« The Night of the Hunter | Main | The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) »
January 31, 2005
Strangers on a Train
Strangers on a Train, a film by Alfred Hitchock with a screenplay by Raymond Chandler and Whitfield Cook based on the novel by Patricia Highsmith, is a very good execution of a suspense yarn in standard Hitchcock fashion.
The story is well known - two strangers meet on a train. One, Guy Haines (Farley Granger) is a famous tennis player who is stuck in a bitter marriage he desperately wants out of; the other, Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker), is the playboy son of a hated wealthy father who wants him to get a job. Bruno brings up his plan of trading murderers, which, when pulled off, will prevent the authorities from ever suspecting someone so unlikely would have been responsible. Guy quickly walks away, thinking Bruno to be a nut, then heads back home. He's been seeing a senator's daughter, and plans on divorcing his wife. However, she announces she's staying with him.
Bruno learns of this and follows her to a carnival one night. There, he strangles here and walks away. He then makes it known to Guy what he had done, and blackmails him into finishing his end of the bargain. Guy resists, but Bruno is unrelenting. Finally, they have a confrontation at the carnival, where an out-of-control merry-go-round leads to the end.
Hitchcock films always feel contrived, but I've begun to think of this as being intentional. I don't think the world is ever meant to feel fully real but instead somehwhat theatrical and phony, from the backdropped car rides to the unlikely events that happen. The merry-go-round out of control is one example of something that sort of works, sort of doesn't - but I can also imagine Hitch or the screenwriter coming up with the idea and being oh so confidant that it would work. And this level of confidence shows through, generally excusing something that's not exactly believable.
It is important to think in terms of images as a filmmaker, and there's lots to remember from Strangers. From the dark carnival which clearly represents carnal sins, to the shadowy streets of Washington D.C. A wonderful shot occurs when Guy is walking by the Lincoln Monument and sees Bruno in the distance standing at the top of the stairs, just staring at him. The camera is frequently tilted one side, giving a sort of cartoonish style to the film.
This is of course one of the films Hitchcock made with negative homosexual implications. Bruno clearly has some sort of crush on young Guy, and Guy doesn't necessarily seem the type to not have it in him. Frequently homosexuals were given negative roles in films, as can also be seen in Rope and one other which doesn't come to mind. Unfortunate, but such is life.
The acting is excellent on everyone's parts, though again, it's stylized acting and not meant to be realistic. Ultimately, my only complaint is that even though the film feels very thought out, there's only so much that can be done on the premise, and clocking in at a modest 90 minutes, it feels slightly throw-away. It's just a quick adventure that an every-man was thrown into with much less scope. Good stuff overall, but it seems as though there's always something lacking in most Hitchcock films to prevent me from awarding anymore than three stars. But hey, who am I?
***/****
Three Slightly Homosexual Stars / Four StarsPosted by nick at January 31, 2005 08:17 PM