The Lodger is one of Hitchcock's greatest films in the respect that it is the first to truely show his talent. This was the film that made the world sit up and take notice of this up and coming director, and now it seems to have been forgotten about. Every other Hitchcock notice board have postings and discussions going on. I'm quite sad actually, that The Lodger is being ignored...
shareThe Lodger is not being ignored at all. If you check back every few months or so you see that the number of votes steadily increase. Albeit slowly, but increase they do.
I first saw this movie on one of the many Mr. Alfred Hitchcock compilation dvds that I own. For some reason, a number of companies are distributing Hitch's old Brit movies. Some stuff three or more films on one disk.
The Lodger is creepy, and of course the Master of Suspense shows off his knowledge of technique. The Man had spent long hours learning every aspect of filmmaking in preparation to becoming one of the few true Masters of the medium.
I would like to comment further on this earlier work, but alas, I have only viddy the picture once.
Dan Ernest
"My precious"
I'm actually writing part of my thesis on it at the moment. If you're interested in Hitchcock, I would reccommend seeing it again. ;0)
share[deleted]
Maybe this film isnt talked about as much as other Hitchcock films simply because it's silent and even though the people talking on this board enjoyed it i guess alot of people simply do not go for silent films. Besides maybe its not that easy to get hold of a copy as what it is some of his other early films such as 39 steps.
I thought it was great myself, could see elements of several later films such as Peeping Tom, a daughter living in a house with a stranger upstairs who isnt trusted by a parent.
------------------------
When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk
I saw this film for the first time the other day, and was immediately hooked! It was so brilliant - I just love silent films, and Hitchcock films! I was also pleasently surprised by the leading man Ivor Novello - what a cutie!
You could REALLY tell this was a Hitchcock film, the style, just everything.
Damn brililiant!!!!
I am glad that people have started discussing this film! As mentioned, the staircase scene is excellent, but my favourite is the scene where Ivor Novello is pacing upstairs and the family are listening. Hitchcock played a blinder by using a glass ceiling to give the unusual effect and has influenced directors ever since.
share[deleted]
As far as I am aware the first print had more title cards but C.M Woolf was concerned about this and a few other points. I believe he got someone he trusted in the studio to edit a few areas and reduce the amount of inter~titles, the name of this person is in many early English Hitchcock books that I have read. Sorry to be forgetful.
shareI am quite young, and yet really enjoyed 'The Lodger'. This film had all the foundations that Hitch used in his later films. It is also the first silent Hitchcock film i have seen, so it was a very refreshing experience.
'Do you want the moon? If you want it, I'll throw a lasso around it and pull it down for you.'
I AM!! It's one of my favorite films--period. I just lament that there is not a better print available for home viewing on DVD. Am glad that it's being appreciated more though.
shareI am very interested in this film. I saw it on PBS a while ago, and I enjoyed it, It is terrific, and a masterpiece.
"I find your lack of faith
disturbing"-Darth Vader
i downloaded this film from www.worldcinemaonline.com its a QUALITY film... i loved it, classic early Hitchcock!!!
shareI watched this movie because I had read that it was the first great Hitchcock, and I hadn't seen any of Hitchcock's silents. I have to say that I was quite disappointed. I know that I am at odds with everyone on this message board, but I just don't think that The Lodger is that good. It is a good film to watch for film history and Hitchcock fans, but to say that it is a great film or one of Hitchcock's best is highly overrating it. Compared to what Murnau, Lang, Chaplin, Keaton, and Eisenstein were accomplishing in this era, The Lodger just isn't very impressive.
Feel free to offer any explanations as to why you think this is a great movie, and I will be happy to reconsider my position.
I haven't seen what Murnau, Lang, Chaplin and Eisenstein were accomplishing in the late 1920's, but I think considering the technological constraints of the time, Hitchcock made a pretty good film. Sure it's flawed, but it is not hard to see that there are signs of a great director, in the performances and technical elements and stuff.
Well, I enjoyed it very much - while I wouldn't call it a masterpiece or anything, it's very interesting and entertaining.
I wouldn't call it a masterpiece either, but it is certainly worth seeing. It's a pity that many won't get to enjoy this because they aren't aware that silent movies can be this good. It's not a "difficult" film at all - it is just as traditionally entertaining as all of Hitchcock's later films.
shareIt's part of the Netflix offering as Alfred Hitchcock: Sabotage and The Lodger (1926). So now maybe more people will see it?
Life is never fair, and perhaps it is a good thing for most of us that it is not.
