The Trouble with Harry (1955) User Reviews

Delightfully twisted

[bat-5 · 7/10 · 23 September 1999]

Everyone who had something to do with Harry just can't figure out if he should stay buried or dig him up. From there, Hitchcock's black comedy brings about tension and giggles. Seems that everyone had a reason for wanting Harry out of the picture, only trouble is, Harry is more trouble dead than alive. A light film for Hitchcock, but it does contain the transference of guilt theme, and the guilt bounces all over our main players. A small gem of a film that often gets overlooked, watch this one and you'll be charmed by the trouble that Harry causes.

Black comedy with funny moments , nice acting , gorgeous outdoors and fun dialogue

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 19 January 2014]

Amusing and lighthearted suspense story about the apparition a corpse on the countryside and there being many suspicious , causing all sorts of troubles for peaceful neighbors in a rural community . Problems take place in a quiet New England little town when a man's bothersome body is found in the forests . The trouble is that almost everyone in town thinks that they had something to do with his death . As Sam Marlowe (John Forsythe) , Mrs. Rogers (film debut of Shirley MacLaine , and she is marvelous as usual) , Captain Wiles (Edmund Gwenn's fourth and last film with Alfred Hitch) and Miss Gravel (Mildred Natwick , John Ford's usual actress) , all of them are suspicious people and carry out several tricks and antics to disappear the evidences , in fact , Harry gets dug up three times throughout the film . Meanwhile , Deputy Sheriff Calvin Wiggs (Royal Dano), the closest thing to law enforcement in their town attempts to finds out about Harry (Alfred Hitchcock insisted on using a real actor for the body of Harry).

Enjoyable mystery movie involves a motley group of characters who hold numerous tricks in order to disappear a corpse as well as find alibis . Entertaining suspense movie packs humor , intrigue and ordinary Hitch touches . This agreeable and often hilarious picture has some 'Black comedy nature' and results to be an unexpected change of pace from master of suspense . Alfred Hitchcock's films have become famous for a number of elements and iconography : vertiginous height , innocent men wrongfully accused, blonde bombshells dressed in white, voyeurism, long non-dialogue sequences, etc. However in this film there aren't these particularities but contains a fun intrigue and amusing situations . Hitch was famous for making his actors follow the script to the word, and in this movie the characters use their dialogue taken from an interesting as well as fun screenplay by Jon Michael Hayes based on the novel by Jack Trevor Story . Alfred Hitchcock's movies were known for featuring famous landmarks such as Mount Rushmore in North by Northwest and the Statue of Liberty in Sabotage ; however here only appears a quiet small town and some colorful outdoors . Hitch apparently decided to leave this movie location unspecific and without recognizable landmarks and filmed in Vermont , though it was hampered by heavy rainfall , as many exterior scenes were actually filmed on sets constructed in a local high school gymnasium . Alfred Hitchcock once said of this film and of ¨Family plot¨ : ¨they are treated with a bit of levity and sophistication , I wanted the feeling of the famous director Ernst Lubitsch making mystery thrillers ." The film was unavailable for decades because its rights -together with four other pictures of the same period- were bought back by Alfred Hitchcock and left as part of his legacy to his daughter. They've been known for years as the infamous "5 lost Hitchcocks" among film buffs, and were re-released in theaters around 1984 after a 30-year absence. The others are ¨The Man Who Knew Too Much¨ (1956), ¨The rear window¨ (1954), ¨The rope¨ (1948) and ¨Vertigo¨(1958). When Music Composer Lyn Murray was working on the music score for ¨Catch a thief' (1955), Alfred Hitchcock was already looking for a composer for this film, which was to be his next. So Murray suggested Bernard Herrmann. Bernard arranged his whimsical themes from this film into a concert suite he called "A Portrait of Hitch". This was the beginning of the long professional relationship between Hitchcock and Herrmann. Colorful and glimmer cinematography in Vistavision by Robert Burks , Alfred's ordinary cameraman , showing nice autumn outdoors .

The motion picture was well directed by Alfred Hitchcock . Originally designed by Hitchcock as an experiment in seeing how audiences would react to a non-star-driven film and was one of Alfred's favorites of all his films . Although this was a failure in the US, it played for a year in England and Italy, and for a year and a half in France. Rating : Better than average . Well worth watching .

A nice attempt at something different, but still an overall failure

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 3 May 2008]

Before I begin in earnest on this review, I must point out that in the future, I'm expecting this review to have received many "not helpful" posts. That's because with many famous directors (such as Godard, Bergman and Hitchcock), there is such a perceived aura of greatness associated with their films that they have many rabid followers who will not allow any criticism of any of their films. While I can in some ways respect their loyalty, these fans seem like cult members the way they attack honest attempts to critique the films. In other words, if you disagree with them, it seems to be a personal attack!! Well, here goes--and in a couple years I'll need to check back with this review and see how poorly it faired.

THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY is probably the strangest and most daring film Hitchcock ever made. While he did occasionally inject some comedic moments into some of his films (such as his deliberately including phallic imagery into NORTH BY NORTHWEST, the odd romantic comedy of MR. AND MRS. SMITH and the kooky moments in his last film, FAMILY PLOT), none of his films were as comically dark and absurd as THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY. Additionally, there were no big-name stars associated with it--something only repeated a few times in his films (such as in FRENZY).

The only problem with this experiment is that the overall effort, at least seen more than fifty years later, isn't all that funny nor involving. Sure, I laughed here and then, but rarely were the laughs all that strong and the film seemed rather forced.

In some ways, the film reminded me a lot of a French film, BUFFET FROID, as both were absurdist films. In other words, when events occurred, people responded in completely unpredictable and confusing ways. When people discovered Harry's body, no one seemed the least bit concerned to find a dead man! In BUFFET FROID, after a man's wife is murdered, the murderer meets the husband and confesses--and they both go out on a road trip together! Some think such scenes are brilliant--I just got tired of it after a while because the shock value subsides very quickly and there isn't a whole lot of depth to it.

Now all this isn't to say this is a bad film--after all, I scored it a 6. It's just that it is far from a great film and isn't much better than a time-passer. Cute at times and very strange, the film never rises near the level of greatness. Of interest to the curious and Hitchcock fans--all others may find this one a bit tedious and unfunny.

Yes, a Hitchcock COMEDY. And it's very clever and a lot of fun!

[Infofreak · 5 September 2003]

One thing I really admire about Hitchcock was that he was willing to experiment, and wasn't content to make the same movie over and over. This meant that he sometimes made movies that puzzled his audiences, and several of them were out and out flops. But the passage of time has been kind to many of these movies which can be enjoyed for what they are, not what the audience WANTED them to be. 'The Trouble With Harry' is a great example. Many of Hitchcock's movies have humour in them, but an actual comedy was a bit left field for him. And not just any kind of comedy, a very black one. Humour is very subjective, but I found this movie to very clever and a lot of fun. It gets off to a bit of a shaky start with John Forsythe's character coming out with some unfunny lines and bits of business, but once the story kicks in and the characters played by Edmund Gwenn and Mildred Natwick are introduced, the movie becomes very amusing. Forsythe is technically the star of the movie, and Shirley MacLaine (in her movie debut) the leading lady, but Natwick, and especially Gwenn, steal the picture, and to me have the best lines. Edmund Gwenn was also in the underrated 1950s monster movie 'Them!', and I'm really fond of him. I also get a kick out of Royal Dano who plays the sheriff. Dano was a very interesting character actor who was in everything from 'Moby Dick' to 'Drum' to 'Killer Klowns From Outer Space'. To be totally honest 'The Trouble With Harry' wouldn't make it into my Top Ten Hitchcock movies, but that is only because he made so many great ones, and it's tough to choose, not because this is poor movie. If you want an edge of your seat thriller then maybe this isn't for you, but if you thought Hitch's droll introductions on his TV show were entertaining, then you should check this one out, as it's cut from the same cloth.

Offbeat Hitchcock Comedy.

[AaronCapenBanner · 6/10 · 12 October 2013]

Director Alfred Hitchcock attempts comedy again, with better results as this film is about the corpse of Harry Worp, which is first discovered by Capt. Albert Wiles(played by Edmund Gwenn) who thinks he shot Harry accidentally when he was hunting rabbits, so decides to hide the body instead. Unsuccessfully, as it turns out, as it is discovered by young Arnie Rogers(played by Jerry Mathers) who then gets his mother(played by Shirley MacLaine) to see it, though she recognizes it as her missing husband! She then decides to hide it herself, only to have artist Sam Marlowe(played by John Forsythe) stumble over it! Thus begins the odyssey of Harry's body, and the trouble it causes... Amusing comedy is almost too droll for its own good, but a fine cast and amiable nature make it a pleasant diversion, but nothing more.

