Search

» » Ich kämpfe um dich (1945)

Short summary

Dr. Constance Petersen (Ingrid Bergman) is a psychiatrist at Green Manors mental asylum. The head of Green Manors has just been replaced, with his replacement being the renowned Dr. Anthony Edwardes (Gregory Peck). Romance blossoms between Dr. Petersen and Dr. Edwards, but Dr. Edwards starts to show odd aversions and personality traits. It is discovered that he is an impostor, and amnesiac, and may have killed the real Dr. Edwardes. Dr. Petersen is determined to discover the truth through unlocking the secrets held in the impostor's mind, a process which potentially puts her and others' lives at risk.

Sir Alfred Hitchcock was a big admirer of Salvador Dalí's work, and realized that no one understood dream imagery better. Producer David O. Selznick was opposed to using Dalí from an expense point of view, until he realized the marketing mileage that could be gained from such a hiring.

The gun blast in the end is hand painted. Sir Alfred Hitchcock used a form of hand-coloring for the orange-red gun-blast at the audience.

The dream sequence was designed by surrealist painter Salvador Dalí, and was originally supposed to run slightly longer. It included a scene in a ballroom with hanging pianos and still figures pretending to dance, followed by John Ballantyne (Gregory Peck) dancing with Dr. Peterson (Ingrid Bergman), who then turns into a statue. In order to create the illusion of a room of great size, little people were used in the background on a scaled-down set, which did not satisfy Sir Alfred Hitchcock or Dali. The sequence was cut from the final movie, due to lack of time. Only part of it was filmed, and even less of it ended up in the released version.

Producer David O. Selznick wanted much of this movie to be based on his experiences in psychotherapy. He even brought his psychotherapist in on the set to be a Technical Advisor. Once, when she disputed with Sir Alfred Hitchcock on the workings of therapy, Hitchcock responded, "My dear, it's only a movie."

The shot where the audience sees the killer's view down a gun barrel pointing at Peterson was filmed using a giant hand holding a giant gun, to achieve the proper perspective.

Sir Alfred Hitchcock referred to this movie as "just another manhunt wrapped up in pseudo-psychoanalysis."

The snow falling on John Ballantyne (Gregory Peck) and Dr. Peterson (Ingrid Bergman) during the skiing scene was actually cornflakes.

One of the first Hollywood movies to deal with psychoanalysis.

Although this movie is in black-and-white, two frames where the gun shot goes off while pointed at the camera are tinted red.

Early versions of the script used the words "sex menace", "frustrations", "libido", and "tomcat" in scenes involving the character of Mary Carmichael. These were eliminated when Product Code Administration Director Joseph I. Breen strongly objected.

Sir Alfred Hitchcock was disappointed with the limits of Gregory Peck's facial expressions. According to Peck, "I couldn't produce the facial expressions that Hitch wanted turned on. I didn't have that facility. He already had a preconception of what the expression ought to be on your face, he planned that as carefully as the camera angles. Hitchcock was an outside fellow, and I had the Stanislavski training from the Neighborhood Playhouse, which means you work from the inside."

DIRECTOR CAMEO (Sir Alfred Hitchcock): (At around forty minutes) Coming out of the elevator at the Empire Hotel carrying a violin case and smoking a cigarette.

Miklós Rózsa's score in this movie inspired the career of movie Composer Jerry Goldsmith. Gregory Peck liked the score so much, that in his last years, he used it in his one-man touring lecture show, "An Evening with Gregory Peck."

After Sir Alfred Hitchcock had suggested "Hidden Impulse" as a title, Studio Secretary Ruth Rickman came up with the title "Spellbound", which tested well in a pre-release survey.

The first preview took place on September 27, 1944, after which, Producer David O. Selznick deleted an opening montage showing treatment of mental cases. After principal photography was completed, Selznick was involved with sound re-recording of the dialogue and the editing, eliminating about fourteen minutes of the movie.

Originally released with an overture before the opening credits, and exit music after the end title.

According to Sir Alfred Hitchcock's biographer Donald Spoto, Retakes Director William Cameron Menzies was disappointed at what he considered an unappealing dream sequence, and asked to remain uncredited for it. When the sequence received critical and audience acclaim, Hitchcock was happy to take the credit.

The Dali dream sequence was shot originally to run twenty minutes, but ended as only two. Sir Alfred Hitchcock originally wanted Josef von Sternberg to shoot it, but it was ultimately directed by William Cameron Menzies.

The Shakespeare quotation at the start of this movie is an abbreviated version of something that Cassius said to Brutus in Act 1 Scene 2 of "Julius Caesar". The full quotation is "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings."

Sir Alfred Hitchcock's first choice for the role of John Ballantyne was Cary Grant. His second choice was Joseph Cotten.

Sir Alfred Hitchcock persuaded Producer David O. Selznick to buy the rights to the novel for forty thousand dollars.

Screenwriter Ben Hecht consulted many of the leading psychoanalysts of the day.

Producer David O. Selznick originally wanted Joseph Cotten, Dorothy McGuire, and Paul Lukas in the roles ultimately played by Gregory Peck, Ingrid Bergman, and Leo G. Carroll. He also briefly toyed with the idea of bringing Greta Garbo out of retirement to play the role of Dr. Constance Petersen.

Producer David O. Selznick wanted Miklós Rózsa to swell the orchestra from fourteen violins to twenty-eight, as he had liked the effect that that had brought when Franz Waxman did it while scoring Rebecca (1940). In addition, Selznick was dissatisfied with Rozsa's musical cue for the skiing sequence, and replaced it with one from Waxman's score for Suspicion (1941).

Composer Miklós Rózsa hated working with Producer David O. Selznick.

The dream sequence was produced by "Poverty Row" studio Monogram Studios. Its initial efforts kept getting rejected by Producer David O. Selznick, until he hired Production Designer William Cameron Menzies to oversee the production. Sir Alfred Hitchcock was barely involved.

Michael Chekhov was the only Best Actor in a Supporting Role Oscar nominee that year that was from a Best Picture nominated movie.

The then relatively obscure Ruth Roman sought a role in this movie. Roman played the female lead in Sir Alfred Hitchcock's Der Fremde im Zug (1951).

Included among the "1,001 Movies You Must See Before You Die," edited by Steven Schneider.

Features Michael Chekhov's only Oscar nominated performance.

The only Best Picture Oscar nominee that year to be also nominated for Best Special Effects.

The only Best Picture Oscar nominee that year not to be nominated in either of the lead acting categories.

James Flavin is in studio records and casting call lists for this movie, but he did not appear, or was not identifiable.

This film is part of the Criterion Collection, spine #136.

Opening credits: The events and characters depicted in this photoplay are fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

User reviews


  • comment
    • Author: Xinetan
    While I wouldn't include 'Spellbound' in my top five favourite Alfred Hitchcock movies it's still wonderfully entertaining. Of course it had dated badly in some ways, but not enough to spoil a modern viewer's enjoyment. Psychoanalysis was still quite a cinematic novelty at the time, but this means that we have to put up with an awkward opening sequence, complete with "explanations" on the screen, and a few pretty hokey moments throughout, but hey, I can live with that, and the amateurish filmed skiing scene. These few flaws, quite a rarity for Hitchcock, are still small potatoes. The legendary Salvador Dali designed dream sequence allegedly used very little of the great surrealists outlandish ideas, but even so it's striking and memorable. I also really enjoyed the inventive score by Miklos Rozsa, which utilized the eerie sound of the theremin, later used in the science fiction classic 'The Day The Earth Stood Still', and The Beach Boys psychedelic pop masterpiece 'Good Vibrations'. Now the best thing about 'Spellbound' and what really makes it into a wonderfully entertaining mystery/romance is Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck. These two Golden Age superstars are both absolutely wonderful individually, but together they are magical, and one of THE great romantic couples in movie history. 'Spellbound' may not be Hitchcock's very best work, but I still highly recommended it. I can't see how anyone could not enjoy it.
  • comment
    • Author: Reighbyra
    "Spellbound" is one of Hitchcock's hardest films to evaluate, because its plot and credibility are so heavily dependent on theories of psychoanalysis that are usually considered to be implausible, at the very best. But if you can accept, for the sake of entertainment, the more dubious plot devices, what remains is a fine film dominated by the great director's usual creativity and technical mastery. Although it's hard to get away from the implausibilities, it's a fine movie in all other respects.

    Gregory Peck stars as an amnesia case, and Ingrid Bergman as a psychoanalyst trying to unravel his mysterious - and possibly murderous - past. Most of the other characters are also psychoanalysts or patients, and the plot revolves around the ways that Bergman's character uses Freudian theories to solve the mystery. Whether you can enjoy the story depends on how willing you are to suspend disbelief concerning the wilder aspects of these theories, but if you are willing to do so, it's quite nicely done in most parts, with some fine scenes and a couple of good plot twists. It is also worth watching for the famous Salvador Dali dream sequence, which is very creatively done and fascinating to watch. Peck and Bergman also create interesting and sympathetic characters, who make the viewer want to know what will happen to them.

    Overall, this is a distinctive film, and well worth seeing for any Hitchcock fan.
  • comment
    • Author: Buzatus
    Could this one be the most underrated of all Hitchcock's American movies/What?only 7.6?And however,you've got plenty of movies for the price of one!Come on ,wake up,and give this triumph its due!

    1.It's a mystery movie:Peck suffers from amnesia,he may or may not be a criminal,only snatches of memory come back and he can't put them together.Some clues appear,the "lines" vision is the most famous.

    2.It's a movie full of suspense;great scenes:the letter which Bergman tries to hide,the news papers at the railway station.

    3.It's a chase movie:Bergman and Peck escape from the nursing home and search a shrink's colleague help.

    4.It's a dreamlike movie:not only for the Dali's -too often unfairly dismissed-dream.Actually, the whole story is wrapped in a supernatural,eerie atmosphere.

    5.It's a romantic story:the scenes outside the nursing home in country landscapes are wonderfully and lovingly filmed.

    6.It's a movie of redemption:Bergman falls in love with her patient,and she's got to struggle -thanks Mister Freud- to help Peck to recover his

    full memory.

    7.It's a technically astounding movie,as in every Hitch movie:it features the shortest color scene (it's a black and white movie)in cinema.And I won't tell you when it appears,watch out.

    8.It's a movie from the Master of suspense,and I trade you "a lapse of memory","shattered" and "the third day " for "Spellbound"!It deserves to be in the top 250!
  • comment
    • Author: Nikobar
    Alfred Hitchcock weaves his spell binding magic into this Francis Beeding novel. In some opinions, this is Hitchcock's best project from the 40's. Powerful stars and a great story line keeps your interest until the final shot.

    An amnesia patient(Gregory Peck)is believed to be a psychotic killer. Bits and pieces of his memory about a childhood accident makes him believe that he is a murderer. Ingrid Bergman plays a young psychiatrist, who helps Peck unravel his past and regain his memory and mental health. During this process, the lovely doctor tries not to fall in love with her needy patient. She takes him to her old professor(Michael Chekhov) for help. He is reluctant to get involved with solving the mystery to clear the patient's name.

    Brilliant camera work and being filmed in black & white really helped the story line. There is an eye opening dream sequence designed by Salvador Dali that is down right mystic.

    The strong and talented cast also includes: Regis Toomey, Leo G. Carroll and Rhonda Fleming. This film is worth the time to watch again and again.
  • comment
    • Author: Aria
    Cinema works best as even-handed, non-egotistical collaboration. Total control by one individual can be hit-or-miss, depending on their proficiency. But what is almost always disastrous is the collision between two dominating personalities. Of the four features produced by David O. Selznick and directed by Alfred Hitchcock, Spellbound is probably the one in which suffers most from them treading on each other's toes.

