Strangers on a Train


Action / Crime / Film-Noir / Romance / Thriller

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 98%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 93%
IMDb Rating 8 10 110467


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 41,343 times
November 26, 2012 at 07:51 AM


Alfred Hitchcock as Man Boarding Train Carrying a Double Bass
Leo G. Carroll as Sen. Morton
Robert Walker as Bruno Antony
Farley Granger as Guy Haines
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
700.89 MB
23.976 fps
1hr 41 min
P/S 6 / 44
1.40 GB
23.976 fps
1hr 41 min
P/S 4 / 35

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by JohnHowardReid 9 / 10

Hitchcock plus Chandler!

Alfred Hitchcock induced Chandler to break his self-imposed exile from Hollywood for Strangers on a Train (1951).

Here we have another screen classic - like Double Indemnity - for which Chandler is not given due credit. Part of this lapse is due to Hitchcock himself who, in later interviews, constantly derided Chandler's contribution.

"The work he did was no good," good old Hitch complained to many a celebrated critic.

But despite the Chandler script's supposed lack of quality, super-indulgent old Hitch had used it anyway.

Adapted from a Patricia Highsmith story, the Chandler hand is evident not only in the inward-twisting plot and contrastingly classy and gaudy atmosphere, but in the tensely nervy and often cynical dialogue, - and even more particularly in the characterization of the festeringly bizarre but remarkably personable psychopath so brilliantly played here by Robert Walker.

Reviewed by frankwiener 8 / 10

Criss Cross

As in the case of many of Alfred Hitchcock's best films, this is a story about an innocent, socially respectable individual who suddenly discovers himself as an unwilling victim of malevolence and depravity. Bruno Antony (Robert Walker) stalks tennis pro Guy Haines (Farley Granger) and utilizes Haines' publicized, miserable marriage in order to implicate him in a twisted double murder plot to which Haines never consents.

The success of this movie hinges upon three key elements, (1) the riveting portrayal of Walker as a demented psychopath in the best performance of his all too short acting career, (2) the extraordinary artistry of my very favorite director, Alfred Hitchcock, and (3) the outstanding technical skills of cinematographer Robert Burks.

Observe at the beginning of the film how Bruno's shadow eclipses that of Miriam and her friends in the boats as a very dark forewarning of what is to follow. In general, the merrymaking of the revelers at the carnival serves as a stark contrast against the dead seriousness of Bruno's business there. In fact, he is even dressed in a business suit, which is an oddity in that setting by itself.

No matter how many times the famous shot of the reflection in the eyeglasses is explained to me, I will never understand how that was accomplished, nor the final scene with the giant telephone in the foreground that Ruth Roman answers as a normal sized phone. The sensational carousel scene in which Guy is literally ensnared into Bruno's trap must be seen to be believed. No description in words can give it justice.

Among the weaknesses of the film are Dmitri Tiomkin's often overbearing musical score, which I felt also occurred in another Hitchcock classic "Dial M for Murder", and a tennis match that ran far too long, which reminded me of the overlong symphony near the end of the re-make of "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (1956).

These momentary flaws are more than compensated by the movie's many dramatic and cinematic strengths. The image of Bruno sitting in the stands of the tennis match with his head fixed dead ahead while all of the spectators around him are following the ball demonstrates just how discordant he is with the rest of the world. I also noted how Hitchcock made Miriam, Guy's loathsome, unfaithful wife, so disagreeable to me that I found myself actually approving of her violent strangulation. In this regard, was I any less sinister than Bruno in my consent of the murder of another human being, no matter how objectionable that human being might be? Once again, as a passive spectator, I felt very successfully manipulated by the master of manipulators. It wasn't the first time, and it surely won't be the last.

Reviewed by Smoreni Zmaj 8 / 10

Great directing of not so great story

Hitchcock gave his best to turn this not so great story into great movie. Acting is very good, especially Robert walker who played his role to perfection. Directing is great and movie had Best Cinematography Oscar nomination. Some scenes are work of genius. Scene when Walker pops balloon with cigarette, heads turning left and right in ridiculous pace while only Walker's head is still fixating our main character, scream in the tunnel, party choking scene, those are just some of moments that will definitely carve into your memory. Perfect Hitchcock atmosphere, but although movie presents its story strongly from the beginning to the end, story itself is, in my opinion, lousy developed. Plot idea is fantastic, but in second part of the movie main characters start to draw illogical moves that are incompatible with basic plot. What looked like beginning of great mystery thriller suddenly turns into psychological drama. Unexpected and unwanted direction of story that begins to lose its meaning, but drama opens the door for actors to show their skills so great directing and acting still cover for screenplay flaws. But, in third part of the movie things go south and movie becomes crime action. It had potential to end with some awesome mindfak twist (I had few ideas), but instead we got dumb, illogical and unconvincing denouement that flushes this potential masterpiece down to mediocre crime story. Still, six would do injustice to fantastic camera, directing and first part of the movie, so I have to compromise and rate it


Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment