The Trouble with Harry (1955) User Reviews

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

An Inconvenient Dead Body

[bkoganbing · 5/10 · 1 February 2007]

Poor Harry, dropping dead in the Vermont woods one autumn day and four people manage to convince themselves they killed him. Including his conspicuously unlamenting widow, Shirley MacLaine.

Alfred Hitchcock sure loved some humor in his films, his characters when they're being pursued throw off some really clever lines. But outright comedy just wasn't Hitchcock's bag. Hitchcock did better with Mr. And Mrs. Smith, a screwball comedy with Carole Lombard that he did as a favor to Lombard with a promise she might be one of his cool blond heroines in the future. Of course that never happened as we sadly know.

Shirley MacLaine was introduced in this film, her debut big screen appearance. She does all right here, but she really hits the big time when she does Some Came Running and blew that attractive cast off the screen when she was on.

John Forsythe, Edmund Gwenn, and Mildred Natwick also think they might have killed old Harry for one reason or other. They keep digging him up and reburying him with rigor mortis coming and going.

The trouble with The Trouble With Harry is that Alfred Hitchcock took one gag and stretched it way too thin for a feature film.

I could see it however in a Laurel and Hardy short though.

just about the drollest, and sometimes just quietly crazy, black comedy about murder ever

[Quinoa1984 · 9/10 · 31 July 2008]

The Trouble with Harry is set in a serene, Technicolor-awe-inspiring backdrop of autumn in New England, reminiscent of the 'cheery' Americana of Shadow of a Doubt. There's also a cast of characters who are more wrapped up in their romantic entanglements than in the body of Harry, who should be the focal point of the story. Matter of fact, one of the greatest delights of The Trouble with Harry is that the so-called MacGuffin this time *is* the dead body, and not some random object. Harry could just as well be anything, but the only thing that is of concern is, of course, that he's dead.

What I loved seeing, as almost Hitchcock being a surrealist (he was a big fan of Bunuel after all) as much as being a director of dark/light comedy, was the non-chalance treated with the body from those around it throughout. The opening scenes had me floored, grinning cheek to cheek and sometimes just chuckling or laughing hysterically, at some line or moment in behavior from Edmund Gwynn and Mildred Natwicks' reactions (or lack thereof) to the dearly departed Harry on the ground. They go on and on talking about meeting later in the day, almost flirting by Gwynn's advances, and there's a DEAD BODY ON THE GROUND! On top of this there's the reactions from a little kid who loves playing with a dead rabbit, Shirley MacClaine as his mother and ex-lover of Harry, and the artist Marlowe played by John Forsythe, who seems to take a detached position almost in spite of making a detailed sketch of the dead Harry's face.

So all of this, done in a manner that should suggest reality but doesn't in the slightest, builds up to something that is like the other side of the morbid coin that one saw in Strangers on a Train. Murder is treated a few Hitchcock works almost philosophically, but with with an air of 'oh, it's just a little death, no harm really', and in the Trouble with Harry it's done to the max. A good portion of the movie has nothing to do with Harry, even if he's on the characters' minds; a lot of courtship goes on between the elder Capt. Wiles and Miss Ivy Gravely and (very rushed, which is the point) between Marlowe and Jennifer Rogers. Forsythe might not be the best cast in the part, but everyone else is, and they all bring something to putting whatever potential is in the script to the fullest. Sometimes it doesn't look like it should be funny, but then something else comes along- another strange line of dialog, another aside about Harry's body being moved here or there- that turns things on its head.

It's basically Hitchcock having fun with something that, for him, is probably more lighthearted then it might be for most. It's not a totally pitch black comedy, but then again Hithcock is deceptive, devilishly so, in in making things as simple as they seem. As with Bunuel everything seems like it should be straightforward, which adds to the absurdity, until one realizes that it means to be absurd like some yarn that you hear from a fellow you don't totally trust but listen intently anyway. It's not quite one of Hitchcock's masterpieces, but it surely is one of the best among those "experiments" that the director made from time to time, testing himself and the audience and putting energies into something that could turn his reputation on a turn.