    Selznick was a rare kind of producer, who rather than simply trying to come up with the most successful money-making formulas, also used his pictures as showcases for his own favourite themes. Spellbound was the result of a passing interest in psychoanalysis, and while Hitch was apparently not against the idea of doing a shrink flick, Selznick's influence places too much emphasis on it. It's also ridiculously laudatory, the foreword and opening scenes giving you the impression that psychoanalysis is as straightforward and effective as prescribing a dose of antibiotics.

    The structure of Spellbound is also not ideally suited to the Hitchcockian mode of suspense, which was based upon revealing the identity of the villain to the audience and then creating tension from making us wonder when and how they will strike again. Sometimes, as in Shadow of a Doubt or Rear Window, the killer would not be identified with certainty, but Hitch would immerse us in the suspicions of the central character, and this worked just as well. In some respects it looks as if Spellbound is an example of the latter. There appear to have been some attempts to create suspense out of the possibility that Gregory Peck's character is a murderer, and there are some typical Hitchcock moments like the business with the razor that play upon this. The trouble is, all those point-of-view shots placing us inside Peck's innocent confusion make it impossible for us to accept him as a killer, not even one who has forgotten his crimes. As such these tense moments, while nicely constructed in themselves, have no impact. The final "twist", when it arrives in the last five minutes seems tacked on, and does not shock or satisfy in any way.

    Spellbound is also an example of why we don't see many outstanding acting performances in Hitchcock movies. It's not just because Hitch didn't give any coaching to his cast members (neither did William Wyler, and his pictures are always superbly acted), it's just that his films are too technical to show off the actors to the best of their abilities. Ingrid Bergman was an exceptional actress, but because of the way Hitch works, the key moments in her performance are cut up into fleeting reaction shots, close-ups of hands and so forth. The best impression we get of her acting is in a fairly mundane scene, when she is fending off the unwanted attentions of Wallace Ford, a moment Hitchcock allows to play out in a mid-shot unbroken take. Spellbound does contain one of the few Oscar-nominated performances in a Hitchcock picture – Michael Chekhov as Dr Brulov. He is not bad, although due to the nature of his part he gets the benefit of more conventional shots which capture his best – hence why he got a nod while Ms Bergman didn't.

    The one Oscar that Spellbound did win was for the Miklos Rozsa score, although it's inferior to his work on The Lost Weekend, which was also nominated. His music for Spellbound is a little overbearing, and is incredibly heavy in the romantic scenes. It's also very sweepingly sentimental, which jars somewhat with Hitch's rather aggressive styling of these moments. Still, there is some intelligent orchestration, and it is rather effective the way it suddenly breaks into a minor key version of the love theme on the theremin when something triggers Peck's memories.

    In spite of all its flaws, Spellbound is still a very watchable picture. The screenplay is by the reliable Ben Hecht, and it moves forward at a solid pace. Hitchcock's to-the-point style of direction may not have been flattering to the cast, but at least it makes the story clear and easy to digest. However, this process of unravelling a mystery does not provide him with opportunities for suspense, or at least not his kind of suspense. Selznick got his "psycho", but this is a mediocre entry for the master.
  • comment
    • Author: AnnyMars
    Perhaps the best of Alfred Hitchcock's collaborations with producer David O. Selznick, "Spellbound" stars Ingrid Bergman as Dr. Constance Petersen, a compassionate but sexually guarded psychotherapist who falls for Dr Edwardes (Gregory Peck), a new doctor who arrives at Green Manors, the mental asylum at which she works.

    With a creepy, near-supernatural score by Miklos Rozsa, the film oscillates between melodrama and horror. These horrors are largely psychological, but Hitchcock's direction, and Rozsa's score, lend the film a near-paranormal edge. Like "Vertigo", "Spellbound" at times feels like a ghost story or perhaps even a story about ghostly possessions.

    The issue of "possession" itself becomes the bedrock of Hitchcock's plot. Peck's character is an impostor who has taken possession of Dr Edwardes' persona. From here on, the film becomes another of Hitchcock's Kafkaesque "wrong man" rides. The real Dr Edwardes has turned up dead and law enforcement officials believe Peck to be the murderer. Peck, now revealed to be amnesic, thus goes on the run. He is supported by Constance, who attempts to prove his innocence. With the help of another famous psychoanalyst, she delves into Peck's unconscious and comes out with some semblance of truth. It turns out, she discovers, that Peck has been repressing a very specific childhood trauma: as a kid, he accidentally killed his brother. The film ends with another revelation: the true murderer of Dr Edwardes was an ageing psychoanalyst who himself feared being dispossessed by a younger man.

    While Peck's an overly stiff actor, Bergman is as magnificent as ever, affording her character a range of subtle facial gestures, and a pleasant mix of intelligence, yearning and vulnerability. Hitchcock, meanwhile, hated hiring Peck, but Selznick kept saddling the director with him; Selznick thought the actor's good looks would bring in big money.

    The film sports a now famous "dream sequence". It was designed by Salvador Dali, the famous surrealist, but directed by William Cameron Menzies, a man who's been unfairly forgotten by history. The first person to be given the film credits of "art director" and "production designer", Menzies is today most well known for directing the surrealist/expressionist "Invaders From Mars". He was also responsible for a number of pioneering, early special effects, and as art director was responsible for the overall "look" of a number of famous films, most notably "Gone With the Wind", which he storyboarded, colour co-ordinated and co directed. "Spellbound's" dream sequence was originally about 20 minutes long, but was highly censored by Selznick. It contains the animated shadow of a gigantic bird; Hitchcock was himself, reportedly, ornithophobic.

    Like most of Hitchcock's films, our female hero is treated with much condescension by men. One great scene at a train station finds Constance turning this to her advantage; feigning naivety and playing to a detective's inflated ego, she weasels her way into a hotel room. The rest of the film both mocks and pays tribute to psychoanalysis. One eccentric character's playfully modelled on Freud, for example, the film's psychoanalytical jargon is comically overwrought, and Hitchcock manages to both turn his villain into a psychoanalyst whilst also respectfully turning psychoanalysis into that which solves the film's central crime. Elsewhere the film mistakes psychoanalysis for kitschy "dream reading". In Hitchcock's hands, psychoanalysts are nothing but art critics who decode or ascribe meaning to various warped visions.

    In Jean-Luc Godard's mammoth "Histoire(s) du cinema", there's a passage in which he pauses to muse about Hitchcock. Hitch, Godard essentially says, is less about content than "decor"; bits of scenery, camera work, clothing, props and moments. You see that with "Spellbound". What you remember are various fragments: powerful point-of-view shots, a subjective shot of a character drinking milk, snow-capped streets, and a shockingly frank scene in which a child is impaled on a fence.

    Upon release, "Spellbound" was embraced by critics and audiences. Today it's typically viewed as being second tier Hitchcock. It's ultimately a potboiler, tarnished by silly Freudian symbolism, but elevated by exquisite direction and some strong moments of comedy and horror.

    7.9/10 – Worth one viewing.
  • comment
    • Author: Obong
    I recently saw this film on the large screen after having not seen it for over 10 years. My memories of it were not that fond -- I recalled it as an unusually melodramatic and not very convincing thriller enlivened by a very attractive cast.

    What I had forgotten about was how almost impossibly silly all the psychoanalytical claptrap is, especially in the first couple of reels, which thereby make us feel very quickly that we're not quite in the mature, masterful grip of Hitch's usual wit and taste. Yes, I know this was made in the 40's, but the first 20 to 30 minutes of the film have more sexist moments and infantile behavior by supposed doctors than one would ever expect from either Hitch or Ben Hecht.

    So who's to blame? One guess -- David O. Selznick! That being said (along with the fact that the story doesn't really add up to much of anything, since all the premises on which it's based seem so shaky, naive and downright goofy), the film has some things going for it. About midway through the picture, when Michael Chekhov appears as Dr. Brulov, the film suddenly kicks into what we might call "classic British Hitch mode," with the kind of understated wit and ensemble playing the director had been doing so well since the early 30's. It almost becomes another (and far more palatable) film at this point. The scenes with Bergman, Peck and Chekhov are the highlight of the film, and I have to admit that I'm even kind of fond of the hotel lobby scene, with the appealingly breezy Bill Goodwin (of "Burns and Allen" radio fame) as the house detective. Peck has never been more handsome, in a strangely fragile way.

    Also worth a look are the brief but truly unusual Dali-designed dream sequences. There is something to be said for Miklos Rozsa's score as well: although it edges a bit far into soupy overscoring, the expressive main theme has quality, and his use of the theremin (which he also employed in his score for THE LOST WEEKEND at virtually the same time) is striking and represented "something new" in film music.

    One could easily make excuses for this film based on "it was only 1945" or "what people knew about psychoanalysis was still naive", etc., but even taken in context of its time it's a pretty silly film without the kind of sustained surety of style leavened with simultaneous suspense, intelligence, taste and humor that he had already proved he could do so well from more than ten years earlier. Given a standard he had already given us with examples from THE 39 STEPS or YOUNG AND INNOCENT through THE LADY VANISHES in the UK, or FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT and SHADOW OF A DOUBT here in the US, this film seems not up to his true capacities, and like his other Selznick-produced American film, REBECCA, seems both overfussy and filled with emphases and spoonfeeding of details which Hitch himself would never have given us.

    You need only compare this film with his very next one, NOTORIOUS, to be painfully aware how much better Hitchcock on his own -- using his own standards of pace, momentum and the ADULT treatment of script themes -- could be when not under the thumb of Selznick. Thank God he didn't have to work for him any more after this.
  • comment
    • Author: RED
    A world in which Freudian psycho-analysis works as it's supposed to is rather like a world in which magic works - so call this film a fantasy. There's nothing whatever wrong with fantasy. Indeed, there's nothing better. Hitchcock announces at the very beginning that the story takes place in a Freudian world; thereafter he plays perfectly fair with us.

    He even chose the right collaborators for a fantasy. The dream sequences were designed by Salvador Dali. (Anyone whose dreams really do look like Dali paintings maybe COULD do with some psycho-analysis.) They're not frightening - dream sequences rarely are - but they are at any rate more interesting than the usual dreams we might have or hear about. The music was by Miklós Rózsa, maybe the best of the composers who settled in Hollywood, certainly the most vividly overpowering. He was exactly the right choice for this film - however much Hitchcock disliked the score, or said that he did.

    The story follows a confused Gregory Peck, who cannot remember key episodes of his recent (and not so recent) past, and who may, just possibly, be a dangerous criminal. Ingrid Bergman is a second-generation disciple of Freud who despite her professional caution finds herself falling in love with him. Perhaps it sounds cardboard already, but the performances invest the characters with more life than my descriptions did. Peck in particular is highly sympathetic. He comes across as not at all mad, not even mentally disturbed - just a man who can't remember one or two things and has an odd aversion to things like parallel lines. (That?s right - parallel lines.) Anyway, as I said, it's a fantasy: the forces of psychoanalysis must unravel the mystery before it's too late. (Why there's a "too late" is too complicated to go into.) The usual kind of Hitchcock suspense isn't there but the man WAS capable of moving outside his home genre now and then. Remember, his other fantasy was "The Birds".
  • comment
    • Author: Faezahn
    This is one of my favorite movies, despite what I must reluctantly admit is a preposterous plot. But what a great cast -- Gregory Peck, the beautiful Ingrid Bergman, and various familiar character actors. Wallace Ford has an entertaining scene as an obnoxious hotel guest trying to pick up Ingrid Bergman, but who gets chased off twice by the house detective. Even though the plot elements are often unbelievable, it doesn't matter, as far as I'm concerned; the pacing is just right, the script is literate, and the dramatic tension sustains the viewer's interest to the end.

