Cast: Michael Fassbender (Martian). Jeffrey Wright (Henry Ogletree). Katherine Waterston (Naomi). Harriet Sansom Harris (Dr. Blake). Saura Lightfoot-Leon (Daniela aka Danny). Jodie Turner-Smith (Samia Zahir). Richard Gere (Bosko, Head of London Station). India Fowler (Poppy).Hugh Bonneville (James Richardson).
Plot: Martian is under suspicion for multiple reasons – his continued interest in retrieving Samia Zahir from Sudan, his supposed liaison contacts with MI6 officer Richardson, his plans to turn a vicious mercenary using an untested back office analyst. All these and more come to Henry’s attention starting an internal mole hunt. Danny is getting closer to the higher echelons of power in Iran, in their nuclear program. Various strands are in the air…
As mentioned in season 1, The Agency is an American remake of the French 4 season TV Series The Bureau where the acting was so good that one had to remind oneself that these are NOT INTELLIGENCE AGENTS BUT PROFESSIONAL ACTORS . It’s a very tall act to follow and Season 1 of The Agency did it very well.
Season 2 is – ahem – a tough one and it is easy to see why. The over clever plotting is perhaps the main culprit as too many things are happening. The internal leaks, Martian’s suspicious behaviour, Henry’s suspicions – all these and more, take up more of the time and could have been easily reduced from 10 episodes to about 8 or so . Samia’s imprisonment stretches longer than the original one in Syria and so that too drags. It’s the Iranian scenes with Danny that come through very well – the abject terror that a NOC has to and MUST go through is shown well in the Iranian scenes. That Danny is addicted to danger is something that Martian identifies and keeps her in place , despite everyone telling him to pull her back for her own safety and so the consequences are but natural. There are couple of surprises that one doesnt see coming at all (at least I didnt) which is somewhat different from the original.
The middle of the season drags very much due to Henry’s molehunt and the resultant surprises are somewhat different than the French serial. The ISIS terrorist who is targeted by French intelligence is replaced by an American ex Marine working with a Russian mercenary group controlling diamond and other rare earth mines in Central African Republic but the end results are the same and these scenes work amazingly well . Thanks to the “Russians” and “Islamic Terrorists” there are many acts of (off screen) brutality which thankfully are in our imagination. The geopolitics is also spot on with all the major new players in the play – China, Russia, Iran and the British. As befitting any “American” TV series with more budget, the look is very stylish and high end compared with the somewhat sparse French looks.
In short the series starts well, lags in between but reaches a fitting and superb climax, with the end guaranteeing a Season 3 and 4. Despite that middle segment dragging, the series is STILL ONE OF THE BEST that shows intelligence work mainly being collating facts from various sources and analysis the final result – with the odd gunplay here and there :) .
Despite all these limitations, it is still an engrossing watch.
Cast: James Stewart (L.B. Jefferies). Grace Kelly (Lisa Fremont). Thelma Ritter (Stella). Wendell Corey (Tom Doyle). Raymond Burr (Lars Thorwald)
Plot: Due to an accident in which his leg was fractured while capturing a motor race accident, photographer Jeffries is confined to his wheelchair for six weeks in an apartment. With nothing to do he observes the neighbourhood through his window and sees various stereotypes. He is convinced that the jewellery salesman in the opposite flat has murdered his invalid wife as he has seen him make mysterious trips in the middle of the night. His girlfriend Lisa and his physiotherapist Stella think he is crazy but soon they too are convinced that something is not right ….
From the early to the late 1980s, I was a member of a film club which showed all the ‘world masters’ such as Kurosawa, Ingmar Berman, Fellini etc . I innocently asked one of the society organisers why they do not show Hitchcock films. He gave me a look that was a cross between disgust and anger. When I persisted , he mumbled something about appropriate 16 mm prints being unavailable .
During the Red Lorry Festival in March this year, I attended the “Directors masterclass” by Sriram Raghavan. Amazingly he narrated a similar incident where during his FTII days, he was ticked off for requesting that Hitchcock films be shown and even included in film studies. Hitchcock is more or less standard in most Western film schools while I am not sure whether it is taught in Indian film schools .
