Platicsco Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Glucedee It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

AnhartLinkin This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

dfwesley LIFEBOAT impressed me so much more the second time around, considering I was a kid the first time. Back then I thought Bankhead's kiss of Hodiak was the sexist thing I ever saw on screen.All the performers were superb. Character development couldn't have been better in every case. Much has been said about everyone except maybe Henry Hull. Here was a "bend over backwards to be fair", millionaire industrialist in a splendid performance, who changes his tune at the end.Oh, I wondered why Tallulah was immaculately alone in the boat, and how they miraculously avoided the shelling and collision, and how Nazi captain Walter Slezak was so deft removing a limb as a non-surgeon using merely a pocket knife, and other trifling incidents, but it didn't change my opinion one iota of this terrific film. For Hitchcock's extraordinary direction, splendid close up photography, and great story telling, it is hard to beat LIFEBOAT.

Dan1863Sickles Everyone remembers this as a Hitchcock film, and all of the reviews focus on how the great director shaped the material and gave every scene and frame his distinctive style. I saw this movie at the age of 12 and I loved it, but more than forty years later I'm really struck by the literary themes and the presence of great novelist John Steinbeck.There's a reason why they call this "John Steinbeck's Lifeboat."First I want to point out that this is a study of a group. Just the way THE GRAPES OF WRATH is about the Joads, and the Okies in flight, much more than about individuals like Tom or Casy, so in this story the lifeboat survivors are only meant to matter to the extent that they work together for common goals and uphold common values. In fact the one way the villain sticks out is that he's self- sufficient, able to keep his own counsel and do everything on his own. Steinbeck is always suspicious of individualism and even of individual strengths. The collective is everything to him, the survival of the group and not the triumph of the individual. At the same time, when you look at the terrible murder in the middle of the movie, it bears an uncanny resemblance to the end of OF MICE AND MEN. Willi the U-Boat Captain and Gus the doomed cripple have a very personal scene in which they sound a lot like George and Lennie! Of course the viewer can decide if Willi really felt any compassion at all for Lennie or if he's an evil Nazi through and through. But the arguments he makes for getting rid of Gus are those George makes about Lennie in similar circumstances. This movie reflects the great strengths of John Steinbeck's humanity and concern for the survival of the human community. It also reflects some of his weaknesses, particularly where the female characters are concerned. Tallulah Bankhead does wonders as Connie, the tough, hard-edged journalist, but it's fair to say that Steinbeck had a tendency to see women as either hard, vicious, and predatory, or weak, soft, and helpless. The young mother with the dead baby is presented as a pitiable victim but at the same time there's a sense of Steinbeck's vague distaste for the maternal instinct, since it reduces women to an animal-like state or to a state of total hysteria. It's no accident that the mother gets killed off early and that the hard, aggressive woman is not allowed much in the way of affection or friendship. Of course there is a romance between the British sailor and the nurse, but they are probably more Hitchcock's invention than Steinbeck's. Both are good comrades who keep a stiff upper lip, more English than American. To sum up, this movie is a Hitchcock classic, but it's also a fascinating look at the world view of a Nobel prize winning author who was then at the height of his powers.

