Love from a Stranger

This movie "Love From a Stranger" is based on a story written by Agatha Christie. It is similar to "Love From a Stranger" made in black and white in 1937 starring Basil Rathbone and Ann Harding.

This one is from 1947 black and white. The stars of this movie are John Hodiak as Manuel Cortez and Sylvia Sidney as Cecily Harrington.The premise is the same in both movies.

A woman wins a sweepstakes/lottery, drops her boyfriend, and meets Mr Wonderful who sweet talks her, marries her in a short time and prepares to kill her at sometime in the near future at 9:PM.

Cecily is the target. She finds out more about Manuel her husband while he is away one night and gets scared. She sees a hole like a burial hole down in the cellar where no one is allowed to go. I like the ending in this one too is was like a bar fight but much better. The one with Basil Rathbone had a ironic ending too. You can watch this with John Hodiak on this IMDb site http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039586/ which will link you to Hulu.

You can download the one with Basil Rathbone at Archive.org for free or watch it on line with the same name. http://www.archive.org/details/LovefromaStranger

In 1937 Basil Rathbone and Ann Harding were directed by Rowland V. Lee in the film LOVE FROM A STRANGER, based on a short story turned into a play by Agatha Christie. Set in contemporary England, Rathbone played a "gallant" type who sweeps the recently enriched Harding into a sudden marriage, and then plots to kill her. She gradually realizes her danger, and at the last moment turns the tables on him. It worked well, and so it was re-shot in 1947. Now it is John Hodiak and Sylvia Sidney who play the ill-fated couple, with John Howard as Sidney's one ally on the outside trying to help her.

It is odd for two reasons. First it was reset into late Victorian, early Edwardian England. The reason seems to have been based on the success in the last few years of Victorian melodramas at the box office (GASLIGHT, THE LODGER, HANGOVER SQUARE, THE VERDICT, THE WOMAN IN WHITE). This should not have been too difficult to do, for murders for profit has occurred in every time period and era. But it leads to a bit of historical theft (see below). The other reason is that the end was altered. The Harding/Sidney character's last trick was weakened in the remake, and Hodiak did not meet quite the same just deserts that Rathbone did. In fact, it becomes something of a steal from Robert Louis Stevenson's TREASURE ISLAND in the end.

The bit of historical theft was concerning Hodiak's background. Like Rathbone, he is a serial killer of wives (usually wealthy ones). In the earlier film, it turns out that Rathbone's earlier career was written up in a book of true crimes, including a photograph of him (with a beard), that was subject to his character trying to get possession of the book before a crime connoisseur could see the picture and go to the authorities. The same plot twist is in this film, but the picture is a newspaper drawing of Hodiak with a beard. But it mentions his earlier crime as being in South Africa (Hodiak's character is given a Spainish name). The possibility exists that Agatha Christie or the screenplay writers were acquainted with the late 19th Century career of wife murderer Frederick Bayley Deeming. Deeming murdered (as far as we know) two wives, and his four children in Liverpool, England (in 1891), and Melbourne, Australia (in 1892). Although money was not involved in either case, he was a con-man, who was extradited from Uruguay in South America in 1890 to serve time for fraud in England. He also tried to confuse witnesses at his murder trial in Melbourne by first shaving off his mustache, and then growing a beard at his trial. It did not work - he was hanged in Melbourne in May 1892. Not quite a fit, but close enough to make one wonder.

As an admirer of Jennifer Jones (JJ) who has collected all her films and read all her biographies etc, I wanted to see an example of one of my heroine's idols of the stage and screen - Sylvia Sydney who plays "Cecily Harrington".I looked up this film on the Imdb and noticed another actress who had worked with JJ - Ann Richards who played Dilly Carson in "Love Letters" (1945).They appear together in this film, "Love from a Stranger" from 1947 opposite John Hodiak.Incidentally, I was very impressed with the speed of dispatch of this video to London from Amazon.com in the U.S.A. considering they acted as agents for my American vendor.Fortunatly my vcr is adapted to play both NTSC & PAL video formats so I can also obtain and enjoy films from the States which never seem available here in the U.K.

Considering Sylvia was born in 1910 in the Bronx, NYK from foreign parents i.e. not native born Americans (which I only discovered after watching this film), I marvelled at her English accent and only suspected she could be American when she uttered a short "a" instead of the longer English vowel towards the end of the film.I could well see how Sylvia could have been an influence on JJ in her portrayals of English ladies, e.g. in "Cluny Brown" from (1946).Once again Ann Richards plays the best friend role but here she is only required to do a straight reading of her undemanding part.This is one of those films where you find yourself screaming at the screen "Don't do it"!!!! when she is obviously ditching her regular fiance (no attempt at an English accent here) and goes for the "Bluebeard" she has just met (John Hodiak) whose provenance is unknown and who is obviously intent to everyone except Cecily Harrington, on relieving her of her recent Calcutta Sweep winnings of £50,000 (a National Lottery type fortune in 1901).Will he just be content with that?

I could not help thinking that with a story by Agatha Christie, what Alfred Hitchcock could have done as director if he had been given this film, (probably substituted brunette Sylvia with his usual cool blond for starters) as the direction was very average and I felt there were many points where more suspense could have been engendered into the plot than was the case in the direction by Richard Whorf.The denoument at the end had all the hallmarks of an amateur dramatic performance when the goodies arrive just in time to save the heroine.

So I agree 5.1/10 is a fair rating but it was my first opportunity to study Sylvia Sydney's work and was gratified she had such a long life, only dieing in 1999, so she was 89, and apparantly was working professionally towards the end - read her biography.Finally I try to spot jobbing actors, in this case Ernest Cossart who plays "Billings".He played the hilarious reverse snobby butler in "Cluny Brown" and a bishop in "Love Letters".

The short lived Trans-Atlantic studio Eagle-Lion produced this film for British and American audiences about a serial killer of wives, his own. His latest victim is Sylvia Sidney who has inherited a windfall and she's a target for fortune hunters.

Coming from America is John Hodiak playing Manuel Cortez who has already murdered two wives after draining them of their assets. His sights are set on Sidney.

I'm at a loss as to why Eagle-Lion did not cast a Latin charmer like Gilbert Roland, Cesar Romero or best of all Anthony Quinn in the lead. Saying that though Hodiak exudes a menace throughout the film. Unfortunately I mean that literally as we know from the beginning that Hodiak is up to no good and is the serial killer.

Menace we have, but suspense is flattened somewhat as we know from the beginning exactly what Hodiak's character is. Still Love From A Stranger is a good thriller

This was a rather pedestrian version of the Agatha Christie short story thriller (Philomel Cottage). Of course, the original short story confined itself to the time the couple spent on their honeymoon, although the subsequent adapted theater play expanded on the plot. Sylvia Sidney came off as a kind of Betty Davis type with a distracting edge to her delivery. John Hodiak's performance started off with subtlety but towards the end it deteriorated into melodrama. I agree with another reviewer that I couldn't help thinking that this would have gotten a much better treatment from Alfred Hitchcock. The plot development was implausible at times. Although the beginning was cogent and mood-setting, I was disappointed by the lack of subtlety in the ending, which differed from the Christie ending. The story should have been about the psychology of predator and prey, but that aspect was muted. I have not read the theater play, so I don't know how its ending compared to the wonderful Christie ending.