|
ESSAYS, ARTICLES, AND THEORIES ABOUT CINEMA
|
|
| |
|
|
| Thursday, May 1, 2008
|
|
Stranger on a Train (1951) |
 Alfred Hitchcock’s 1951 classic Strangers on a Train is equally considered a clear masterpiece. The brilliantly crafted story written by Raymond Chandler, Czenzi Ormonde, Whitfield Cook, and based off the novel by Patricia Highsmith, is filled with memorable characters with haunting similarities and plenty of excitement to keep the less interested action fan satisfied. Hitchcock’s craving for suspense illuminates the screen with situations of held action until the right moment when the audience’s adrenaline glands rage like pistons.
Hitchcock is famously known for telling the story with the eye of a camera. Some might say the camera is his brush and then screen is his canvas. His abstractive smooth and steady dolly shots are mere brushstrokes to the director. The story begins outside of a train station with the focus on Guy and Bruno’s shoes as they step out of vehicles and follows all the way to the train. At first the focus is on Guy’s shoes: shiny and black, but then transitioned to Bruno’s shoes: black and white, winged-tip. That is to assume even though both shoes are different, both gentlemen walk the same and may have further similarities.
“Strangers on a Train” is an off-railed story about two men who, by fate, cross paths and agree to  exchange murders. Both characters are coherently established from the start. Guy Haines, portrayed by Farley Granger, is the rich, elegant, kind-hearted, tennis player eager to leave his intolerable wife for a senator’s daughter. Robert Walker plays Bruno Anthony, the sly, feminine, evil stranger who is ruled by his authoritative father. While both sitting across from one another in the passenger car of a train, Bruno attempts to cross his legs, but taps shoes with Guy’s and thus begins their “business arrangement.” The idea is a suggestion from Bruno to switch murders. Right away it is obvious that Bruno has an ability to read Guy like a book. Guy considers the idea ludicrous and exits the train at his stop with no intentions of running into Bruno ever again. Little did he know that Bruno’s plan had already begun.
A huge concept in a Hitchcock film is the sheer fact that little key pieces make up the rising  action of a story, and are responsible for the reasoning behind that action. In Notorious: a key, in Shadow of a Doubt (1943): a ring, in Blackmail (1929): a painting in Vertigo (1958): a necklace, in Frenzy (1972): a pin, and in this case: a lighter. The focus is on the material possession that serves as a springboard to redemption or incarceration. Guy mistakenly leaves his lighter on the train with Bruno, which evolves to Bruno stalking Guy’s ex-wife and killing her. Bruno does just that. He follows her to a carnival and strangles the helpless woman. As the murder occurs, her glasses fall off, and the act is shown through the reflection of the glasses lenses. After the murder, Bruno holds Guy’s lighter and takes a few seconds to contemplate, leaving the audience with an idea what Bruno plans next.
The murder is announced to Guy, and Bruno approaches him with a morbidly elated persona. Bruno cites his excitement for Guy’s turn at murder, but Guy refuses and angrily ends all tides with the killer. Instead of taking the news easily, Bruno decides to stalk Guy and becomes well acquainted with his new girlfriend and her senator father. Bruno also remarks, “And I was very careful, Guy. Even when I dropped your cigarette lighter there, I went back to pick it up.” Suddenly the exchange turns into entrapment. Guy threatens to call the police, but Bruno tells him that in fact they both have committed the murder. He adds the notion why would he kill a girl he doesn’t know unless it was arranged. Guy is forced to play Bruno’s game and by his rules. Guy finally submits to the mastermind and agrees to kill Bruno’s father. Once night falls, Guy creeps into Bruno’s home, softly walks in the father’s room and whispers, “Mr. Anthony, don’t be alarmed, but I must talk to you about your son, about Bruno.” The lamp suddenly illuminates the area, revealing Bruno sitting in the bed. Bruno swears to achieve his reimbursement through his own twisted method.
The police follow Guy’s every move due to a faulty alibi. Guy plays in his big tennis match as Bruno takes a train back to a familiar area: the carnival. Guy, who once was a careful  experienced player, now is forced to win the match quickly. He plays his mind and heart out as Bruno nears the scene of the murder with lighter in hand. Guy wins the first set, loses the second, but reclaims the third. After finishing, he distracts the cops and makes a run for the train station, but the police are not too far behind. Here we have a natural reoccurrence of situations. Bruno returns to the scene where he murdered Guy’s wife and the both of them returning to the train which symbolizes the ever-longing lust for desire. At first, the desire was felt by Guy and Bruno to kill, but now Guy desires to survive this new world of coercion or incarceration. Bruno eagerly waits for night to fall, in order to drop the lighter in the crime scene so no one will recognize him. He stands in line, but the ride manager slowly recollects Bruno’s face, and off Bruno runs. Guy and Bruno clash into one another again, but this time Guy wants Bruno to give a confession to the police, and Bruno wants Guy dead. Guy chases Bruno onto a carousel. The police try shooting Guy, but instead hit the carousel worker which causes the ride to begin spinning at a high speed and finally to an uncontrollable velocity. The climactic runaway carousel scene finally comes to a halt with the ride breaking down and both Guy and Bruno being thrown from the carousel. The police find Guy and the ride manager reveals having no recollection of him. They find Bruno and he gives his final words attempting to bring Guy down with him, but fails as his eyes close, his hand opens up revealing the lighter.
A parallel theme is the plot itself as a comparison to a tennis match. Guy is a tennis player and if analytically contemplated about, the plot clearly resembles that of a tennis match. On one side of the court is Guy, but on the other is his opponent, Bruno. This analogy is clearly stated throughout the entire film. In fact, Guy plays his big match and the sets are compiled of Guy winning the first, losing the second and winning the third, thus winning the match. In the beginning, Guy’s wife is killed: A problem taken off his shoulders, hence the first set won by Guy. Although, Bruno uses the lighter as leverage and steals the upper hand with the ability to frame Guy, and so Bruno wins the second set. Finally, good overcomes evil with Guy fighting off Bruno and proving his innocence with the victory of the third set and the match.
Like two trains, Bruno and Guy crossed at the  tracks. One grossly indulged with life, and the other grossly indulged with death. Polar similarities hold the two as one. Bruno is a sense, Guy’s inner demon. The physical built-up of the evil conscious Guy innocently depicts in his mind. Notice how Guy never killed Bruno’s father. The only murders that occurred in the story were that of Guy’s wife, whom he wanted dead, and Bruno, which might have served as the murder of his evil self. The scenes of Bruno with his mother and father might translate as flashbacks of Guy’s own childhood. Bruno kills Guy’s wife by strangulation, which is a crime of passion. The psychological and sexual frustration might come from Guy and transpire through Bruno. After Bruno takes his final breath, the ride manager asks about the identity of this “mysterious guy.” Guy simply responds, “Bruno. Bruno Anthony. Very clever fellow.” |
|
posted by Will Lewis 8:40 PM
 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
