REVIEW : "Strangers On A Train" (1951) - Movie by Alfred Hitchcock

Hitchcock was a prolific director - he directed more than 50 feature length movies during his career. But it is really only a handful of them that is now considered masterpieces, even if he is likely the most celebrated director in history. It only goes to show, that even for best of them, things are never that easy.

After the Selznick years, he started the Transatlantic Company, which went down due to the total failure of "Under Capricorn", a costume piece produced in the same long take fashion as the suspense piece "Rope". The last Transatlantic was the forgettable "Stage Fright". So now back in the studio system at Warner Bros., Hitch needed a hit to consolidate his position in the filmmaking world. That one was the adaptation of the novel "Strangers On A Train", by Patricia Highsmith.

Two "strangers" meet on a train... or rather one stranger, Bruno Antony (Robert Walker), casually strikes up a conversation with a famous tennis star Guy Haines (Farley Granger) and circumstances has it, they end up eating dinner together. Bruno is aware of Guy´s slightly complicated girlfriend situation and understands that he really wants to get rid of her for another woman.

Since Bruno himself is fed up with his dominating father, they both want to get rid of someone, as he puts it. So he suggests that they each do each others "murder", thus being able to create a perfect alibi. Guy Haines has not really caught up to the psychological nature of Bruno or understands that he is actually deadly serious about his suggestion. Guy sort of goes along on the "game" saying "sure we have a deal".

Bruno carries out what he believes is his part of the deal and then proudly reveals the deed to Guy. This was not exactly what Guy had planned, he is now considered the main suspect in the murder of his ex fiancée. He cannot reveal Bruno since he will expose the whole ordeal and make things even worse for Guy.

But Bruno wants his "part" of the "deal" executed and presses Guy to do something about it. Guy is now in a situation where the only solution is for himself to "eliminate" Bruno´s ability to put the final blame on him.

We are here once again dealing with a version of "the wrong man" plot. This is a recurring theme in several of Hitchcock´s most revered movies. In this case Guy has a bit of responsibility for ending up where he is, even if none of the "crime" is his fault. This kind of grey zone plot is a newer development in his curriculum and points towards a more modern and slightly less clear cut plot structure than before.

It still has the central protagonist forced to take care of his situation himself, but it has more subconscious elements that gives this movie a more interesting and more dual flow than the straight up "39 Steps" kind of structure. Hitchcock manages to keep the suspense at maximum pretty much from start to finish, and in my opinion only some of the tennis match thrill is encumbering it a bit.

A few scenes like those with the father in law and fiancee at home are a bit dated in their suspense, but these are small things. For some reason, Strangers On A Train, seems to get lesser praise in the pantheon of Hitchcock. In my opinion it is in the top 5, certainly in a top 10 list. In a way I see it as the purest, quintessential "early" (American) Hitchcock movie. It has all the trademarks of classic suspense, brilliant camera work throughout and solid acting performances.

Most memorable is Robert Walker as Bruno. His face has the perfect duality of the superficially "normal" and nice gentleman and the raving mad psychopath right underneath. Check out the scene where he uses an elderly lady's neck to show his strangulation skills and how his expression changes when he spots Pat Hitchcock´s face which is a spitting bespectaled image of the girl he has recently killed.

Another magnificent scene is when Guy´s "girlfriend" is strangled by Bruno. look how the camera stops following the young persons and just "stares" over the lake. Then the "victim" enters into the frame backwards and is slightly surprised by the presence, you, right behind her, as she turns a round. The efficiency of Bruno is portrayed in how he lights a lighter that reflects in her glasses and gets a confirmation of her name, immediately followed by a two hands grabbing her neck.

Now the view switches to the glasses that she has dropped and we see the "deed" being done as a reflection in the glasses. This is just classic Hitchcock and it is a small precursor to the highly stylised montage of the shower scene in Psycho a decade later. It has a bit of the same "efficiency" to it and the meticulously put together shots.

It is not the best Hitchcock there is, but it certainly is a serious step up in quality of most of what he had previously done, since Shadow Of A Doubt. It suffers a little from a somewhat wooden Guy Haines, who is a little hard to identify with, as he seems to have no faults at all, except for being easy to woo into a "criss cross" murder. Not exactly what a viewer wants to be associated with.

But overall there are plenty of things to be entertained by. A tricky plot, an interesting villain, very good camera work and a decent climax. it comes highly recommended.

9/10