Nonureva Really Surprised!

Inclubabu Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

HottWwjdIam There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

zkonedog On the surface, "Suspicion" looks like a film that would be a perfect fit for Hitchcock's directorial touch. It contains two star leads, great opportunities for tremendous acting, and even more possibilities for intense drama/suspense. Unfortunately, Hitch fails to cull all those aspects together in this case, instead producing a middling film with a conclusion that will have you wondering if it was all worth it.For a basic plot summary, "Suspicion" sees debonair gentleman Johnnie (Cary Grant) marry the rather practical Lina (Joan Fontaine). After the fabulous courtship, however, Lina discovers that Johnnie is nowhere near what he seemed at first, and that he may even have some murderous intentions in order to get himself out of debt.The trouble with "Suspicion" is twofold:First, none of the character development ends up leading anywhere. I won't give any major spoilers here, but suffice it to say that in the end, you will be severely disappointed with how the characters turn out. In typical "40's cinema" fashion, emotions turn on a dime with no rhyme or reason and are explained away with a single sentence at the end.Secondly, the "suspense" promised us only comes near the very end of the film, and then is quickly ruined by (again) the cop-out ending. The rest of the run-time is filled with scenes that should be building up the two lead characters, but instead amount to waffling back and forth between "Lina loves Johnnie" and "Lina suspects Johnnie".Put simply, "Suspicion" may have thrilled film fans during its time, but it certainly does not hold up well today. I'll give it 2.5 stars because the acting is quite fine throughout, but other than that there just isn't much to get excited about here.

l_rawjalaurence Dismissed by critics as "minor" Hitchcock, SUSPICION nonetheless has plenty to recommend it.Set in a chocolate-box English village reconstructed on the RKO back-lot, full of green fields, mock-Tudor housing, hunting scenes and over-stuffed interiors, the film contrasts the stultifying respectability of spinster Lina's (Joan Fontaine's) life with the prospects offered by chancer Johnnie (Cary Grant).Lina lives in a village world where church-going and hunt balls are the highlights of daily life. Her parents (Dame May Witty and Sir Cedric Hardwicke) spend their days in their comfortable living-room, either embroidering or reading the paper. They have no need for excitement: General McLaidlaw (Hardwicke) has enjoyed a distinguished military career and has now retired. By contrast Johnnie, although reluctant to work, as well as being a habitual liar with a penchant for betting, has that indefinable quality called charm (what else would he be, when played by Grant?) Lina understands what a worthless person he is, but cannot detach herself from him. As Johnnie's friend Beaky (Nigel Bruce) tell her, he can be excused anything.The only suggestion that something might be amiss is communicated through lighting. The two protagonists are perpetually photographed with bars - window-bars, blinds, stairwells being three example - either across their bodies or at the back of the frame, suggesting imprisonment. This is both physical as well as emotional: neither Johnnie nor Lina can be honest with one another. As a result Lina continually suspects her husband's motives.There are continual echoes of REBECCA, filmed in the previous year - not only with the presence of Fontaine in the case, but also with the use of stock footage taken on the coast from the cliffs looking down at the sea crashing below. The final sequence, where Johnnie drives his sports car at breakneck speed, putting both his own and his spouse's safety at risk, recalls a similar moment in the earlier film. The endings of the two films are different, but the intertexts remain.There is one memorable sequence towards the film's end, drawing attention to Hitchcock's penchant for the macabre. As Johnnie is abound to climb the stairs, he is photographed in shadow, picked out against a tight column of bright light. Just what his motives are, we know not; but the visual effect is stunning.

Kirpianuscus first, it is a real interesting film. because, in many scenes it seems be an experiment to mix different pieces from different genres. it is, in same measure, a dark comedy, a thriller, mystery and quiz. the occasion to discover a different Cary Grant, exploring his art for romantic comedy in admirable manner and occasion for Joan Fontain to guide the viewer on the web of innocence, rumors, fear and need to know the truth. the end is a compromise. brutal, uncomfortable but, maybe, part of experiment, solution to escape from the predictability or the scissor of censors. a strange film because it contains the lines who define Hitchcock universe but, in same measure, seems profound different. and, finally, this is far to be a bad thing.

Christopher Reid Suspicion starts out like a nice romance. You wonder where the typical Hitchcock mystery and intrigue are going to arise from. Cary Grant meets Joan Fontaine and seems to immediately like her. He's charming and very forward and pretty soon she seems to fall for him as well. Still, the whole thing feels a bit rushed and really they don't know each-other that well, which is probably asking for trouble. In real life, I've often found people end up not as perfect or as nice as you thought they were once you get to know them. Cracks start appearing in their personality, little nasty or hypocritical things about them.Well, perhaps Grant's character is not so flawless after all. What's good about the movie is that we can strongly relate to Fontaine's character. She starts to become ever more concerned and frustrated at her husband's behaviour. She comes across as intelligent and perhaps her only weakness is how much she loves him - she may be too forgiving. I can't say much else, but the movie cleverly leads us to feel more and more suspicious without ever revealing anything explicit. We can never be sure, there is always some doubt.Joan Fontaine won an Oscar for her performance (the only ever acting Oscar won for a Hitchcock movie) and perhaps it was also a nod to her acting in Rebecca (1940) the previous year. But she is very good in this film as is Cary Grant. I found Grant funny in a lot of scenes but then started to feel uncomfortable about him. It is a scary situation to be in, feeling afraid of someone but having no solid evidence of misdeeds and having no good excuses to behave any differently from normal. He appears cold at times but we don't necessarily know exactly why.Suspicion reminded me of The Prestige (2006) in that I wanted to discuss it with other people afterwards. It engaged me, put me through some emotional ups and downs and left me feeling a bit confused and unsure. But that can be good. It's not predictable and there is certainly some amount of ambiguity by the end. But because of that, it stays in your mind and you keep pondering it, analysing it.There are parts that are truly haunting and also heart-breaking. The main characters really do appear to be in love. But one of them has bad habits and a tendency to be manipulative at times. Maybe he can't help it and maybe he can change. Maybe it's not worth the trouble for his wife but then can't love conquer all? Her suspicions feel justified but could he really be like that? I think we are much more vulnerable to those we love and to even suspect them of something can cause immense pain. Joan goes through these feelings and so do we.