One of the first thing i notice in the film is their shoes that tells something about their character, one being straightforward and everyman like appearance and the other is bold and eccentric which already conveys or hints at their personality.
@skumomcbee12555 жыл бұрын
For such a classic movie, there are so few analysis videos.. To be fair I only found this through Netflix but I'm so glad I did.
@poetcomic12 жыл бұрын
Hitchcock personally chose Bruno's garish tie with its ominous pairs of lobster claws like strangling hands.
@susancarter23653 жыл бұрын
Criss Cross!! Brilliant film.
@the_real_stan_pines30246 ай бұрын
There is actually a scene with a bird in the film, an imposing stone eagle on the foreground who watches over the tennis match near the film's climax. Amazing how Hitchcock repeats his motifs!
@JamesBrown-ij1px3 жыл бұрын
I love ‘Strangers on a Train’. Thank you for this.
@robertplattner16363 жыл бұрын
In my opinion, the glasses shot from this film is Hitchcock’s best shot out of his entire body of work.
@gkroll84672 жыл бұрын
Yes but the glasses wouldn’t break landing on the grass
@gregorybrown32725 жыл бұрын
Not only are Barbara and Anne doubles, but they are also doppelgangers of Alma, Hitchcock's wife, as is the character of Midge from Vertigo.
@ariannacandelaria29975 жыл бұрын
LOVE THIS MOVIE
@pacard334 жыл бұрын
It's been 20 years since I've seen SOAT. I'll have to watch it again.
@pauledson3972 жыл бұрын
Gee, I don't know why I waited so long to see this movie. It was a work of genius. It's too bad that one doesn't here about this Hitchcock movie more.
@Catssandra135 жыл бұрын
As an avid fan of Hitchcock films, I thoroughly enjoyed your excellent analysis of this classic. Thanks and looking forward to more of your reviews of classic films. Another Hitchcock film with the doubles motif is "Shadow of a Doubt" (1943), would love to hear your review of that one too, thanks.
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
Thanks. I'll take another look at Shadow of a Doubt.
@marktuovinen38886 жыл бұрын
whatt...this is crazy, I just finished watching Strangers on a Train, then to look up a video essay on it finding that it was uploaded just recently....crazy
@AMillionMovies6 жыл бұрын
That’s a Hitchcock-level twist! Fair warning that next week’s episode looks like it may be about Bye Bye Birdie... just in case you’re looking for something to watch next weekend.
@marktuovinen38886 жыл бұрын
sweet...great video btw, you've earned my sub!
@charlynegezze85364 жыл бұрын
I just saw it yesterday but didn't realize the doubles thing. 🤔 Interesting!
@amigodavid275 жыл бұрын
Bruno wears a tie with two crabs in the train. The Hitchcock cameo with the double bass is also a double stuff, both of them have similar color and shape. Great video, I like this film very much.
@poetcomic12 жыл бұрын
Hitchcock personally chose Bruno's tie with the 'strangling claws'.
@elaineteeter9485 Жыл бұрын
@@poetcomic1 I did not know that; thanks for telling us.
@chidedneck22 күн бұрын
Looks like lobsters, love.
@joshdodge64825 жыл бұрын
Thanks for this! I just watched the movie and didn’t get much out of it, so this really helped me understand it. If I could add to this, I noticed a few wide shots with Bruno standing in shadow or in front of a dark background while Guy stood in the light. It’s interesting to see a whole movie framed around a motif like this, and hats off to you for picking up on all of this
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
Glad you liked it. To be fair, others have pointed out this motif as well. All I did was try to document the ones I could find.
@bluecollarlit5 жыл бұрын
It is really good work, deserves more views. I've seen this film so many times, and I Never thought about "doubles"... Oh no, is there something wrong with me?! Haha Love the movie, love your video.
@catswalkjpgr5 жыл бұрын
Can you watch the whole movie here?
@audreydaleski10672 жыл бұрын
Ordered this moviiie, finally.
@nicolarralde4 жыл бұрын
Excellent video. You can also see important similarities between the lighter and the glasses. Both of them function as a “gift”, Guy lends Anthony the lighter at the beginning, and Anthony gives Miriam’s glasses to Guy after he kills her. They also function as a way to know who the killer is, Anne realizes this because Miriam and Barbara both had glasses as you mentioned, and the police finally gets Anthony because he had the lighter, also taking into account that it used as a threat to Guy throughout the movie. It is important that these similarities between the two things start when they both fall together after Miriam is murdered. Thanks a lot, like and new subscription!
