Suspicion - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Suspicion Reviews

Page 2 of 33
December 28, 2014
Hitchcock (always a master self-plagiarist) here provides shades of Rebecca (1940), a recent hit for him. So again, we see Joan Fontaine anxious and doubtful of her husband (but this time she won the Oscar she was earlier denied). Cary Grant plays the charming cad well enough for us to think that he could be a murderer (which is what Fontaine eventually suspects - hence the title). Accounts differ as to whether the censors (or Cary's backers at the studio) tampered with the ending or whether Hitch wanted all along to portray a woman's paranoid fantasies. Indeed, things are mostly ambiguous most of the time - although we can probably agree that Cary is irresponsible and thus rather unlikeable. No real MacGuffin here but a glowing glass of warm milk that may be spiked with an untraceable poison is a memorable touch. A key plank in the construction of Hitchcock's image, if not his best work.
December 28, 2014
one of hitch's best efforts
½ November 29, 2014
One of the most overtly Hitchcockian pictures the great director has ever produced.
October 19, 2014
Cary Grant was always wearing a tux, drinking excessively, and driving recklessly in movies from the '30s & '40s! lol This Hitchcock classic is no exception. The set-up is a little slow but the tension in the last half is great. There are also some fantastic shadowy shots - ol' Hitch sure was a master! The abrupt ending was a letdown, though - maybe because Hollywood altered it from the book. 4-ish stars
½ September 27, 2014
an inexcusable final scene ruins great Grant and Fontaine performances
½ September 14, 2014
A 1941 film criticizing patriarchy through a murder suspense story brings a smile from ear to ear. Suspicion also delivered wonderful production design and cinematography. Some of the lighting trickery and shot composition was nothing short of forgettable. However, this film had a fatal flaw, especially considering Hitchcock's undeniable ability of one crucial story component-- suspense. The story had a dire lack of it. I found plot beats repetitive, unsurprising, and even uninteresting. I was waiting for it to ramp up in the slow-brew fashion you can expect from this legendary filmmaker. Even if Grant pushed Fontaine out of the car at the end of this film, the journey to this point, was not a roller coaster of mystery-- the audience never trusted Cary Grant's character. I have to say I'm disappointed with this film as the story and acting performances were certainly forgettable.
½ September 3, 2014
Hitchcock teams up for the first time with Cary Grant, and they would team up three more times following this. This is the story of a shy young woman, bound to become a spinster, who falls for the charming Cary Grant. The two rush into marriage and soon after the woman begins to discover truths about her husband, such as he has no money or job, that he goes off to gamble...and soon she suspects him of murder and even comes to believe he is going to murder her. It is a fine little thriller, not Hitchcock's best, but a decent classic film nonetheless.
July 26, 2014
This Alfred Hitchcock movie is one of his greatest films he directed Carey Grant and Joan Fontaine and supporting cast make this movie shine.
½ June 8, 2014
Alfred Hitchcock nos presenta este oscuro relato acerca de un vividor (Cary Grant) que tal vez quiere matar a su mejor amigo (Nigel Bruce) o a su sufrida esposa (Joan Fontaine). ¿Será Johnny un asesino? ¿Habrá veneno en ese vaso de leche?
½ May 26, 2014
(61%)
Studio interference may have stifled the ending infecting the whole movie with a cursed sense of pointlessness, but this is still a very well made Hitchcock movie that could and should have been even better. Worth a watch, but sadly lacking.
½ April 28, 2014
Plodding Hitchcock thriller from 1941 with gentlemen smoking cigars, drinking brandy and fox-hunting, while a woman's place was to take instruction from their significant others (in other words, incredibly dated).
Cary Grant schmoozes into Joan Fontaine's life to cynically romance her, all the while she's wondering whether or not he murdered his previous wife.
Fontaine won an Oscar for her performance, but one can't help but feel it was to apologise for her not winning the previous year for Rebecca (which she definitely deserved!)
The film can be viewed in a colour or black & white version, but the colour version is a bit headache-inducing. Stick to the B&W.
Personally, I didn't think this was anywhere near as good as Hitchcock's usual output and the Hollywood ending is very disappointing.
April 23, 2014
Oh Alfie, you've made a blunder here. Suspicion is decidedly boring and loosely plotted. Like most movies early in the career of the Master of Suspense, Suspicion thinks it is a lot better than it actually is. See it if you want to get a glimpse of early Hitchcockian filmmaking, but just be warned.
Super Reviewer
½ April 23, 2014
Hitchcock knew how to use Grant to his full potential and he is mysterious as heck in this film to good effect. Other Hitchcocks have more of a fan base but this is one not to be forgotten.
April 12, 2014
wow....stunnning....brilliant....amazing....i have just seen this movie 4 the 1st time n think that this is such a brilliant movie 2 watch......its got a good cast of actors/actressess throughout this movie.....i think that cary grant (.R.I.P.), joan fontaine (.R.I.P.), cedric hardwicke (.R.I.P.), nigel bruce (.R.I.P.), dame may whitty (.R.I.P.), play good roles/parts throughout this movie......i think that the director of this drama/mystery/suspense/thriller/classics movie had done a good job of directing this movie because you never know what 2 expect throughout this movie......