A really good film but badly promoted at the time

[TheLittleSongbird · 9/10 · 8 May 2013]

While Alfred Hitchcock is my favourite director, I am not going to say that he hasn't made a disappointing film(and actually I haven't come across that many Hitch fans that have said that). But even his disappointments I find are not that terrible, certainly in comparison to the worst of other directors' resumes. The Trouble with Harry for me may fall short of being one of his top 10 films(Psycho, Vertigo, Rear Window, Rebecca, Notorious, The Lady Vanishes, Strangers on a Train, Shadow of a Doubt, North By Northwest and The Birds) and it is one that seems to divide audiences, but it is nowhere near among his weakest like Jamaica Inn, Topaz, Under Capricorn and The Paradine Case. The Trouble with Harry does come across as pedestrian pace-wise sometimes, but even if people don't like it(and that is absolutely fine) I do find it difficult to believe personally that they'd give it a score that indicates that it has no redeeming values, then again that may be just me.

Dissenting opinions, saying that the film is not funny and that it has no plot, and that it was a flop at the box office might indicate for some that The Trouble with Harry is not a great film. I think a large part of why was how it was promoted/marketed. Anybody thinking it would be a murder mystery and that it would have suspense like Hitchcock's master of suspense nickname suggests will be disappointed, and I don't think it helped that Paramount clearly didn't know how to promote it. The Trouble with Harry is an acquired taste and I wouldn't go as far to say it's perfect, but to me it is an example of a film that succeeds at being different. Besides, how a film did at the box office or how much money has made has never been an overriding factor in how I judge films anyway, it isn't a fair criticism and there are many examples of films that made lots of money but actually aren't that good.

The Trouble with Harry is really well-made for a start. The cinematography is wholly professional and sometimes has a dream-like look to it. The scenery is a genuine beauty, and I'd go as far to say that The Trouble with Harry is one of Hitch's most visually pleasing films. Hitchcock splendidly directs, the opening sequence was a truly great touch and set the scene of the film really well, sure it is different to what he is known for, but there is the odd suspenseful moment. And there are those suspenseful moments you can tell that it is Hitch directing, which is more than I can say for something like Jamaica Inn or Under Capricorn where I was struggling to tell where it was Hitchcock directing or not. Bernard Hermann would do even better later with Psycho and especially Vertigo but the music score for The Trouble with Harry is still an atmospheric one that does a fine job fitting with the film.

I'll also say that I am one of those who did find The Trouble with Harry very funny, often hilarious. Black humour works wonders when done right, and the black humour I found was done right here. It is very wry and deliciously ironic, also with some of the one-liners with Edmund Gwenn and Mildred Natwick quite ahead-of-its-time. Some will find the story plot-less with not much of a point, compared to other Hitchcock films that is true as there are more tautly written stories. However the story here while somewhat odd is clever and I did love how dramatically understated it was. The characters are disparate and will not come across as very likable to people, but like with the subtle storytelling and understated drama to keep them like that- and to have them spending the time thinking who did it? and did I do it?- was a deliberate choice and one that came off very nicely. The most endearing character is Miss Graveley, closely followed by Arnie.

From an acting point of view, The Trouble with Harry is as excellent as the humour. Dwight Marfield is a little wooden, but it is not enough to harm anything and doesn't stick out too much like a sore thumb to everybody else. It is better to judge John Forsythe on his own, rather than comparing him to the likes of Cary Grant and James Stewart. His performance won't be up there with one of the greatest in a Hitchcock film, but his ruggedly handsome looks, subtle comic delivery and quiet intelligence makes it an above decent one. Shirley MacLaine was in her film debut, and it is a very charming and sweet(but not overly-so) debut indeed, again like Forsythe she works better being judged in her own way as well. Their chemistry is convincing enough, but that between Gwenn and Natwick was stronger. Mildreds Natwick and Dunnock are very easy to like and seem to be thoroughly enjoying themselves, while Jerry Mathers is similarly likable(and cute). I found Edmund Gwenn to be the one who dominated though and in a good way, he has brilliant comic timing and is very commanding and cool, it really helps that he has the best lines along with Natwick(their chemistry was adorable).

