Title: Sabotage

Year: 1936

Country: UK

Language: English

Genre: Thriller

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Writers:

Charles Bennett

Ian Hay

Helen Simpson

based on Joseph Conrad’s novel THE SECRET AGENT

Music:

Hubert Bath

Jack Beaver

Louis Levy

Cinematography: Bernard Knowles

Cast:

Sylvia Sidney

Oskar Homolka

John Loder

Desmond Tester

William Dewhurst

Austin Trevor

Peter Bull

Martita Hunt

Torin Thatcher

Rating: 6.6/10

A Hitchcock thriller made in his UK years, SABOTAGE opens with its own definition in a dictionary, but there is little to be said apropos of the motivation behind the anarchists. It is an usual London night, all the razzle-dazzle is in full bloom, suddenly a blackout causes some commotion on the street and in the centre stage there is Bijou cinema, where patrons are baying for refund of their tickets, at the same time, its owner Mr. Verloc (Homolka) furtively sneaks back to his apartment upstairs, and pretends that he has never gone out when his wife (Sidney) surprisingly finds him on the bed.

So it seems that this time Mr. Hitchcock doesn’t play either the whodunit or the why-do-it card and clocking in a condensed 76-minute, the film even waive the possibility of a McGuffin to compel audience into the puzzle. Admittedly, there is no puzzle at all, Mr. Verloc is the said saboteur, whose blackout sabotage doesn’t quite hit the mark (even being pilloried by the media)and he is tasked to up the antes, it doesn’t take much persuasion for him to forgo his no-casualties-causing vow to collude with a professor (Dewhurst) who is excel at making“fireworks”. In a straightforward manner, the story also sidetracks in the incipient attractions between Ms. Verloc and Ted (Loder), who works in the greengrocery next to the cinema, but his real identity is an undercover sergeant of Scotland Yard, and secretly stakes out Mr. Verloc.

Ms. Verloc has no inking of her hubby’s insidious deal, time and again she tells Ted that Mr. Verloc has the most kind-hearted soul she has ever met, which is a farcically self-defeating statement because whoever has eyes can palpably detect something amiss inOskar Homolka’s hammy affectation with all those mannered scowls and insincere oratory, one might seriously wonder how dumb a woman could be if she fails to sense that from the man she shares a bed every night, that’s a disservice to Hitchcock’s heroine, beautiful but dumb, yet, she still deserves a miracle in the end.

Then there is that infamous“boy with a bomb” set piece, the story is a no-brainer, but the suspense never goes to seed under Hitchcock’s rein. One must admit it is a left-field coup-de-théâtre (through a string of heightened montages) a first-time spectator barely can see it coming, Mr. Hitchcock really dares to corroborate that nothing is impossible on the silver screen, although in retrospect this only materializes as a flash in the pan because when he veers into the Hollywood thoroughfare, he will be inured to adhere to a more morally rigorous precept. A minor Hitchcock film can still be engaging, only its aftertaste tends to be a shade astringent.

referential points: Hitchcock’s THE LADY VANISHES (1938, 7.9/10), FOREIGN CORRESPONDENT (1940, 7.1/10), SHADOW OF A DOUBT (1943, 7.3/10).

电影《怠工》（片名叫“阴谋破坏”更适合）根据波兰政治小说《秘密特工》改编，拍摄于法西斯主义盛嚣尘上的1936年，故事讲的是电影院老板卡尔阴谋在伦敦搞恐怖活动，最后活动失败，错炸死了自己老婆的弟弟stevie，自己最后也死在老婆刀下的故事。

电影里，卡尔恐怖活动的动机并没有在里面明确披露，但这种恐怖主义的气氛与当时的欧洲大环境不谋而合，原著小说里对应电影院老板这个身份的姓名，并不是电影里的“卡尔”，而正好与第三帝国的领袖Adolf一致，希区柯克或许为了避免露骨，或许为了避嫌，而把Adolf换了另一个普遍的德国名字Karl——不过这一更改，反倒不免激起人们对“国家社会主义”与“共产主义”的无限遐想。

不管这部电影有没有对当时时政的指涉，希区柯克对这样一个犯罪题材的“模糊动机”的处理与同时期的电影，以及与希区柯克的其他电影来说，都是很鲜见的。当然，电影的出色之处并不在于这方面，而是希区柯克一贯善长的惊悚场面的营造和处理。Stevie在公交车上被炸死，这段高潮从酝酿到爆发的处理令人印象深刻，恰到好处的酝酿长度，以及突如其来的意外爆发，让人对小Stevie的惨死深感痛惜。除此之外，卡尔的老婆在得知自己丈夫的真面目，以及自己的弟弟被丈夫害死的真相之后的心理变化，心理斗争，及最后用刀捅死自己丈夫的整个过程，也处理得简短有力，被人称道。回头再仔细看看，会发现希区柯克仅仅是穿插了对卡尔老婆对弟弟的幻想，以及运用一些暗示镜头就充分的达到了想要的效果——卡尔的老婆在吃饭过程中对刀的注视（镜头对刀的暗示性特写）和她企图摘结婚戒指的这些细微动作都巧妙有力的给观众传达了“关系破裂”和之后可能发生悲剧的信息。这一暗示，让人想起《惊魂记》开头不久时，Marion收拾东西准备“卷钱跑路”的经典暗示。

不过，电影在卧底警官TED看到卡尔被杀之后，尤其在卡尔的老婆一直希望去自首的情况下，TED还一直希望帮她逃脱制裁，甚至愿意和她一起私奔美国这一情节上，让人感觉有点突兀，TED的转变和下决心的前期“造势”不够，TED这个人物和其他角色相比略显苍白。不过，总的来说，这片子是希区柯克在离开英国赴美（1939年）前还算不错的片子之一。

这怕是希区柯克最残缺的影片了吧。也许再多一个小时，再让警察和女主相处时间更久一些，接吻看似也不那么唐突。

在餐桌上女主刺杀丈夫的那场戏中，摄影剪辑完美。希区柯克通过鸟笼及空着的座位再次提示了女主的弟弟已经不复存在。女主拿起又放下的刀叉体现女主想杀了丈夫的踌躇。两个人的特写镜头表情错愕，眼睛瞳孔放大，这一镜给予了整部戏的惊人效果。

作为Alfred Hitchcock的Fans，我认为这是Hitchcock导演史上比较失败的作品。电影一开始还是不错的.Hitchcock电影独有的悬念感所带来的电影中抖不完的有趣包袱，再加上英国式的幽默作调料。使这部电影紧张，刺激而又令观影过程不失惬意。但电影从那个男孩子被炸弹炸死后，变味了。我不是说忍受不了这个有点悲剧式的结局，我是说，从一个悬疑中略带幽默的轻松观影氛围忽然转换到一个悲剧结局，当中竟然没有任何铺垫，使观众的观影情绪产生很大的情感落差，继而使整部电影的质量产生严重的下降。作为一个伟大的导演，真的不得不说是一个大大的失误！（虽然那个妻子杀死丈夫的段落实在很经典。）