An unusual comedy from Alfred Hitchcock

[Tweekums · 7/10 · 10 March 2014]

It is a sunny autumn day in Vermont and Harry Worp is lying dead in a particularly scenic spot. His body is first found by young Arnie Rogers who runs of to get his mother, Jennifer Rogers. Meanwhile the body is found for a second time; this time by Captain Wiles. He was out rabbit hunting and worries that he'd killed Harry with a stray shot. While he is wondering what to do Arnie returns with his mother and it becomes clear that Harry was her estranged husband and she doesn't seem too upset that he is dead! It later emerges that she too thinks she killed him as she'd hit him over the head with a bottle… if that isn't enough suspects another woman thinks she may have killed Harry as well! Local artist Sam Marlowe also gets involved as he helps the Captain bury the body (several times) and falls in love with Jennifer. While these four are trying to hide Harry the local deputy sheriff has heard about the body and is determined to find out what is going on.

This is a rather strange movie; it is a gentle comedy, a mystery and a romance… added to that it is directed by Alfred Hitchcock. That isn't to say it is bad; the mystery is fun even if its real purpose is to bring Sam and Jennifer together and provide a series of laughs as the four protagonists deal with the body and try to keep the deputy from finding out what is going on. This film is most notable for being Shirley MacLaine's film debut; she is a delight as Jennifer… even if she is a little young for a twice widowed woman with a child; although I didn't really think about this till after it had finished. The rest of the cast do a decent job in what is a fairly light film. When we learn the truth about Harry's death it provides a satisfying explanation and fits the comic tone of the film. Overall I'd say that this may not be a classic but it is worth watching, especially if you are a fan of Hitchcock or Shirley MacLaine.

Surely an inspiration for Twin Peaks...

[Red-Barracuda · 6/10 · 15 April 2013]

What is most notable about The Trouble with Harry is that it is a very early example of an American black comedy. At the time, black humour was mainly the reserve of the British, most notably films from Ealing studio, such as Kind Hearts and Coronets (1949). Laughing at murder was not something American audiences really understood or appreciated at this time, so it would be fair to say that this movie only ever got the go-ahead due to the considerable clout its director Alfred Hitchcock had at the time. As it was, it is one of the few out-and-out comedies that he ever made. He almost always included humorous moments and comic characters in his more typical thrillers but with this one, they took centre stage and the thriller part of the plot was marginalised to the point of irrelevance. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it was not a big hit in the United States but it did do well in Europe and it did subsequently turn a profit.

It is an unusual film. The humour is really very silly. The characters never behave believably at any point. It's about the discovery of a dead body in the countryside; several characters think that they must have been responsible his death. In some ways it felt like a proto version of the TV series Twin Peaks. Not only is the story propelled by the discovery of a dead body but both share the quirky small-town characters and absurd humour. They also share a remote idyllic setting for their murder mystery, in this case New England. The leafy golden woodlands certainly make for a pleasant landscape. John Forsythe plays the central character, a bohemian artist. Better was Shirley McLaine in her first starring role, as the wife of the dead Harry. She gives an effortlessly sweet and likable performance. Hitchcock soundtrack regular Bernard Herrmann chips in with a playful reworking of a typical Hitchcock thriller score; the music really fits the picture.

The Trouble with Harry isn't really laugh-out-loud funny to be perfectly honest. But it is one of the strangest films that Hitchcock ever made. It shows again that he was always willing to experiment with off-beat ideas. It must have been quite a puzzling film at the time of its release.

Cinema's Best Shaggy Dog Story

[Holdjerhorses · 10/10 · 5 September 2005]

With all humor, you either get the "joke" or you don't. If you don't, no amount of explaining can change your mind. If you do, the details are endlessly enjoyable.

Part of the joke that's "The Trouble With Harry" is that "nothing happens." Hitchcock's "anti-Hitchcock" film defies expectations for action, shock, mayhem, suspense, spectacular climaxes on national monuments, etc. Instead, it's a New England cross-stitch of lovingly detailed writing, acting, photography, directing and editing.

Saul Steinberg's title illustration tells you exactly what you're in for. One long pan of a child's drawing of birds and trees . . . ending with a corpse stretched out on the ground as "Directed by Alfred Hitchcock" briefly appears.

So meticulously is "The Trouble With Harry" conceived, the only two images in the title art that are NOT trees, plants or birds are a house with a rocking chair on its porch and that corpse. The film literally plays in reverse of the title sequence -- from little Arnie's (Jerry Mathers, pre-Beaver. The boy who drew the titles?) discovery of the corpse, back to the home with the rocking chair, as Hitchcock's final "joke" puts the audience safely to bed. A double bed, in this case.

What's the film about? Oh, Great Big Themes like Life and Death, Youth and Age, Love and Hate, Guilt and Innocence, Truth and Lies, Art and Pragmatism -- packaged with deceptive simplicity.

The "hero," Sam Marlowe (John Forsythe), is an artist. The man the "child" who drew the titles (Arnie, or someone like him) might have become. His name is an amalgamation of two of hard-boiled fiction's greatest detectives: Sam Spade and Philip Marlowe. Indeed, Sam Marlowe functions here as a "sort of" detective. But enough of pointing out the detailed construction of this script and film: repeated viewings yield far greater pleasures.

