Like a Hitchcock movie
341104
This is a slight book, almost a novella.  Within its brief chapters, however, it possesses plot twists and turns worthy of Hitchcock. If you think you know why the violence occurs, who the bad guy(s) are, and what will happen next, you are probably wrong.
Briefly, a beginning college professor with an uncertain past is violently attacked to jumpstart the book.  This trigger ignites events leading to a disappearing wife, involvement with people from his previous underworld dealings, ties to crimes of his father, and a shifting cast of allies and adversaries.  To provide any other explanations would ruin the plot.
The author does not telegraph events - the reader is just as surprised as the main protagonist.
This makes a good airplane read.  I finished it on one coast-to-coast flight.
2870982
No question about it: this one of Hitchcock's best, and it ought to be a lot better known.
  There's some truth in the contention that much of Hitchcock's work is based on flimsy plotting, gimmickry, and attractive stick figures racing from one scene to the next just a step ahead of sense or logic. This is easily seen even in much-admired films like "North by Northwest".

  But "Shadow of a Doubt" (along with "Vertigo" and the first half of "Psycho") gives the lie to the claim that this was all there was to Hitchcock. This is a film in which every turn of the narrative is governed by the development of character, as a girl matures from giddy teenager to strong (and even deadly) young woman while grappling with the knowledge that her beloved uncle is a serial killer.
  The acting is uniformly outstanding. Cotten is in full lounge-lizard mode here--nobody ever enunciated a perfectly-balanced sentence with more venom. Hume Cronyn plays a neighborhood geek almost--but not quite--to the point of parody. But it's Teresa Wright who takes the prize here. Wright was a pleasant but unremarkable presence in a number of films, but in "Doubt" she really shows what she was capable of. Consider the expression on her face as she descends the stairs in the climactic scene, and how easy it would have been to overplay it.
  Perhaps it was the influence of Wilder (though his biographers state that he actually didn't really do much work on the picture), but "Shadow of a Doubt" is one film in which the master outdid himself, stepping beyond the limits of entertainment into something approaching art.
1080882
The cover of this DVD misleads when it likens its drama to Hitchcock's work. There is actually nothing approaching a Hitchcock level of suspense here. However, the viewer is kept intellectually guessing, ping-ponging back and forth at least through the first part of the film, wondering,  "Did the man have a moustache, or didn't he? Is he gaslighting his wife, or is she gaslighting him?"

Like the French language itself, there are so many letters of explanation in this film that don't get pronounced, but that inform the pronunciation of other letters in the words. Director Emmanuel Carrere refers to "ghosts" whose presence is felt, trailing the characters' lives. However again, none of this rises to the level of suspense.

Most of the value of this movie lies in its view of a marriage. This is an adult relationship, different from the kind we see in most American films where one spouse (usually the woman) is shown as mere adjunct to the man's answering call to action. Here both partners are given gravity and tenderness and extension.

Actor Vincent Lindon is especially good at showing a longing bafflement. He doesn't undermine his performance by distancing himself from his character as many Americans might when called upon to play a man who isn't conforming to all gender stereotypes. Here Lindon is unflinching as a man who is not interested in football and who gets lost, almost waif-like, in what might be the complexities of his own imagining.

There's a good director/producer commentary on this DVD, pointing out the ground from which some of the film's mists arise. But this isn't the movie for anyone who demands clear plot or resolution. In fact, the film is almost gratuitously devoid of explanations. But you might feel invited to fill in the tantalizing blanks yourself, to suit your own view.
2279786
I think of this movie more as a romantic comedy than as a thriller.  Margaret Lockwood plays a rich heiress who is traveling back home to marry an unwanted husband.  On the train, she runs into a kindly nanny, Miss Froy (played by Dame May Whitty).  After sharing tea with Miss Froy, Lockwood retires for a nap.  When she awakes, she finds that Miss Froy has dissapeared, and no one on the train admits to ever seeing her.  Puzzled and worried, Lockwood grudgingly enlists the help of Micheal Redgrave, who plays a bohemian musician, in finding Miss Froy.  The chemistry between Redgrave and Lockwood is delicious.  They trade insults in between searching through the train.  (And, of course, they fall in love.)  Then the movie takes a rather unbelievable, but interesting turn as an international spy ring becomes involved.  I believe this version of the film contains a trailer and an introduction that have little to do with the film, but the picture and sound were decent.  The atmosphere is light, unlike later Hitchcock films.  A treat.
2961788
This is a fairly intense psychological thriller, set in Canada, that was first published in 1957, and which seems a bit dated at this point.