    And for my money, this movie contains one of the most, if not THE most, romantic scenes ever put on film: Gregory Peck and Ingrid Bergman, having met only a day or two before, admit to each other that they've fallen in love. He walks slowly toward her and she lifts her face to him and closes her eyes. The scene dissolves to a series of lovely doors opening slowly down a hall, to the accompaniment of Miklos Rosza's incomparably beautiful "Spellbound Theme". Now THAT'S romantic! I highly recommend "Spellbound" to any classic movie fan.
  • comment
    • Author: Celen
    If Hitchcock dealt with psychological themes in 'Shadow of a Doubt' and 'Suspicion', with 'Spellbound' he was facing the affairs of the mind… Most of his film took place in a mental asylum, where the Swedish star was the best-looking doctor you have ever seen… Cool, seductive, and attractive in front of Hitchcock's eyes…

    When Gregory Peck arrived as the new head doctor, she fell in love with him; but soon his staring eyes, his long pauses and the heavy shadows surrounding him led her, like us, to suspect that he was not 'Dr. Anthony Edwards' at all, but was really a mental case himself who had assumed the identity of the doctor… In that case, what had happened to the real doctor?

    Gregory Peck could not say, because he was suffering from amnesia and could not remember his past… While we begin to wonder, he became convinced that he was a murderer and took fight, sought by the police…

    Convinced of his innocence – but needing to persuade her patient to prove it – Ingrid Bergman caught up with Peck and took him for shelter to a psychoanalyst who tried to solve the truth in his dreams…

    'Spellbound' is a harmless and suspenseful piece of cinema… Hitchcock touches were splendid, and the stars shined magically… The psychiatric window-dressing was impressive, and surrealist artist Salvador Dali was hired to paint the dream sequences... This was not, incidentally, Salvador Dali's introduction to the cinema: in 1929 he had collaborated in writing 'Un Chien Andalou' with the man whose cinematic imagination has always flowered in the gardens of the unconscious mind: Luis Buñuel.

    Rhonda Fleming made her film debut here, and Norman Lloyd, last seen as he fell from the Statue of Liberty in 'Saboteur', made a brief appearance as a patient…
  • comment
    • Author: Ka
    In Green Manors mental institution, Dr. Constance Petersen (Ingrid Bergman) is initiating her career of psychoanalyst and is considered a cold woman that has no time for love by her colleagues. When the head of the hospital Dr. Murchison (Leo G. Carroll) is forced to retire by the board after a breakdown, his replacement is the successful Dr. Anthony Edwardes (Gregory Peck) that is so young that surprises the other doctors in his arrival. Constance and Edwardes immediately fall in love for each other, but in a couple of days later it is disclosed that the man that supposes to be Dr. Edwardes in indeed an impostor that seems to be a paranoid amnesiac with guilty complex that might have killed the famous psychoanalyst. He goes away from Green Manors to the Empire State Hotel in New York and leaves a message to Dr. Constance that decides to find him. She sneaks and travels to New York, where she meets him lodged with the identity of John Brown. Dr. Constance decides to heal him recovering his memory and discover the fate of the true Dr. Anthony Edwardes.

    "Spellbound" is far from being among my favorite Hitchcock's movies, but there is at least one unforgettable moment in this suspenseful but dull romance: the sequence of John Ballantine's dream based on designs of Salvador Dali. Ingrid Bergman performs a psychoanalyst vulnerable in many moments and with unacceptable attitudes, like for example, prioritizing to open her correspondence that giving attention to her mentally ill patient Mr. Garmes or her juvenile rapture with Gregory Peck's character. My vote is seven.

    Title (Brazil): "Spellbound – Quando Fala o Coração" ("Spellbound – When the Heart Speaks")
  • comment
    • Author: Balhala
    The head of the famous Green Manors mental asylum is being replaced by a younger psychiatrist, Dr Edwards. When Edwards arrives he falls for Dr Petersen and she for him. However, after exhibiting some very strange reactions, Edwards is exposed as a fraud - an amnesiac who has deep issues and may or may not have killed the real Edwards prior to taking up his job. Blinded by her love for him, Petersen flees the police with him and protects him as she tries to uncover the truth locked deep within his mind.

    As someone who watches way too many films for my own good I probably should have seen Spellbound many years ago. Making up for lost time I watched it recently unsure of even the basic plot. I was surprised by the twist (which I guess for 99% of those watching this, won't be a twist) that Edwards was not who he claimed (thought) to be. The psychoanalysis against the clock scenario was a bit too tidy, but it does work well. I'm not a big believer of this world of therapy so some of the scenes stuck in my throat but it was proof of Hitchcock's ability that he managed to make them tense.

    The example that came to my mind was the film Blackjack by John Woo in which Dolph Lungren is scared of the colour white! In that movie I was almost in fits of laughter when Lungren is stopped in his tracks by the bad guys spilling lots of milk everywhere! Here there was no such reaction to Edwards' similar fear. The director really manages to bring out tension and paranoia in every scene – there was nary a moment where I wasn't involved in the film, it was hard to know whether Edwards was a killer, a nut or what! Some of the imagry is a little obvious (doors opening) but most is good and the Dali dream sequences are pretty cool.

    Of course part of this is down to Peck playing just perfect. Some of his bug eyed reactions to lines etc would have been comical had he not been able to follow through, but he did. It is to his credit that I was kept guessing as to his intentions right through the film. Bergman is also good but has to carry lines such as `I believe him because I could never feel this way for a man with badness in him' (I'm paraphrasing), the romantic side of the film is harder to carry but she does it well. Support is good, but Leo G Carroll looks very young indeed and took me by surprise when I saw him!

    Overall I enjoyed this film even though there was so much that could have been a mess. It is to Hitchcock's credit that he cranks the tension up well and never lets it get silly (as it could easily have been in lesser hands). Some of it is a little too easy (isn't this deep seated stuff meant to take years rather than days?) but this aside it moves swiftly along and is a very interesting way to make a thriller.
  • comment
    • Author: Dagdarad
    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.
  • comment
    • Author: Āłł_Ÿøūrš
    "Spellbound" is probably one of Hitchcock's most uneven films. It has some brilliant scenes (like the point-of-view shot near the end) that showcase Hitchcock's mastery and imagination, but it also has too many talky sequences and it takes too much time to reach its less-than-satisfying conclusion. Hitchcock relies heavily on psychological theories for his explanations, but I think that those explanations are far too simplistic. The "decoding" of the weird dream sequences is also too literal: every image has a definite and obvious meaning - does that ever happen in YOUR dreams? The low point is, for me, the explanation that the movie provides for the wheel's presence in the dream.
  • comment
    • Author: Hadadel
    Psychiatry isn't as simple as Spellbound would have you believe, the reasons for one's neuroses sure can't get cured with two or three sessions with Ingrid Bergman. But certain events can definitely be explained and it all seems quite reasonable when the explanations come from Alfred Hitchcock.

