Opiniones de usuarios

Tight and delicious. Everything matters and nothing matters. An amazing commercial eye without detracting from the poetry. Poetry? Yes poetry. Robert Donat was one of the best actors of his generation - I wonder why he's not better known. Maybe he will be rediscovered. The 39 Steps, The Winslow Boy, Goodbye Mr Chips just to name 3 of his spectacular performances. Madeleine Carroll is perfect as an early, classy and icy Hitchcock blonde. The coupling of Donat and Carroll has all the signature traits of the Master and it's downright irresistible. Not to be missed.

Nearly every era in Hitchcock's directing career has incredible strengths. When we view a later film like "North by Northwest" we are tempted to say that "The 39 Steps" is simply a training film for the bigger budget, star studded film that came later. This is not true. This movie stands on its own. With wonderful actors like Robert Donat and Madeline Carrol, we are led on an intense ride, culminating in a crowded theater. There are amazing shots of the characters weaving their way through crowds, close ups used strictly for the purpose of moving the plot. With Hitchcock there is no excess. He is a poet with a camera. As the tension mounts and Donat's character becomes swept away in its arms, we are taken with it. His wisecracking character is out of words and must act, just as Cary Grant did in the aforementioned film. There is something lurking and we have to find out who it is and why does he need to know what he knows? I've seen this many times and will see it again.

If what you want from a thriller is in-yer-face mugging, special effects, noise, a booming soundtrack, gore, nudity and flashy editing, this one is not for you.

However if you are a more discerning moviegoer who values a great script, exquisite understated acting, wit, humour and intelligence, and you are willing to overlook the technically rough bits (come on, this was 1935, you cannot measure it by 2005 standards !!) - then enjoy, because you are in for a treat.

Robert Donat is one of the most charming heroes that ever graced the screen, and but for his frail health and loathing of the Hollywood pzazz (he later refused some great movie parts offered to him, which eventually went to the likes of Erroll Flynn and Douglas Fairbanks Jr) he might have become one of the greatest. Watch the dinner scene with the crofters, in which he manages to convey his plight to the wife entirely without words. Great acting. Also the wickedly funny bravura piece at the political rally.

Madeleine Carroll must be among the coolest and feistiest of Hitchcock's favoured blondes, not as insipid or irrelevant as many of the others were. She is a veritable icicle and it takes a long time for her to thaw, but then watch the sparks fly.

I feel a little sad for the people who cannot be bothered to check out this movie because of the tinny sound or the b&w photography. Forget about those superficialities and concentrate on the real values - the script, the acting, the lighting, photography and camera work -, just allow yourself to get carried away with the fast paced action, and you'll love it.

Trust and betrayal have been a recurrent theme in several of Alfred Hitchcock's works. The 39 Steps, made in 1935, has the all the classic elements of the master filmmaker that set the standard for later Hitchcock films. The 39 Steps has the classic Hitchcockian theme of an average, innocent man caught up in extraordinary events which are quite beyond his control. The sexually frustrating institution of marriage is another major motif present in the film. The strained and loveless relationship between the crofter and his wife, the placid relationship of the innkeeper and his wife, the (physical) bond between Hannay and Pamela can be examined in terms of degrees of trust between the couples. In fact, the short 'acquaintance' between Hannay and Smith and Hannay and the crofter's wife are also built completely upon trust. It is these couples, and the chemistry between them (or the lack thereof) that drive the entire film.

Over a span of four days, the smart and unflappable protagonist, Richard Hannay (Robert Donat) is involved in a circular journey to prove his innocence and expose the hive of intrigue. He is involved in chases and romantic interludes that take him from London to the Scottish Highlands and back again and he assumes numerous identities on the way - a milkman, an auto mechanic, a honeymooner, a political speaker among others.

The opening of the film, the first three shorts do not show him above his neck. With his back to the camera, he is followed down the aisle to his seat. He is then assumed to be lost in the crowd. This gives the audience the feeling that he could be anybody. Later when he takes in the identities of a milkman, a mechanic, a politician one realizes that he is Hitchcock's archetypal 'everyman' who unwittingly finds himself in incredible dilemmas.

