Kein Lorbeer für den Mörder

If you have read the book, what the film has to offer is unfortunately a replay of what Hitchcock created in 1959.

Ernest Lehman was the script writer for Hitchcock's "North by northwest." I was surprised that two scenes from the classic were modified by Lehman for "The Prize". The famous scene of Cary Grant being almost killed by a plane in the open field is replayed here with Paul Newman being terrorized by a car on an empty bridge at night. A few minutes later into the film Lehman replaces the auction sequence in the Cary Grant film with Newman in a nudist conference. If you have seen the Hitchcock film you know what follows. Was it a homage to Hitchcock or was Lehman suffering a bout of creativity loss? Or was Director Mark Robson a die hard Hitchcock fan?

The book, pulp fiction at its best, made good casual reading. The film is good to pass the time, watching Paul Newman and Edward G. Robinson re-enacting roles similar to what they have enjoyed playing so often. The wisecracks (thanks to Irving Wallace) make the otherwise dumb and predictable film worth your time.

Andrew Craig, studly, anti-establishment and slightly tipsy Nobel Prize winner of literature, suspects that nationalized American physicist Stratman is not who he claims to be, and that Communist East Germany is coercing him into disowning the US.

Mark Robson is no Hitchcock, but then again, quite often even Hitchcock wasn't. 'The Prize' is certainly a consistently entertaining and worthy effort, its key scenes playing almost exactly like Hitch counterparts. Among others I loved the scene where Craig, played tongue in cheek by Paul Newman, seeks refuge from his pursuers at a nudist conference, and in order to disguise himself has an excuse to display his bronzed sixpack. And the film's climax is certainly suspenseful in the way that Hitch taught us to expect.

Quite a wonderful film, then, well-acted and well-paced. Stockholm is a beautiful venue, and the blondes seem to have fun.

I absolutely enjoyed this 2+ hour-long movie, and the fact that, as others have mentioned, it's inspired by Hitchcock doesn't change anything.

I liked Newman's character. A man who is more interested in women and drink rather than the Nobel Prize, who has a devil-may-care attitude towards everything, decides to endanger his own life when he realizes his colleague is in trouble. Maybe he does it partially because he is bored and partially because he has been writing detective stories for the past few years, but it is interesting to watch his behavior anyway.

Although the plot is pretty simple, there is something that gets you hooked from the very beginning and doesn't let you go until the very last phrase. The film is very interesting, and the supporting characters play a significant role here.

Absolutely lovely movie. A lovely 60's Stockholm and its Grand Hotel, an adorable and extremely beautiful Elke Sommer, a very young and charismatic Paul Newman, the glamour of the Nobel prize and lots of what we now a days consider that romantic innocence from the older times.

The movie itself is not exactly a good one. First of all you can notice that every scene outside is shot with a film behind so that very probably, Mr.Newman never got to go to Stockholm at all, but was filmed in some studio in Hollywood. Then all these stereotypes that are making angry to Italians, Swedes and even Danes. Well, take a look at any Hollywood movie happening in Spain and you will find see that those old stereotypes are there for every nationality and are certainly annoying. We are bullfighters here theoretically.

The plot is very simplistic, the bad guys are really clumsy, some scenes are taken from other movies and as mentioned before by someone else, it is a photocopy of Hitchcock's Torn Curtain as well.

Still, as imperfect as it is, it is just lovely, and the little romance of Newman and Sommers, those innocent but very hot kisses dressing up so smart are worth the movie for those who feel romantic.

Imitation in the film world is not always a bad thing. We can all think of movies that are eminently watchable despite owing an obvious debt to an earlier film or to the work of a particular director. Alfred Hitchcock is one director who has always attracted his fair share of imitators. Films such as Henry Hathaway's 'Niagara', J. Lee Thompson's 'Cape Fear' or Brian de Palma's 'Dressed to Kill' all owe an obvious debt to the master's work (even down to the trademark blonde heroine) but are nevertheless good films in their own right.

All the above films were influenced by the darker side of Hitchcock's work; the strongest influence on 'Dressed to Kill', for example, seems to have been 'Psycho'. He did, however, have a lighter side, often seen in his spy films which frequently blend suspense with humour. Examples are 'The Lady Vanishes', with its two eccentric cricket-loving English gentlemen, 'The Thirty-Nine Steps' and, most importantly for our purposes, 'North by North-West'.

'The Prize' clearly shows the influence of the lighter Hitchcock. The setting is the Nobel Prize ceremony in Stockholm, and the central character is the winner of the prize for literature, Andrew Craig, an alcoholic American novelist suffering from writer's block. (As numerous figures in the American literary establishment around this time did indeed have a drink problem, it is interesting to speculate who might have been the model for the character). Craig discovers a Soviet-block plot to kidnap Dr Stratmann, the German-born American winner of the physics prize, and to replace him with a double who will use ceremony to announce his defection to East Germany. Like the Hitchcock films mentioned above, the film mixes tension with humorous moments. The tension arises from Craig's attempts to thwart the kidnap plot and to convince the sceptical Swedish authorities of its existence. The humour mostly arises from the scenes featuring the other prize-winners. The French husband-and-wife team who have shared the chemistry prize have done so despite the fact that they cannot stand each other. (The husband has insisted on his mistress accompanying him under the guise of his 'secretary', while the wife enjoys flirting with Craig). The American and Italian co-winners of the prize for medicine constantly bicker about which of them has plagiarised the other's work. (The peace prize winner does not appear to feature in the film, although a pacifist is sorely needed to keep the peace among the others).

Even the scenes featuring Craig are not always to be taken seriously. Although there are genuine moments of suspense, such as the scene with the car on the bridge, there are humorous moments as well. As other reviewers have pointed out, the scene at the nudist convention owes much to the auction scene in 'North by North-West', also written by Ernest Lehman. The humour here arises from the contrast between the seeming absurdity of Craig's actions and their underlying serious purpose- he is trying to attract the attention of the police because he is in danger from the villains.

There are a number of effective performances, especially from Paul Newman as Craig and Edward G. Robinson as both Dr Stratmann and his double. The result is a superior piece of entertainment, not quite as good as Hitchcock at his best, but better than most of his sixties movies except 'Psycho' and possibly 'Marnie'. It is certainly closer to authentic Hitchcock than his last two spy films, 'Torn Curtain' and 'Topaz'. 8/10.