    Spellbound gave both Gregory Peck and Ingrid Bergman their first Hitchcock films and their only film together. Peck arrives at a sanitarium to take the place of director Leo G. Carroll. But after a short time, the other psychiatrists realize that he's not all he seems.

    In fact he's not a psychiatrist at all, but in fact a mental patient who has stolen the doctor's identity. The doctor has disappeared and in all likelihood been murdered. Peck flees the sanitarium, but Ingrid doesn't believe he's guilty of anything and she pursues and finds him and together they try to unravel what's locked up in his mind.

    Back when I was in college I took an introductory psychology course to fill up my electives and Spellbound got to mean something to me then. I had a professor who I wasn't quite sure didn't belong in an asylum run by Leo G. Carroll. It was a running joke in the class that we were all in the midst of a Spellbound like drama that this man had killed the real professor and that at any time the men with the nets were going to drag our teacher away.

    Episodes in Peck's life from childhood and the war and the trauma of seeing what happened to the real doctor have made him an amnesia case out of Peck. It's up to Ingrid to unravel it all by trying to interpret some recurring dreams.

    The dream sequences involve some sets courtesy of Salvador Dali and it's the main reason that Spellbound is remembered today as opposed to being just another of Alfred Hitchcock's masterpieces. For fans of the great painter this film is a must.

    Spellbound got a whole slew of nominations including Best Picture, Best Director and several more in technical categories. Spellbound and Alfred Hitchcock came up short against The Lost Weekend and Billy Wilder. Michael Chekov got a Best Supporting Actor nomination but lost to James Dunn for A Tree Grows In Brooklyn. Chekov plays Ingrid Bergman's mentor and he's right out of central casting as a Viennese Freudian psychiatrist.

    Spellbound took home one award for Miklos Rosza's score and it will linger with you a long time after you've seen Spellbound.

    Rhonda Fleming got her first critical notice as a homicidal mental patient, it's a brief but telling role. John Emery who is probably best known for being Tallulah Bankhead's husband plays a wolfish analyst on the make for Ingrid Bergman and plays it well.

    When Bergman finally unravels it all, her final confrontation scene with the villain is one of Hitchcock's masterpieces. Talk about coolness under fire.

    Though simplistic in its treatment of psychiatry, Spellbound will leave you just that when you see it.
  • comment
    • Author: Nilarius
    Ingrid Bergman plays as a psychiatrist from a mental hospital with several ills(Norman Lloyd, Rhonda Fleming), along with Leo G. Carroll and other doctors heal the patients . There comes Gregory Peck replacing former director . But Peck has amnesia and having panic to white color and the lines , then Ingrid falls in love with him , as she uncovers his previous life through Freudian analysis . The pictures is based on novel ¨House of Edwards¨ by Bleeding and concerning about the psychoanalysis , an usual theme in post-WWII time.

    The movie contains thriller , tension , suspense , romance , unlimited excitement and plenty of plot twists , as usual in Hitchcock films . Besides , it has a literately witty dialog with distinctive Hitch's touches and writing credits by Ben Hetch (Billy Wilder's habitual). There's also an exciting and famous dream sequence by Salvador Dali . Hitch didn't want the ordinary dream images with fog and cloud but he asked David O'Selznick (the famed producer) for hire to Dali . Superb performances from main characters , a gorgeous blonde (as later Grace Kelly , Kim Novak) Ingrid Bergman (1915-1982) who'll work with Hitchcock various films (Notorious , Under Capricorn) and the elegant and brilliant Gregory Peck (Paradine trial) as the confuse amnesic is frankly well . Sensational black and white cinematography by George Barnes . Dramatic and atmospheric musical score by Miklos Rozsa , he won an Academy Award for the excellent score . The flick will appeal to Hitchcock enthusiasts . Rating : Above average , well worth watching.
  • comment
    • Author: Binthars
    I honestly expected to be a little spellbound by Alfred Hitchcock's 1945 mystery "Spellbound" given that they are some talented talents behind it. I mean this film's got stars Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck, and director Alfred Hitchcock behind it. Given that I have reasonably high expectations based on their work, I wanted to get into this film for the sake of those people involved. Unfortunately, such talented people as these can't save a disappointingly dull film such as "Spellbound".

    In the film, we follow a psychiatrist (Ingrid Bergman) at a mental hospital who is considered by her fellow doctors as one of the best. She and her fellow peers welcome the new director (Gregory Peck) of the hospital, but fairly soon, she begins to notice some peculiar aspects about him. She notices that he has a unusual fear of seeing dark parallel lines and a white background together. In addition, she eventually finds out that he isn't who he claims to be and that he has a serious case of amnesia. When she also learns that he accidentally committed a murder, she tries to cure him of his mental struggles by learning more about his past.

    I should mention the few aspects of this picture that I found were decent. One thing is that there are a few eye-catching shots that I thought were well executed. There's a shot in which is similar to the type of camera shots you see in today's first person shooter video games, where someone is pointing a gun at one of the main leads and we see through their point of view. I thought that shot and similar shots like that were worthy of praising. I also don't find the performances from the leads that bad and I thought they were doing whatever they could to keep the film moving.

    So what did I think made "Spellbound" as disappointing as I'm claiming it to be? Well, my problem with "Spellbound" can be summarized as such: it's boring beyond belief. Why do I find it boring? I thought the direction seemed to indicate that everything that was happening in the plot was not the slightest bit interesting. The screenplay by Ben Hecht didn't give its characters anything fascinating to talk about and hardly did anything to get us invested in following the plot. This film is basically trying to force us to avoid emotionally attaching to it as much as possible. What's worse is that it succeeds well at doing just that. About 10 to 20 minutes into watching this film, that's the point where I completely lost interest in following the narrative since it is told in such a lifeless manner between the boring conversations the characters have and the boring things that are being captured on film.