In one of the brilliantly managed sequences on the train, Richard Hannay throws himself at a lone girl and forces a kiss just as a detective and two policemen pass by their compartment. It reveals his desperation to remain free until he can prove his innocence. In the scene after Annabella staggers into his room with a kitchen knife in her back, Hannay sees her ghostly image (which is superimposed) talking to him, `What you are laughing at right now is true. These men will stop at nothing.' The double exposure achieves a result which is a tad chilling and sad. The hallmark of Hitchcock's style is his ability to completely shock his audience by deliberately playing against how they would be thinking. In such episodes as the murder of the woman in Hannay's apartment or when the vicious professor with the missing finger casually shoots Hannay, the action progresses almost nonchalantly leaving the viewers stunned.

A great story, interesting and likeable characters, slyly incongruous wit, classic Hitchcockian motifs and a great MacGuffin are just a few things that make the The 39 Steps the quintessential Hitchcock.

The 39 Steps is one of Hitchcock's most economical and greatest films. In this plot-heavy film, Richard Hannay - a young bachelor - experiences a series of very improbable events, starting with the murder of a mystery woman in his apartment by what he believes to be foreign agents and a picture perfect frame-up. Dogged by the police, Scotland Yard and jealous husbands, Hannay runs for his life. Catapulted from one humorous quasi-romantic encounter, plot twist, and narrow escape to another, our protagonist searches frantically for a way out and ends up with much more than he could have expected.

A lot of good intellectual analysis has been written here on IMDb and elsewhere about The 39 Steps. And the film deserves it. The 39 Steps is not only a great romantic adventure with the usual Hitchcock humor blended seamlessly into the mix, but it is also rich in allegory, metaphor and even subtle symbolism. Many of Hitchcock's typical themes appear throughout the film - marriage in its various forms, human relationships, and the many varieties and scales of deceit. But the purpose of this review is not to indulge in the meta-text of The 39 Steps, but rather, to discuss its entertainment value.

It is lovely to look at, but lacks much of the cinematographic experimentation and play of Hitchcock's earlier films. It is perfectly scripted - each character has a distinct personality and predicament, and they are all very believable and very well acted. The plot provides suspense, comedy, a powerful but unexaggerated analysis of belief, paranoia and propaganda. Suffice to say that the film can be seen from many perspectives and tends to hit its audience at many levels.

The camera work is more consistently focused on the story than many of Hitchcock's films, and the script offers a lot of activity jammed into a relatively short length. No time is wasted and the film zips by. Despite the lean and economical style, The 39 Steps is easily followed and doesn't require a great deal of thought or interpretation. However, as previously stated, the film can certainly inspire interpretive and critical thought if that's what you are looking for.

The 39 Steps is a gift, and never a burden. Highly recommended.

...with Robert Donat as a Canadian ex-pat living in London who gets accused of murder. He goes on the run, avoiding the authorities in hopes of clearing his name, with the trail leading to the Scottish countryside. He eventually ends up involving a reluctant Madeleine Carroll. With Lucie Mannheim, Godfrey Tearle, Helen Haye, Wylie Watson, John Laurie, and Peggy Ashcroft.

Highlights for me: the Scottish Highlands, Madeleine Carroll removing her stockings while handcuffed to Donat, and Peggy Ashcroft's brief turn as the unhappy wife of a country farmer. Donat's easy charm and affable demeanor foretell the similar performances by Stewart and Grant in Hitchcock's later thrillers. There are some glaring plot-holes (why don't the villains deal with Donat when they off the woman in his apartment at the film's start?), but they can be ignored thanks to the pace of the proceedings.

The Criterion DVD bonus features include commentary by Hitchcock expert Marian Keane; a "visual essay" by Hitchcock expert (how many are there?) Leonard Leff; Hitchcock: The Early Years (2000), a short British documentary; excerpts from a 1966 British TV interview; more audio-only excerpts of Truffaut's Hitchcock interviews; a booklet/essay from critic David Cairns; and the complete Lux Radio Theatre adaptation, with Ida Lupino and Robert Montgomery. Truly the best way to see it, and thus why I bring it up.

