User Reviews

The title sets the stage for this, another twisty, **** pickle. On a long rail commute into the city, two men make small talk and casually hatch a hypothetical double-murder plot. At least, one thinks it’s just speculation, laughing off the whole conversation and disembarking without a second thought. The other sees it more like permission and sets to holding up his end of the bargain. Both have human obstacles in their lives, people that would serve them much better in the morgue, so why not scratch each other’s back? Why not exchange that messy work? The more reluctant conspirator is a tennis hotshot (Farley Granger, in an appropriately stiff, polite performance), while the other’s a roguish cad (Robert Walker, who plays his role like a barely-closeted queen), quite accustomed to pushing and pestering until he gets his way. As soon as he’s shoveled dirt over his new buddy’s estranged wife, Walker makes a big nuisance of himself, regularly interrupting and imposing upon the befuddled athlete’s private life. It’s tough not to hold our breath each time this irritating busybody inserts himself on the scene, smiling proudly as his flustered cohort tries to explain his presence away. Hitchcock plays that suspense in his typical fashion, cranking up the heat until things reach an unbearable boil at the beginning of the third act. There’s a great back-and-forth sequence here, both men hurrying to finish an obligation before dark, that merits a spot on the director’s extended highlight reel. Strangers on a Train has its share of moments where Lord Alfred overplays his hand, pursuing daring visuals at the expense of good mechanics, but not here. This one’s a masterful display of tension, delivered with the director’s customary panache. While the suspense works, the noir-influenced cinematography is delicious and the story’s grim novelty is appreciable, this film’s reliance upon coincidence and bad judgment quickly wears thin and things go completely off the rails at the end. There, everything suddenly explodes in a loud cacophony that’s so contrived, I couldn’t help laughing. C’mon, Alfred, surely you can do better than that!

Robert Walker carried this movie with his portrayal of Bruno Antony. He is enigmatic and full of clever sayings that thrill the viewer. He outshines everyone else in this film

I have been watching Alfred Hitchcock's movie nowadays. His movies are so different and fun to watch. He made movies which were ahead of it's time. This movie is his another great work. This movie had everything a crime mystery drama should have. It was nicely made. The direction, performances by the actors, story.... everything was good. There is thrill and suspense till the end. Movie tries to confuse you due to which you are unable to predict the ending. One thing that I didn't like about the story was that some scenes in conclusion part were unnecessary and overstretched and the last scene wrapped quickly. Other than that it's a good watch. Overall, it is a good crime drama thriller which will keep you bounded till the end.

Most of the scenes are great and with well written characters, especially Robert Walker as Bruno Anthony is perfect. But some of the scenes are looking outdated.

Super smart, witty, suspenseful, and gorgeous on the eyes, 'Strangers on a Train' masterfully exploits insanity and human's difficulties in decision making to deliver a knock-out thriller plot that brilliantly starts, builds, and ends. It stands tall as one of Hitchcock's best efforts as a director and one of the best films from the 1950's.

Another excellent Hitchcock film Alfred Hitchcock is the master of suspense, and this film is undoubtedly a very good one, despite not yet considering him, even, as one of the best of the director. There is really no mystery in this film, we know everything that goes on, but we still stay to see it, because the characters were so well built that we care what will happen. In this film, two strangers start talking during a long train ride: one is Guy Haines, a renowned tennis player who is going through a tumultuous divorce to marry another woman; the other is Bruno Antony, a spoiled aristocrat who maintains a conflicted relationship with his father, on whom he depends financially. It is Bruno who makes the decision, therefore, to solve their problems by helping each other: Guy would kill Bruno's father and he, in turn, would murder Guy's wife, in the hope of not being caught. The film is good but the plot lacks logic and meaning. Bruno, especially, is a character devoid of any coherence, as he has attitudes that anyone, even an unusual person, would decide not to have, like trying to convince a stranger to kill his father. It is something so strange and apparently crazy that it has no verisimilitude. The cast is based on the elegant and successful performance of two actors: Farley Granger and Robert Walker. Both are excellent and, when they come together and share the screen, they become even more remarkable and grand, particularly Walker, who seems crazy and truly dangerous in his character. Ruth Roman, Kasey Rogers and Patricia Hitchcock also did a satisfying job. Technically, it is an impeccable film: elegant cinematography makes good use of the effects of light and shadow, and the footage is crisp and beautifully framed. The effects are discreet and the sets and costumes are very good.