"Introducing Shirley MacLaine" in her first screen role threw that enduring actress into an astounding mix of old pros: Edmund Gwenn, Mildred Dunnock, Mildred Natwick and Forsythe. That MacLaine held the screen then, and still does 50 years later (name another major actor who can say that), validates Hitchcock's astute casting.

In fact, TTWH is a tribute to cinematic "acting" as much as anything else. These are among the finest performances ever captured of these terrific actors. Since there are none of the expected "spectacular" Hitchcock sequences, nor his nail-biting tension, all that's left is for the actors to fully inhabit their characters.

That they do with brilliance, efficiency and breathtaking comic timing. No pratfalls here. Just nuances.

Edmund Gwenn and Mildred Natwick are the real stars. Had Hitchcock said so, the film would never have been produced. Their scenes (they receive as much if not more screen time together than Forsythe and MacLaine) are possibly the most delightful (and yes, romantically and sexually tense) ever filmed of courtship in middle-and-old age. Perfectly realized in every intonation and gesture. Occasionally laugh-out-loud funny.

Theirs is paralleled by the courtship of the younger "stars," Forsythe and MacLaine. "Love" at both ends of life, young and old, and love's wonderful humor and mysterious redemption, even in the face of death -- that inconvenient corpse on the hill.

Perhaps the most surprising and powerful undertow in "The Trouble With Harry" (one hesitates to name it because it's handled so delicately) is Sex.

It is only barely present in the lines given the characters, but the subtext is always there. Occasionally, it boils over into an infinitely subtle burlesque, as in the exchange between Gwenn and Forsythe about crossing Miss Gravely's (get that name?) "threshold" for the first time.

The look in Gwenn's eyes and the repressed joy and romantic hope in his face -- even at his stage of life -- is bliss.

The coffee cup and saucer "for a man's fingers;" the ribbon for Miss Gravely's newly-cut hair (Wiggy cuts it in the general store -- Mildred Dunnock in another unbelievably subtle performance -- muttering, "Well, I guess it will grow back."); Arnie's dead rabbit and live frog; the constantly shifting implications of guilt in the death of "Harry" up there on the hill; the characters' struggles to regain innocence by "doing the right thing"; the closet door that swings open for no apparent reason (never explained); the characters' revelations of the truths about themselves; their wishes granted through Sam's "negotiations" with the millionaire art collector from the "city" -- ALL portrayed within the conservative but ultimately flexible confines of their New England repression and stoicism (yes, the film is also a satiric comment on '50s morality) -- these details and more finally yield a rich tapestry of our common humanity, observed at a particular time and place, through specific people caught in an absurd yet utterly plausible circumstance.

Nothing happens? Only somebody who doesn't know how to look and listen -- REALLY observe, like an artist / creator -- could reach that conclusion about "The Trouble With Harry." Only a genius, like Hitchcock, would have the audacity to pull the rug out from under his audience's expectations at the height of his career by offering a profoundly subtle morality play in the guise of a slightly macabre Hallmark Card.

When the final "revelation" arrives, in the last line that takes us home to the marital bed where love culminates and all human life begins -- yours and mine -- and draws from us a happy smile of recognition, so Hitchcock's greatest secret is revealed, more blatantly in this than any of his films.

"Life and death -- and all of it in between -- are a joke! Don't you get it?" It's there in all his pictures. Nowhere more lovingly and less showily presented than in "The Trouble With Harry." Thank you, Hitch.

A repeat performance!

[JohnHowardReid · 7/10 · 10 November 2016]

NOTES: The film's original reception from both critics and public was lukewarm at best.

Although originally advertised as being photographed in VistaVision, this credit has been removed from current (2016) prints. I have a still of Hitch directing a studio interior in which a VistaVision camera is obviously employed, but I must admit my doubts as to such a heavy piece of equipment being dragged all over the beautiful backwoods of Vermont.

COMMENT: I enjoyed the film, yes, but it's by no means the height of humorous originality that its fans claim. The idea of a missing, waylaid or bothersome corpse is a standard gimmick in literature. Alec Coppel, in fact, has used this stratagem at least twice: — in his novel, "Mr. Denning Drives North" (filmed in 1951) and in his Broadway stage play, "The Gazebo" (filmed in 1959 with Glenn Ford and Debbie Reynolds). "The Gazebo" has surfaced quite a few times on television, and so has "Mr. Denning..." Both were extremely popular films in their day. So it's no wonder "The Trouble with Harry" was not the super- duper success its makers intended. The total lack of star power didn't help at the time either. (Whilst she has a major role, this was Shirley MacLaine's debut film).