After a panic scene into a music-hall where actuates Mr. Memory(Watson),Richard(Robert Donat)invites his house a foreign(Mannheim)whom pursues a espionage net called 39 steps.Later he goes to Scotland where is pursued at the same time by the police and the spies.Richard is handcuffed to a unknown beautiful blonde(Madeleine Carroll).They confront united several risks,odds and misfortunes.

This is the most important pursuit-film in the Hitchcock's British period as ¨North by Northwest¨(1959)is in American stage. The movie combines imagination,thriller,action and satirical comedy. Picture contains the usual elements argument in Hitchcock as the wrong guilty,pursuits,and the McGuffin,this time are the 39 steps. Elegant and charming Robert Donat(1905-1958)submitted to continuous escapes is top-notch.Delightful Madeleine Carroll(recent her acting for John Ford) as distinguished and elegant blonde is marvellous .The support casting is frankly excellent,John Laurie,Helen Haye and famed theatre actress Peggy Ashcroft(born 1907) who win an Oscar(1985) by ¨Passage to India¨(David Lean).The film is a Gaumont British production by the great producer Michael Balcon.As almost always the screenwriter is Alma Reville,Hitchcock's wife.Besides his usual musical conductor Louis Levy and a dark black and white cinematography by his habitual cameraman Bernard Knowles. The motion picture is magnificently directed by the master of suspense.

Alfred Hitchcock followed up his first international success, The Man Who Knew Too Much with an even better film, The Thirty Nine Steps. Hitchcock must have had a particular fondness for this film because I see elements of it North By Northwest, Saboteur, and Torn Curtain.

There is no director in the history of the cinema who liked a good chase film better than Alfred Hitchcock. This one's a beauty with a wrongly accused of murder Robert Donat, running from London to Scotland and back again to find some spies to clear his name. Along the way Donat picks up a lovely and first unwilling traveling companion in Madeleine Carroll who is arguably the first of his blonde heroines.

Donat and Ronald Colman rivaled for roles somewhat, they seem always to be cast as the same type of characters. Of course Donat worked primarily in the UK and on stage while Colman was strictly a movie actor since the silent days. Colman is the only other guy who could have done this and other Donat parts. It's a pity there are none like either of these guys around today.

When Geoffrey Tearle thinks he's disposed of Donat by shooting him, Donat's life got saved by a hymn book in his breast pocket. Whether that was a device in the original novel by John Buchan or something Alfred Hitchcock improvised the inspiration for it was definitely taken from the attempted assassination of former President Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. While running for president on the Progressive ticket that year, Roosevelt was shot in the chest in Milwaukee. What saved his life was a copy of his speech and an eyeglass case in his breast pocket.

The whole thing here is how the espionage is being carried out and I won't reveal it. But if you've seen Torn Curtain remember why Paul Newman was the only guy they could send on that espionage mission.

This is probably Hitchcock's best film from his pre-Hollywood period and shouldn't be missed.

'The 39 Steps (1935)', an early Hitchcock classic, has all the hallmarks its director would later come to be known by. In fact, it's practically a prototype of 'North By Northwest (1959)'; it sees its every-man protagonist thrown into a world of secrets, spies and international treason after he's framed for the murder of the mysterious woman who has just informed him that a foreign power is attempting to steal a vital state secret. The film is ahead of its time in a myriad of ways, not least in its uncanny ability to subvert genre tropes that weren't even tropes at the time of its initial release. It's strikingly well-made, with shots that simply shouldn't exist in a film of its age and efficiently visual storytelling that belies its director's silent-era background. Although it does start to sag somewhat in its mid-section, the flick has plenty of exciting set-pieces, intriguing characters and unexpected surprises. It's entertaining right the way through. 7/10