robert-temple-1 This is one of the disappointing Hitchcock films. It is not that it is bad, it is just that it is not particularly good. It proudly proclaims that it was written by the then famous American author John Steinbeck. However, several other fingers were in that pie, and not all of them were called Steinbeck. (Never believe what you see on credits.) The story is simple, and there was only one set. Of course, all the cast got repeatedly drenched, because they were in a lifeboat and passed through storms, pulled themselves out of the water, etc. It was no fun for the actors to make. This film is the only Hitchcock film of which I knew the star very well personally. Of course I did not know her at the time, because this film was made before I was born. I am referring to Tallulah Bankhead, whom I knew well in the 1960s when I was in my teens and she took me under her wing for a while. This is the only film Tallulah made in her 'middle period' between being a glamorous Paramount starlet in several thirties films and making some when she was older. Tallulah dominates this film, just as she dominates the lifeboat. That was what she was like. It is important to know that she did not dominate situations for egotistical or narcissistic reasons at all. To assume that would be to misunderstand her. She did so simply from the overwhelming force and energy of her personality. She was like a human hurricane, and she could not be turned off like a fan or an air conditioner, she was simply on all the time. But she had that droll manner where she could deliver a one-liner put-down spontaneously upon any occasion, and she needed no script for her raucous life. Her close friendships with such writers as Noel Coward and Tennessee Williams were based not just upon her liveliness but upon her scintillating intelligence, razor sharp wit, gift for repartee, wide-ranging knowledge of people and events, and superb dry humour. I cannot imagine her and Hitchcock becoming friends under any circumstances. To describe them as chalk and cheese or oil and water is to underestimate the difference between them. He was essentially a neurotic, closed personality, whereas Tallulah was as open as a shattered French window. If he had let her get close to him, she would have let him know in no time that she thought he was a cowering wimp. She could be withering, but she was never cruel, and often kept her devastating appraisals of other people to herself so as not to hurt their feelings. She was really the perfect choice to dominate a lifeboat on the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of World War Two. Any German encountering her had better be worried. There is a patriotic tinge to this film, with disparaging remarks of the Nazis emphasized in a proud and flag-flying manner. In wartime it is hard to resist beating a few drums, which can throw subtlety overboard sometimes, and not just from lifeboats. The story cannot avoid being rather corny, nor is it realistic. I hesitate to call attention to what are tactfully called natural functions, but when and how did they take place over the many days in that lifeboat? What did they do with William Bendix's leg which had to be amputated? And how did they mop up all the blood? Things like that. Also, why are they all so unconcerned about getting seriously sunburned? But the film was never intended to be realistic, because Alfred Hitchcock was not Roberto Rossellini, and you went to a Hitchcock film knowing that you would get a Hitchcock film, and you always did. And this is one of them that has some holes in the curtain and is not as good as many of the others which sweep you away with his vision-of-the-day. Some of the cast are better than others. Tallulah is the best, of course. Walter Slezak is superb as the German U-boat captain whom they pick up. Henry Hull is excellent as H. J. Rittenhouse (as in the Philadelphia square), a charming multi-millionaire who has thousands of employees but cannot command a lifeboat. John Hodiak as 'the hunk' overacts and clearly suffered from Hitchcock's usual lack of directions to his actors. Canada Lee as the black man has a thankless task, since his role is to stand off to the side and take no part in decisions or events. In the script this was doubtless meant to highlight his oppressed social status, but in the film it merely comes across as his being feeble. No acting challenge there, as all he had to do was stand in the background looking powerless. Two unconvincing romances blossom during the time the cast are stuck on the lifeboat, but it is impossible to believe in either of them. Why Hume Cronyn should suddenly fall in love at the most unlikely time could not possibly be contrived, could it? This film is essentially a 'concept film' which fails its 'proof of concept' test. However, it has its moments.

Christopher Reid Lifeboat is one of those films that takes place only in one spot. A handful of random survivors are thrown into a tough situation together and are stuck with each-other for a length of time. In this case, a freight ship has been sunk and the survivors gradually accumulate in a lifeboat. We meet them one by one and start to learn what's going on. We get first impressions of them but the characters gain more depth as the movie continues. And wouldn't you know it, one of the Germans from the U-Boat which also went down has to join the party as well.Some of the people are dominating whereas other are submissive, some are upper class while others are workers. It's a microcosm of society at large. They all have stories, personal things they reveal when they feel like it. They are not caricatures but have details to their personalities - subtle quirks and contradictions. They can be reasonable and civilised but also argumentative and confrontational. They face moral choices and it's the thoughts and feelings they go through that are more important than their final decisions. We are free to assess their choices and behaviour. We see a more intense, raw side of humanity in these kinds of situations.It's impressive that the film manages to be so engaging even within it's claustrophobic environment. It's not artificial entertainment either. We are naturally interested in the characters and whether they will survive or not. Shocks and twists occur at random intervals. New information comes up that creates more drama and tension. We don't know if we can trust the German. We don't know if the boat is headed in the right direction or not. We don't know if a storm might be just around the corner.One part calls for an emergency operation which really had me squirming in a way few horror movies can achieve. The movie doesn't shy away from the simple reality of what is happening. The movie isn't bogged down by clichés, it's confident in the value of real people behaving realistically. I feel like Hitchcock's direction is simple and transparent. He doesn't try to do too much.The actors are all believable and do a good job. Bankhead in particular stands out. She seems arrogant and superficial at first but emerges as mature and reasonable compared to the others. The German comes across as intelligent and calm. Canada Lee plays a dignified African-American in a time when I believe that was rare. It's a shame he's not given more to do in the film. In fact, when the others ask for his opinion on something, he's surprised and taken aback that he even gets to have a say.It's interesting that the movie has practically no music. But the splashing water and swaying boat fulfills that job. It's calming and creates a unique atmosphere. I'm sure a lot could be read into the symbolism of a lifeboat floating in a vast ocean. You could deeply analyse the interplay of different personality types as well. I'm sure there are numerous examples of various psychological phenomena.Lifeboat has many similarities to films like 12 Angry Men and Reservoir Dogs. We don't see the events that led up to the film. Just the aftermath. Characters judge and accuse each-other. Perhaps not everyone's versions of what happened are fully accurate. Someone might be deceiving the others or keeping quiet about something. But really these movies are just a chance to get into the human psyche a bit. To consider extreme circumstances and observe the spectrum of possible human responses. You might not like every character, but then you might like to ask what you would do in the same situation.