As the book opens, four men are preparing to go on a weekend fishing trip. The four, who are best friends, are to meet at a rural lodge which is owned by the wealthiest of the four and which is to be their weekend headquarters. However, Ron Galloway, the owner of the lodge, clearly has other plans as he is packing to leave his house in town, and he never makes it out to the lodge.

The other three men, including Galloway's best friend, Harry Breem, can't imagine what might have happened to him. Harry is a pharmaceutical rep, and is one of those mild mannered guys without much strength of character--the kind of guy who never seems to take charge of his life, but who rather helplessly watches it roll over him.

Harry married a bit late in life, and his wife, Thelma, is more than a little quirky herself. Esther, Galloway's wife doesn't like her at all. Galloway insists that he doesn't care much for Thelma either and claims that he tolerates her simply because she's the wife of his best friend.

When Galloway disappears, without ever reaching the lodge, his friends and the police begin an intensive search and in the process, Galloway's friends discover things about him--and about themselves--that they might have been better off not knowing. It would be unfair to say much more than that about the plot, and this is another case in which the tease for the book probably gives away too much. Suffice it to say that the tension builds to a surprising climax.

This is not a crime novel in the traditional sense; certainly it's not the sort of book that Millar's husband, Ross Macdonald would have written. But it's interesting to watch the principal characters in the book react to the developments that unfold. Millar had a long and distinguished career herself and this is a book that will appeal to those who want a broad understanding of how the crime fiction genre has evolved over the years.
4750066
It had the feel of being a "whodunit." Not the easiest language to understand, and not a very long book either, I got through it all in one sitting. I was fascinated by the creative examination of human thoughts and drives. It's worth a read, but be patient with it
1686576
A daredevil confined to a wheelchair is the concept of Alfred Hitchcock's comedy-mystery "Rear Window", a man of action so bored with his confinement that he begins spying on the neighbors he can see across his Greenwich Village courtyard: the frustrated composer,the "interpretative dancer", the newlyweds, the desperately lonely spinster ... and the bickering couple. The wife suddenly disappears. Has she been murdered? L.B. Jeffries thinks so, and he convinces his fiance Lisa (Grace Kelly) and the insurance company nurse Stella (Thelma Ritter) who visits him every day. (Jeffries, a professional photographer, has been temporarily disabled in an accident.) This set-up is perfect for Hitchcock, who loved tense situations in close quarters ("Life Boat", "Rope"), and who was in top form when he directed this masterpiece of entertainment in 1954. (There was a made-for-TV remake a few years back; according to... reviewers, it's pretty awful.) James Stewart was one of Hollywood's most popular personalities, but he was often mis-cast. He was pushing fifty when he played the 25-year old Lindbergh in"The Spirit of St Louis". Similarly, in "Rear Window" he's too mature for the lead. The part just weeps for William Holden. Stewart even takes his shirt off in a couple of scenes, revealing a pale, thin physique. The idea that Grace Kelly would travel all the way down from the East Sixties to Greenwich Village to spend the evening with him is a little ... well,unbelievable. Miss Kelly is almost as seductive here as she was in her next Hitchcock "To Catch a Thief".The Master was obviously infatuated -- but, then, who wasn't? She also had a droll sense of humor: the way she pronounces "weird" is priceless. Thelma Ritter and Wendell Corey give witty support. Raymond Burr, just a couple of years away from playing the most famous of fictional lawyers, is quite creepy as the killer Thorwald. The sound track is a mixed marvel of car traffic, distant voices, and snatches of music; it sounds great with stereophonic ear phones. About the only real complaint in John Michael Hayes' screenplay that the pragmatic might bring up: Doesn't Jeffries ever LOCK his door?
3041616
What a strange movie.  It's well-acted and directed, but the plot is just plain weird.

The movie starts out simple enough. Borgman lives in an underground shelter and is forced out of his home when hunters with a scent dog come by and destroy his leaf-camouflaged roof.  Borgman escapes via a tunnel, alarms a few other underground dwellers like Ludwig and Pascal and runs into the neighborhood, focusing on a wealthier neighborhood in hopes of being able to bathe in a stranger's home.  Borgman seems like a man who simply needs some kindness and luxury, a helping hand.