Film history was made in 1935 when Alfred Hitchcock, who was at the time an active but little known and somewhat run of the mill film director, received a contract to create a low budget potboiler type spy thriller, and used the opportunity to provide his studio with a masterpiece which has never been forgotten. In addition he established his reputation as the master of suspense, something which remained unchallenged throughout the remainder of his career. In style this film is quintessimal Hitchcock, and those who know his films can pick out sequences in any of his later ones which were based on, or inspired by, his work in this early thriller. Similarly, sequences from this film have also been imitated by many other directors - for example Richard Pearce, in the thriller "No Mercy" (1986), included sequences that imitated a famous sequence in Hitchcock's film where Robert Donat and Madeleine Carroll were handcuffed together and on the run , by showing Richard Gere and Kim Basinger fleeing pursuers whilst handcuffed together. Because of this "The 39 Steps" has become a "must see" classic that most movie buffs still regard as an essential element in their personal film collection.

There are two criticisms commonly made of this film. The first is that there are logical imperfections in the story. This is true of almost all Hitchcock films (as well as those of most other directors). The point is that Hitchcock had an unsurpassed ability to maintain a flow in the unfolding of his story on the screen which totally distracts his audience from the type of mental agility required to even be aware of them. Only when dissecting the story on a sequence by sequence basis will such imperfections become significant. The second criticism is that this film, whilst based on John Buchan's novel of the same name, departs very considerably from the story in the book. I am not a purist about this, books and films are totally different media and must be judged independently. In some cases it must be recognised that a book is structured so that it is almost impossible for a film to remain true to the original book. What I do believe is important is that the film-goer should be entitled to know how true a film is to a previously read and perhaps long loved book. If a film is described as "the film of the best selling novel........", then it should be as accurate a dramatic presentation of the story in the book as possible. (Where the original is a play, not a book, the dramatic medium is already much closer to the movie form, and I believe such a description should only be used when most of the original dialogue from the play is accurately reproduced in the movie.) By contrast, if a film is described as "based on............" then the filmmaker should have considerably more freedom; and if the phrase used is "inspired by........" then a largely independent dramatic presentation should be expected. In the case of "The 39 Steps, Hichcock's film comes into the latter category, but a later (and in my opinion generally inferior) 1978 film of the same name can legitimately claim to be much more closely based on the book. In this instance I personally do not regard the original book as sufficiently important to be sacrosanct, but those who differ from me about this may feel they have an adequate reason for preferring the 1978 film.

Today "The 39 Steps" is seldom shown in movie theaters and, when a home video rather than the actual film is under consideration, attention needs to be given to the medium and technology with which it has been reproduced. The catch phrase "digitally remastered" is often used to reassure a purchaser that he is buying the best possible product, but this may be totally irrelevant. The nuances of shade in a good black and white photograph can often be artistically more significant than those of colour in a colour print, and the same is true for many early movies. But home video versions of black and white films are usually disappointing as these nuances are seldom reproduced accurately, if at all. It is regrettable that, largely because of this, many young people today have no appreciation of the artistic appeal a really good black and white movie film can have. Home video versions of "The 39 Steps" as both DVD's and videotapes have been released by a number of different distributors and these vary in quality enormously. In general DVD's are capable of better rendering of these subtle shade differences than videotapes, but either can be satisfactory. The first requirement is that the distributor has used a high quality master for the material copied, not an old tape that has already been played numerous times. The next is that proper equipment designed for copying from black and white masters is used. Too often copies of old black and white films are made with equipment that is designed only for copying colour films. In such cases the nuances of the multitude of grey shades present in the master are likely to be totally lost. Many of the copies of Hitchcock's film still being sold are particularly bad in this respect, with highlight areas that are totally burnt out instead of containing a mass of detail. The best advice is to consult a website such as that of Amazon.com, where the various versions available are listed and priced, with user comments that indicate how satisfactory the final product has been found by the purchaser concerned. My advice is DO NOT LET YOURSELF BE HAD - THIS WILL ONLY ENCOURAGE THE MARKETING OF SUB-STANDARD MATERIAL.

