I saw this film a number of years ago, with someone very special, and just before the cineplex facilities effected closing the majority of the conventional, free-standing movie theaters in large cities and small. Just saw it again, after a number of years.
We sat in the balcony, and, having always enjoyed Van Johnson's work, I enjoyed this clever, interesting story even more than if the lead had been someone else.
With all of the elements and twists one finds with Hitchcock, the fact of the principal character's blindness is effective and adds a dimension to the mystery/thriller aspects of the film. (Of course, this handicap is necessary, since a sighted person would have seen what he overhears in the pub, setting-off the drama changing the story's essence. And, it adds to the quality of the story that this factor is not exaggerated or "hokey," and everything surrounding it is logical and believable.)
There are the two primary co-stars with Johnson, and absent are the greater number of characters surrounding the leads which one would normally expect to find - and the movie is better for this.
Van Johnson, who is now 90, in my opinion is underrated as a talent. He had boyish, casual good looks, and came into film as a leading man during a period when as handsome as they were, most leading men always seemed to have a pint of Wildroot or Brilliantine in their hair (e.g. Tyrone Power, Flynn, Robert Taylor).
He played light comedy, serio-comedy love stories, and serious roles with talented, versatile performances. Like Alan Ladd, although not regarded in this capacity, he'd had experience as a male chorus member/dancer in earlier career - during the era when more of the nightclub/review type of entertainment was present.
This film is interesting, with a neat, tight story, engaging characters and performances - and now that it is 50 years since its release, it also provides a nostalgic look at a film from the mid-1950's, with that period's "noir" characteristics.
We sat in the balcony, and, having always enjoyed Van Johnson's work, I enjoyed this clever, interesting story even more than if the lead had been someone else.
With all of the elements and twists one finds with Hitchcock, the fact of the principal character's blindness is effective and adds a dimension to the mystery/thriller aspects of the film. (Of course, this handicap is necessary, since a sighted person would have seen what he overhears in the pub, setting-off the drama changing the story's essence. And, it adds to the quality of the story that this factor is not exaggerated or "hokey," and everything surrounding it is logical and believable.)
There are the two primary co-stars with Johnson, and absent are the greater number of characters surrounding the leads which one would normally expect to find - and the movie is better for this.
Van Johnson, who is now 90, in my opinion is underrated as a talent. He had boyish, casual good looks, and came into film as a leading man during a period when as handsome as they were, most leading men always seemed to have a pint of Wildroot or Brilliantine in their hair (e.g. Tyrone Power, Flynn, Robert Taylor).
He played light comedy, serio-comedy love stories, and serious roles with talented, versatile performances. Like Alan Ladd, although not regarded in this capacity, he'd had experience as a male chorus member/dancer in earlier career - during the era when more of the nightclub/review type of entertainment was present.
This film is interesting, with a neat, tight story, engaging characters and performances - and now that it is 50 years since its release, it also provides a nostalgic look at a film from the mid-1950's, with that period's "noir" characteristics.