Overall, really good, even great, film that shouldn't be dismissed so quickly. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Better than I expected

[Beefy-2 · 1 April 2000]

When I read the box at the video store, I thought it sounded a little silly, but since it was directed buy Hitchcock, I decided to give it a try. I was glad I did!

This film does a good job at showing what life is like (in a twisted way) in a small American town. Of course the whole thing is a black comedy about a corpse, but it's great fun, and suspenseful too, especially when Calvin is in the room, questioning everybody. I didn't understand why the door kept opening, but maybe it was just a joke - normally the door would signal a killer entering or something like that - but the door is never any cause for alarm.

All the actors are good, especially Gwenn, and Mrs. Gravely was so endearing. Don't ignore this lesser known Hitchcock movie. It's a treat to watch and is genuinely funny.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Hitch blew this one

[helpless_dancer · 2/10 · 1 April 2001]

Unutterably boring dialogue, completely silly story, but lovely scenery. I kept waiting for something to happen, but all that ever went on was a group of folks kept burying and digging up a dead guy. Two of the people thought they were responsible for the death and were trying to hide the evidence and circumstances continued to require that they keep shuffling the body around. Very tedious. I would rather watch a red oak grow that waste my time watching this drivel.

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!

Black Comedy

[davidmvining · 8/10 · 7 August 2020]

Alfred Hitchcock decided to experiment again. This time he wanted a movie without stars (that Shirley MacClaine would later become a big movie star on her own after this, her first role, is an interesting little irony) and with a light but rather darkly humorous feel. It's interesting to note that this came out the same year as the original The Ladykillers in England. Contemporary audiences were a bit turned off by the idea of finding humor about the burial and reburials of a dead man, but I think that time has been very good to one of only a handful of comedies that Hitchcock ever made (it's usually noted as only his second, but these people always forget both The Farmer's Wife and Champagne). One thing that tends to turn off modern audiences is the rather lackadaisical pace the movie takes, but I find the steady build very conducive to creating a rather wonderful bevy of characters through which all of the action flows.

Harry's dead and he won't go away. Captain Wiles finds the dead Harry, convinced that one of his three shots that morning found its mark in the unsuspecting Harry. As he struggled to find out what to do, several other people come by to remark about the body and take no real notice of it at the same time. The first is Miss Gravely, an older spinster of the small New England town nearby who politely greets Wiles and notes that he should get moving if he's to bury Harry soon. The second is Jennifer Rogers and her five year old son Arnie. Jennifer is almost ecstatic at the sight of the dead body. The third is a tramp who takes Harry's shoes. The fourth is Sam Marlowe, a local artist who takes a sketch of the dead man's face.

And it is with this cast of characters that they decide to bury Harry, first convinced of Captain Wiles' accidental guilt before they dig him back up, rebury him, dig him up again, and then clean up the body and his clothes to set him out for the next day when Arnie will rediscover the body and, using his twisted sense of time, tell everyone that he found the body today, which really means yesterday to him.

The dark humor of the situation underlies every interaction as people who have lived close to each other interact for the first time in any meaningful sense because three of the four (Captain Wiles, Miss Gravely, and Jennifer) all end up thinking that they killed Harry. Captain Wiles is an old sea captain who found this small corner of New England just three years before, clinging to the articles he had collected over his career in his small out of the way hut. Miss Gravely is a spinster that doesn't realize how much she looks like one but happily takes the advice of Sam Marlowe as he cuts her hair. Jennifer tells of how Harry married her after Harry's brother and Jennifer's former fiancé died, only to disappear on their wedding night at the insistence of his horoscope.

