The Paradine Case (1947)

Tommy Tainant · Jun 26, 2021

The Paradine Case (1947) ⭐ 6.5 | Crime, Drama, Romance

2h 5m | Approved

www.imdb.com

I found this on youtube and thought it would be a cracking watch.

Gregory Peck is the star and Hitchcock directs but it stubbornly refuses to come to life. I think that the script is to blame. Its fucking awful.
Selznick wrote it according to the credits and I think there is too big a nod towards British middle class sensibilities. I think he would have been a lot more comfortable if it was based in the States and we would have got a harder edged drama. Very disappointed.

Flopper · Jun 29, 2021

Tommy Tainant said:
The Paradine Case (1947) ⭐ 6.5 | Crime, Drama, Romance

2h 5m | Approved

www.imdb.com

I found this on youtube and thought it would be a cracking watch.

Gregory Peck is the star and Hitchcock directs but it stubbornly refuses to come to life. I think that the script is to blame. Its fucking awful.
Selznick wrote it according to the credits and I think there is too big a nod towards British middle class sensibilities. I think he would have been a lot more comfortable if it was based in the States and we would have got a harder edged drama. Very disappointed.

"The Paradine Case" is just not in the same league as "Rear Window", "Vertigo", "Psycho", and "Stranger on a Train". The 1933 novel was certainly a great story. With Hitchcock and a cast that includes Gregory Peck, Ann Todd , Valli, Charles Laughton, Charles Coburn, Louis Jourdan, and Ethel Barrymore, and Leo G. Carroll backed by Selznick, one would expect a really great movie. What we got was Hitchcock's least memorable movie that was down right boring at times.

So what went wrong? Lots of stuff. This was Hitchcock's last movie working for Selznick. Before the movie got off the ground, there were problems. Both Selznick and Hitchcock wanted Garbo and Ronald Coleman to play the lead but Garbo after a screen test decided to retire and Coleman said he wasn't interested if Garbo said no. Then Selznick and Hitchcock could not agree on the leads or the cast and so for a year they did screen tests, meetings, script changes trying to sign up John Barrymore, Lionel Barrymore, Laurence Olivier, Ingrid Bergman, Maurice Evans, Joseph Cotten, Alan Marshal, James Mason, Anthony Keane; Claude Rains, and Robert Newton. For one reason or another after nearly a year, there was no cast. Selznick ended up using contract actors.

Once production got underway, the censors tore apart the screen play which was written mostly by Hitchcock. The result was 4 screen writers were hired to produce a script that everyone could agree on. According Hitchcock's biographer, "He was disgusted with the content and method that were forced upon him that conspired to produce an uneasy atmosphere from which Hitchcock could scarcely wait to extricate himself." Gregory Peck was quoted as saying, ""Hitch seemed really bored with the whole thing..."

After the premier, Selznick cut 22 minutes out the film to it's current length of 114 minus. Hitchcock was not involve with the finial cut. Neither critics nor audiences were thrilled with the film. After distributions in the US and abroad the film which cost almost as much as "Gone With Wind", 4.5 million eventually broke even. And once again we have a film that could have been great had it not been for for widespread disagreements, rumors, misunderstanding, and meddling by those who should have had no part in the production of the movie.