@Gencturk924 жыл бұрын
thats actually a good symbolism i never thought of that, Hitchcock films are 10x better than movies today. the 50's looked so good
@nicolarralde4 жыл бұрын
@@Gencturk92 totally agree, any random movie from those times is much better than a good movie today, although there are exceptions. Good luck!
@Gencturk924 жыл бұрын
@@nicolarralde this was a really good film and very underrated, i've been a Hitchcock fan for long time but i never saw this before, my favorite films were rear window, psycho, dial m for murder but after watching strangers on a train 3 years ago its now up there on my list. Rear window, dial m for murder and strangers on a train is brilliant, the 50's just looks so great it makes me want to live in those days. The way people are dressed, talking, people were polite, girls would talk to men I mean I dont know it looks like life was simple then
@nicolarralde4 жыл бұрын
@@Gencturk92 I agree, Strangers on a Train is one of my favorite movies and an underrated Hitchcock movie. Things back then seemed to be nicer, but also think that we see this through movies!
@Dion19575 жыл бұрын
In the "Birds" sequence, "Jimmy the Raven was up for a role but he was busy on a Capra film.
@paulchristman24565 жыл бұрын
Here's one---the film features two key scenes which take place on a carousel : the first has Miriam, her two dates (!) and Bruno all aboard the merrygoround at the same time, and the second scene is the spectacular out of control whirl and ultimate crash.
@paulpiacentini9 ай бұрын
Brilliant. Soo clever. Thank you.
@SenorZorrozzz5 жыл бұрын
Somewhere I have the photos of the Danbury ct locations where they shot this film. I took shots of the film with me. They match up well.
@astrosoap6 жыл бұрын
Great video, subscribed and looking forward to more content
@AMillionMovies6 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@colinpayn89486 ай бұрын
The sequence where Bruno murders Miriam at the funfair as seen through her dropped glasses on the grass was way ahead of its time. Hitchcock was always ahead of the game
@andrewm88314 жыл бұрын
Masterpiece of a movie, i was transfixed at the end with carousel scene wondering how they managed to simulate Guy hanging on the pole
@AMillionMovies4 жыл бұрын
Not sure about that (I thought he was just in the rubble), but I was more impressed by the ride operator crawling under the moving carousel. I’ve heard a few times that that was the guy who normally operated the carousel (not an actor or stuntman). Not sure if that’s true, but would be a great stunt for an amateur to have done.
@neiljones19383 жыл бұрын
@@AMillionMovies They had special effects back then that were very clever like back/rear projection. Obviously CGI came about in mid 1980s.
@muratsoydeger19466 жыл бұрын
Thanks for a great video. Moving forward, i would very much like to see a Billy Wilder movie analysis at your channel.
@AMillionMovies6 жыл бұрын
That’s a good idea. I’ve touched on The Apartment and Sunset Boulevard in other videos, but I haven’t done one solely about a Wilder film. Double Indemnity is one of my favorites, so that might be a good one to dig in to.
@bravehome42762 жыл бұрын
This move is just two good!
@CoinOpTV5 жыл бұрын
nice job dude
@KamenRiderAliks5 жыл бұрын
This was very well done, thanks!
@millee62694 жыл бұрын
Terrific analysis!!
@anthonyborruso13384 жыл бұрын
Paterson has a similar use of doubles and mirrored structures. You should check it out if you haven't already.
@ianallardyce42224 ай бұрын
The Academy Format is also framed perfectly in every shot
@anthonykoeslag5 жыл бұрын
awesome video
@barbaracarney63983 жыл бұрын
The record store scene has these doubles: 2 women at the counter, including Miriam. Miriam wears glasses - 2 lenses add a 2nd element to her sight. When guy and Miriam enter the listening booth together, there are couples in the 2 other booths behind them with the men on the right. But when Guy and Miriam come in, she is on the right with the 2 other men, Then switches to the left when things change about the divorce. The man in the next booth is always visible to the left of Guy or Miriam. Oh, yeah - Miriam is pregnant - 2 people in 1 body. And we see Guy play at a tennis court 2x. The scene where Bruno first follows Guy home and waits across the street is amazing for the use of shadows and light, Bruno trying to draw Guy behind the bars, out of the light and into the dark with him. Guy on a moral fence and trying not to go there, then realizing he is trapped. Criss-cross indeed.
@barbaradacostabooks5 жыл бұрын
Your snippet from Birds....shows the crows on playground equipment, and then, as Hedren realizes something's up, she begins to rise....and watch her collar line, like wings...
@Sawlon5 жыл бұрын
I just discovered your channel and I'm on a marathon tonight of your videos with my wife. Good stuff!
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
Thanks for watching. I appreciate it.
@Halum114 ай бұрын
1:06 “both have someone in their life they would like to get rid off”. There’s some wrong analysis going on here. Sure guy’s wife is a burden on him but there’s nothing in the movie to suggest that he wants to get rid of her. Bruno is the one who insists to guy that he should get get rid of his wife by letting him kill her. Guy doesn’t express anything to suggest he wants to get rid of her.
@chelmsfordroad50 Жыл бұрын
Wouldn't you say that a staircase was rather prominent in Psycho as well? (Arbogast).
@robertmusacchio94095 жыл бұрын
Some of the continuing motifs in Hitchcock films are merely places/things that the director enjoyed and probably found challanging as well as artistic, like trains. In "The Lady Vanishes" (my favorite), Hitch built a vast train model just because he wanted to. Is a great observation about 'doubles' in "Strangers on a Train". The almost obsession with these pairings does seem in fact a main point of the whole film. Maybe this is one reason why the Hitchcock film is so much more successful than Woody Allen's obvious homage in "Match Point," which seems kind-of lifeless in comparison.
@sgtdedhed2 жыл бұрын
The night was moist.
@susanb20155 ай бұрын
Great movie. Throw Mama from the train.
@robertjohnson66012 жыл бұрын
I wonder how many murders have happened based on the idea, "you do my murder, I do yours".
@andrewbaroch21413 жыл бұрын
Analyst has a math obsession.
@goodmaro5 жыл бұрын
Just try counting all the doubles allusions on my friend Damon's TV serial "Lost" -- and the motif's a clue to the real plot! And now, thanks to your KZbin, I just got 3 allusions "Lost" made to "Strangers on a Train": Charlie's trying to carry a big string instrument onto the airliner, a couple of characters being strangled after answering questions, and the whole "go back" motif with another flight. What it also makes me wonder now is whether the real plot included a "trade" of scams; I'd been considering this lately but thought it unlikely, but if "Lost" is pointing specifically to "Strangers on a Train", that gives that hypothesis additional credence.
@goodmaro5 жыл бұрын
Lost also alluded very heavily and cleverly to "North By Northwest" -- for instance, by compass heading 325 -- and to "Psycho". And to who knows how much other Hitchcockiana I missed?
@doctorbohr1585 Жыл бұрын
Hitch also featured stairs in Psycho!
@marccolten98015 жыл бұрын
Re birds in Strangers on a Train - you couldn't pull taffy that far without destroying it.
@kristinekoski734511 ай бұрын
I absolutely love, LoOoVe that your covering this, becuz it's one of my favorite scenes, ("criss cross, I kill your wife, you kill my father, criss cross") And did you know they used that scene in an 80's movie called "throw moma from the train ~imobsessed~
@UntitledShowwithBobandPat2 жыл бұрын
This movie even has a double, Throw Mama from the Train
@cynthiaennis31075 жыл бұрын
A Million Movies there was another movie based on this one, wasn’t there?? I remember some documentary saying this, but now I can’t remember what other movie it was! Do you know which movie was created off this one? I think it was with women who where the murderers...maybe it was a show on a series on tv...perhaps a tv murder mystery! I can’t remember! I really thought it was a movie though. Do you remember?? Thanks! Great channel! Will check out Arsnic & Old Lace on your channel! Love Cary Grant! 😊
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
There have been tons of TV shows and several movies that have borrowed this plot. “Throw Mamma from the Train” is one that comes to mind.
@cynthiaennis31075 жыл бұрын
A Million Movies Oh heavens! Lol! I never saw that! Wow! Amazing the “borrowing” that goes on! Thank you! 😁
@PilgrimLJC5 жыл бұрын
Very good, Jeff! “Strangers on a Train” is probably my favorite Hitchcock movie, though I love them all. Plus I’m a huge tennis fan. I love all the doubles you picked up on. It’s a shame Guy wasn’t playing doubles in his tennis match. To add to your list 😊 Do you think Hitchcock intentionally used this motif? (It’s hard to imagine that it was unintentional.). Or was it an unconscious OCD episode? LOL
@tombrown1898 Жыл бұрын
Kasey Rogers, Miriam in "Strangers On a Train" achieved fame, of a sort, as Larry Tate's wife, Louise, on "Bewitched."
