Robert Walker, an actor who would be dead within a year after making this great movie. Walker had previously played some wonderful roles, but he astounded the world with his acting ability once "Strangers On A Train" was released. Aside from Walker's amazing performance, "Strangers On A Train" is full of half-hidden meanings which relate to the dual personality each of us possesses. Hitchcock was a true genius, who not only understood both the dark and the bright sides of the human psyche, but who also knew how to depict that understanding by way of film. I have watched "Strangers On A Train" a dozen or more times, and never tire of watching it yet again, each time finding something new that I had not noticed the time I watched it before. But, the main reason I watch this film so often is to enjoy the exceptional , perfect performance by Robert Walker. Walker was only in his 30s when he died. He was a tragic figure in real life. He died much too soon, and we are very fortunate to be able to observe his wonderful talent, preserved in this movie, almost fifty years after his passing.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
DVD ~ Teresa Wright
DVD ~ Cary Grant
DVD ~ James Stewart
DVD ~ Ross Bagdasarian
DVD ~ James Stewart