The Lodger is the first of the many Hitchcock films in which an innocent man, framed by circumstance and blind chance, becomes the object of a manhunt. Others with this same theme include Young & Innocent, Sabateur, and North by Northwest.
shareAnd it's the first in which Hitch made a cameo appearance.
shareWell, obviously the people responding to the OP are people who have seen the movie and are interested in it. I just recommended it to a friend. It's been terribly long since I've seen it, though (as well as Blackmail) so I can't talk authoritatively about it.
I think there are two reasons why this movie is not as well known or as popular as some of Hitch's other films. First, it is silent. Now, once someone gets serious about watching silent movies and becomes accustomed to the pace and different feel, both of the sound (ha!) and image, he or she will certainly want to see the great movies of the era, and The Lodger is great, or at least very good. But it takes time to acquire that taste, as well as a desire. I found silents very tedious when I was starting to learn about film. Too bad -- all the earlier I could have been watching Nosferatu, Metropolis, Battleship Potemkin, and so on. My knowledge of silents is still sparse, and I try to keep up with them; someone who hasn't made that commitment is not going to seek this film out just because it's Hitchcock.
Because the second reason is if people are interested in Hitch, they are more likely to see films from his "Golden Age" -- Rear Window, Vertigo, North by Northwest, Psycho, and so on. And, of course, he directed plenty of other good films during and before that period. (I personally don't care for most of the films he made after Psycho but that's just me). Someone who is just beginning to study film seriously is likely to spend more than one or two viewings on Vertigo, for example, before moving on to silent Hitch. How many classical musicians are fluent in Mozart's Second Symphony? Compare that with the greater audience that can tap their foot along to the Jupiter.
So I don't think it's all a question of ignoring the movie, though that probably plays a part in it.
There's something different about you today, Mr. Laurio.
I love this film but my friends aren't interested in it because they don't like silent films, so what can I say
shareThis is a marvellous movie. It's the first full silent I ever saw and I was hooked from the start. I hadn't imagined a silent movie could be so gripping.
There's a rivetting erudite book by Michael Williams called Ivor Novello Screen Idol. I've no special interest in Hitchcock and came to this movie as an Ivor Novello fan delighted to find a movie of his on DVD. The combination of early Hitchcock, Novello and the Expressionism that apparently Hitchcock had worked with earlier in Germany are what take this movie above the ordinary. Now I've read the Williams book, I understand a great deal more about what was being indicated in movies of the period and particularly in this one which is discussed a lot by Williams. As Williams points out, in 1926, the important person was Welsh movie superstar Ivor Novello, and Hitchcock was a newbie. It was Novello who "sold" the movie. Yet nowadays he's hardly remembered or sometimes even denigrated, whilst Hitchcock has become the icon Novello once was and Hitchcock gets all the plaudits.
The Williams book discusses in great depth the state of mind of people just after the Great War, explaining the sometimes strange-looking acting in movies in the 20's. Also there's the film stock which apparently made human skin look dirty. This explains the massive amount of makeup the actors had to wear - look at their hands and you see how skin really looks on that early film stock.
The talkie remake again with Novello shows how things have moved on. From some of the comments I'd read elsewhere, I had the impression Phantom Fiend must be a bad movie. But it's actually very good - though different. The movie's no longer expressionist and strange and disturbing. The war trauma situation has changed or faded or whatever. The director Maurice Elvey doesn't achieve the same level of tension that Hitchcock achieved. Talking isn't always a benefit. Yet it's still a good movie and Novello still sells it.
I really do recommend the Williams book if you are seriously interested in 20's silents.
Just watched it last night and I enjoyed it. Very German impressionistic! Hitch being very inventive! And his fetish(?) for blond hair has a field day! I agree that silents scare most people away but I find silents visually amazing! The visuals overwelm you while talkies flip you viewing from one side of the brain over to the other side of the brain: the logical side. It is a pity the quality is poor and the film has not been restored. Ivor Novello gives an interesting performance for a novice and I think it took guts for a young mantinee idol to risk such a film at that stage of his life.
share"The Lodger" is an essential and important film in his filmography, because it features all the famous Hitchcock trademarks. The movie was made shortly after Hitchcock returned from Germany, and there are notable influences of the German Expressionists such as Lang and Murnau. I was quite impressed by The Lodger .This is a must watch for everyone.
Read this great review :
http://www.aycyas.com/lodger27.htm
When I look at both The Lodger and Downhill I thank God for silent film if Ivor Novello spoke in either of these two movies his terrible accent would have ruined any sense of mystery . His name may have initially sold the film but certainly the films owe very little to his performances.
shareI'm mystified by this comment. His accent varied according to what he was doing. He has a fine Welsh accent. He had his "stock Ruritanian" accent. He had a received English accent (which I find very sexy and very attractive). He must have had other accents. I think he must have used whatever accent was relevant to the play or situation.