Alfred Hitchcock's cameo is a signature occurrence in most of his films. In Suspicion he can be seen (45 minutes into the film) mailing a letter at the village postbox; also earlier in the film at the equestrian gathering, pulling a horse in front the camera right before Cary Grant is reintroduced, though this has not been confirmed.

Fontaine won the Academy Award for Best Actress for her performance. This was the only Academy Award-winning performance under Hitchcock's direction.

its got a good soundtrack throughout this movie.......i think that this is such a really suspenseful movie 2 watch i think that this is such a really well written/acted/directed movie 2 watch its got a great cast throughout this movie......i think that this is such a classics movie 2 watch its got a great cast throughout this movie.......i think that Auriol Lee (.R.I.P.) was great throughout this movie as Isobel Sedbusk throughout this movie.....i think that Leo G. Carroll (.R.I.P.) as Captain George Melbeck was good throughout this movie.......i think that this is such a thrilling classics movie 2 watch its such a really well written/acted/directed movie 2 watch its got a good cast throughout this movie.....the car is
a powerful convertible (a 1936 Lagonda LG45), i think that this is such a classics movie 2 watch its got a great cast throughout this movie......i think that this is such a brilliant movie 2 watch its such a cult classics movie 2 watch it is so really well directed/written/acted movie 2 watch its such a brilliant movie 2 watch with a great cast throughout this movie......
Cameron W. Johnson
Super Reviewer
½ March 10, 2014
Hm, so, let me see, do you reckon this is supposed to be a suspense film or something? Oh man, that is one startlingly obvious and uncreative title! Well, it's not like Alfred Hitchcock's got any more creative after this film, so I suppose this marked an end in Hitchcock's inspiration... many years before "Dial M for Murder", "Rear Window", "To Catch a Thief", "Vertigo", "North by Northwest", "Psycho" and "The Birds. Well, it was at least evidence of Hitchcock losing his inspiration in creative titling, because even this film had enough inspiration to score an Oscar for Best Actress. It's the only Oscar-winning performance in a Hitchcock film, which is kind of bogus, because Joan Fontaine was pretty firmly topped by plenty of people who didn't even get nominations. Well, I don't know if I can give Fontaine all that much heat, because she is very good and the film, and probably would have been better if she had the material that many of Hitchcock's other collaborators got when they were in thrillers in which more stuff actually happened. No, this film has a pretty decent bit of effectiveness, but it's far from the most thrilling Hitchcock thriller, for a number of reasons.

Despite being so character-driven, this drama seems to slam-bang development, sometimes glaringly, while placing only so many layers to its characterization, until you can't help but feel rather distanced from the undercooked, maybe even thin characters, as well as their conflicts, which are distancing enough for other reasons. Flaunting questionable dialogue (Ladies, would you marry a man who nicknamed you Monkey Face?), subtlety issues and other happenings of limited probability, this film too often feels too manufactured as a melodrama, overwrought with Hollywood histrionics that tend to devolve into cheese, one way or another, no matter how much it reaches that point inconsistently. Although it keeps consistent in the questionable probability, the core of this dramatic thriller rather leaps between subtlety, if not fluff, and intensity rather messily, what with its spending too much time dragging along a certain dramatic layer, until it begins to feel aimless. The film's storytelling is overblown, and yet, the story itself does not have the meat to justify so much fat around the edges, because as bloated as this drama's tones and conflicts are, the narrative concept itself is lacking in intrigue, partly because it's just too blasted familiar. I might be a little more willing to forgive all of the developmental shortcomings, inconsistencies and Hollywoodisms if the film was more unique, having some refreshing elements, but many more elements that are more-or-less nothing new, and leave the film to feel hopelessly predictable. The film is well-done in enough places for you to not mind the predictability substantially, but this is nevertheless a worn down path, further roughed up by inconsistencies in tonal and pacing structured, and shameless melodramatics, until one might find this flick too great of a challenge to decency. There's enough laziness here to drive the final product into mediocrity, yet at the same time, there's enough inspiration to save the film as fairly decent, particularly in such areas as visual style.

