Here is my review of Foreign Correspondent for our Alfred Hitchcock blogathon. Has Hitchcock finally given me a movie I could enjoy immensely? Read on to find out….
As those of you who have been following this blogathon already know, I have not been very enamored by any of Hitchcock’s earlier films that I’ve reviewed (this is my 11th review), but I knew that eventually I would come across a movie of his that I would enjoy and would restore faith in me that Hitchcock truly was a great Director.
This movie’s plot is about an American crime reporter sent to be a foreign correspondent in England on the eve of WWII who finds out of a conspiracy of enemy agents in Britain who want to thwart England’s involvement in the upcoming war.
I always love a good conspiracy theory movie and this one is done right.
There are so many plot points that I’d love to divulge here, but the fact that I want to keep this spoiler free will not let me do so.
I really like the idea of sending a crime reporter “undercover” in a attempt to get more substantial stories than a “normal” foreign correspondent would be able to get.
The fact that this plot was originally written 5 years before War actually broke out in Europe also shows a bit of prophesy that worked to everyone’s benefit in the end. The German’s began to bomb Britain a few weeks after this movie came out.
Hitchcock’s genius in setting up a story and keeping us thrilled throughout is quite evident here and I’m glad I got to finally see this one.
This movie was Hitchcock’s second US film, the first being Rebecca (1940). Ironically, both were nominated for numerous Oscars that year including Best Picture. I found this one more enjoyable than the other one, but Thrillers aren’t usually known for taking home Best Picture Oscars, so it’s not surprising that Rebecca (1940) beat this one.
Rating – Oscar Worthy