'The Thirty-Nine Steps' shows all the hallmarks of embryonic, vintage Hitchcock; the bickering romance, the dark humor, the paranoid sense of persecution, the chase, and the mysterious, but really quite irrelevant, McGuffin, fuelling it all.

The story, though pretty slim, is carried along at a brisk pace. The sequence on the train is composed with a very modern sense of editing and composition, which really reveals Hitchcock's revolutionary understanding of the dynamics of movie-making. Werndorff brings an original German Expressionist eye to the production design and several scenes are truly striking, particularly on the fog bound Scottish moorland. Though John Laurie almost steals the whole show (as usual), Donat and Carroll have great chemistry, with the kind of sexy and sharply written dialogue that for some reason, became extinct around 1951. The biggest fault of the movie is that they only actually spend about 20 minutes of screen time together.

Though 'The Lady Vanishes' is, in my mind, the best from Hitchcock's 'British Period', 'The Thirty-Nine Steps' is a great example of the director's emerging style and a thoroughly entertaining adventure romp in its own right.

I understand fully the historic importance of this movie, since it was a very early example of Alfred Hitchcock's work in the suspense genre. That alone qualifies it to be considered a classic. In my opinion, however, that may be the only thing that qualifies this as a classic, and it astonishes me that so many people consider this a masterpiece. All I can observe is that Hitchcock got better as the years went on.

A lot could be said about this. The story revolves around a Canadian man in London who gets involved in some sort of foreign espionage activity and ends up wrongly accused of murder. The movie tries to unravel the mystery. It did not, however, enthrall me. I thought it plodded along with performances that were passable but little more. Some elements of the story mystified me and as a result I found myself losing focus from time to time. The scenes in the Scottish man's house seemed unnecessary. The movie's high rating surprises me, quite frankly. The only reason I can come up with for the high rating is that it's early Hitchcock.

In fairness, this isn't a bad movie. Compared to other movies of the era, it's what might be described as fair to middlin'. I've seen many worse movies from the 30's, but there are also movies from the 30's that seem timeless and can still hold me captive. Overall - 4/10

While I personally prefer Hitchcock's darker, more troubling movies, especially 'Vertigo' and 'Psycho', as far as his straightforward thrillers go 'The 39 Steps' is still one of his most entertaining. The man on the run because of false accusations or "knowing too much" motif may or may not have been invented here, but it certainly influenced dozens of subsequent thrillers, all the way up until contemporary movies like 'Enemy Of The State' and 'Minority Report'. Robert Donat makes a great hero, and Madeleine Carroll is charming and funny as his reluctant partner. The chemistry and repartee between the two is something that has been copied countless times since. Some people seem to regard 'The 39 Steps' as a practice run for Hitch's later 'North By Northwest', but I prefer the earlier movie. It may not be complex and deep, but it's great fun, and full of old fashioned movie magic. A classic thriller that is still wonderfully entertaining, and should prove to be enjoyable to almost everyone who watches it. Recommended.

The Thirty Nine Steps is extraordinary in every conceivabe way. Anyone who doesn't mind slightly old, black-and-white movies will be enraptured by this Hitchcock classic, which was one of the first films to present sophisticated and witty banter between two ill-matched characters. What makes it even more extraordinary is that it virtually totally alters the source material (John Buchan's novel), yet still comes across as a work of ingenuity.

The story concerns Richard Hannay (Robert Donat) a handsome young man who owns a London flat. A mysterious woman comes to him for help, claiming that she is being hunted by some spies. Hannay helps her, but when she is murdered in his home it look like he is to blame, and he has to go on the run from the police (who obviously want him for the "crime") and the spies (who want him to find out how much he actually knows). En route, he has many adventures as he flees across the South Scotland landscapes, including being handcuffed to a woman (Madeline Carroll) who happens to think he is guilty of the murder.

This is splendid from the word "go". It has enough memorable set pieces for a dozen films, its pace is invigorating, the plot is constantly turning up new surprises, and the performances are just about perfect. Hitchcock spent his career narrating tale of innocent men on the run (indeed, many consider it to be his "favourite" theme) and this is one of the very finest examples of that. Anyone interested in Hitchcock or cinema of the '30s simply must, must, must see this film.

