The Paradine Case (1947)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Purely Joyful Movie!

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

While I don't consider any of Alfred Hitchcock's films truly terrible- then again there may be some bias as he is my favourite director- I do think there are some disappointments in his resume. And unfortunately The Paradine Case, while not a disaster in any shape or form, is one of them. As always with Hitchcock's films The Paradine Case is well made, everything is very slick and evocatively shot. Some of the shots are really inspired, the beginning with Alida Valli being arrested was the standout while the shot introducing Louis Jourdan is quite innovative Hitchcock's direction is good and thoughtful enough, if not quite as involved as it usually is, I think how the story is dealt with is part of why and studio interference being another factor. The music is memorable and ominous, but never obvious. And a vast majority of the cast are very good. Coming off best is Charles Laughton, who literally chews the scenery and it was a shrewd, somewhat malevolent and gleefully hammy performance of a truly beastly character indeed.Alida Valli is beautiful and mysterious, very magnetic to watch, if perhaps rather cold for some viewers. Ethel Barrymore has very little to do and was deserving of a better developed subplot and character, but this is an example of a support performance in this position that makes the most of what they have, Barrymore did very well in that respect. The scene between her and Laughton at the end is indeed chilling. Charles Coburn is nicely understated in one of the more fleshed-out roles of the film, Louis Jourdan makes a promising debut while Leo G. Caroll and Joan Tretzel are equally fine. Ann Todd gives a loyal and deeply felt performance, but like Barrymore is given little to do in a role that is somewhat of a cliché.I personally however found Gregory Peck miscast in the lead role. I do like Peck especially in To Kill a Mockingbird, but here in stiff and remote form I don't think I've seen him this uncomfortable before. His British accent doesn't convince at all either. There are other problems with The Paradine Case though too. The story and script are the main culprits. The story feels much too thin and stretched out, which made the film feel overlong, and the turgid pacing makes it even duller. The script is a mix of overly-melodramatic soap opera and too-wordy courtroom scenes. Everything just felt stilted and overwrought, the courtroom scenes especially could have been so intriguing but the unbelievable dialogue just let things significantly. The characters are not particularly well drawn, the most interesting are Valli's and especially Laughton's, while if Todd and Barrymore hadn't done as well as they had their characters would have made no impression whatsoever.Overall, a disappointing Hitchcock, considering the cast and how good so many of Hitchcock's other films are, but hardly a film so bad that you prefer to forget it ever existed. 6/10 Bethany Cox

"The Paradine Case" is a dull, stiff melodrama by Alfred Hitchcock. Based on a novel by Robert Hichens, the film was produced by David O. Selznick, a man who delighted in churning out overproduced prestige pictures. Fresh off the failure of "Duel in the Sun", Selznick exerted an unusual amount of control on "The Paradine Case", his fingers strangling all life out of the picture. He even credited himself with writing the film's script. Hitchcock hated the film.Part murder mystery, part legal thriller, the film stars a wooden Gregory Pack as Anthony Keane, a defence attorney tasked with defending Anna Paradine, a woman accused of poisoning her blind husband. Hitchcock wanted Laurence Olivier for Peck's role, but Selznick disagreed. Selznick wanted Greta Garbo for Paradine's role – she was to come out of retirement – but those plans collapsed.The film's mostly a stagey melodrama, but several scenes allow Hitchcock to flex his muscles. A last act courtroom is imaginatively prowled by The Master's camera, and a sequence in a bedroom recalls Lila Crane's exploration of Norman Bates' bedroom in "Psycho". There are some loose connections to Hitch's other films – Peck's infatuated with and idealises women, as Hitchcock's male leads oft do, and a suicide is brushed aside like a certain Miss Lonelyheart in "Rear Window" – but this is otherwise a routine picture.Most of Hitchcock's films have weird, psycho-sexual stuff going on in between frames. Not so much "The Paradine Case", though it does have a defence attorney whose entire defence functions as a kind of projection of his own feelings toward his client. Peck essentially wills Anna into innocence in order to justify his own feelings toward her, jealously removes prospective lovers from her reach so that he may woo her himself. Even when Anna eventually admits to murder, we're never sure if she's telling the truth or is merely confessing so as to scar her attorney; we can't take her admission at face value. And like the characters in Hitchcock's "Notorious", selfish behaviour is constantly being rationalised as being selfless, characters helping others only in so far it benefits them, resulting in all kinds of weird power relationships.In typical Selznick fashion, the film looks garish, overly ornate and tackily expensive. This is a vulgar looking picture, in contrast to the sleek, pop-modernism/pop-Expressionism of Hitchcock's best films.6/10 - For Hitchcock completists only.

