Strangers on a Train (1951)
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Starring: Farley Granger, Ruth Roman, Robert Walker
Honors:
#32 on AFI 100 Thrills
Alfred Hitchcock continues his cinematic pursuit of
capturing stories of attempts at getting away with performing murders in his
1951 psychological thriller Strangers on a Train. For this take on getting
away with murder the key is if one can recruit another to do the act for you
allowing there to be disconnected from suspicion, while repaying the partner in
kind for the corporation. Following many of his usual tropes Hitchcock
commences a resurgence of success following his lull in the late 1940s with a box
office success. Filled with inspired cinematography and editing due in part to
its creative writing, the film proves to be a study of artistic storytelling through
cinema.
Strangers on a Train is a film nior thriller about a
casual acquaintance who floats a joking scheme of dual murders and taking it
too far. Smooth talker Bruno Antony (Robert Walker) meets famous amateur tennis
star Guy Haines (Farley Granger) on a train ride, striking up a conversation. Knowing
Guy’s trouble relationship with his estranged philandering wife, Miriam (Kasey
Rogers), Bruno shares his own troubles with his own father, and concocts a
scheme that they should aid one another by ridding each other’s problem through
traded murders so that neither could be suspected for the deeds. Guy is
unnerved by the proposal taking it as a twisted joke, while Bruno is all too
serious, following through on strangling Miriam and insistence of Guy carry out
his part of the bargain. Bruno persists in pushing Guy, quietly terrorizing him
while Guy shares time with his girlfriend Anne (Ruth Roman), the daughter of a
US Senator. Police become suspicious of Guy’s involvement with his late wife’s
murder as Bruno threatens to frame him, only to find themselves at the scene of
the crime where a dramatic alteration helps finger Bruno as the killer.
A picture filled with creative analogies, brilliant
foresight in filming that lends to artistic editing, good casting, and
wonderful writing Stranger on a Train makes for one of the great
pictures in Alfred Hitchcock’s long resumé. It may not be his best film,
overshadowed by the many features yet to come in him career, but it was
definitely a picture that stands as a distinct marker in his body of work.
Granger and Walker shine as opposites attached in this evil plot that ties them
together. Kasey Rogers is memorable as the simple yet philandering wife, the
victim of the murder. Even Hitchcock’s own daughter, Patricia, does a very fine
job in her supporting role, adding to the suspense and peril that the feature
offers its viewers. Above all this film manifests all the greatness of
Hitchcock as he reworked acquired stories making it his own for the silver
screen.
Inspired by the Patricia Highsmith novel of the same name, as
usual Hitchcock took the story and proceeded to manipulated in his own mind.
Taking the core of the story about a deal for traded murders, Hitchcock would
change most of the source material including the names of the characters to fit
his style. The character that became Bruno was originally a deplorable
alcoholic, but in Hitchcock-ian fashion was made into a dapper smooth-talker who
proves to be a psychopath. Guy was changed from an architect to a tennis player
to add a layer of celebrity to his character, furthering his suspense when his
wife is murdered. To fit the Hollywood censors Guy went from committing the murder
of Bruno’s father in the novel to not doing so in the movie, which would fit
well the Hitchcock style of the “wrong man” motif as he is suspected for the
murder of his wife, the style the filmmaker loved to exude in his pictures.
The screenplay was a struggle in pre-production as director
and studio looked to attach a known name to the writing credit, settling on
British novelist and screenwriter Raymond Chandler to adapt the novel. Creative
differences between writer and director saw the dismissal of Chandler after his
first draft with Hitchcock simply throwing the script in the garbage and
seeking new writers to completely rework the everything. Despite having nothing
lasting from the original script in the final film Chandler would remain primarily
credited for writing to keep his name attached to the project. In reality the script
would be penned by Czenzi Ormonde and with some reworking by Whitfield Cook who
were both recruited by Hitchcock. Ormonde would create the bones of the story,
structing it to fit the needs of filmmaker, while Cook refined the double
context to the picture where Guy and Bruno are opposites of the same coin.
In the production star Farley Granger is reunited with
Hitchcock, having previously worked together in Rope (1948), again
providing a similar nervous energy to the role of Guy. His real-life secret
homosexuality helped to add the deep subtext between the two main characters as
a shared off-putting relationship aside from their murderous dealings. The
usually warm and inviting actor Robert Walker plays against his type as the
villain bruno, manipulating through his kindness belaying his psychopathic
undertones. Also headlining the picture was Ruth Roman as the lovely Miriam, senator’s
daughter and Guy’s girlfriend and hopeful bride once he is freed from his wife.
Roman was a reluctant casting for the role, forced upon Hitchcock by Warner
Bros. as a way to get one of their signed studio actors into the picture that
usually saw Hitchcock get his way. Due to this studio casting Hitchcock showed
no interest in the actress who became the target of his scorn from the director
during production, a common occurrence in many of his productions in one way or
another.
Much the picture hinges of how Hitchcock pieced together the
nuances of the story and how the two men are connected with Bruno being a dark
character dressed in a light persona while Guy is the reserved, troubled, and
overall darker fellow who is good person. Creative filming and editing piece
together the two men as opposites, but very much tied together with framing and
cutting emphasizing their connection. Underneath it all many may not recognize
a homosexual subtext as they are drawn together, but repulsed at the same time.
This unmentioned undertone was one Hitchcock enjoyed adding in his stories to
create an unease in a number of features that goes unsaid and only slightly
implied.
All these nuances lead to the film being well regarded all
these years later for it layers of inventiveness in telling a story in layers
of writing, framing, editing, and acting in this visual medium. This however
cannot be said when the picture originally released to audiences. Original reviews
were mixed for the feature as critics were weary of Hitchcock’s picture after a
series of disappointments by the director in recent years, drawing from similar
ideas. To those negative reviewers it began to feel the director was rehashing old
ideas too many times. Audiences on the other hand loved the film as the feature
drew large box office numbers and reinvigorating the filmmaker’s success. Hitchcock
may have been repeating similar tropes, but he was refining them in a way that
was pleasing to the masses as the king of suspense was setting himself towards
a string of great success in his career.
In the year’s since it initial release other features such
as Rear Window (1954), Vertigo (1958), North by Northwest (1959), and Psycho
(1960) would overshadow Strangers on a Train. However, the construct of Strangers
on a Train would continue to be praised by critics, cinema historians, and
film students over the decades as the film has been closely studied for story
construction for decades. At the end of the century the American Film Institute
would name the picture as one of American cinema’s best films in the category
of thrillers as it remains a testament of storytelling through film. In the
years since tributes, homages, and inspirations arose from the treasured
feature as it remains quietly one of the great film from the long list of
Alfred Hitchcock’s works.
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment