Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

Konterr Brilliant and touching

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Ezmae Chang This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

bkoganbing From what I've been reading we're fortunate to have this film at all much less showing for rent on Amazon. Not unlike what Paramount did with Frank Capra's Broadway Bill when that studio made Riding High, MGM destroyed this original British made version of Gaslight that came out four years before MGM remade it with Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman and Joseph Cotten, that classic that won Ingrid Bergman her first Oscar. Fortunately MGM was not thorough and we can enjoy Diana Wynyard and Anton Walbrook in this original film version of the play Angel Street.It might have been nice to have a version of that surviving as well. On stage Vincent Price played the suave husband who is trying to get his wife to question her sanity, he co-starred with Judith Evelyn in the Patrick Hamilton play that ran 1295 performances on Broadway from 1941 to 1944. I can see Price easily doing this part.Of course it would be without the continental suavity of both Charles Boyer and here, Anton Walbrook. Walbrook is one both cold and cool and cruel customer as he tries to drive Wynyard out of her mind. She's at a loss to explain his change toward her. In point of fact she's accidentally discovered a clue to his real identity and he's had history with her family before. She doesn't know what she's discovered which makes her all the more frightened. Wynyard is every bit as good as Bergman in the remake.The major change that MGM made was in the policeman's role. In fact there is some reason to speculate that Scotland Yard man Joseph Cotten may end up with Bergman in the MGM version. Here the dogged detective is British character actor Frank Pettengill who's strictly business. He recognizes Walbrook, but can't prove anything without positive identification.Gaslight remains firmly fixed in the Victorian era it is set. Today what involved an elaborate scheme of deception by Pettengill could be remedied easily with fax and telephotos to Australia where Walbrook presumably was staying for many years.This version of Gaslight is every bit the equal of the finely mounted MGM version and since it is closer to what author Hamilton had in mind, many consider it superior. It's pretty darn good any way you slice it.

Lechuguilla The film gets off to a great start. A burglar, whose face we do not see, kills an old woman named Alice Barlow (Marie Wright) in a big, two-story house, in late nineteenth century London. Her murder goes unsolved.The plot then fast-forwards to a later era. Ladies' man Paul (Anton Walbrook) and his insecure wife Bella (Diana Wynyard) move into the creepy house. But the relationship between Paul and Bella is strained. And when Paul leaves each night, leaving Bella alone, she hears strange sounds above her bedroom, and the gaslight in the room mysteriously dims. Paul claims Bella is imagining things.With a tight plot and fine B&W lighting, the film is suspenseful, dark, and brooding. Which is a good thing, because the script's underlying premise is just a tad hokey. Lots of Victorian bric-a-brac in the old house conveys a claustrophobic feel, as if the walls are closing in on Bella. Maybe she is going insane. Costumes are elaborate. Acting trends melodramatic, especially the performance of Walbrook.Originating as a play, this 1940 screen version is superior to the 1944 MGM remake, which is long and drawn out. The 1940 film also looks better, with sharper visuals. Also, I didn't like Hollywood's attitude to this film relative to the later remake.An uneasy calm and psychological subterfuge pervade the plot of "Gaslight" (1940), giving the impression that Hitchcock had a hand in making the film. Although the premise is weak and contrived, there is enough suspense and creepy atmosphere to recommend it as a fine 1940 British thriller.

Martin Teller This really isn't a bad movie, it's just that the remake improves on it in almost every way. A full half hour shorter, it begs the question: is it better to slowly build tension, or cut to the chase? While I didn't particularly mind that the entire courtship between the husband and wife was missing (i.e., most of the first act) I did feel like this was a little too rushed, getting straight to the beats of the plot without building that sense of dread and helplessness. Another thing the remake does (and I have no idea what the original text is like) is give the husband much better motivation to marry the woman in the first place. As for the casting, between Charles Boyer and Anton Walbrook, I'll call it a draw. Maybe even a slight edge to Walbrook, who seems a little bit nastier. Diana Wynyard is okay, but no match at all for Ingrid Bergman. Bergman just has a far more compelling screen presence, especially in the finale. Frank Pettingell vs. Joseph Cotten is a trickier comparison, because the characters are completely different. I think I like the character more in the original, but the performance more in the remake. Is it unfair to make these comparisons, particularly since this one came first? Yes, but I can't help it. One version is far more well-known and well-regarded, and for good reason. Again, not a bad movie, but the 1944 version does it so much better, and leaves little reason to watch this one.

Spikeopath Gaslight is directed by Thorold Dickinson and co-written by A.R. Rawlinson and Bridget Boland, who adapt from Patrick Hamilton's play Gas Light (1938). It stars Anton Walbrook, Diana Wynyard, Frank Pettingell, Cathleen Cordell and Robert Newton. Music is by Richard Addinsell and photography by Bernard Knowles.Alice Barlow is murdered in her home by an unknown man, who proceeds to ransack the house looking for some valuable rubies belonging to the deceased. After sitting empty for years, Alice's house finally gets new owners, Paul (Walbrook) and Bella (Wynyard) Mallen. Not long after moving in Bella finds she may be losing her mind as she keeps misplacing things, hiding objects, imagining strange noises upstairs and convincing herself that the gaslights are weirdly dimming. All is not as it seems in this part of Pimlico Square…. Not as famous as MGM's more glossy version released in 1944, this is, however, every bit the equal of the Ingrid Bergman Oscar grabber. Though stories of MGM to burning the negatives of this film have over the years been embellished, it's true that they did all they could to suppress the release of the film in America. Thing is, they needn't have worried, for Dickinson's film is a very British piece anyway, certainly you feel that their own American produced version would still have had the same popularity that it ultimately had. Dickinson's film is a period melodrama dealing in psychological manipulation whilst casting a roving eye over the British class system in place at the time. There's also a caustic glance at the woman's place in the home, here poor Bella (Wynyard wonderfully correct in portrayal) just wants to be a good wife and be friendly in the neighbourhood, but her life as written is one defined by pure male dominance. This lets in Walbrook, who excels as Paul, ice cold, suave, sinister and effectively calm, you have to ask, what the hell did Bella see in this guy in the first place? Mood is always on the edge of unease, as Bella's mind starts to unravel and with the oppression that comes with the film mostly being set in this one London square, Gaslight starts to gnaw away at the senses. Knowles' monochrome photography dallies in ominous shadows, neatly cloaking the excellent sets in a menacing sheen, and Dickinson (The Arsenal Stadium Mystery) has a gift for tonal pacing and camera work that's not unlike a certain Mr. Hitchcock.It's not perfect, secondary characters could have done with more flesh on the bones and Addinsell's music doesn't always hit the right atmospheric notes. But small moans aside, this is still a fine exponent of the period thriller drama. 8/10