@TalesFromTheBlahSide4 ай бұрын
when i first saw to catch a thief i though the caged birds on the bus and cary grant's double take was a hilarious gag on hitchcocks film the bird. only some time later did i realise to catch a thief was a good few years before the birds. shame really as it would have been a good gag.
@dylanford99293 жыл бұрын
When Guy says he could strangle her on the phone as the phone passes someone can be seen passing. I wonder if this is bruno.
@lawrencetaylor41015 жыл бұрын
I remember a French filmmaker analysing Hitchcock films, was it Truffault? He did a good breakdown. Speaking of doubles, I think that there was a Truffault film that was copied exactly by the maker of either A Texas Chainsaw Massacre or Last House on the Left. Maybe you'd like to compare the scenes?
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
Truffaut had a great relationship with Hitchcock. I’ll look for that other film.
@sutherland93 жыл бұрын
Very clever to notice all the doubles but why was it done? What is the profound meaning of 'doubles' or is it just a directorial 'shtick'? Would the film have been just as meaningful without all the references to doubles? Thank you.
@AMillionMovies3 жыл бұрын
Possibly, but Hitchcock movies are filled with little extras that help convey a theme or reinforce a meaning. You can read his movies almost like literature that way.
@sutherland93 жыл бұрын
@@AMillionMovies Thanks for the reply. I also enjoyed F. Granger in Hitchcock's "Rope".
@Gencturk923 жыл бұрын
@@sutherland9 i didn't like rope found it boring, but strangers on a train is brilliant, rear window and dial m for murder
@Gencturk923 жыл бұрын
@@AMillionMovies all movies usually have symbolism's or something, titanic does
@danahsutton1012 жыл бұрын
You have a lot of free time.
@ADAMSIXTIES Жыл бұрын
I don't really see these "doubles" as something that significant, just elements that happen to be there.
@andrewbaroch21413 жыл бұрын
Why don't you show the damned movie?
@marccolten98015 жыл бұрын
Benny Hill has a sketch where a film director is being praised for the brilliant symbolism in his movies, like a dog running up to a character or switching from color to black and white. In each case he learns there is no symbolism. The dog just ran in front of the camera and they were out of money so they switched to cheaper stock. Do you have any evidence that Hitchcock planned for neckties and cigarette lighters to mean these things or are you just seeing what you want to see?
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
It may be a bit of both, but Hitchcock did this sort of thing very often in his movies. I’m sure that much of it was intentional.
@nicolarralde4 жыл бұрын
I think it may be a coincidence if it happens once, but it happens in all of his movies and a lot of times in this one. You also have to take into account that these things are related, they are not just things that are repeated, they have a purpose, for example they both look at the time and think about hands at the same moment, as shown and explained in the video. Also the whole purpose of repeating things in a movie (symmetry) is to show that they are not just a coincidence. Good luck!
@ItWILLbeWONDERFUL_THERE5 жыл бұрын
The Bruno/ Guy characters should be reversed. For some reason, the skinny guy seems to fit Bruno's personality. Or maybe it's just me? This movie was the inspiration for the movie Throw Mama from the Train.
@cypheru53 жыл бұрын
From a modern perspective, I really can't appreciate these details, I don't see how the double motif complements anything. I'm not criticizing, I just don't get it.
@AMillionMovies3 жыл бұрын
I totally get that. In some movies, they can feel too subtle or even too in your face, and it’s hard to see how they improve the movie. For me, they give me a better understanding of what the director is trying to communicate beyond the entertainment value of the movie. Modern directors use them too. For example, Edgar Wright’s movies are loaded with them.
@cypheru53 жыл бұрын
@@AMillionMovies I’m currently taking a cinema course in university, after a few lectures I’m starting to appreciate cinematography better from a more analytical prospective. This was one of the first films we watched and I think we didn’t get to talk a lot about when I wrote down this comment. I do now notice a lot more of the choices made by film directors. Thank you for the reply.
@mikeswan9832 Жыл бұрын
Snoop and Puffy??
@scronx5 жыл бұрын
Very interesting, but why did they do all this? With a few exceptions, the many extra twos don't add anything to the plot or impact -- do they? Mebbe they just did it to impress nerds like us. Was Hitchcock aware of all this -- was it his doing, the core of his genius?
@AMillionMovies5 жыл бұрын
Hitchcock used lots of symbolism in his movies. There are a million decisions a director makes during a production, and I’d bet some of these were planned and others were just things that fell into place that continued his theme.