On the other hand, the picture is beautifully photographed on wondrously autumnal locations and has so much inherently whimsical and oddball appeal, its visual delights tend to stay in the memory. It's the sort of film that provides such captivating scenery and such mildly memorable characterizations, it can be viewed with pleasure again and again.

Outlandish black comedy from Hitch, a failure when released as it was probably a little ahead of its time.

[barnabyrudge · 9/10 · 10 April 2005]

The Trouble With Harry is a comedy film about a dead body. Alfred Hitchcock makes the macabre concept deliciously funny and entertaining in his unique style. Helping Hitchcock to turn this unlikeliest of premises into an enjoyable film are Bernard Herrmann (providing fabulous music scoring), and a cast of winning actors who judge to perfection how far to push their tongues into their cheeks.

A dead body turns up on a patch of grass near the top of a wooded New England hill. Various people have reason to believe that they're responsible for the man's death. Septugenarian ex-sea captain Albert Wiles (Edmund Gwenn) is worried that he might have accidentally shot the man while hunting for rabbits. Old spinster Miss Gravely (Mildred Natwick) fears that when she whacked the man over the head with her shoe, she may have done more damage than she intended. And single mother Jennifer (Shirley MacLaine) has even greater cause to feel responsible, for she is the dead man's wife. During an argument, she smashed a bottle over his head and is now almost sure that he died as a result. Local artist Sam Marlowe (John Forsythe) decides to help his neighbours to cover up the crime, but after burying and digging up the corpse several times, the truth behind "Harry's" death is finally revealed.

No Hitchcock film divides viewers more than this one. Some consider the film a masterpiece of understated black comedy; others deem it a plot less, pointless time-waster. The film was a fairly massive box office flop at the time (audiences obviously felt from the movie poster that they were going to see a murder mystery, and were disappointed to actually find themselves experiencing a bizarre, off-kilter black comedy). In retrospect, I'd say The Trouble With Harry is a great film that was probably a good two decades ahead of its time. The performances are wonderfully outrageous, especially the elders (Gwenn and Natwick) who give perceptive comic turns that actors nowadays just don't seem to have the range to do. Forsythe and MacLaine are delightful too (the latter in her movie debut), and Royal Dano rounds off the cast as a gullible cop who nearly finds out that the other four have been up to no good. There's no doubt that The Trouble With Harry is an acquired taste; but if this taste is to your liking then you're in for a delectable treat!

A black comedy, forgotten and misunderstood.

[filipemanuelneto · 6/10 · 17 June 2017]

Hitchcock bet heavily in this film: a cast of perfect unknown, an unusual plot and a cascade of black humor made with charm and class. All put together and hardly even looks like a movie by the renowned master, but it is. I've never laughed so hard at a movie made by him, and that was a very interesting and enjoyable surprise. The plot is based on the discovery of a corpse by an occasional hunter who, thus, believes he has killed him by accident. However, a lot of people end up getting involved and, some time later, there is an improvised gang bet on hiding the body, buried and unearthed several times. And still some say that the dead rest in peace! Of course, being a British movie, everything is done in a formal, polite way and always between a tea and a card game. This way of being is part of the joke. Target of a bad marketing strategy when it was released, the film has been misunderstood by the general public since then becoming, perhaps, one of the most forgotten films of this famous filmmaker's work. Anyway, it's a funny movie. It should be seen as a black comedy, not as a thriller or mystery movie. Its not a masterpiece, its not his best film, but still deserves to be watched.

Oh the irony!

[eeesh98 · 10/10 · 4 October 2004]

I've been a big fan of Hitchcock as long as I can remember, but I only had the opportunity to see The Trouble with Harry recently. I never knew the film was a comedy before I began watching, so you can imagine my surprise when one innocent character after the next stumbled upon a brutally murdered corpse and react in the very least expected ways possible. It was almost as surpring, however, when I read the comments on IMDb and realized that a large portion of Hitchcock's audience simply didn't "get it". Of course the character's are not reacting the way real people would in these circumstances! How many of Hitch's characters actually would? The Trouble with Harry is Hitchcock's own jab at himself, at the entire suspense film genre, and a wonderfully inspired satire on the implications of desensitization. The film is not that simple though, for even in addressing these objectives Hitch tantalizingly avoids any answers or definitive statements. Its a difficult film to describe, but definitely worth seeing as it confirms Hitchcock's dual mastery of comedy and suspense. Watch it for the social commentary, the sleepy New England setting, but above all else, for the blissful irony that fills its every crevace. It is the kind of irony that makes shows like Family Guy so popular today. A wonderfully surpring film in every way!