    I believe this is definitely one of Alfred Hitchcock's weakest films because of its lack of emotional involvement, because of its uninspiring direction, because of its lame script, and because of the fact that the story that was being told wasn't that good to begin with. Maybe I didn't pick up on something in the main plot, maybe I followed it just fine enough, either way I expected much more from the talents involved that what I got. Unless you're a hardcore Hitchcock fan and just want to look at it for the sake of seeing all his flicks, I'd definitely say there are much better Hitchcock films to check out.
  • comment
    • Author: Ice_One_Guys
    Not one of my favourite Hitchcocks. This psychological drama draws on familiar territory for the director: it's about a supposedly wronged man, on the run for murder, the victim of a conspiracy that he must unravel before the police close the net. The twist is that the mystery lies inside his amnesic mind, and his new love interest must attempt to solve the clues and puzzle out the truth before it's too late.

    My main problem with this film is the story, or lack thereof. It's just too slender to sustain a feature-length production, and the denouement, when it comes, is largely routine (save for a shocking childhood flashback) and could have been explained a lot earlier. There are extraneous characters galore and long, drawn-out sequences where nothing much happens. I found Hitchcock's trademark tension to be thin on the ground, and I was expecting a lot more from the man who made the likes of FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT and NORTH BY NORTHWEST.

    On the plus side, the film boasts a central pair of good performances from both Gregory Peck and Ingrid Bergman, and a fine supporting turn for THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E.'s Leo G. Carroll. It's just a shame their talents couldn't have been put to use in a better production.
  • comment
    • Author: zzzachibis
    It reminds me of "Lady in the Dark" in its naive take on shrinkery.

    It's nice to see Greg and Ingrid as always but they were better

    elsewhere.

    The storyline is, as the English say, "utter tosh" and is close to

    satire itself. The aged doctor has been lampooned into the ground

    by Sid Caesar on his program and Howie Morris in "High Anxiety"

    (Which is, of course, a takeoff on Hitchcock.) and the

    psychobabble is even funnier. The obviously rear-projected skiing

    scene has been mentioned here many times over.

    Loved the red gunshot!
  • comment
    • Author: Kendis
    I didn't like "Spellbound". I felt performances by Peck and Bergman were played to dramatic. The film's musical score also seemed to over power the scenes, rather than complimenting them as a supporting character. I felt bombarded by music rather than plot and performance.

    I don't feel "Spellbound" nor earlier Hitch films contains the Hitch substance that his later films do. "Spellbound" in particular seemed to omit the philosophical underlinings and dark humor of Hitch's later films like "Strangers on a Train", "Rope", "The Trouble with Harry", "Rear Window" to name a few.

    I didn't like "Spellbound". If you're a 1950's Hitch film fan, it's likely you will not either.
  • comment
    • Author: Tojahn
    This film centered around psychology and the interpretation of dreams. One very neat scene shows a short dream sequence a la Salvador Dali and one of his wild paintings. I wish the rest of the film was as cool as that, although I usually enjoy looking at Ingrid Bergman's face, too. She's very pretty in here: a real pleasure to this male's eye. I also enjoyed listening to the older psychiatrist in this film played by Michael Chekov. I liked the fact he said he was from Rochester, New York, which is only about 50 miles from where I live.

    Otherwise, it had a bunch of typical Alfred Hitchcock traits such as very little action; an innocent man being framed, God never being a solution to anything - complete secular viewpoints about everything.

    Overall, I thought the movie was "fair" but not a "keeper" because stories in which nice people are slowly driven insane do not appeal to me.
  • comment
    • Author: Kizshura
    Good-looking, but terminal, highly disappointing Alfred Hitchcock melodrama-cum-thriller involving a miscast Ingrid Bergman playing psychoanalyst to amnesiac Gregory Peck, who has been posing as a medical director. Naturally, this being a star-crossed lovers tale in disguise, Bergman falls in love with Peck, but we're never able to ascertain why (it plays like a convenient plot contrivance). The film takes at least 40 minutes to get going, and even then it's rather stuffy. Bergman has one fine sequence in the lobby of a New York hotel, but Peck's wide-eyed recollections and dramatic fainting spells become almost unintentionally funny. David O. Selznick leaves his mark on the production end, and the picture looks incredibly handsome, but the script is weak. The corny preamble could've been dropped entirely. Mikos Kozsa actually won an Oscar for his blaring background music. **1/2 from ****
  • comment
    • Author: Ann
    I will remember "Spellbound" not for the story but for the use of cinematic tools to entertain the viewer. Hitchcock always had a yen for kissing scenes ("Notorious," "Torn Curtain," "Marnie", "Rear Window," etc.). Here instead of the close-up, he uses the camera to fade into a series of 7 doors opening as if the camera was rushing in through them to signify the adrenaline rush of the first kiss between the two lead characters. It was inventive for its time, though you could say the simile was overwrought.

    The second startling scene was the accidental fall of the child on the sharp iron barriers of the house was graphic but few remember it. I thought that was great cinema, to show the gory end without any blood!

    The third scene in the film was the attempted pick-up of the leading lady by a stranger in the hotel lobby captured by a static camera and the interruption by the hotel detective. This was Ben Hecht and Hitchcock at work providing another magical interlude.

    The fourth magical moment is the use of color to signify blood briefly after a gun shot in a black and white movie.

    The fifth magical moment was the envelop lying on the floor, seen by the leading lady but not others even as they step on it, except for one gentleman.

