Strangers on a Train is a splendid Hitchcock thriller with an engrossing story, brilliant performances, and a satisfying ending.

To describe it is to diminish it. Robert Walker steals this film hands down. He IS the film.

Ridiculous arch thriller about a flamboyant psychopath who hatches a murder plot based on anonymity, then does everything possible to connect himself to the crime and those involved. Like the worst Hitchcock storytelling, it has a contrived quality that stifles any suspense and keeps the audience at a distance, unable to engage with it as anything but pure camp. Patricia Hitchcock is the film's only bright spot as the morbid, true-crime obsessed teenager, but her role is minimal. In the words of one character, "it's too fantastic, isn't it?"

Great movie. Good actors and a captivating storyline.

1951's 'Strangers On A Train' is a diabolically entertaining thriller from director Alfred Hitchcock. SYNOPSIS: 'A psychopath tries to forcibly persuade a tennis star to agree to his theory that two strangers can get away with murder by submitting to his plan to kill the other's most-hated person.' 'Strangers On A Train' is by far one of Hitchcock's masterpieces, and that's saying a lot considering the quality of his work. This intriguing film deals with all the autuer's issues, including the double motif, and draws a fine line between hero and villain. Two men, both with problems, and a crime is an old theme, but the list of works that exploit it perfectly is a short one. This is a story that's been interpreted on numerous occasions but never to this quality. Gripping all the way, this is Hitchcock in his pomp, and with unique effects that had never been seen before in Hollywood. A classic! 10/10

Bruno’s character is so charming yet despicable that one cannot help but be drawn into this thrilling tale.

This is a great Hitchcock movie - one of his best in my opinion. No blondes to murder in the shower or throw birds at, but a wonderfully tight noir plot co-written by Chandler - who else! Farley Granger (Guy Haines) and Ruth Roman (Anne Morton) are suitably colourless as the leading man and lady (deliberate choice?) and Robert Walker (Bruno Antony) is wonderfully OTT as the charming psychopath. But for me the standout performances are the minor roles. Leo G Carroll can play a US Senator in his sleep. You would think he really was a senator of the 1950s. Where has the gravitas from today's politicians gone? But the standout for me is Patricia Hitchcock as the younger, impressionable sister Barbara Morton who likes to read graphic accounts of real life gory murders. She revels in Guy's situation but is supportive as well. There's a great little moment when at the end of the tennis match when she is supposed to distract detective Hennessey, she is so taken up with applauding Guy, Anne has to nudge her to remind her. In fact all the supporting cast are great in their roles. But it is the visuals that stay in the memory. Bruno reaching through the storm drain to retrieve the lighter (cf The Third Man), the shots of Bruno and Guy's contrasting shoes at the start, the murder of Miriam Haines seen in her glasses and the great final carousel scene with the young boy having a great time despite the crazy speed. The film shows that train travel is far more conducive to drama than travel by plane. What have we lost?

Great visuals, interesting plot, and quality acting with a great cast. However, like many modern day movies, Strangers On A Train stumbles into absurdity in the final climactic scene. Guy is being followed by the police who suspect him of killing his wife. When Guy quickly ducks onto the the merry-go-round the policeman's first instinct is to fire into the carnival ride full of children! He misses Guy but the operator is hit and presumed killed and the ride goes spinning out of control. Then another old-timer volunteers to stop it. He crawls under the spinning platform, reaches the center and pulls the brake. It is safe to assume that he is also killed when the spinning ride then explodes with him in the center of it. How many of the children on the ride are killed we'll never know. The same scene also contains an unintentionally hilarious line. When Guy asks the policeman (who just fired into a crowd of children) if he can go through dying Bruno's pockets to find the cigarette lighter Bruno was going to frame Guy with, the cop replies, "No, and besides he said he doesn't have it." I guess he was a stickler for some rules.

This is such a classic. Never a step out of place and delivered with wonderful panache. A stellar performance from the cast and of course Hitchcock himself.

Extremely dated in every way and it’s a rather fantastical method of turning the hypothetical into practice, but it’s still an effective thriller. The tension and drama builds as he becomes trapped through blackmail and the unhinged stalker element is very well done with great acting. The music adds to every scene and whilst the ending is ridiculously silly and a bit drawn out, it’s a memorable finale.