Body, Body, Who's Got the Body

[Hitchcoc · 7/10 · 5 December 2016]

I was really young when I saw this film for the first time. In a quaint Vermont town, a body is found. For a while, the guy is just part of the landscape. Kids even play around it (that's Jerry Mather...the Beaver). A flood of guilt settles on the community. At least three people feel they may have caused the death of this man. However, the townspeople will do anything to keep the authorities from getting wind of it. Royal Dano, the long faced sheriff, is out there somewhere. We are also introduced to Shirley MacLaine who plays a young mother and is the wife of the deceased. As with all Hitchcock films, there is a lot of unique situations as people bury, dig up, hide, cover the body. If some feel the end is anticlimactic, that's what it's supposed to be. One of the stars of the show is Vermont in the fall which provides a backdrop for all the grim doings that are going on.

Not Too Wild About Harry.

[rmax304823 · 3/10 · 5 April 2012]

Hitchcock was in his own curious way a genius. No one has made better films -- of their type -- than he has. He had a singular sense of humor too. His thrillers were often as funny as they were entertaining. I'm thinking of the remake of "The Man Who Knew Too Much", Jimmy Stewart's struggling with the staff of Ambrose Chapel's taxidermy shop, before finally squirming out the door and slamming it behind him, and the director's quick cut to the head of a stuffed lion wearing an expression of amazement.

He even managed to insert the odd good laugh into some of his otherwise unqualified dramas. In "Shadow of a Doubt," in Hitchcock's cameo, we don't see his face, just a shot over his shoulder at his bridge partner. We can see Hitchcock's cards. It's a Grand Slam in spades. The partner stares at him and remarks, "You don't look so good yourself." But he had nothing but trouble building an entire film around comedy. He'd tried it in 1941 with "Mr. and Mrs. Smith" and despite the piping score it didn't work. It doesn't work well here either. In some ways, the best thing about it is the location photography: New England in the Fall, with all that florid foliage.

John Forsythe as the artist is reassuring but bland. Shirley MacLaine is an awfully cute red-headed widow with hints of horniness but this was her debut film and often she seems self conscious. When she's supposed to be relaxed and thoughtful she assumes a slightly unnatural position with her shoulders hunched and her face down. Edmund Gwenn and Mildred Natwick both get their jobs done but aren't as endearing as the director seems to believe.

Mostly, though, the problem is that there is nothing intrinsically amusing about a dead body that no one seems to know what to do with. I lost count of the number of times Harry was buried and dug up again. It reminded me of one of those Laurel and Hardy two reelers in which the duo spend all their time trying to get something done -- a house built, a piano lugged up a long staircase, a boat painted -- and the audience waits and waits for the job to be done, and it never is.

I can imagine, though, that some people might find this ludic understatement very funny. I can imagine myself enjoying it more but I'd have to be in the right mood -- stoned.

Entertaining Change-Of-Pace From Hitchcock

[Snow Leopard · 17 July 2001]

This is a real change-of-pace from Hitchcock, and some of his most devoted fans do not really enjoy "The Trouble With Harry", but it is quite entertaining if you appreciate Hitchcock's subtle British sense of humor. There are funnier black comedies, but this one holds up pretty well, and has a number of things going for it.

'Harry' appears only as a dead body, discovered at the beginning of the film in a clearing outside a picturesque New England town. More than one of the residents feels responsible for Harry's death - so, just by being there, Harry sets off a lengthy chain of events in the lives of several persons in the town. There are no tremendous laughs, but a lot of good low-key wit, much of it having to do what the situation brings out about the various characters' perspectives on themselves and others. The cast is pretty good, and the scenery is beautiful, some of the best in any Hitchcock film.

There is not the action or suspense in this one that most fans associate with Hitchcock. But if you appreciate Hitchcock's sense of humor - for example, the kinds of subtly ghoulish remarks that he used to make on his television shows - give it a try.

Fun Hitchcock Mistery but inconsequential story

[fiusza · 6/10 · 6 April 2020]

Definitely not a movie we remind of Hitchcock when we think about him. Dont get me wrong is not a bad movie and its coloring and shooting are both astonishingly beautiful. But despite it's original story the movie has some flaws. The dialogue is uninteresting in quite a few scenes and the whole movie feels inconsequential - unlike all the great Hitchcock's films. The movie inconsequential ending justify it's fun but it feels messy, like things should've gone at least bad. Worth watching it once tho just for the beauty of the shots, a fine scratch for Hitchcock's Rear Window.

