I should point out that I have seen many Hitchcock films and although he made many excellent films, I feel he made quite a few turkeys that somehow seem to have been ignored by those who have proclaimed Hitchcock's genius. I think he was a very good director but feel his reputation is greatly inflated. A far more successful director would be William Wyler--whose quality and consistency of work is unmatched in America. As examples of not so hot Hitchcock movies, I name this one and especially the Paradine Case (a wretchedly dull Gregory Peck "drama"), Marnie and Jamaica Inn (among others).
Secondly, I need to point out that I have extensive training in individual and group psychotherapy and this ruins the movie for me BUT might not ruin it for the average viewer. Many of the theories espoused in the movie are complete psychological "mumbo jumbo" and the behavior of Ingrid Bergman (as Peck's therapist) would result in her having her license to practice stripped in all 50 states (and probably result in criminal prosecution).
So what did I like? First, though brief, I like the dream sequence created by Salvador Dali for the film. It's weird and wacky but cool. I like to show it to my Psychology students for insight into both dream interpretation and the analytic approach to therapy (that is no longer in vogue). Second, I like the nutty character portrayed by Leo G. Carroll. He's only in the movie here and there, but he's malevolent and calculating.
Unfortunately, despite their amazing talents, this movie does nothing to improve the reputations of Peck, Bergman or Hitchcock when viewed today. Ingrid Bergman plays a female therapist that hardly seems professional, but is instead a hyper-emotional and rather silly woman--hardly a shining example for women's rights. Peck plays a guy who spends most of the movie behaving "flaky"--and that's about about deep as his role is allowed to progress. Maybe at the time this was seen as slick stuff, but today it just seems silly and so full of holes and inconsistencies.
Secondly, I need to point out that I have extensive training in individual and group psychotherapy and this ruins the movie for me BUT might not ruin it for the average viewer. Many of the theories espoused in the movie are complete psychological "mumbo jumbo" and the behavior of Ingrid Bergman (as Peck's therapist) would result in her having her license to practice stripped in all 50 states (and probably result in criminal prosecution).
So what did I like? First, though brief, I like the dream sequence created by Salvador Dali for the film. It's weird and wacky but cool. I like to show it to my Psychology students for insight into both dream interpretation and the analytic approach to therapy (that is no longer in vogue). Second, I like the nutty character portrayed by Leo G. Carroll. He's only in the movie here and there, but he's malevolent and calculating.
Unfortunately, despite their amazing talents, this movie does nothing to improve the reputations of Peck, Bergman or Hitchcock when viewed today. Ingrid Bergman plays a female therapist that hardly seems professional, but is instead a hyper-emotional and rather silly woman--hardly a shining example for women's rights. Peck plays a guy who spends most of the movie behaving "flaky"--and that's about about deep as his role is allowed to progress. Maybe at the time this was seen as slick stuff, but today it just seems silly and so full of holes and inconsistencies.