Le chant du Danube

This musical comedy must be one of Hitchcock's most obscure movies (not even reviewed in Leonard Maltin's guide until the latest edition!). It has very little dramatic interest, and not much in the way of notable visuals either, but the production does have a certain opulence (including some enormous sets), and of course the Strauss music is a pleasure to listen to, particularly in the concert sequence. Apparently Jessie Matthews was one of Britain's biggest musical stars around this period, but you'd never know it from this picture - she sings only once and never dances. ** out of 4.

It is not his best, not even close, but his worst film is Juno and Paycock with Jamaica Inn and Champagne not far off. Number 17, Under Capricorn and Topaz are also towards the bottom. Waltzes from Vienna does look lovely, sumptuous sets and costumes, good photography and some nice visual flourishes. The music sparkles with beauty and energy throughout, while Edmund Gwenn gives a great performance, Jessie Matthews is charming enough and there's also the Blue Danube scene which is by far the highlight of the film. Esmond Knight does look uncomfortable and can have a tendency to over-act, while Fay Compton under-characterises. The direction has its moments but there is a sense that Hitchcock wasn't particularly interested in the project. The comedy scenes are rather forced and are played too broadly, while the story has a little charm but can be a little dull and silly, with some underdeveloped characters and relationships- that of Johann and Rasi is rather un-engaging- and sub-plots that serve little point and the script is on the talky side. Overall, one of Hitchcock's weakest but not his worst like he considered it to be, of the films of his personally seen there are at least 6 or 7 that are worse. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Strauss's Great Waltz will go down as your most atypical Alfred Hitchcock film. Mainly because at this time he was not an icon in the film profession but a contract director Gaumont-British Pictures. The Hitchcock stamp is definitely not on this one.

But it is the only musical in his career so you would think something better would have come from it, especially since he had the United Kingdom's number one musical star at the time Jessie Matthews. Who has no real musical numbers, talk about strange. Her singing and dancing talents may have been left on the cutting room floor.

The story was covered far better in MGM's high gloss film, The Great Waltz. Young Johann Strauss, Jr. is considered by his father to be the least promising of his offspring and the senior Strauss Edmund Gwenn ridicules his efforts at composing at every opportunity. Young Strauss who is Esmond Knight in this film has even gone to work in a bakery, in real life Strauss wanted his son to be a banker.

Countess Fay Compton however encourages Knight's genius and we all know what happened after that.

The musical with book and lyrics by Guy Bolton had a nice run on the London Stage. Obviously Hitchcock just didn't have his heart in this assignment and sadly the results show.

'Waltzes from Vienna' is Alfred Hitchcock's only musical and he directed this because he didn't have any other projects to choose from, and by that time he was still under the contract with British International Pictures. Although being peculiarity in Hitchcock's filmography 'Waltzes from Vienna' includes quite many Hitchcockian moments, including his usual trademark humor. The story itself is by the numbers affair coupled with few musical numbers, but it is masterfully orchestrated by genius conductor. The film is probably most notable of the use of combining the editing with the flow and rhythm of the music.

Sweet little movie which proves that masterful director can turn quite shallow script into somewhat enjoyable entertainment.

This is a fairly entertaining pre-War cheaply made British musical comedy which sadly fails in a number of ways: it was the 3rd film with Jessie Matthews and Edmund Gwenn, and definitely the least satisfying of them; it was Hitchcock directing a non-thriller with his heart not in it; Hitchcock and Matthews didn't get on, and it showed in his screen treatment of her - Britain's top singing and dancing star at the time; and a ridiculously fictitious plot. Hitch thought it was the worst film he'd ever made and Jessie thought it was "perfectly dreadful".

It was an adaptation of a London musical stage play which apparently ran for over a year: Johann Strauss II played by Esmond Knight wants to be a composer like his father, I (Gwenn), who is arrogantly dismissive of his talents throughout. I'm afraid I won't see Gwenn as Santa quite the same again. II eventually succeeds spectacularly with the help of Countess Fay Compton (was she ever anything but elderly and wistful?) and barmaid girlfriend Matthews - incidentally Robert Hale who played her father was her real-life father-in-law. Jessie was as usual good to look at (personally speaking) but unfortunately didn't really get to sing much, and Hitchcock was excellent as usual but didn't get to show off much. Most people will be disappointed with the latter, but for myself it was with the lack of Jessie's beautiful singing voice in what was after all billed as a musical, and with her name over the title. On the other hand, Hitchcock seemed to be mining the One Hour With You stylistic vein a lot of the time albeit in a cheaper but still pleasant British way, there were some nice sets and of course there was Louis Levy's orchestrations for The Blue Danube to admire when it arrived. The less said about how II was supposed to have composed it here, the better!

It's a pleasant enough 76 minutes for someone like me who isn't a Hitchcock completist, but probably will be a real chore if you are.