Not my favourite Hitchcock film.I thought it was rather amateurish in parts. Especially near the end when the old man goes under the ride to turn it off near the end..I thought he was never going to reach the turn off lever.

4.5 stars. If you're a true movie buff, then the mention of the name Hitchcock instantly brings a feeling of thrills, chills, and suspense. After all, he is the master of that film genre. He recognized that motion pictures are a visual experience and that visuals are the primary way we process information. His genius took that knowledge and created characters and visuals that leave just enough to the audience's imagination to get them involved in the movie itself. As an example of audience involvement: Normally, a tennis fan would have great interest in the outcome of the match in the film. However, the film's plot was that the protagonist had to win the match in three straight sets in order to leave and catch a critical train departure. This added a level of tension to the scene that went beyond tennis fandom. Also, I can only imagine what a 1951 audience felt during the runaway merry-go-round scene. This was his first movie of the fifties. To me, it was the beginning of some of his best movies. I think this movie was a big step in developing the techniques that made him so iconic throughout that period.

Well Written movie, Makes me feel like stalker

Be careful of who you meet, because you have no idea what you're getting yourself into! Guy Haines is struggling with finalizing his divorce with his ex-wife, only for a coincidental meeting with the charming yet odd Bruno Anthony to lead to murder and mayhem, with him caught on the other side of a disturbing criss cross. With some exceptional screenplay by the legendary Hitchcock, this dark thriller warns us about talking with strangers!

Another 3.5 Hitchcock. They are consistently good, never great. As with Suspicion, there is a hint of something that could be greatness, but it falls short, this one at an earlier inning than Suspicion. The seeds are there, but the serious road isn't taken--instead the fork chosen is that of light fare, Hollywood entertainment. This is the work of a director in the Hollywood system, not outside it, and it shows.

It starts with a shriek of a train whistle... and ends with shrieking excitement! Strangers on a Train is a 1951 American psychological thriller film noir produced and directed by Alfred Hitchcock 👓 It's good 🙂 I'd recommend it if you like this genre 👍🏼 Although some scenes have dated and are laughable, this is an entertaining thriller. The carousel scene is particularly memorable… Two strangers meet on a train. They've never met before. Both of whom have someone they'd like to murder. So, they swap murders. A psychopath shares this concept with tennis star Guy Haines, whose wife refuses to get a divorce. He agrees, thinking it is a joke. But now his wife is dead, Haines finds himself a prime suspect and the man wants Guy to kill his father.

Alfred Hitchcock's brilliant and genius film "strangers on a train" is so unbelievably thrilling and suspenseful that it could only come from the brilliant mind of Alfred Hitchcock.At no time throughout the entire film is there not a scene where there isn't suspense and or excitement. The film is highlighted by the brilliant acting of Robert Walker who plays the incredibly creepy and chilling Bruno Anthony. The film is capped off by an amazing special effect scene on a carousel, that for the time was truly amazing.

Exciting thriller with great shots and some excellent acting. The suspense is gripping and it is a fun story that was well worth the watch. One of the better Hitchcock films.

Great premise. Engaging for 20 minutes - and then it just gets silly. Bruno's mother serves no valuable purpose, yet is more of a focus than the father who is apparently worthy of being murdered by his son, and almost completely absent from the film. Policemen are put on 24-hour watch over a man who hasn't been charged with a crime? The high-society crowd seems completely accepting of the fact that a married man who is dating the senator's daughter, is constantly accompanied by a policeman, and is the main suspect in the murder of his wife. The girlfriend makes a leap of conclusion based on relatively nothing. A merry-go-round is whirling impossibly out of control so fast that police offers fail to get on it, yet the children riding it are virtually unaffected, including a young child who only needs to hold on with one hand? And the ride is brought to a stop, it somehow explodes and the only one hurt (fatally) is a grown man, but none of the kids nor moms that were riding it? Good grief. How is this a classic?

The best scene for me was at the end when a carousel when wildly out of control.