@goodmaro5 жыл бұрын
Check out the heavy (in some cases heavy-handed) visual symbolism on a single motif in the movie adaptation of "The Mothman Prophecies". (BTW, I got friendly with John Keel in his later years.) The motif was of dual red lights, and that symbolically encoded a contributing factor to why the Silver Bridge collapsed when it did: traffic lights stuck on red on both ends of the bridge. The book and the movie seemed to all be about mystical causes of the collapse, but there the movie was encoding something to say it wasn't so mysterious after all. (In fairness, Keel's book mentioned that too.) The structural weakness of the bridge has been well documented.
@bobmarley9653 жыл бұрын
wtf
@WalterLiddy5 жыл бұрын
Here's some thoughts re: whether Bruno and Guy are really mirror images: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oKrci6WJgdydeaM
@scotgat5 жыл бұрын
Sir, you have missed the most obvious and most over-arching "doubles" throughout the whole movie: male/male, Guy and Bruno. There is an obvious homosexual subtext to the whole relationship between Guy and Bruno. Note how they meet by playing "footsies" with one another in the beginning of the movie. Guy has an obvious reluctance to be seen in public with Bruno. I could go on and on. The book, by Patricia Highsmith, is even more explicit about the homosexual subtext than the movie. The Supreme Court has ruled gay marriage Constitutional. You don't have to be reluctant at broaching a subject matter that was once deemed taboo. If I seem a little irritated it is because I am. Having aired my irritation, however, you did a very good analysis of the film. Thank you.
@markmaki44604 жыл бұрын
*Rolls eyes*
@andromedastar49004 жыл бұрын
Definitely, wrote a paper on this film years ago, about the obvious homoeroticism and homosexual subtext in the film and the sexual tension between the two men.Back then, everything was subtext, nothing was stated or shown overty, but it was heavily implied and masterfully hinted at with symbols, storytelling and filming techniques, lines, etc. Hitchcock was especially masterful and making things clear while still being able to get past the censors. Every scene is masterfully crafted to say a thousand more words than what is said and shown. Take for example, the very first scene. Like you noticed, literally in that first scene they meet by playing footsies, with Bruno probably purposefully positioning his feet that way because he saw Guy walking towards his table...so right from the beginning there is that heavy subtext and clues. Bruno is openly gay, while Guy is more repressed about his attraction to other men. Bruno doesn't fit into society, partly because he is so eccentric but also because he doesn't hide or repress his homosexuality. Guy on the other hand, fits in to society like the boy-next-door, precisely because he chooses to deny and represses his homosexuality. Bruno from the beginning shows an obvious attraction towards Guy, and is openly flirtatious towards him. Bruno isn't just attracted or romantically interested in Guy, he's absolutely infatuated, enamored with and even becomes obsessed, and starts basically stalking him. Guy's feelings towards Bruno are conflicted, he wants him gone, but at the same time he cares about him, he thinks he's crazy, but at the same time he loves him. On one hand he's bewildered by this new relationship with this sometimes motionally abusive man that exhibits stalker-like behavior, and is clearly obsessed with him. On the other hand, he finds it exciting, intriguing, enthralling. He likes being the object of Bruno's desire, enjoys Bruno's pursuit of him, deep down he likes the fact that Bruno is obsessed with him, even though part of him is afraid of that obsession. Guy is effectively seduced, finds himself tangled in the web of Bruno's charm and guile, enamored with Bruno but also aware that he's caught in this bond with him and he can't escape it. There's the duality of the differences in the two men's personalities, but also how in some ways they were very similar. The murder scheme (a secret they share) is almost a metaphor for the even bigger secret they share: their homosexual relationship, and the struggles of being homosexual in the time period in which they lived (a common theme in Highsmith's stories).
@zacharycat6033 жыл бұрын
why doesn't guy just divorce his wife, she is running around on him, pregnant with another man's baby, etc?
@AMillionMovies3 жыл бұрын
Been a bit since I’ve seen it, but I think he asked her for the divorce when they were in the record store. I think she threatened to say the baby was his and that he was abandoning her.
@alg112972 жыл бұрын
Yeah, and what about the two lenses in the glasses? And the two men walking by at any given moment. The point is, if you're making a movie with two main characters you would have to flip back and forth to them unless they were together alot, which they weren't. I thought this was a very over rated film with great cinematogrophy and incredibly bad acting.
@mikedbigame33982 жыл бұрын
I don't understand Hitchcock's choice to use Farley Granger as a lead in two of his better stories. His terrible acting knock both Strangers' and Rope, down a peg, in comparison to some of his best.