Opiniones de usuarios

A year or so before he worked with him for SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, director Rowland V. Lee unleashed a maniacal Basil Rathbone in this unusual thriller that's not really a "good film", but is still pretty interesting and serves up a delicious climax if you can wait it out. Rathbone plays a suave ladies' man who charms his way into the life of a young woman who's just won the lottery. They get married, and only then does the woman realize her husband is not what he seems and may have half his screws loose. If you don't love Basil's insane performance in SON OF FRANKENSTEIN, this will probably drive you even crazier; but if, like me, you think he's more fun than a barrel of monkeys when he lets it all hang out, this one is for you. The battle of wits at the end between Ann Harding and Rathbone has got to be seen to be believed! This one's a must if you love Basil Rathbone, and no Rathbone fan should dare miss it. **1/2 out of ****

This is based on an Agatha Christie story and contains some of the most histrionic acting I've ever witnessed. I never knew that anyone could go so far over the top and not shoot out of the frame and into space.

The basic plot concerns a young woman who wins a lottery and soon after meets and falls in love with a "stranger", played by Basil Rathbone. Rathbone's intentions are far from happy and it all winds down to a conclusion that allows... well lets just say you will wonder about everyone's sanity.

I'm not sure I liked this. Its good, but it takes a while to get going. Once its moving its fine but even then I was never really content. I want to say that its oddly British, but its not so much that its British as mannered. I like that you have the pure unrestrained emotion in the final act, but at the same time compared to the earlier low key nature of it I was wondering how many coffees the cast had.

Frankly I'm reserving my final judgment until I see it again.

Even with all of that said and done I suggest you do see this movie- and stay to the end. Unless you've seen this before, I'm certain you've never witnessed what Basil Rathbone was truly capable of. I won't try to explain that statement, I'll let you search this out and see for yourself.

Interesting British-made suspenser - from an Agatha Christie story, no less - which feels quite dated today due to the low budget and a rather slow pace (though the atrocious condition in which it's available doesn't help matters any!), but survives nevertheless by virtue of its excellent leading performances.

I've watched Ann Harding in only a few other films - most notably PETER IBBETSON (1935) - but, even if she has been largely forgotten, here again she proves her standing as one of the unsung actresses of her time. Basil Rathbone relishes his role as the suave murderer and the latter stages of the film allow him to go into all-out hysterics in much the same way (and under the same director!) as he would, memorably, in SON OF FRANKENSTEIN (1939); in fact, the last 15 minutes create a genuinely electrifying tension that are basically the film's raison d'etre.

Rowland V. Lee has perhaps never been a highly regarded film-maker but, from what little I've seen of his work, he was a reasonably efficient craftsman and, given promising material, he always turned in a quality product (the two films of his I would most love to catch up with are the definitive screen version of THE COUNT OF MONTE CRISTO [1934] and TOWER OF London [1939], yet another Rathbone collaboration).

Once this gets moving, it's a good thriller with an interesting story that is well worth watching. It has a good cast, led by Basil Rathbone and Ann Harding. The last half of it builds up the suspense very nicely in leading up to a tense climax.

The story is a fairly straightforward one about a young woman who is swept away by a charming man, and then quickly marries him, but then begins to wonder if he is really what he seems to be. The first part is rather slow in setting everything up (the Agatha Christie story on which the play and movie are based is much more economical, and just as suspenseful), but stick with it, because the last part is more than worth waiting for. It squeezes quite a bit out of the possibilities that the situation offers, and you'll definitely want to find out what happens.

"A Night of Terror," or "Love from a Stranger" from 1937 is based on an Agatha Christie story. A woman, Carol Howard (Ann Harding) wins a huge amount of money in a lottery. She decides to sublet her apartment and go to Europe, first to claim the money in Paris, and then to sightsee. Her fiance doesn't understand, and is unhappy that after working hard for a good job, they're not going to need his salary. They consequently break up.

A man, Gerald Lovell (Basil Rathbone) comes to see the apartment - it's too short a time for him to sublet, but when she and her friend (Binnie Hale) board the ship for Paris, he's on it. Gerald wines and dines Carol, and they are soon married.

They move into the country, where Gerald exhibits some odd mood swings and secretive behavior, which includes making the basement his sacred place where no one is allowed.

On the night before they're due to leave on a long trip, the relationship boils over.

This is a wonderful psychological drama, with very good acting. One of the posts mentioned that the acting was so over the top as to be absurd. For the times, it was excellent acting. Acting style has changed and become much less theatrical over the years. I think it's important (for me anyway) to appreciate films from the perspective of the times in which they were made. Not all performances from those days survive today's critiques. Rathbone and Harding are both excellent.

This is the definitive movie version of the story. The later movie version pales by comparison. The casting is terrific. The plot is plausible. The pacing is perfect. The settings were simple yet convincing. The acting is right on the button. Basil Rathbone is extraordinary in what may be one of his finest performances. Hitchock could not have directed it any better. The psychopathology is presented in a valid way, eschewing melodrama. This version is uncompromisingly true to the meaning and the tone of Christie's creation. Just as importantly the dialogue does not insult your intelligence. The final scene is intense yet controlled and makes one yearn for these well-done black and white movies in contrast to the melodramatic, syrupy Technicolor endings we get nowadays.

Ann Harding was capable of delivering as fine a dramatic screen performance as any actress of her generation. That is a big statement, but watch this film and you will be impressed with her performance every minute she is on screen. It is that good.

