Save your money for something good and enjoyable

A waste of 90 minutes of my life

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

To me this was NOT one of the more impressive moves by Alfred Hitchcock and it is Alfred Hitchcock Mannerism that gets in the way that reduces the film to silliness. The musical score is overbearing while Gregory Peck and Ingrid Bergman are under bearing. The notion of Freud seems more fraudulent about psychology than reflective of any psychological reality.But the most powerful defect goes to a portentous and pretentious musical score that announces itself.When you look at the best of Hitchcock (Dial M for Murder, Rebeca, the 39 Steps, The Man who Knew Too Much, ) the story line succeeds in pulling the Hitchcock mannerisms forward without reducing the film to silliness. There must always be a sense of plausibility to a film, "Well, it could happen, now couldn't it?" Even "ET, the Extra Terrestrial" succeeds for this very element of plausibility. Somehow with this, Hitchcock here failed in that most basic element of story telling; it all seemed a stretch. I never understand the adulation for Hitchcock. When he tells a good story he is excellent; when Hitchcock himself gets in the way of the story, the story suffers.

Even when Hitchcock stretches the bounds of reality, it is still such a trip. As Ingrid Bergman does everything she can to validate her feelings for an amnesiac with whom she has fallen in love, she puts herself in grave danger. Not only does she not know what lurks in the mind of Gregory Peck's character, but she does know that the police could be around every corner. Of course, everything here is Freudian and assumes that psychoanalysis is the only answer. Enter Salvador Dali. Imagine being a movie director who can call in one of our greatest artists and surrealists to do a part of his film. This set of scenes from the unconscious mind is about as memorable as anything that has ever been done in the movies. Some might call it pretty schmaltzy and convenient, but it is still remarkable. Of course, we know that all will be well. Hollywood at the time was pretty predictable. Nevertheless, watching great actors like Bergman and Peck play off one another makes it worth the price of admission.

Along with its obvious echoes of the style the master of suspense was so renowned for, SPELLBOUND is a slightly different movie of his. Except for the Expressionistic character of Hitchcock's movies both in their visual schemes and thematic concerns, it is a "tale of psychiatry, love and murder" (Robert Snow). Bearing this in mind, we might quote Francois Truffaut who said about the director that he "gets the maximum effect from the minimum elements." This maximum effect in SPELLBOUND finds its fullest realization in its psychoanalysis, a true novelty for the 1940s.The psychoanalysis here, as dated as it may seem, occurs to symbolize a particularly modern approach not only to the screen adaptation of a literary piece (the film is based upon a 1927 novel THE HOUSE OF DR EDWARDES by Hilary Saint George Saunders and John Palmer) but primarily to addressing of the versatile needs and expectations of its viewers. Certain dated visuals do not, indeed, shadow the dynamic effect of appeal, understanding, interest that the movie still instills after all these decades. All its artistic equipment, including the terrific soundtrack by Miklos Rozsa (not Bergman) known for the instrument of theremin, brilliant details of images, namely the opening doors that appear to symbolize the opening of hidden worlds of characters in a totally new, yet undiscovered manner (Selznick's idea), the ultra-popular dream sequence designed by Salvador Dali (I will mention later) constitute the great merit of the film and its director who could "infuse the simple story with compelling camera work and great pacing that keeps us guessing until the final pieces drop into place" (Robert Snow). However, the major strength of SPELLBOUND lies elsewhere...Carter B Horsley in one of his reviews on Hitchcock's films stated memorably that the Master of Suspense could boast three major points: "immense influence, sardonic and mischievous with and the magnetism of his cast." The two first points would never exist without the last one, that is the leading and supporting cast who make SPELLBOUND a true feat of acing.As the story imprisons its characters within the spheres of psychoanalytical approach which reinforces the duality of human nature, the actors deserve full credit. Ingrid Bergman as Constance Petersen and Gregory Peck as John Ballatyne) make a brilliant couple of a doctor and her patient developing various emotions and feelings that come and go in their growing relationship. With certain liberties taken with its original literary source and highly adapted to the medium needs by Ben Hecht, the cast supply us with an authentic insight into situations and states of mind therein depicted. As the story develops 'emotional problems of the sane,' (which we read at the beginning), they handle the task to prompt the audience to psychoanalyze the characters. Of course, we, supplied already with incomparable experience within that field after years of its popularity, do that differently than viewers of the 1940s did that. Anyway, that inspiration still works. Roger Ebert rightly pointed out about Ingrid Bergman that she "subtly combined the noble and the carnal" Some of the very best moments of theirs include the railway station moment, the kiss, Peck's first entrance and the visit at Dr Alexander Brulov's played magnificently by Michael Checkov. With his weird English accent and his cutting remarks, he makes for supreme wit and thrill as well as adds clever intellectual resonance to the story.The minor point of criticism might refer to the skiing sequence which surely occurs dates and a bit laughable and the performance of Leo G. Caroll as Dr Murchison who, on the one hand, does not call our attention on the true villain (and rightly so) but, on the other hand, becomes a bit too suspicious with his forged respectability, calmness and conventionality.Something needs to be mentioned about Dali sequence. Initially planned as a 22 minute sequence and finally cut to 2 minutes, it is still the most intriguing, nightmarish, mysterious almost part of the movie that is impossible to be skipped. Robert Snow rightly calls it 'cool' stating further that "the backgrounds have that stark, painted quality of Dali's surrealist works." Much more could be said about this excellent movie but the word limit, unfortunately, does not allow that. Putting it in a nutshell, it is one of a little less famous Hitchcock but, surely, highly worth seeing as a tremendous depiction of any sane man put behind bars of guilt complex.

Well, I'll tell you one thing for certain - Alfred Hitchcock's "Spellbound" definitely didn't hold me spellbound. Far from it. In fact, a number of times throughout the story I actually burst out laughing at how corny, clichéd, and, yes, cockeyed this particular romance was.I guess back in 1945 (with WW2 ending, and everything) they must have figured that no matter how implausible and dumb "Spellbound's" story really was, it couldn't fail to be a success since it starred 2 of Hollywood's most beautiful and adored actors-of-the-day, Ingrid Bergman and Gregory Peck (both in their prime at 30).And, of course, Spellbound was, indeed, a huge hit when it was first released.For me, though - About the only thing worth watching Spellbound for was its brief dream sequence which was conceived by surrealist artist, Salvador Dali.Unfortunately, this particular episode in the film was cut from its original 20 minutes to only 2 minutes by the film's producer, David Selznick, who, apparently, clashed with Hitchcock often over the direction of this production.