Beautiful and wry, but slow as maple syrup

[secondtake · 6/10 · 29 March 2010]

The Trouble with Harry (1955)

When I first saw this years ago it was on a little television screen and the whole experience left me baffled. I saw it this time on a large, good quality projection and I had the same experience. What a frivolous, boring movie!

It has charms, for sure, including the whole exaggerated Vermont setting in all its idyllic small town beauty. (The movie premiered in Barre, Vermont.) And it is, truly, lightly humorous throughout, so yes, call it a comedy. But so little happens it gets maddening. It feels mostly like a Hitchcock Presents television production stretched into a full length movie. It's not a coincidence that the premier of that t.v. series was October, 1955, just as filming was under way for The Trouble with Harry. Initial shooting took a month that fall, with some later fill-in shooting at the end of the year.

Here Hitchcock uses (with great fanfare) the new Vistavision very widescreen format, and full Technicolor. You might think the movie was just a way to dip into the mid 1950s revelation in big, colorful cinema. And along those lines, cinematographer Robert Burks makes the most of autumn in Vermont with some beautiful location shooting. And the ticklish music by Bernard Herrmann is, as usual, perfect. Burks was already a longtime favorite of Hitchcock, but this was the first of many collaborations with Herrmann.

But the plot, and the acting (including a couple of respectable names like Shirley MacLaine, though Hitchcock hasn't always wanted the very best from his women leads) are flat and slow. Suspense? Not a bit. That's not the point. The movie flopped here in the U.S. but was a success in the U.K. so maybe, just maybe, we Yanks just don't get the humor.

Notable because of Shirley Maclaine's performance and the lovely visuals of Vermont

[JuguAbraham · 7/10 · 22 August 2019]

Lovely colourful photography of Vermont. A fantastic adorable debut from Shirley Maclaine that earned her a Golden Globe. Amusing, endearing performances by all characters. And a large dose of Hitchcockian humour that begins with the credits. However the doctor who reads while walking and stumbling was a bit over the top.

An absolute gem, one of the few 10's I've ever given!!!

[honesty · 10/10 · 20 December 1998]

This movie is fantastic. I don't think anyone except Hitchcock could have made such humour out of a dead body. Shirley MacLaine (in her first role) is delightful and Edmond Gwenn perfect. You'll see a young Jerry Mathers pre-dating Leave it to Beaver by a few years. Don't miss this little gem, it's as funny today as it was in 1955 and I suspect for a long time to come.

A bit of a failure...

[fletch5 · 6/10 · 16 July 2001]

This is quite possibly Hitchcock's oddest film, as well as being one of his least successful projects. "The Trouble with Harry" is an interesting endeavour that never really works; the movie is occasionally somewhat amusing, but too often tedious and it has a pretty stuffy feel to it. On the other hand, the cinematography is extremely striking - beautiful colours of autumn have rarely been captured as gorgeously.

What Is The Trouble? 'Possible' Spoilers

[ngs712 · 8/10 · 12 November 2008]

This movie is in my top five favorite Hitchcock films. Maybe I committed 'blasphemy' for putting it ahead of films like North by Northwest, Shadow of a Doubt, and Notorious, but I think it was worth it. Sadly, this is a film that's overlooked when you think of his other films, like the ones I mentioned above. For fans of the film, we can only wonder why it's swept under the rug. Sure it's no 'Vertigo', but the thing is it's not meant to be.

The Trouble with Harry has the unique distinction of being only one of two comedies that Hitch made, in the U.S. anyway. The other being Mr. & Mrs. Smith. Of course Hitch is famous for little touches of black humor, but on this film he went all out. A plain, simple, black comedy that probably ends up flying under the radar of people used to watching Marx Bros. films, who I also like.

While not exactly, laugh-out-loud comedy I enjoy watching it. I think it's a relaxing film, especially when you see the great photography that captures the beauty of autumn in New England. Then again, I don't think you can ever get a bad shot of that. It's an amusing tale with good acting from John Forsythe, Shirley MacLaine, Edmund Gwenn, and Mildred Natwick occupying the main and almost only roles in the film. It also marks the first collaboration between Hitchcock and Herrmann who brings a light, airy, and playful score that helps make the concern of the story less of 'how' Harry died, but what exactly to do with him.

Basically, if you like Hitchcock, black comedy and don't mind an uncomplicated story, then I highly recommend it.

