Gaslight (1940)

terrible... so disappointed.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

One of those movie experiences that is so good it makes you realize you've been grading everything else on a curve.

Psycopath Anton Walbrook (Paul) is after something at 12 Pimlico Square. His wife Diana Wynyard (Bella) is a hindrance and he needs her out of the way, so goes through with a plan to convince her that she is mad and belongs in an institution. However, ex-detective Frank Pettingell (Rough) recognizes Anton from his past and is determined to find out what he is up to.I've read that MGM tried to destroy all copies of this film so that their 1944 remake would be the definitive version. Thank goodness they failed. This film is just as good as the re-make. It has some subtle differences and the cast are excellent – apart from the servant Cathleen Cordell (Nancy) who seems to grin inanely for no purpose on a couple of occasions. Her suitor Jimmy Hanley (Cobb) speaks like a plonker at the beginning but is forgiven, and Frank Pettigell gives the whole story someone to root for as the saviour. He has no romantic interest, he just acts as a kind of Sherlock Holmes who is solving a mystery.There are good scenes and settings and we have a gripping climax when Wynyard turns the tables on Walbrook at the end. Is she going to get even? And check out the can-can dancers. An entertaining film.

This is the original movie of this name. Most people are familiar with the 1944 American Version starring Ingrid Bergman, Charles Boyer & the screen debut of Angela Lansbury.Released in 1940 starring Anton Walbrook & Diane Wynyard this was as classic a tale then as it is now. I prefer it slightly over the American version as the storyline is a darker more abusive affair than America's. By the way Walbrook & Wynyard were big stars then & the acting is best in the British version.The story begins with a cruel & foul murder of an old woman knitting in her home. Young love causes a new bride to bring the husband she loves so dearly back to the house her murdered aunt had left to her years ago. No one had been willing to rent the place because of the evil crime. It stood empty & decaying for years despite it's location in Covent Gardens a very desirable location in London. The police had always been suspicious of the extensive damage done to the house & furnishings during the night of the murder & thought the old ladies rubies had disappeared with the killer.In this show it's all about the relationship of wife, husband, maid & the gems. Not to mention the old retired detective who remembered the case from back when & thought he recognized the wife's husband. A 5 star tale & well worth buying if you like your characters dark in a murder story. The disc I got had this 1940 version on 1 side & the 1944 American version on the other. Two worlds- One price. Enjoy!

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.

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.