As much as I have always admired Hitchcock's work, I just couldn't bare the monotony and flatness that surround The Paradine Case. Unfortunately, this film is probably one of the most boring and least interesting of all of the great director's works. The storyline is very slow and simple, and there aren't any spectacular suspenseful moments that he accustomed us to so frequently. Sadly, in times of so many fast-paced and impressive courtroom thrillers and dramas (i.e. Witness for the Prosecution, Anatomy of a Murder, Judgment at Nuremberg) this movie really deserved the bad reputation that it gained in the first few years after its original release.If it weren't for the well-known director and notable movie stars, the movie would probably end up as some long-forgotten B-grade flick that no one would really want to watch.It's a story of forbidden romance, which began between a woman, accused of killing her blind husband, and her prominent defender. This chief motive intertwines with all the events that occur inside the courtroom.The movie started a mindset connected with the notions of feminism. It presents how a woman is able to wrap a man around her finger and make him do everything that she says. She is the strong figure that gives orders, and manipulates all those men, who fall in love with her at first sight.Still, I must say that there are some positive aspects that may be taken from the movie. Definitely, the viewer is able to admire the very decent scenery, set, and costumes shown in the picture.The movie presents a fine insight into the London middle class life. It also depicts, in an inquisitive manner, how the English court operated on a daily basis in those times, and proved once again that all the proceedings, consisting of various twists and revelations, might be thrilling, and can sometimes end up in a very surprising fashion. The acting is on a very high level. Gregory Peck is great as the barrister Anthony Keane, who falls blindly in love with a woman he is supposed to defend with cold blood and full consciousness of the mind, not through heart and emotions. Charles Laughton gives a convincing performance, as the strict, rigorous, emphatic and ironic judge. He is in total contradiction with Peck's character, one might notice. Alida Valli is mesmerizing As Lady Paradine, with all her grace and beauty, which makes it easy to see why every man lusts her and falls under her spell. Ann Todd as the brave and lovable Gay Keane, a wife, who even under the difficult circumstances doesn't give up and lets go of the jealousy.All in all, The Paradine Case looks more like a soap opera designed for TV, not a substantial film directed by one of the greatest director's in history. However, as you watch it, don't concentrate too much on the story, and simply enjoy the precise and entertaining courtroom scenes and the pleasurable subtleness of London's atmosphere.

There are quite a few things wrong with this minor Hitchcock work. First off, casting Gregory Peck was a huge misfire. Seeing him try to pull off being an English barrister is kinda painful. It just doesn't work. This was a role before Peck became a superstar so maybe he was just getting his bearings as an actor.It doesn't help that the major issue with this film is o'Selznicks script. He is most certainly not a screenwriter. Some of the dialog and scene changes are so bad it's sad.Towards the end there's a scene where the old judge is sitting with his wife and she tries to talk him out of sentencing the defendant to death and she says something like.."don't find her guilty or sentence her to death, she's had a hard enough life." Are you kidding me? How stupid is that. Girl kills her husband, who did nothing to her, and we should just let it pass? Gimme a break. This is that o'Selznick script writing again. The whole premise of the film is centered around how a high end barrister takes the case of a supposed husband killer and how everyone around him sees him falling in love with her. Within 20 minutes of the film there's already talk about it but there's one problem, there are no lead-ins letting you know its happened. I mean he meets with her twice in prison to talk about the case and there's no chemistry at all.Figuring out why this film was made is pretty simple. Read around online and you'll see the history behind this and right off you know that o'Selznick totally took over this film and therein lies the problem. He totally takes control of the film and just ruins it with bad casting and even worse screen writing. It's like taking a lawn mower mechanic and telling him to go work on a Ferrari. He had no business writing for this work. You can bet Hitchcock was glad to finish out his contract with this minimal work. Seemed like he just phoned this one in to be done with it. Being that this was his last film with this studio and knowing the Hitchcock time-line, you'll notice how after this film is when his best films were made. Hmmmm, I wonder why?Skip this one and save your brain power for a better film...cause this ain't a very good one.