He finds that with Richard and Marina.  This couple have a modern two-story home with small pond on the edge of a forest. Marina seems sympathetic to Borgman but Richard is immediately suspicious.  Does Borgman know his wife from a previous job?  He gets beaten badly by Richard in a jealous fit, but Marina shows compassion, lets Borgman rest in their small guest cottage on their property, and sneaks him food and gives him some first aid.  It is this action that in the end turns the family upside down.  Borgman is no longer the grateful homeless man, but a man who quickly manipulates the family, the three children, and the young Danish nanny.  Borgman becomes a modern-day Rasputin who haunts Marina's dreams and desires.  The movie becomes a suspenseful psychological horror film, bordering on absurdist realms. The confusion hits the viewer, who doesn't quite know what to think of this all.  The plot would be very probable but now Borgman is part of a group of criminals determined to wipe out all the people who threaten his new livelihood.  Marina, the nanny and the children all watch helplessly and do no seem threatened by the presence of Borgman and his crew.

The end is bizarre.  It leaves the viewer thinking there is more to come.  There is no real conclusion, which only adds to the suspense and leaves one wondering what this movie was all about  other than a struggle between rich and poor, good and evil.
3821665
The writing is simple and straightforward, which made this a fast read. The story reminded me a bit of Gone Girl and the ending a bit like Atonement. It's a bit dark but would make a great movie. Just don't expect to sympathize with the main character.
4387653
Some fine acting, a convoluted plot, and the machinations of humans doing their darndest to get by in life by fibbing, cheating, masquerading,

stealing, and murdering.  There are texts and sub-texts and Mr Hitchcock, even when he is not at his absolute best, is far better than most. Worth revisiting from time to time.
3656364
3 of 5 stars for the movie thriller A Perfect Getaway. We meet three couples who are on vacations in Hawaii. We soon learn that a tourist couple was murdered elsewhere in Hawaii and the suspects are a young man and woman. Hummm .... Sounds like a good setup for a thriller. Several plot twists and tangents to keep you guessing. Of course we end up alone in the middle of nowhere on an island. Enough said. The plot is actually very simple and predictable. The value in the movie is in the acting and character development which casts doubt on each of the three couples. The scenery is amazing. Well photographed, good pace and some real surprises. Milla Jovovich (a favorite of mine) had a relatively minor role and didn't stand-out.

This movie will keep you guessing and keep you at the edge of your seat. Why only 3 stars? Well, it is a thriller, but, I have seen many movies with similar plots and this one never really got you truly scared or fully engaged. So, its good not great.
247683
I feel like only Hitchcock could make this movie at this caliber.  It's compelling and fantastic, all while confined to a lifeboat.  The cast is stellar.  This is in my top 5 favorite Hitchcock movies.
4437098
I finished this in one evening. The author did a fair job of building suspense and there were unanticipated plot twists. Yet, this soon settled into predictability and I guessed much of the events at the end of the book.  Amazon seems to have a proliferation of 'chick-lit' thrillers.  They often disappoint.  This is nothing like the books it is compared to - Girl on The Train, Gone Girl, etc
804079
great but seemed too focused on her wifee, trying to give an unrealistic holywood ending compared to the real hitchcock
2653441
Boyfriend of a dead girl takes revenge on the son of a god fearing, but paradoxically satanic-like, torture and killing family. A classic twisty kidnap thriller except the over scripting just made the story confusing resulting in little tension and drama. The acting is too over-the-top directed (stand here, move there like this) making the movie not very believable. The viewer feels as if they're standing along side the director hearing his directions. The dialogue is typical Hollywood make believe talk adding to that too staged feeling i.e. as if every short sentence is rehearsed and "retaken" multiple times. The usual dumb decisions that only characters in movies make.  The usual "you think people are dead but they seem to come back with one last surprise knife attack". A too predictable and emotionally ho hum movie.
3323866
I didn't like this movie as much as Almodovar's past films, because it's lacking his craziness. Instead you get a film noir feel, like that from a Hitchcock movie. The movie is still worth seeing, and it has some really great singing in it too.
3875410
Ok, interesting characters, kind of like a Lifetime movie.