Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Ella-May O'Brien Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

MisterWhiplash The first fifteen minutes of Hitchcock's Stage Fright feels so much like vintage work from this filmmaker - a set up that is so this director that even if you've only seen one or two of his movies it would feel like you're right at home in the fully realized world of Wrong Man Suspense he did so well - that one might almost take it for granted. Oh, ho-hum, another day another man who is caught suspected of murder (and it would appear the lady, here Marlene Dietrich and the man Richard Todd, who didn't work before or after with Hitch but has that same look to his eyes like Farley Granger in Rope or Strangers). This time it's set in England, so it's easy to pair it up with the movies that Hitchcock made before he left for America (and after this he'd only return twice more), as it's in black and white and the rest of the story is loaded with sometimes quirky but memorable and realistic feeling characters.But this opening is electric, starting with a car ride where Todd explains to worried Jane Wyman in flashback about how he got mixed up with Marlene Dietrich's theater star Charlotte Inwood (Wyman's Eve is an aspiring actress but not there yet, which of course will work its way into the narrative), and the important piece to the puzzle is a blood-stained dress. After this opening, now that Wyman along with her father (the definitive Scrooge, Alistair Sim, and it's a total joy to see him in this kind of role as the supportive, cunning but genial father), has to keep up a ruse around the detectives searching for Todd, we get a story that involves... performance, and what it means to take on characters and to have deception as the name of the game. Not completely unusual of course for Hitchcock - what would a good spy movie be, which this isn't but you know what I mean, without Playing A Character as part of the entertainment of it all - though in the world of the theater as the backdrop it makes it all the more fitting.I think that the work on the script and of course Hitchcock's direction mark this as something superior to what it could've been, and having Dietrich as the nonplussed diva (she asks and states things in such a way that could sound demanding or bitchy, but her tone is more bemused than really ever agitated so people do what she says and asks, even down to a last request in her last scene for a chair to sit on), and Sim as I mentioned as the father. Todd is quite good too, though basically the one note "I Didn't Do It" until a certain final twist ending that at least half the audience will guess without me saying it. The only one who feels a little out of place, and it harms the movie a bit too, is Wyman; she's a fine actress and in the right role (All That Heaven Allows, The Lost Weekend) she's solid. Here, she does what the script and director ask her to, but I didn't buy her as Sim's daughter - one line explaining away her being at an American conservatory aside - and perhaps the friction she and Hitchcock had behind the scenes shows, and not in a productive way.Don't get me wrong, she doesn't suddenly derail the production or stand out so badly, but she is noticeably not the same caliber of acting as Dietrich or Sim or Todd or some of the other smaller-role players. And there is a very slight lull midway through the movie where my attention started to wane as well, a mark against the script I suppose. But so much steam ends up being picked up at that big fair where Inwood is giving her performance in a tent (and Sim does a mighty fine job at not-but-still winning a doll for a particularly biting moment), that I got engrossed in the movie all the same. Stage Fright dances with becoming one of the director's classics, aided by an Alma Hitchcock and Whitfield Cook script, and the ending is rather (surprisingly) graphic despite not the full final "curtain" shown. If it's a little lessor than his other films, it's still better than many other's finest, with a fun suspense story and believable performances.

zkonedog A movie like "Stage Fright" is a bit of a strange product. It is directed by the remarkable Alfred Hitchcock, it has loads of talented actors, & it contains a plot ("the stage") that has very interesting potential. Sadly, that potential is never realized as the film just wanders about.For a basic plot summary, "Stage Fright" sees Eve Gill (Jane Wyman) drawn into a murderous situation surrounding her love interest Jonathan Cooper (Richard Todd) & his controlling lover Charlotte Inwood (Marlene Dietrich). Also thrown into the mix is Detective Smith (Michael Wilding), who struggles to decipher the strange circumstances surrounding an acting troupe.The trouble with this movie is that it is just "blah" all the way through. The plot is a familiar murder mystery, with its climax coming just minutes into the movie. The rest is a uninspiring mix of prolonged dialogue and (in a rare Hitchcock miss) very little actual suspense.Despite the acting talent, I can't remember watching any other Hitchcock movie that falls flatter in that regard. Never once did I feel as if I was drawn into any of the characters whatsoever.Simply put, "Stage Fright" is a subpar Hitchcock effort that ranks among the lowest of his wide collection of works. Only a decent twist at the end gives this movie any sort of exciting jolt whatsoever. A stodgy old "thriller" that just doesn't hold up in any way, shape, or form.

