Ohjaus:
Alfred HitchcockKäsikirjoitus:
Ben HechtKuvaus:
George BarnesSävellys:
Miklós RózsaNäyttelijät:
Ingrid Bergman, Gregory Peck, Michael Chekhov, Leo G. Carroll, Rhonda Fleming, John Emery, Norman Lloyd, Donald Curtis, Wallace Ford, Regis Toomey (lisää)Juonikuvaukset(1)
When John Ballantine (Gregory Peck), the new director of a mental asylum arrives on the job, the staff is concerned. He seems to be too young for the position and his answers to their questions are vague and detached. Dr. Peterson (Ingrid Bergman) while knowing he is an imposter with emotional issues, nevertheless falls in love with him. Turning to her mentor Dr. Alex Brulov (Michael Chekhov) and the use of Freudian psychoanalysis, she tries to get to the root of Ballantine's emotional problems. (jakelijan virallinen teksti)
(lisää)Arvostelut (2)
I essentially had a great time with this. But it was a little different than how Hitchcock originally intended. It's similar to when a notorious B-movie filmmaker makes an unintentionally hilarious genre film that reliably makes you laugh more than an Oscar-winning comedy. Meanwhile, Hitchcock is lucky that he enjoyed lightening up his films with humor and over the years, the line between what he once took seriously and what was meant to be funny has blurred. Hitchcock's idea of psychoanalysis was heavily naive and detached from any reality even at the time of its creation, and today it appears truly ridiculous. Hitchcock builds the love relationship between his protagonists in the most clichéd ways, straight from the dime-a-dozen romance novels. One wouldn't recognize from Gregory Peck's acting that he is one of the legends of the silver screen. Ingrid Bergman certainly exudes charisma in all directions, but she plays the ultimate fool, a role she probably never repeated in her career. Instead of tension, the master this time served me something that unintentionally approaches self-parody. Overall impression: 65%.
()
It’s no great surprise that the Master didn’t really like this movie. Although it seems that there isn’t much to fault here. It is marvelously filmed, as always, in terms of acting, this is certainly high above average and, not just the story, but also the original dream sequence by Dali is captivating. What brings Spellbound down a few pegs is the rather surprising screenplay. Unfortunately, the final denouement is pretty obvious right from the very beginning. This predictability might not have mattered at all, if the movie weren’t a few dozen minutes longer than it should have been. Of course, this is no great disappointment, but nor is this an above average Hitchcock. This is rather mediocre in terms of his filmography, but it is still a quality work in comparison with other contemporary productions; for instance the one-year younger case of plagiarism in the shape of Shock with Vincent Price.
()