    Finally, there is the famous Dali painting sequence--which is remarkably close to Dali/Bunuel's work in "Un Chien Andalou." There is more of the typical Hitchcock in this film: wrong man chased by the police ("The 39 steps", "Saboteur," etc.) obsession with food and drinks (the meal scene where the leading lady draws an image with a fork, and the value of drinking milk at night eschewed by the foxy old psychiatrist). There is sexist humor too "Women make the best psycho-analysts until they fall in love, after which they become the best patients." This is true of men as well! The film is not the best of Hitchcock but his stamp is all over it. His master move was to cast Ingrid Bergman, who is simply a treat to watch and admire, in the lead role. Ms Bergman lifted up this movie. So also was the commendable casting of Michael Chekov as the old psycho-analyst. These factors negate the illogical emergency surgery conducted by a team of psycho-analysts and the awful staged ski sequences.
  • comment
    • Author: Fenrinos
    There's much that's wrong with "Spellbound," but it has a way of keeping you watching.

    Dr. Constance Petersen (Ingrid Bergman) is a resident analyst at Green Manors, a psychiatric institution in Vermont. She's a thorough professional, though seen as too cool by patients and peers alike. Her poise is shattered when she meets her new boss (Gregory Peck), who goes by the name of Dr. Edwardes. At once both suspicious and swept off her feet by this handsome stranger, Constance soon finds herself deep in a mystery that puts both her life and sanity at risk.

    Bergman's performance is easily the best thing in the film. She's at the peak of her acclaimed radiance yet quite human, too, alternately projecting aloofness, compassion, and sheer terror. This is one of Hitch's "women's pictures," and one of his better ones, presenting us with a main character both strikingly independent and far from being in charge of her situation.

    Hitch and scripter Ben Hecht have some perverse fun with the romance between Constance and Edwardes, and Bergman is terrific playing along. Her big romantic scene with Peck ends with her saying but a single word, and what a word: "Liverwurst." Bergman almost glows as she sighs the line, which is what sells it as both comic and endearing. Here and throughout the film, Bergman is just so much fun to watch.

    A big problem for me is that she shares too many great moments with Gregory Peck, here at his most stiff and insufferable. Much of this is the product of a flawed script that requires him to drift off into a trance-like state any time there's a flash of white on-screen. Still, Peck's struggle to sell this makes for hard viewing. If you want an actor playing a shrink to render believable a line like: "We'll look at some sane trees, normal grass, and clouds without complexes," you need someone who had less starch in his collar than Peck had.

    Much of "Spellbound" feels a bit too on the nose as the story develops. The famous dream sequence designed by Salvador Dalí is interesting but entirely too literal in communicating plot points. The patients at Green Manors we briefly meet all speak out their phobias for instant analysis. ("I hate men. I loathe them.") There are drawn-out exposition scenes; a rather superfluous voice-over bit that almost spoils an otherwise fantastic ending; and more of an obvious focus on symbolism from Hitch even without Dalí, such as a couple's first kiss being accompanied with an over-the-top image of multiple doors flying open.

    Constance's diagnosis of "Edwardes" problem feels pat even by doctrinaire Freudian terms, and the final cure, when it comes, is laughably simplistic. Did anyone really ever think amnesia was merely "a trick of the mind for staying sane"?

    At some level, though, you can't attack "Spellbound" for being dime- store Freud because the hooey sort of works in the context of the movie. Even if you agree with Rhonda Fleming's Mary character that "this whole thing is ridiculous," you have to allow for psychiatry's magic efficacy in this film the same way you allow for Jedi mind tricks in "Star Wars." Doing so has its payoff at the end, when another overly literal dream analysis session turns into a killer's standoff, precisely because of that silly Freud stuff.

    Hitchcock is masterful in his compositions here, and delivers a wonderful series of set-pieces. Bergman's great performance is wonderfully supported by Leo G. Carroll, Michael Chekhov, and John Emery as my favorite character in the movie, Constance's dogged but unsuccessful suitor Dr. Fleurot, who memorably dubs her "Miss Frozen Puss." Humor and suspense are kept in fresh supply, which helps a bit in swallowing the various, badly delivered Peck lines ("Will you love me just as much when I'm normal?" "If there's anything I hate, it's a smug woman!")

    Most of all, it gives us a memorable central performance from Bergman, who makes us believe in what she's doing by the power of her character's dangerous commitment. "I couldn't feel this way toward a man who is bad." Ultimately, you may disagree with Constance, but as played by Bergman you care enough about her to stick around to the end.
  • comment
    • Author: Kit
    "Spellbound" has become one of my favorite Hitchcock movies. I think Gregory Peck is excellent in this movie as John Ballantine, the amnesiac who receives help from Dr. Constance Peterson (Ingrid Bergman). But John has more problems than amnesia. He cannot stand to see dark lines on a white background. For example, a blanket, a robe, and a tablecloth. But he remembers what had happened to him thanks to Constance and her former teacher, another psychologist named Dr. Brulov.

    There is also a wonderful performance by Leo G. Carroll, who plays Dr. Murchison. He has also been one of my favorite actors, and he's brilliant in this movie.

    So the bottom line is, you should really see this movie, and not just for Gregory Peck's handsome face, or Ingrid Bergman's beauty. I think it's one of Hitch's best suspense movies. By the way, Gregory Peck does look very, very handsome in this movie, so for those girls out there who still think you might not want to see it, it's worth it!
  • Complete credited cast:
    Ingrid Bergman Ingrid Bergman - Dr. Constance Petersen
    Gregory Peck Gregory Peck - John Ballantyne
    Michael Chekhov Michael Chekhov - Dr. Alexander Brulov
    Leo G. Carroll Leo G. Carroll - Dr. Murchison
    Rhonda Fleming Rhonda Fleming - Mary Carmichael
    John Emery John Emery - Dr. Fleurot
    Norman Lloyd Norman Lloyd - Mr. Garmes
    Bill Goodwin Bill Goodwin - House Detective
    Steven Geray Steven Geray - Dr. Graff
    Donald Curtis Donald Curtis - Harry
    Wallace Ford Wallace Ford - Stranger in Hotel Lobby
    Art Baker Art Baker - Det. Lt. Cooley
    Regis Toomey Regis Toomey - Det. Sgt. Gillespie
    Paul Harvey Paul Harvey - Dr. Hanish
    All rights reserved © 2017-2024 hd.thomson-multimedia.com