Scarecrow-88 Hitchcock returns to London with this nifty variation on the "wronged man" formula. Instead of the innocent man pursuing to clear his name, in this film it is a woman in love with him. Robinson (Richard Todd) goes to Eve (Jane Wyman), a theater understudy in training, about his being trouble with the law due to trying to help his lover, a renowned stage actress, Mrs. Inwood (Marlene Dietrich) cover up the murder of her abusive husband. So she convinces her father (Alistair Sim) to hide Robinson until she can prove his innocence. Deciding to "go undercover" as a lowly maid, Eve convinces Inwood's current maid, Nellie (Kay Walsh), to allow her a chance to substitute for her. But when Eve meets a detective inspector in a pub, Smith (Michael Wilding), her life will become increasingly complicated.Excellent casting (especially Sim) top to bottom, typically magnificent camera-work (elaborating in a voice that speaks volumes when characters don't talk), exceptional lighting (especially at the end when Eve and Robinson are in hiding while police look for them in an abandoned theater building), and twisty conclusion make for a real Hitchcock gem that deserves re-evaluation. It certainly turns the *wronged man* plot on its head with that ending. Dietrich gets to sing and raise her iconic eyebrows during scenes where her diva character is trying to worm her way out of uncomfortable situations which could condemn her. Todd's teetering from one emotional place to another at the end, showing us a completely different side to his character is good stuff. Hitchcock brings back the umbrellas momentarily during the Garden party sequence which has a neat scene with Sim involving a doll, using a child to deliver it to a mortified Dietrich on stage performing in a tent. Wyman's soft-spoken, sweet character, juggling so many circumstances at once (including a blossoming romance with "Ordinary" Smith), is the right kind of heroine for this kind of Hitchcockian comedy thriller. She is driven, loyal to a fault, and trustworthy: Robinson could go to her and Inwood could confide in her. Sim's fragile relations with his estranged wife is a hoot. The taxi scene where Eve realizes her love for Smith, and he can't hold back his for her is a delight. I'm not a fan of Dietrich's singing, but her scene with the bloody dress doll is masterful. She gets a wonderful monologue at the end, too, when she understands she's an accessory. Because Hitchcock has so many classics, really good ones like "Frenzy" or "Stage Fright" often get overlooked. I think it is time Stage Fright gets its chance. Wyman is the lead all the way, in almost every scene, but it is clear Dietrich is the Movie Star; I think you can tell with how they are cast, that Dietrich's status was highly respected in a showy part while Wyman's cherubic heart-of-gold character is overwhelmed in comparison when the two appear together in scenes. None the more is this apparent than at the end when Eve tries to get a confession from Inwood; timidity is bruised by ego, as Eve is overpowered by Inwood when the two discuss what *really* happened to her husband. Sim is a joy to watch every time he appears. Witty, clever, wise, spirited, and given the best dialogue, this character Sim wears with kid gloves.

tieman64 For an Alfred Hitchcock thriller released in 1950, "Stage Fright" seems strangely behind the times. Afterall, "Shadow of a Doubt" was released in 1943, "Rope" a fear years later and "Strangers on a Train" a year after "Stage Fright". These are all incredibly "modern" pictures. "Stage Fright", in contrast, plays like one of Hitchcock's 1930s thrillers, lacking the sophistication of much of his 1940s work. At the same time, were it released by any other director, "Fright" would perhaps be fairly highly regarded. It's just, with Hitchcock, one places higher standards.The plot? The incomparable Marlene Dietrich plays Charlotte Inwood, a stage actress who rules London's theatre houses. Being a cold hearted wench, she frames actor Jonathan Cooper (Richard Todd) for the murder of her husband and then watches with delight as poor Cooper falls headlong into another one of Hitchcock's Kafkaesque "wrong man" plots. Assisting Cooper is Eve Gill (Jane Wyman), a spunky young actress who attempts to prove Cooper's innocence. Resilent and cunning, she ensnares Charlotte in a trap of her own. Sounds like Hitchcock's "Spellbound"? Yes, it's virtually the same film.Unsurprisingly, "Stage Fright" is preoccupied with stages, acting, false identities and performances. All the main characters are actors, and Eve frequently poses as invented characters in order to learn information, get into barred locations or bribe others. The film's first three acts are likewise structured around a series of lies (virtually everything said is dishonest), whilst the film's climax involves a series of truthful revelations, though again these are staged as actorly performances. As far as I know, this was also the first film to use a now well-worm cliché; it's the old gag in which the villain is tricked into revealing or confessing his or her crimes in front of an audience he or she is unaware is present ("Minority Report", "Monster's Inc" etc etc).The film marked Hitchcock's return to England after a series of pictures in America. It contains one riveting, suspenseful set piece, and continues Hitchcock's trend of favouring strong female roles. The rest of the film is well shot, but its script will undoubtedly seem generic and well-worn to modern audiences.7.9/10 – Worth one viewing.