A black-and-white affair, this film's visual style is dated, but for the time, it's outstanding, and still mighty remarkable to this day, with Harry Stradling Sr.'s cinematography making haunting plays on shadows that stress lighter moments beautifully, while making the darker moments bleak in a fashion that is immersive in a thriller like this. Despite its being dated, this film's visual style is undeniably impressive for what it is, actually putting coloration limitations to good use in order to absorb a sense of tonal layering that is more organic than the tonal layering within Samson Raphaelson's, Joan Harrison's and Alma Reville's script, and couldn't have been pulled off without Alfred Hitchcock's stylish directorial celebration of the film's visuals. His framing relatively impeccable, Hitchcock augments the substance value of the film's visual style with a tight attention to intimate imagery, while playing with atmosphere sharply enough to keep pacing from slipping so deeply into its slow spells that it bores, if not entertain through plays on Franz Waxman's colorful score. Really, if the film has nothing else going for it, it is entertainment value, which, even then, is limited, but not to where it fails to sustain a fair consistent degree of your attention, eventually incorporating dramatic highlights which draw such attention to the narrative's potential. The story concept is melodramatic and familiar, and its execution would be all over the place in tone if it wasn't so draggy in its layered progression, but as a study on a wife's gradual discovery of dark secrets within her beloved husband that grow darker and darker as the path to success grows brighter and brighter is nothing short of intriguing, sold reasonably well by Hitchcock's efforts, as well as the efforts of the performers. The characters are lacking in development and layers, and are made all the harder to buy by the histrionics, but their portrayals do what they can, with charisma and relatively solid dramatic depth, particularly within the beautiful Joan Fontaine, whose lead performance particularly sells the character-driven conflicts every step of the way. While Fontaine's performance isn't particularly outstanding, I wish that the rest of the film was more worthy of it, rather than borderline mediocre, and yet, there's enough bite to this drama to save the film as decent and adequately effective, even though it could have sunk its teeth much deeper.

Once the tension finally breaks, the film all but falls into mediocrity under the weight of a minimalist story's being handled with limited development, Hollywood histrionics, inconsistencies in pacing and tone, and much in the way of conventions, yet enough support comes from solid cinematography, reasonably effective direction and good performances - particularly the lead one by Joan Fontaine - to secure Alfred Hitchcock's "Suspicion" as a decent, if somewhat lacking dramatic thriller.

2.5/5 - Fair
½ February 27, 2014
It would have got 4 stars if they went with Hitchcock's darker ending.
February 2, 2014
Suspicion is an amazing film. It is about a shy young English woman marries a charming gentleman and then begins to suspect him of trying to kill her. Cary Grant and Joan Fontaine give incredible performances. The screenplay is well written. Alfred Hitchcock did a great job directing this movie. I enjoyed watching this motion picture because of the drama and mystery. Suspicion is a must see.
December 19, 2013
Hitchcock returns to themes of domestic mistrust, paranoia and deceit in a film that is a little less dark than Rebecca but nevertheless is just as good, despite it being counted inexplicably as somewhat of a minor work in his filmography. Suspicion is, in fact, very gripping and full of intriguing and rather intricate psychological plots that, perhaps in the film's most remarkable feat, ably leads us to question Cary Grant's usual charming persona a dangerous individual. Joan Fontaine is superb in this film and her portrayal of internal conflict makes the film all the more effective, thus it is no wonder that she was awarded with an Oscar for her role as the loyal yet insecure Lina - the only one for a performance directed by the master of suspense.
½ December 17, 2013
I really wanted to like this one a bit more than I did, but the idea of her loving Grant's boorish ne'er-do-well character just bugged me, as he's just not THAT Goddamned charming.

Perhaps it will grow on me with a repeat viewing, but for now I must give it a tentative 'Rental' suggestion and leave it at that.
November 11, 2013
Grant as a villain, a small price to pay for working under Hitchcock. Nearly as good as the original.
Page 2 of 33