For me this was just okay Hitchcock I never empathized with any character, and the plot of switching murders is too ludicrous to buy. And the pace was kinda draggy. But, I do give props the strong performers and Hitchcock's bravura carousel ending.

I thought it was a little slow paced at times and while the plot was original, It didn't really capture me as I thought it would. I never felt that the main character was in a dire situation and was a little disappointed that they swayed from how the book originally was as I felt that would have made for a better plot.

Pour un film de Hitchcock, le fameux Maître... de l'ennui, réalisateur-tortue déjà surcoté à cette époque et davantage encore par la suite, L'Inconnu du Nord-Express reste à peu près regardable selon bien sûr la tolérance du moment du spectateur. Il faut dire que contrairement à ses autres "oeuvres", le film démarre assez prestement (au lieu de caler habituellement comme une vieille poubelle) grâce à l'idée évidemment brillante (que l'on doit au roman de Patricia Highsmith) de l'échange des meurtres. Mais le film connaît ici et là quelques lenteurs dont le Maître est si friand ainsi que les séquences superflues syndicales. On reconnaît également les tics et les tocs du réalisateur qui passent davantage pour un maniérisme un brin pédant que pour des éclairs de génie, contrairement à ce que l'on veut nous faire croire. Sa réalisation reste en tout cas d'un bon niveau et non cloîtrée dans le studio aux projos de 3000W, ce qui est à la fois surprenant et très appréciable de sa part. Nous tiquons néanmoins de temps à autre devant quelques invraisemblances ("pourquoi il me regarde comme ça ? c'est lui l'assassin !" ou "j'ai déjà vu ce type-là la semaine dernière, c'est donc lui l'assassin !" ou bien "il joue à étrangler Mamie (?!) c'est donc lui l'assassin !"... et ainsi de suite... sans compter bien entendu le final bien ridicule, complètement hystérique sur le manège... Pour autant, Hitchcock ne parvient pas à nous faire roupiller (à son grand dam ou à son insu sans doute) et ce polar arrive à aiguiser la curiosité grâce au jeu assez bien défini du personnage machiavélique, vindicatif et obsessionnel qui donne un bon air de thriller à ce polar. Une demi-mauvaise surprise donc pour un Hitchcock à peu près comestible.

Strangers On A Train is actually quite familiar on Hitchcock's world, a quirky brutal era that breathes for inanity. Strangers On A Train Hitchcock's another perfect plan for a perfect crime is wisely not a gut wrenching bloodbath but a poised and reserved act of trauma. And just like its opening sequence, Hitchcock has you hooked from the first footage and similar to it, the storytelling is fluent and gripping. The conversations are pragmatic and are brimmed with humor and ironic drama that is imputed smoothly without any compromise on the track. The concept is very amusing and yet convincing through brilliant execution, and has the potential to boost off the film for the entire feature. Hitchcock uses the props and creates an arc out of them like a character where the entire feature ends up hanging on it. Wisely, the makers aren't confined on delivering the rudimentary process of investigation along with the usual cat and mouse chase. Instead, the screenplay is quite fast paced and is always ready to evolve with a smarter script that keeps the audience on the brisk, with its gritty ideology and metaphorical cinematography that helps view this tale with a more brighter and clearer lens. The performance isn't extraordinary or eye popping but as far as cynicism is concerned Walker's body language does give you the chills. And on the other hand the victim of the film, Granger unfortunately doesn't have much range to factor in effectively especially since his character is basically a scaredy cat for the most part of it. This meticulous novel is adapted with smart editing and crispy cinematic sequences bubbled up (especially the followed up or the aftermath of the crime that is wound up in one big scene) from it that remains the highlight of it and stays with you even after you leave the screen. Strangers On A Train is actually quite familiar on Hitchcock's world, a quirky brutal era that breathes for inanity.

A very solid and intriguing suspense, 'Strangers on a Train' it's one of Hitchcock's best and certainly will give you nightmares about merry-go-rounds.