It's hard to talk about the charms of this movie, because it's really all about the feeling of it. The notion that these sweet interactions between Captain Wiles and Miss Gravely as they develop a romance and the similar relationship that develops between Sam and Jennifer are all happening while people try to figure out who was responsible for the death of a man on the outskirts of town ends up being really endearing. A lot of that is carried by the performances, especially Edmund Gwenn with whom Hitchcock had worked several times before. As Captain Wiles, Gwenn is disarmingly sweet as he figures out how to deal with his situation and then courts Miss Gravely, but it's John Forsythe as Sam who's really at the center of the film. His slightly detached air provides the audience with our vehicle into the little world of the film, and his sardonic tone is a pleasing voice through which to follow. Shirley MacClaine in quite literally her first film role, is also sweet and innocent as the jilted wife with little concern for her dead husband as she steadily falls for the masculine Sam.

The plot is bare because it is there as an excuse for these four characters to interact and grow together. It moves at its own steady pace, happy to let scenes play out for their own sake rather than to get on to the next scene about either digging up or burying the body. The dark aspect of the material provides an off kilter feeling to everything that really only enhances the sweet nature of the characters' growth. There's also something about the overall feel of character interactions that makes this feel like it could have been set in the English countryside rather than New England. The way characters are just so polite to each other reminds me of one of Hitchcock's last British picture, Young and Innocent.

While I can understand why many modern audiences wouldn't share my enthusiasm for The Trouble with Harry considering its slow pace and gentle sense of humor, I find the combination rather infectious. It's a delightful movie that straddles a combination of tones rather deftly. The Trouble with Harry has gotten a re-evaluation over the years, and I think it's richly deserved.

Who couldn't dig this Hitchcock mystery comedy?

[SimonJack · 8/10 · 1 February 2017]

This film was Alfred Hitchcock's foray into comedy. "The Trouble with Harry" is that he's a corpse. And, the film develops into a complex whodunit after the first assumed culprit. It's a dark comedy with mystery and wonderful humor that keeps it light throughout. The musical score is superb in helping to convey the not-too-serious tone of the film.

Hitchcock went to the stage to get his leading actors. John Forsythe had been performing in "Teahouse of the August Moon," and Shirley MacLaine was caught perchance on a night when she was the under-study and substituted for the main actress. It turned out to be her big break, and this was her debut on the silver screen. Forsythe plays Sam Marlowe and MacLaine plays Jennifer Rogers. But, the lead character is Capt. Albert Wiles, played by Edmund Gwenn. A fourth leading role is that of Miss Ivy Gravely, played by Mildred Natwick.

The film has a small cast, and all are superb in their roles. Each of the main characters is something of an eccentric in the hamlet of Highwater, Vermont. Sam is a painter who hasn't yet sold any of his paintings from Mrs. Wiggs' cider stand outside her general store. Albert is a retired sea captain of some sort who goes rabbit hunting with a 22 caliber or slightly larger rifle. (The bullet holes in the sign and beer can are just that – holes made by small caliber rifle bullets – not shotgun blasts.) Jennifer is a young woman who moved to the small Vermont hamlet in the past year with her small son, Arnie, to get away from somebody. Ivy is a native of the area who has never married. Mrs. Wiggs (Mildred Dunnock) runs the general store and fruit stand outside. Her son (Royal Dano) is Deputy Sheriff Calvin Wiggs, who keeps an antique car running as his hobby.

In watching this film, one realizes that if they keep digging long enough, they'll get to the bottom of the mystery. It's a mostly visual film that includes some spectacular scenic shots of the Vermont countryside in the fall. It does have some funny dialog in places. Here are some sample lines.

Arnie, "Say, how do rabbits get to be born?" Sam, "Same way elephants do." Arnie, "Oh, sure"

Arnie, "How come you never came over to visit me before?" Sam, "I didn't know you had such a pretty mother, Arnie." Arnie, "You think she's pretty, you should see my slingshot."

Sam, "Perhaps I'll come back tomorrow." Arnie, "When's that?" Sam, "The day after today." Arnie, "That's yesterday. Today's tomorrow." Sam, "It was." Arnie, "When was tomorrow yesterday, Mr. Marlowe?" Sam, "Today." Arnie, "Oh, sure. Yesterday."

Jennifer, "I've never been to a homemade funeral before." Albert, "Huh, I have. This is my third. All in one day."

Sam, "All right. If I had my choice, I'd rather be thought a murderer than proved one."