Rathbone seemed to get a lot of roles requiring a lot of dramatic "flair", such as Dr. Frankenstein, Sherlock Holmes, and this role here. Within that context he always delivers what is required, which is to walk the fine line between overacting and "flair".

While a bit slow developing, the good acting by all the cast in "A Night of Terror" will hold your attention, and will leave you wanting to look for more Ann Harding films.

If you are a fan of good, straight, no-gimmick drama, watch this one.

Since it's from the mind of Agatha Christie, it's not quite as straightforward as you first think. In the hands of Alfred Hitchcock however this could have been something really special but as it is, it's just ok.

As soon as Basil Rathbone shows up you know he's a bad'un. This role is perfect for him and he gives a spectacular performance. Ann Harding however is as bland as she usually is but that mousy naive character is necessary for the story to work. It does however make it difficult to sympathise too much with her so it's not as gripping as it should be. I think it would have been better to have given the lead to Binnie Hale who had a lot more oomph but in this she doesn't really have much to do. Surprisingly she's also uncharacteristically quite frumpy which is a shame.

To set the scene, the start is very slow and although the tension really builds up half way through, by then you're losing interest. As I said, this is the type of story which Hitchcock would have got the pacing just right unlike Rowland Lee who's direction feels too inconsistent.

The production is first rate - it's a big budget affair from Max Schach (made at Korda's state of the art studio), the script and performances are believable but the actual story isn't really that engrossing. Maybe it wasn't so clichéd back in 37 but this isn't classic Christie.

I love Basil Rathbone. He made a wonderful Holmes. Too bad the scripts didn't match the performance. But that's another issue. Here he plays a type of Bluebeard who marries women who come into money and then bumps them off. He is a mass of psychoses, depression, and a bad ticker. He goes from being suave and successful, to maudlin and manic. A modern psychologist would have a field day. The tension that builds as he goes through his rant is a little like Jack Nicholson in "The Shining." There's a moment where the bride becomes cognizant of the fact that she is married to a lunatic. And, of course, she had been warned and has married him anyway. Anyway, the last scene where they spar intellectually is delightful and shows both actors at their best. There's a wonderful moment of realization on the young woman's face where she realizes that her life depends on what she says. It is one of the most claustrophobic bits I've ever seen and is very effective in showing that there is just a little tilt to the scales on both sides.

Basil Rathbone as a crazed wife killer took time to get used too but actually he was excellent. The film begins very slowly for about forty minutes as Carol Howard wins the lottery. She now has money and starts to spend it. Gerald Lovell "Rathbone" comes into her life and sweeps her off her feet into marriage. Little does she know that he has a secret life. He is actually a killer of three previous wives and intends to make her the fourth. The final half of the film makes up for the first half as we begin to see Rathbone in action. The end features the "battle to the death" between Rathbone and wife Carol.

Love from a Stranger (1937)

*** (out of 4)

A poor woman (Ann Harding) wins the lottery and soon she's swept off her feet by a nice man (Basil Rathbone) but after they're married she begins to think he has a few secrets including murder. Director Rowland V. Lee does a good job on this story by Agatha Christie and builds some nice atmosphere, which helps matters. Harding is very good in her role but the real key here is Rathbone who, as later in Son of Frankenstein, goes through a nervous breakdown, which is wonderful to watch. Some might call it over the top but I think he does a good job at showing the character losing his mind. Some slow segments hamper the film but the ending certainly makes up for that.

All right, it creaks a bit, now, and suffers from the staginess which afflicted many if not most British films of this period, but the Agatha Christie plot (with a strong family resemblance to that other hyper-theatrical melodrama, "Gaslight") is gripping, and the necessary claustrophobic atmosphere is established and maintained -- with help from the excellent score from a very youthful Benjamin Britten (I have, by the way, never come across a reference to this early effort in any Britten biography; it is unmentioned in the long article in Grove's Dictionary). Most of all, it's worth seeing for the terrifying performance by Basil Rathbone, which again reminds us what an accomplished and versatile actor was all-but obliterated in his later absorption into Sherlock Holmes. No goalie-mask, no retractile steel claws, no camera-tricks, he scares the pants off you using only an actor's equipment, and you'll never forget his portrayal of a psychotic, obsessive Bluebeard.

Ann Harding (Carol) wins the lottery and instead of working through her 3-month notice period, she just walks out of her job. How unrealistic. Everyone who wins the lottery would surely continue to turn up to the workplace every dreary morning in order to help make their employer richer and richer with no benefit to themselves. That's how our wonderful work system operates and why we are all so proud to be part of it. She tells her fiancée she is now rich and he is immediately outraged and doesn't understand why she wouldn't want to struggle in life so they quarrel and split up. He is Bruce Seton (Ronald) and is obviously a moron. Ann is now rich and single and, by chance, meets Basil Rathbone (Gerald) who comes to see her flat which she is letting out while she travels to Paris. So, a new romance blossoms.........uh-oh.....

Rathbone is excellent as always. What is there not to like about a well-spoken, well-mannered gentleman? He does, however, have a peculiar interest in unsolved crimes and in particular, one case about a man called Fletcher who killed 3 of his wives. His picture seems to be missing from Rathbone's copy of the book. I think you can put two and two together on this one.

We build to a climax in the secluded house in Kent that Harding and Rathbone share one night when Rathbone sends the staff away and locks all the window and doors. By this point, Harding is aware that he is a maniac but can she fight back and avert the plan he has in store for her?

There are a few unnecessary comedy characters but they don't outstay their welcome like they usually do. The film builds the drama and tension in the second half and is played out by Harding and Rathbone in an entertaining final segment.