A change of pace

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 25 November 2018]

THE TROUBLE WITH HARRY is a change of pace for auteur director Alfred Hitchcock, an out-and-out comedy rather than his usual brand of suspense thrillers. As such I didn't enjoy it as much as his well-regarded classics, but I was still surprised at how good this all is. It's a blacker-than-black comedy in which an unwelcome corpse comes into the lives of a small-knit group of rural townsfolk, who must decide what to do with it. Character and history is explored in detail as the unlikely story plays out. Watching this on Blu-ray, I was surprised at how gorgeous it looks; it's Hitch's most colourful movie and the autumnal scenery is breathtaking. The script is tight and humorous, too, and the film benefits immensely from some fine performances from the likeable likes of Edmund Gwenn and John Forsythe. Perhaps not a masterpiece, but not a disappointment either.

Twin Peaks 1950s style

[23skidoo-4 · 10/10 · 14 November 2003]

The Trouble with Harry could well be one of the funniest films I have ever seen. It's a case of Alfred Hitchcock successfully parodying himself, while in the meantime offering some memorable cinematic moments.

Perhaps the most memorable is the screen debut of Shirley MacLaine, who is extremely cute and animated and fun to watch. It's easy to see why Hollywood fell in love with the elfin elder sister of Warren Beatty. Her performance betrays her inexperience in front of the camera, but you'll be too busy watching her facial expressions to care.

The rest of the cast is also excellent, with the actor who plays the captain deserving special recognition for his calm and cool demeanor throughout.

As far as the script goes, I think David Lynch must have had Trouble with Harry in mind as one of the inspirations for Twin Peaks. The dialogue is hilarious, with non-sequitors coming out of nowhere, as well as one-liners that will have you backing up the DVD/video saying "did I really hear that?" For one thing, the film is surprisingly risque for 1955 -- there's a boob joke involving a statue that could easily fit into an Austin Powers movie, and a pre-Beaver Jerry Mathers gets some of the film's biggest laughs with some perfect comic timing.

It's a mystery to me why this film bombed in its initial release. True, it's leisurely paced in comparison to other Hitchcock films, and there are no scary moments to be found. Instead, this is a film that is fun to watch, and provides laughs at the most unexpected places. Highly recommended.

Delighfully absurd

[Polaris_DiB · 7/10 · 8 April 2006]

This one goes down on my list as pretty much one of the most entertaining of Hitchcock's oeuvre. Hitchcock places a dead body in a very small town (not even a town, more like a grouping of houses with a general store) and let's the characters there come together and discover more about themselves, each other, and just how useless the life of a stranger can be to them when the death provides so much more excitement.

It's quirky, a quite black, a bit dry, and a lot of fun. This is Hitchcock's British-style absurdist humor distinctly rising to make it's own mark upon his collected works. The best part is that it bleeds into almost all forms of the film-making, including the imagery, like the kid shot between Harry's legs. I don't understand why, but that shot always provides chuckles.

Anyway, it would have been really great overall if Hitchcock had refrained from trying to find ways of sticking some of his (frankly repetitive) ideas in there, like when the old man talks about the great passion of feeling loved while stamping down heavily on Harry's fresh grave. Yes yes, we know, you want to connect sex and death, yet again, Hitch. We got it the last hundred times you've done it. Lighten up.

Otherwise, it's a jolly good time.

--PolarisDiB

Please enlighten me, I thought this movie was quite bad.

[RareWindow · 4/10 · 15 November 2004]

This film is meant to be funny but is quite unfunny. I say this not because the center of the humor is a corpse. Don't get me wrong: corpses can be hilarious. This one isn't, though. I think that if this movie weren't a Hitchcock film, people wouldn't feel obligated to like it and thus wouldn't like it. The characters are extremely annoying (that little boy is not funny at all and he talks way too fast), the story moves soooo slowly, and the characters' motivations are constantly shifting (first the artist is all about himself and then he is Mr Magnanimous). The "reasons" the characters have for burying and exhuming Harry are not convincing--they seemed forced (like the writer needed 5 or 6 different reasons for burying a body but could find only a couple and just scraped together a few others to toe the line of the "comic" premise). This fact is betrayed at the end when the characters are trying to explain the situation and they cannot remember all the reasons for the various burials--the reasons are not reiterated here because they were not compelling reasons. Also, the characters can hear the cars in the town from where they are burying Harry, so the spot must be very close, and yet no one ever sees them going up and down the hill with shovels. Also, the spot is traversed by 40 zillion people in the wildly implausible opening scene, and then remains relatively deserted for the rest of the film. How lucky. With some exceptions, only the folks who are going up there to deal with Harry go there. I guess the two main problems for me, then, were these: the story is annoyingly implausible in many ways and the jokes are simply not funny. Most of Hitchcock's films contain a lot of humor, and almost always humor that is much, much better than the humor in The Trouble With Harry. That whispering of "double bed" joke that caps the film says it all, I think--this film is lame.

Help me out! Am I wrong about this movie? Will someone please point out what redeeming qualities, if any, this movie possesses?