Because Rear Window remains an amazing example of the craft of film making.
Looking at the film today and judging by the audience response in a recent screening, the film still holds its own and is not at all dated. The audience response was EXACTLY the same as when I saw it three days in a row , forty years ago. A private screening at a friend’s place, the response was exactly the same with the audience letting out gasps at the same places as happened years ago.
So what is it that makes this CLASSIC?
The amazing set design? looking at how tightly the camera moves, it is impossible to believe that whatever Jeff sees from his point of view is actually one gigantic setting filled with amazing characters such as the struggling song writer, ‘Miss Lonelyhearts” – a single somewhat aged woman who is struggling to find a partner, Miss Torso – the well endowed ballet dancer who is trying to find the ‘right man’, a deaf sculptress, Thorwald the jewellery salesman mocked by his invalid wife, an aged childless couple who let down their pet dog every day by a basket , a newlywed couple who rarely open the window once they enter the nearby flat . And so on.
As mentioned by Donald Spoto in his classic book The Art of Alfred Hitchcock, each of them represents the various possibilities that Jeff and Lisa may end up as – lonely, embittered couple, childless couple ; as Jeff says “he would welcome trouble at this stage”. And boy does he get it.
Much more than the murder mystery angle is the totally sneaky way in which the film gradually peels away the layers and points out why we love films – basically we are all voyeurs! Stella clearly tells Jeff “we have become a race of peeping Toms; we should go out and take a good look at ourselves’. Since it happens in the film’s beginning most of us may miss that line but it is THE clear connection about film being nothing but scripted voyeurism!
This is sophisticated film making and as with any Hitchcock, the script crackles with wit , sometimes macabrely – when Jeff is about to eat his morning bacon breakfast, Stella looks at Thorwald’s flat and wonders aloud “where would he cut her up ? where could he have done it?’ Needless to say Jeff puts the bacon back on the plate.
Many moments like these pepper the film which remains easily among any top 10 Hitchcock films.
The final word – WATCH IT ANYHOW.
PS: With such a terrific story , its no wonder that many have tried to remake it . Some have succeeded while others remain meh! Here are the list of two remakes that I know of:
1. Rear Window (1998) – Christopher Reeve as a paralysed man confined to his wheel chair who is sure he has seen a murder; would love to watch to check out how it turned out. The film is available on You Tube!
2. Disturbia (2008) – A teenager confined to his home with an electronic locker on his foot, is sure he has seen a murder, in the neighboring home. Very gripping.
Script – 5 out of 5
Story – 5 out of 5
Direction – 5 out of 5
Photography – 5 out of 5
Total – 5 out of 5
One response to “Rear Window (1954) – Classic”
Robin Bhat
Hi Rammesh,
Another great review! Yes, to some extent or another, we are all ‘voyeurs’ !
A small bit of trivia, also from the Spoto book:
“The movie begins as the credits appear over a slowly ascending bamboo shade. The view we finally see beyond the shade is the panorama of the largest indoor set built by Paramount Studios up to the end of 1953 – the array of apartments in the buildings surrounding Jeff”.
The book goes on to explain how Hitchcock did his homework… the address of the apartment.. proximity to the police station… in the film, and in reality; this is not the first Hitchcock film where one can trace the local address/geography in the film to an actual map.
(In contrast.. unlike typical Bollywood masala, where most murders/takedowns/police sirens end up – if a Mumbai setting at the Ballard Estate area or if New Delhi, the ‘Lutyens’ area)
—
Any Hindi film remake of ‘Rear Window’ ?
—
Lastly, very impressed at knowing that you attended the “Directors Masterclass” conducted by none other than masterclass director Sriram Raghavan! (Ikkis, Andhadhun, Badlapur, Johnny Gaddar…)
When I was doing research for my book on Hrishikesh Mukherjee (Human Cinema available on Amazon on Kindle and Print ; for Amazon link, please click herehttp://bit.ly/4pnxUPL ), I came across this statement by Hrishida – “My film is not a copy of any foreign film; it is just a story of two friends one of whom doesn’t want to let go of the other”. If anything, Hrishida was very good at dissembling and diverting attention in a cheeky sort of way. He said similar things about Anupama (supposedly based on a cousin’s life story) and Abhiman (supposedly about one of his friends who had a problem with his wife and NOT any musical personalities’ personal lives).
When Namak Haraam was released, there was some loose talk about it being a direct copy of the 1964 English film Becket, updated for modern times. I can confirm that this supposed loose talk is more than true. The King becomes the Industrialist and the Head Priest/ Arch Bishop becomes the Industrial worker turned Union Leader. In both cases the King/ Industrialist places his friend in a position thinking that his “friend” would be his puppet. Predictably his friend, the supposed puppet, turns adversary, does what is morally right and not what is convenient for the King.
There is NO WAY that anyone can dismiss Namak Haraam as anything but an – er – inspiration of Becket. Yet, I find the Indianisation perfect and contemporary to the times in which it was set in. The early 1970s were filled with news of various industrial strikes across India due to labour unrest, fuelled by a perception that the ordinary industrial worker was not getting his dues and all the ‘profits’ from their labour were filling the coffers of their masters. The most famous or should we say infamous example of this was the textile strike of the late 1970s/ early 1980s that ultimately resulted in massive job losses and multiple textile mills in the area of Parel-Lower Parel-Mahalaxmi shutting down and never opening again. Today the land has been sold and most of them are made in to apartments or malls while the chawls in which the workers lived, still stand in their original semi dilapidated condition, cheek by jowl with the towers.
Coming back to Namak Haram. When it was released in 1973, the biggest indicator of Amitabh Bachchan’s rising stardom was as shown in the hair cutting salon which I used to visit. There was an “Amitabh cut”, complete with Amitabh’s photo and how the hairdressers would go about doing it. This also was the second film in which Rajesh Khanna and Amitabh Bachchan worked together. Hrishida also said in an interview that he had to keep the ending a secret as both stars wanted mileage out of the ending. Amitabh was supposedly upset that he didn’t get to ‘die’ onscreen.
Vicky as a character is fascinating at best; he cannot give up his friend and he wants to childishly hold on to him despite growing evidence that Somu is a different human from the friend with whom he used to go drinking, chasing women and indulging in extravaganzas he couldn’t afford and he knows that everything is paid for, by Vicky. Somu ‘grows up’ from something of a ‘chamcha’ as his locality calls him, to a ‘planted union leader’ designed to break the stranglehold of Bipin Lal the Union leader, to finally a human who realises where his moral duty as a Union Leader lies, which is to fight for the labourer’s rights. In contrast, Vicky remains the same embittered somewhat childishly selfish person he always was. Only Somu’s death makes him see the light and he promises to set things right.
Becket’s story is somewhat similar. Becket’s King is bothered by The Church which keeps questioning his authority and wants him to submit to it. So, what better way to control it than to have his friend, a priest, be made the figurehead Arch Bishop whom he can control? While he thinks He, The King, is the law, the Arch Bishop soon starts countering saying that there is a HIGHER LAW that has to be obeyed and soon both are at loggerheads with each other.
So, which is the better version? This is incredibly difficult to answer.
Becket is the longer film and has some moments which we cannot relate to, especially the religious and historical angle. From that context alone, Namak Haram is easy to relate to due to the Indian milieu in which it is set, the focus on the friendships and of course music which forwards the story. The side plot of the drunk poet is something that is not there in the original film but is a perfect example of the localisation that was done, leading to an interesting song situation, the totally melancholic Mai shaayar badnaam. A fleeting shot of the dying poet looking at Bipin Lal’s daughter leaves us with a question – is she the woman who ditched him, leading to his alcoholism, and his sad smile is a final thank you? Such ambiguity is there in many of Hrishida’s films and we can make whatever meanings we want out of it.
Both films begin in the same way. In the Hindi film, Vicky released from prison, goes home and is confronted by the photo of a smiling Somu. In the English film, the King reaches a mausoleum where the death mask of the Bishop has been kept; the King starts questioning the death mask. So right from the first scene, we know both the characters are dead. Immediately the film cuts to the past with both of them running away from a young girl’s farm loft, while being chased by the girl’s parents. Similar scene in the Hindi film except that in keeping with th1 1970s, the two work in a law firm and sketch their boss’s female secretary.
Finally. Which is the better film? No. I am not going to answer that question but let you judge for yourself.
I would rate BOTH versions 5 out of 5 for direction, screenplay, dialogues and superb performances from the leads, namely Richard Burton and Peter O’Toole in the English original; Rajesh Khanna and Amitabh Bachchan in the respective Hindi roles.
One response to “Becket (1964) and Namak Haram (1973) – One story Two Versions – again”
Robin Bhat
Hi Rammesh,
Beautiful, side-by-side look at two classic films!
I would say that Namak Haram is easily the more relatable film to the Indian movie-goer.
Beckett is also a gem, with three huge actors (Peter O’Toole, John Gielgud and Richard Burton)… but unless one is deep into Henry II and his era (1154-1189), there is little context to the film., except for the titanic encounter of State vs. Religion. (a struggle resonating the news as recently as yesterday, July 4).
Naram Haram was in the hotbed of Indira’s India, the times when ‘Garibi Hatao’ became an empty slogan, and the unfortunate mill workers of Parel (Mumbai), became pawns in a ruthless war (the union strike, Datta Samant, etc.). Deewar was set in the same general time, and VInay Lal’s book on that film covers the same terrible angst of India (and Bombay’s) youth.
—
Only some points to add on Namak Haram:
1. This is the second (first being Buddha Mil Gaya) of ten (?) collaborations with R. D. Burman. Four solos for Kishore Kumar in Namak Haram, and, IMO, one of the very best of the RDB-Anand Bakshi efforts seen in ‘main shayar badnaam’.
Though probably having heard the others maybe a thousand times, the one I love is the evergreen election song! ‘Woh jhootha hai’ is a number that is useful every few months.
(Not ashamed to admit that only a few years ago, I voted for a local politico, who did get elected, but is now in prison. LOL!)
2.
Small, but important footnote. This was Gulzar’s second back-to-back Filmfare Award for Best Dialog – first Anand, then Namak Haram.
3.
A nod to Om Shivpuri for his role as wily father/factory owner.
4. Asrani was nominated for Best Comedian.
Lastly, I always a chuckle at Hrishida and Amitabh flaunting for us the ‘tech toys’ of that era – a spool recorder… a video camera!
https://rammesh.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1-pixel.png00Rammeshhttps://rammesh.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1-pixel.pngRammesh2026-07-05 11:23:112026-07-05 11:23:12Becket (1964) and Namak Haram (1973) – One story Two Versions – again
Plot: Surprised to discover that watch smuggling is a major activity due to the lack of any credible Indian brand of high quality, Xerxes Desai puts a proposal to manufacture high quality watches in India, to his mentor and friend J.R.D. Tata, the head of the Tata group, who is amused but doesn’t say anything. While on a visit abroad to explore the possibilities, JRD faces a personal insult by a Swiss precision watch manufacturer about India being unable to make any such high-quality precision watch. On his return, JRD gives the green signal to Xerxes. Desai gathers together a team that ultimately becomes the core group – Akash, Gaurav, Megha – that starts the process of setting up and manufacturing precision quartz watches with the Tata stamp of quality and dependability...
As a thumb rule, I avoid “sports movies”, “business success movies” as we know that the hero/ main protagonist will win in the end against all obstacles, hurdles, challenges, etc. He will be the one who will have multiple brainwaves while all the others around him / her stare at the sky and are motivated by the protagonist’s zeal and burning desire to bring forth the final result. He/ she will overcome all personal and professional challenges with or without the support of people in his life. He / she is usually a very scrupulous/ honest person who follows all the rules of business and life . The Founder was probably the only film to break the rule as it showed Ray Kroc as a complete shit who stole the McDonalds brand name from the McDonald brothers, so much that they had to close their original restaurant and were unable to use their own name. ( Check out my take on The Founder at this link ).
This TV Series also follows this “business success story” template except that the core team is also shown contributing to the overall success story of Titan watches. This is not Xerxes ‘Zee’ Desai’s lone battle but that of his core team too who are as fired up as ‘Zee’ to get the final product into the Indian market, while facing multiple challenges. So how much of this story is true? That will be the question on everyone’s lip, before starting the series. I like the series and since I have read the book, let me answer my own question in a fun way. Two of the five main characters in the TV series are “real” – Xerxes Desai and J.R.D. Tata. The rest are fully filmi composite characters (If you read the book, then you will know the real history).
Then why on earth was I smiling throughout the six episodes? Why on earth did I laugh out aloud at some of the silly, theatrical even ‘filmi’ devices in the story – like JRD himself refusing to wear a watch till the time Titan makes its first watch? And why on earth did I want to know what will happen next – so much that I almost binge watched the series?
Simple. Because ofthe emotional connect that the writing generates. Unlike all ‘foreign’ business success stories, this one has its heart in the right place, especially the constant references to an era when ‘smuggled watches’ were a sign of prestige and ‘local watches’ were generally ridiculed being a poor second cousin / okay quality. My personal experience will probably give a perspective, especially to those who were – er – not around in that era.
Sometime in my final year of college, 1980, I was presented anHMT Ajeeth watch with a green dial ( HMT is referred to as GMT in the TV series; click on the link to see how it looked). Now a watch itself was a prestige symbol, and a long-lasting watch, even more so (my father had the same mechanical watch for almost 40 years) and an HMT watch with its wide range was even a bigger prestige. On a visit to Singapore in 1982, I bought a Casio digital watch, which I used for a long time since the HMT had stopped working and couldn’t be repaired. Casio digital watch was the ‘hep thing’ in the early 1980s and Bombay’s DN Road had tons of smuggled watches being sold openly. Only sometime in the late 1990s did the famous Mozart Symphony No. 25 adorn my wrist by which time, I realised that not only did the Titan match in quality but also the price and feature range.
The TV series, somewhat follows this timeline and is on the dot when it comes to the Titan watches being widely available across India. Except that the story is full of dramatic incidents that we can only pass off as fully filmi. Eg – Xerxes and Aksah meet Haji Mastan? Who they discover is the king of the watch smuggling ring? Surely, they weren’t that naïve or that innocent. If as the book states, the core team had done its market research before entering the market, it surely wouldn’t have done something so foolish (and filmy). In the same way the “Titan Tune” – Mozart Symphony No.25 – wasn’t the result of JRD taking the entire team to a Western Classical Concert . Again this is a very filmi scene, but it still is nice to watch every character suddenly “connect” to THE tune that would make a lasting impression as The Titan Tune – especially after everyone is shown listening to multiple songs and tunes in various Indian languages with overall amusing results.
We can dismiss this and many other similar incidents as “creative liberty” that happily doesn’t detract from the story but instead adds to the overall story of showing the emotional drive of the main characters. And it is on this emotional drive that the series is on target. That quality called as jazbaat as the story telling that grabs you from the word go.
I have a problem with the overall underexposed even dull photography to depict those ‘gloomy’ times. All scenes inside the offices and anywhere else have a dank and gloomy look to it. The moment the two characters Megha and Gaurav were introduced, we immediately know that they will be ultimately married by the end of the TV series. The real characters on whom they were based were already married when they joined the company ( at least the man was).
Despite such cliches, the TV series is heart warming and nice to see a real Indian success story without any hanky panky, due to the straight arrow guidance of JRD himself , played magnificently by Naseeruddin Shah. We know that JRD didn’t have to throw his weight around and THAT is PROJECTED amazingly by Naseer. A magnificent performance even though he doesn’t have as much screen time as Jimmy Sarbh’s endearing performance as the cranky, endearing, egoistic and finally human ‘Zee’. One would expect that the Head of Marketing would be an outgoing confident ‘Type A’ personality and this is probably the only blemish in the series, as Megha Mhatre comes across as a softspoken, somewhat diffident person. The foreigners are stereotypes – who have nothing but disdain for India and Indians. I was actually surprised to learn from the series (and the book) that “Andre Leuba” (actually the world-famous Swiss watch brand Favre Leuba) was acquired by Titan watches in 2011, which the Series shows truthfully in a small coda. (Titan sold off this acquisition in 2023).
The overall atmosphere of the late 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s is superbly recreated and the production design team should be lauded for their painstaking attention to detail in many of the scenes, especially those set in the 1970s and 1980s. The book on which this TV series is based covers the rise of the brand and its misadventures in 4 out of its 10 chapters.
What would be the best way to summarize the story ? Simple. It is BASED ON A TRUE STORY (which means , less true story and more masala ; here the masala is in perfect proportion with the overall story. Not too much, not too little) Overall, this is an absolute FEEL-GOOD TV series that I absolutely endorse due to the overall superb performances and attention to detail and excellent production design, aided by appropriate songs from mostly 1950s, 1960s and 1970s film songs, which at times mirror the storyline.
https://rammesh.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1-pixel.png00Rammeshhttps://rammesh.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1-pixel.pngRammesh2026-06-28 10:46:332026-06-28 10:46:35Made in India_A Titan Story (2026) – “Sweet and Fully filmi Fun”
Cast: Naseeruddin Shah (Ishar Singh Grewal). Vedang Raina (Keenu / Young Ishar Singh Grewal). Diljit Dosanjh (Nirvair Singh). Sharvari (Afsana/Jiya).
Plot: In the present , 95-year-old Ishar Singh Grewal is driven by the family driver to Attari check post , at the Indo-Pak border, since he wants to go to Sargodha. The BSF officers at first mock him but then quickly understand that the dementia-stricken Grewal needs medical care. In London. Ishar’s grandson Nirvair is trying various jobs while his heart is in standup comedy. He returns to India and is at his grandfather’s bedside, not dismissing his dementia-stricken words as nonsense but starts searching for the meaning and the events behind the words like Martians, Government College, curse of the women, and so on …
Partition stories mostly follow a similar pattern – tragedies, massacres, depredations on both sides, and of course the super human superman strength of Gadar 1 and Gadar 2. Rare is the film that delves into the meanings behind the words and ultimately what was the HUMAN EXPERIENCE that ended up as words and books.
This film had me choking at various moments not because of the Partition tales but because of the fact that finally there IS a “meeting of minds” among the family members who used to dismiss the “old man and his rants and ramblings”. Nirvair slowly and steadily gathers the pieces of the “Keenu’s” journey from undivided India to post Partition India and finally what was it that was keeping his grandfather alive. As the grandson, he cannot in any way relate to the stories till the time he finally understands his grandfathers’ experiences. For others they are words; for him and his grandfather, they are life experiences that still don’t have a closure.
Nirvair’s unsettled life in London, contrasts with that of his grandfather, the young ‘Keenu” who likes and chases the young Jiya. Both are unaware of the impending disaster called Partition. Keenu, actually tells the local gangster who is threatening his life, that he wont go from this place and he can do whatever they want with him, since it is not written whether their town will be in India or Pakistan. It is somewhat crazily funny and dangerous in the same breath as no one is sure what will happen.
Partition films generally do not talk of healing and closure but to show the gradual ascent to bestiality on both sides of the communal divide. Normally they also talk about a lost time and era which appear as sepia tinted photographs. Bitterness. Longing. An Open Wound – all these and more have been covered in multiple films.
Chaliya (1960) was a rare film that spoke of healing on both sides as the Indian side adopts the sister of the Pathan as their own while the Pathan adopts the heroine’s child as his own. It wasn’t a big hit though the songs were exceptionally popular. In the modern era, Gadar , Border and a host of such ‘kill all Pakistanis’ type of films have been hits, no doubt due to the political climate in which they have been released. All the characters were cardboard cutouts.
So, we can actually relate to a Keenu and Nirvair’s bewilderment as they go about trying to unravel the happenings. Keenu’s loss of innocence is balanced by Nirvair’s loss of innocence in that he finds that he doesn’t belong in London but in India. Keenu knows that he has lost everything yet has to seek out Jiya and it is this quest – like most stories centred on quests – that forms the core of the film.
The trailers say this is supposedly based on a true story; yet we cannot be sure as there would have been hundreds of such stories. The historical background is of course very much true as millions on both sides found a new life albeit with a sense of loss and the possibility of no return to their roots. In the final analysis, that’s what the film is all about – the search for one’s roots.
I saw the film on June 18th in a theatre in an evening show. The same day in the afternoon I had watched on Amazon Prime the TV series, “Made in India: A Titan Story”. Naseeruddin Shah was JRD Tata in the TV series and the same evening he was the dementia-stricken Ishar; the contrast couldn’t be more dramatic. This is Naseer’s film from start to finish, and he is incredible despite spending almost all the film on a bed. Diljit Dosanjh is also good as the grandson who starts the quest which his grandfather couldn’t and, in the process, realises more about himself than he thought was possible.
In the end this is NOT about politics or religion but the quest for completion, closure and always memories. The onscreen duo seeks it in their own way. Relentlessly.
The films end shows the multiple wars worldwide that contribute to multiple ongoing refugee crises; and how the rootlessness of the refugees leads to an overall loss and despondency.
DO NOT MISS IT AT ANY COST. It will be worth it. These days, rare is the film that makes me want to go back to the theatre and see it again. This is one such film.
It is always a mixed blessing when watching remakes of an original, especially when the original has the “Master of suspense”, Alfred Hitchcock’s stamp in various scenes. As always, Hitchcock’s “suspense movies” have one twist after the other, making you wonder what is the “MacGuffin” – the crux/ the core idea of the story. There are three versions of this story, two of which are available on You Tube. The 2012 version seems to be unavailable on any online platform in India (though available on Amazon Prime USA).
The Lady Vanishes (1938)
Genre: Mystery/ “Spy Adjacent” thriller
Platform: You Tube
Time: 1 hour 35 minutes
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Cast: Margaret Lockwood (Iris Henderson). Michael Redgrave (Gilbert Redman). Paul Lukas (Dr. Egon Hartz). May Whitty (Miss Froy).
Plot: Musicologist Gilbert Redman and Iris Henderson have had multiple feuds before they board a train in a European country Bandrika. Gilbert who has been around to document Bandrika’s folk music is clearly skeptical but is slowly convinced that there really was a Miss Froy, who had helped iris, when a brick , intended for Miss Froy, fell on her head, leading to everyone concluding that she is suffering the after effects of the ‘head injury’. Iris wonders why everyone is lying about not seeing Miss Froy, with whom she had been friendly. Iris suspects that there is some kind of conspiracy afoot to kidnap Miss Froy who isn’t someone she claims to be, a humble governess…
The film was entirely shot in studio and it is evident in the way most of the scenes have that ‘studio’ feel. That said, it is still one of the most playfully written screenplays by Hitchcock’s constant collaborator and wife, Alma Reville. There is an overall feeling of pulling the viewer by the nose and pointing in different directions. We know that everyone except Iris is clearly in on “some conspiracy” but we do not know what. The plot steadily accelerates to its climatic shootout and the bold and daring escape from “Bandrika” to “Switzerland”. Most of us can’t be sure whether the kindly, somewhat eccentric old woman could be a spy and she denies being one too but we are not too sure. The end reveals otherwise.
