preppy-3 Jane Wyman plays Eve Gill. She's an actress living in England. A man she loves (Richard Todd) is accused of killing the husband of an actress he's romancing (Marlene Dietrich). He didn't do it but the police don't believe him. Eve helps him hide out while she tries to find evidence to clear his name. The wonderful Alastair Sim pops up as her father and the sadly underused Michael Wilding is a detective investigating the case.It's a little too long and I could have lived without hearing Dietrich do THREE songs but still worth catching. There's many clever twists and turns in the plot and Wyman, Dietrich and Sim are excellent in their roles. Also it's beautifully directed (of course) with some great set pieces. Worth catching.

Spikeopath Stage Fright is directed by Alfred Hitchcock and collectively written by Whitfield Cook, Ranald MacDougall, Alma Reville and James Bridie, it's based on the novel "Man Running" written by Selwyn Jepson. It stars Jane Wyman, Marlene Dietrich, Michael Wilding, Richard Todd and Alastair Sim. Plot sees Wyman as drama student Eve Gill, who is asked by friend Jonathan Cooper (Todd) for help because he is on the run for the alleged murder of Charlotte Inwood's (Dietrich) husband. He swears his innocence and with Eve's father (Sim) also in tow, they set about trying to prove Jonathan's innocence. It kind of goes without saying, since 90% of other reviews for Stage Fright have made the point, but Stage Fright is a lesser Hitchcock movie in terms of quality. In fact, watching it now upon revisits, it's actually, well, a bit of a bore. Yes it finds the directing maestro dallying in the realm of acting = deception, himself the deception puppet master, and the cast can't be faulted for quality of performance; notably Wyman who leads the film as a heroine taking on a number of different guises to a number of different people. But it lacks menace, it lacks sardonic humour and after playing the audience like an appropriately named fiddle, the pay off lacks dramatic impact or surprise. It has a bit more to it than merely being one for Hitchcock completists, for one thing fans of British cinema get a nice cameo from the wonderful Joyce Grenfell, but unlike a good portion of Hitchcock's work, this one doesn't hold up on repeat viewings. Decent but not actually very good. 6/10

atlasmb I regard Stage Fright as one of Hitchcock's most undervalued films. It contains certain conventions of his film craft, yet introduces a unique twist--a twist that is misunderstood.As is always the case in a Hitchcock film, blood is the element of murder. Here, the blood stain on a dress is what links the characters together. Like a deadly game of tag, the dress goes from person to person, pulling them into the story, tainting them. First, the framed boyfriend, then the girl who loves him, then her father.Hitchcock likes to play with the difference between what the characters know and what the viewers know. When the audience knows more, it can add suspense (e.g. when Raymond Burr sees Grace Kelly point to the ring in Rear Window). Here he toys with us, giving us a flashback that misleads, but it is not really a "false flashback" as it has so often been called. Remember that this is not a case of the director showing what happened prior; it is an illustration of the story being told to Jane Wyman by Richard Todd. He is manipulating her with a false story. So the misunderstanding is caused by a false telling, not a false flashback. But, yes, Hitchcock does use it to mislead us. He is challenging the rules (but in a fair way) just as he fooled everyone by killing off the "star" of his movie Psycho.Personally, I enjoyed all the acting, especially Alastair Sims as Jane Wyman's father. I found the dialogue of this movie very enjoyable--clever and full of nuance and illusion. Sims really took advantage of his role and delivered some delicious lines.It was nice to Patricia Hitchcock in the minor role of Chubby. In Strangers on a Train, she gets to better display her talents.Wyman's character, an acting student, takes on the various roles as the lies pile up. Eventually, she becomes the assistant/dresser for the star actress played by Marlene Dietrich. Her father becomes her assistant/dresser in that role, as she is drawn deeper and deeper into her own fiction.At the beginning of the film, we see the curtain rise on the proceedings (something Baz Luhrmann used later). Until the final curtain falls, we are drawn into a suspenseful story of an amateur sleuth. Time is an important element in suspense, and Hitchcock does not need to put a clock on screen to remind us of the impending problems that threaten his characters here. And he sometimes seems to drag out the time with inconsequentials, knowing he is drawing us further into the anxiety of his protagonists.I thoroughly enjoyed this film. I hope others discover it.

ivyfield She steals the movie. I really enjoyed it and bought it for £1.29 on Amazon! Don't want to write any spoilers so if you get the chance, watch it. There's some really bad editing and vocal over-dubbing which in itself is quite amusing. Certainly worth a watch. I find some of Hitchcock's work a little reliant on his name to put the essential bums on seats but this I'm glad to say is an exception. The songs performed by Marlene are instantly forgettable with the exception of 'La Vie En Rose' despite one of the forgettable numbers being written specifically for her/the movie by no other than COLE PORTER! The extras on the DVD are nice to watch. Always like a bit of insight into the projects tho if I want to know more I always look to IDMB who do a GREAT job.