One of the most enjoyable Hitchcock thrillers.Still as good after repeated viewing.Robert Donat stars as the innocent man with a murder charge on his head and accidently mixed up in a spy story.Trying to expose a spy-ring and clear his name he flees to Scotland and encounters a lot of people who help and hinder him.

Robert Donat gives one of his best performances of his career as the protagonist.The chemistry between him and Madeleine Carroll,and especially a young Peggy Ashcroft (A brilliant performance)is wonderful to behold.John Laurie must also be mentioned,as the sinister farmer. One of the best chase-movies ever. Rating: ***** out of *****

The classic mistaken man caught up in the middle of high drama and intrigue. A man(Robert Donat) comes to the aid of a young woman(Madeleine Carroll) only to get involved in a cloak and dagger chase through London and Scotland. The mysterious spy activities culminates in a novel climax. Donat and Carroll are flawless. Their banter will influence movie dialog for decades to come. This mystery is not that easily unwound.

A perfect example of the genius of Hitchcock's pre-war British period. Also in the movie are Godfrey Tearle and Frank Cellier. A small, but major role in the plot is played by Wylie Watson as Mr. Memory.

This is proof - if ever it were really needed - that age doesn't really affect a film's quality. If anyone needs to see some of Hitchcock's finest moments, this should be among them.

Playing fast and loose somewhat with John Buchan's (1916) novel, Hitchcock nevertheless directs a fast-moving, riveting story of political intrigue and paranoia with some truly hair-raising scenes (the Forth rail bridge scene springs to mind).

Hitchcock makes his usual cameo appearances. Apart from the one noted here, he's also in one of the early scenes after Arabella Smith fires the pistol. The music hall audience panics and make for the egress, 'Hitch' being one of the crowd. He's also one of the detectives seeking Hannay after he leaves the train on the Forth bridge.

There are some really sparkling lines of dialogue: cold, hungry and tired after tramping across the moors in (what I suppose is Fife), Hannay encounters a crofter (played by John Laurie, later famous as Fraser in Dad's Army): Crofter (to Hannay who has asked him for a bed for the night): Can you sleep in a box bed?" Hannay: "I can try" Crofter: "Can you eat the herring?" Hannay: "I could eat half a dozen right now".

Once inside, the crofter's (much younger) wife asks Hannay the following, after hearing that he lives in London: "Is it true that the women in London are beautiful?" Hannay: "Some of them are but they wouldn't be if they stood next to you." My word, what a charmer!

In case you were wondering, the thirty-nine steps in the original book referred to the steps down to the sea at a secluded bay, the spy involved arranging to be extracted by a submarine when the tide had covered up to the thirty-ninth step from the top. This is not alluded to in the 1935 film version, other than to give a name to the network of spies involved. Hannay was a mining engineer and Arabella Smith in the book is a man! It's a short-ish film too, coming in at about an hour and a quarter. It's occasionally on British terrestrial telly and never fails to please. Why they tried to remake this (in 1953 and 1978) is anyone's guess as you can't improve on perfection.

Being a fan of anything Hitchcock, I decided to go back in time and view some of Hitch's early British period productions, via a packaged set. Well, I just realized that it all started way back when-all the elements of Hitchcock's epics are right here in this 1930's era espionage thriller. It's all here: the everday man caught up where he's not supposed to be, the blonde femme fatales, the humor; it's almost an early day Man Who Knew Too Much or North By Northwest. It's just Hitchcock gone Scotland Yard for this To Catch A Thief. If you enjoy the prototypical Hitchcock spy drama with a twist, you'll have fun viewing this early product. It really really was Jolly Good Fun!