There are enough pointers to the “Hitchcock touch” – such as the huge close up of a mysterious hand slowly moving the brick to target Froy but which instead falls on Iris’s head. The supposedly spiked drinks which the duo are about to drink where the glasses are in the foreground which we the audience know but not the unsuspecting lead duo. A mysterious ‘conjurer’ who almost kills the leading duo but after a few moments, smiles happily his way past the leading duo, leading the doctor to suspect that Iris has been suffering serious delusions; and so on.
For its time, Iris is shown as a somewhat ‘bold’ woman whose ideas of marriage are not exactly conventional as she hints at flings and is finally setting for matrimony with a supposedly straight but dull man. There are two cricket mad fanatics who are only intent on reaching England for a crucial test match and to hell with all the people on the train, including the missing woman and the “young woman making up a devil of a fuss”. These are pre-WW2 Englishmen who are straight and narrow and will always do the right thing for England, come what may. There are also a couple on an illicit affair where the man doesn’t want to be found out as he is a judge. The film is an overall delightful film that has the right mix of suspense punctuated by peppy crackling dialogues and Free on You Tube
Script – 5 out of 5
Story – 4 out of 5
Direction – 5 out of 5
Photography – 5 out of 5
Total – 4.8 out of 5
The Lady Vanishes (1979)
Genre: Mystery/ “Spy Adjacent” thriller
Platform: You Tube
Time: 1 hour 39 minutes
Director: Anthony Page
Cast: Elliott Gould (Robert Condon). Cybill Shepherd (Mrs Amanda Kelly). Angela Lansbury (Miss Froy). Herbert Lom (Dr. Egon Hartz).
Plot: American heiress Mrs Amanda Kelly is treated sympathetically by Miss Froy, due to her drinking antics ending up with a severe hangover, when they board a train in Nazi Germany. When Amanda wakes up from a nap in her compartment, everyone in the compartment denies ever seeing Miss Froy. Newspaperman Robert Condon is sure that this is a case of some kind of hangover inspired by Kelly’s binge drinking and also with Dr. Hartz’s suggestions that this could be due to Kelly’s antics the previous night, where her effort to mimic Hitler had met with the local SA’s displeasure who had literally thrown her overboard from the table where she was strutting. Kelly is sure that she has seen Miss Froy and something bad has happened to her…
When I saw this film on its initial release, at Sterling theatre, I was unaware that this was a remake of the Hitchcock film and enjoyed it. Years late I became aware of the original when I bought Donald Spoto’s book on Alfred Hitchcock. Sometime in the 1990s I saw the “original” and was pleasantly surprised how much the original and this color version were alike, almost to the point of being a scene by scene, shot by shot and even some line-by-line remake of the 1938 film. So; does it succeed? Admirably so.
There is a lightweight touch to the overall proceedings including keeping the same characters as the original, especially the cricket mad duo Charters and Caldicott. Then there is the illicit couple on an illicit weekend and other multiple characters. The film is tailored to then rising star Cybil Shepherd’s reputation as a ‘comedienne’ and she is excellent as the loud American heiress. Her comic timing more than makes up, to keep the overall atmosphere lightweight. The musicologist is replaced by a Life magazine photographer thus making both the lead characters American, to appeal to a larger (= American) audience while keeping the peripheral characters British. Nazi Germany is explicitly mentioned and lest someone thinks otherwise, there are enough shots of German soldiers and finally an SS officer in his all-black uniform, leaving no doubt that this is Nazi Germany and surely poor Miss Froy must have some vital secret about the upcoming war.
There are some superb shots of the “German train”, traversing the “German Bavarian landscape” – all the train scenes were shot in Austria and the Austrian Railways are thanked at the film’s ending. Since Shepherd has the better written role, she gets more time onscreen and like the original, she (and most other characters on the train), wear the same dress throughout the film which is free on You Tube
https://rammesh.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1-pixel.png00Rammeshhttps://rammesh.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1-pixel.pngRammesh2026-06-14 07:45:042026-06-14 07:45:07The Lady Vanishes – Two equally good versions
Leave a Reply