Alfred Hitchcock directed this film in 1935. It's one of his greatest successes. The film is based on a novel by John Buchan, also known as Lord Tweedsmuir. The story has a Canadian mining engineer, Richard Hannay, unwillingly drawn into a spy chase when a woman unknown to him latches onto him as he's leaving a London theatre. She tells him she's a spy and that she needs his help. He's skeptical of her story, but he goes back to his London flat with her. Hannay is brilliantly played by actor Robert Donat. He turns out to be quite an interesting character, and a resourceful one at that. When the woman he returned home with turns up dead in his flat, Hannay flees London for Scotland, hoping to find a man he believes can clear him. The newspapers accuse Hannay of murder, so he knows he's a wanted man. During a chase through Scotland, Hannay finds he's not only pursued by the police for the murder he didn't commit, but by members of the spy ring the woman warned him about. Watch how he manages to deal with police, spies and a beautiful young woman played by Madeleine Carroll.

While I'm not as enthusiastic about this Hitchcock film as some of the others here, I do appreciate the chemistry between ROBERT DONAT (as the man on the run) and his reluctant, but charming, partner who shares the handcuffs with rightful indignation, MADELEINE CARROLL. Both were still in their prime and make an interesting duo.

However, it's the kind of story that we've seen countless times since--and even Hitchcock himself has repeated it with stories like NORTH BY NORTHWEST or SABATEUR. Furthermore, my favorite man on the run stories were THIS GUN FOR HIRE (with Alan Ladd and Veronica Lake) and MINISTRY OF FEAR (with Ray Milland on the run the moment he steps outside of an asylum into an even crazier world).

Nevertheless, as the story progresses from an entertaining opening at a British Music Hall and the spy theme is quickly developed, which leads to the chase that occupies most of the film, it's clear that Hitchcock is in his element. He himself had an absolute fear of authorities such as the police and it's clear from the clever camera-work and point of view of the film's leading character that he is able to transmit this fear and loathing to the viewer.

Summing up: Not the best of Hitchcock and it's absolutely necessary to view this one in a good print. Many of the public domain copies are hard to watch and liable to alienate you from the film's gripping suspense.

This is the oldest movie that I've seen (made in 1935), and it took me a bit of time to get adjusted to it as a film from such and early era. After all, it was only recently that I really started enjoying movies from the 50's.

But as I was adjusting to the classic black and white visuals and the abrupt editing, I began noticing the same Hitchcock themes and flourishes that I've seen in the later favorites like North by Northwest. The train scenes, the cases of mistaken identity and being in the wrong place at the wrong time, the innocent man on the run who meets an icy blonde, it's all here. The 39 Steps is Hitchcock through and through, that's for sure.

I thought the story was pretty good, if a little abrupt in places. There's lots of tension, a bit of occasional sexually charged humor, and another thrilling escape for the protagonist always seems just around the corner. Any fans of Hitchcock's other movies will probably appreciate this.

As a Hitchcock fan, this was the only movie of his I had not seen. I waited for a very special occasion to watch it and the setting was perfect. Oh, but what a disappointment! I mean a huge disappointment, especially compared to any other Hitchcock film. As another reviewer has mentioned, I think this is an example of people giving good reviews simply because they are supposed to and it shows their "Love & Understanding of Fine Cinema." My guess is many have not seen the movie. Where do I begin to tell you why this movie is such a disappointment? Ridiculous overacting, implausible change of heart by main character, forgettable milquetoast of a leading man (Donat), and repeated coincidences to push the seriously weak plot that are so unbelievably silly that everyone in my viewing laughed.

The capper was the ending. After I watched it, I went to the National Archives in D.C. (I live there) to find original reviews on the movie (which I do often). The 1935 critical reviews are far more diverse in their opinions than the glowing write-ups on this board would lead you to believe. Many major critics of the day hated the movie and many more were confused by the silly and convenient ending which Hitchcock himself was forced to explain many times. I recommend that those interested do their own research into the opinions of Hitchcock's contemporaries without the modern "hindsight" and positive baggage the director's name conveys.

I'm sorry to say this but the 39 Steps is, without any doubt on my part, Hitchcock's worst. I recommend you take 39 Steps away from this movie and move down the isle to get _any_ other Hitchcock movie especially Torn Curtain, Rear Window, Lifeboat, and The Lady Vanishes.