Jennifer, "It's too late to say prayers. Besides, wherever he's going, he's there now. Bye, Harry. I forgive you."

Blueberry Velvet

[tieman64 · 10 January 2012]

"Everything's perverted in a different way, isn't it?" - Alfred Hitchcock

Alfred Hitchcock's "The Trouble With Harry" was completed in 1955 but only given a nationwide release 2 years later in 1957, reportedly because studious had trouble promoting and marketing the film. The film remained critically overlooked for a number of years, until Hitchcock bought back all its rights and it was given a VHS release in the mid 1980s.

One of Hitchcock's few outright comedies, "The Trouble With Harry" sees a group of bumbling small-towners struggling to deal with a body which has turned up dead in a nearby field. A local artist named Sam Marlowe (conjuring up the great fictional detectives Sam Spade and Philip Marlowe) serves as our guide. He investigates the various persons who've come into contact with the corpse - later identified as a man once known as Harry Worp - and attempts to get to the bottom of its demise.

Interestingly, "Harry" isn't a who-dun-it, or detective tale, but rather a kind of farcical what-shall-we-do-with-it-now, all of Hitch's characters, who turn out to be entirely innocent of Harry's death, casually wrestling with what to do with the corpse in order to preserve their own innocence. Much of the film's humour is then derived from the corpse's constant burial and exhumation, and the casual, dead-pan way in which the townsfolk treat the death. And as with most of Hitchcock's films, the humour is macabre, jet-black and mischievous, and the film is packed with kinky sex-jokes, shameless flirting, talk of nudity, preserving/taking virginity, double entendres and sexual innuendos. Like several of Hitchcock's other films, "Harry" then ends with an implied sex gag.

Whilst "Harry" is dated in some minor respects (some obvious sets, a bit dull when an old sea-captain is on screen), it's also a farce which should still play well with modern audiences raised on postmodern irony and Coen Bros flicks. The contrast between the film's homey, rural, 1950s "conservatism", and Hitchcok's gleeful deviance also remains unique. People forget how artfully perverted The Master was.

Aesthetically, the film is sub-par for Hitchcock, filmed simply and without fuss. Still, several funny compositions pepper the film (the corpses giant feet, a kid running about with toy guns etc), the score has a certain ironic humour (this was Bernard Herrmann's first score for Hitch) and the residents' sleepy Vermont town is bathed in a pleasantly perpetual autumnal glow. The film's autumn setting is itself significant: a time of death and replacement, the transition from summer to winter, all of which encapsulate the sense of mortality which suffuses the film, subtly with falling leaves, overtly with shots of local churches and of course the constantly reappearing corpse; humanity just can't look the other way when it comes to death. In a similar fashion, the film is packed with talk of the passage of time, dialogue which Hitch mirrors to the shenanigans of a five year old kid, who not only can't recognise that the corpse belongs to his uncle and stepfather, but has absolutely no grasp of time, todays, tomorrows and yesterday. The kid spends the film marching about the countryside, trapped in a perpetual "now", toy guns strapped to his waist, dead rabbits clasped in his hands.

Aside from the local artist – a comical take on the private detective – the film's characters aren't particularly interesting, though they are all very clearly drawn. Take the way Hitchcock parallels a young budding romance to that of an older couple, both companionships forged to assuage mortal fear. Death brings all these people together, even a travelling millionaire, who whimsically buys Sam's paintings, one of which, we're told, is of nothing less than the flaming birth of the universe.

Some view "The Trouble With Harry" as being Hitchcock's only comedy. But that's not quite true. Most of his films are actually fairly wicked comedies. His thrillers, for example, function a lot like screwballs, and even a "horror movie" like "The Birds", with its avian apocalypse raining down upon its petty cast of silly humans, is quite funny.

Bizarrely for Hitchcock, "The Trouble With Harry" features not a cast of classy, suave schemers, but fairly ordinary schmucks. Beyond this, the film works fairly well as a parody of the "murder mystery" genre and many quite serious papers (and books) have been written postulating that "the trouble with Harry" is not only that he is dead, but that he was homosexual whilst alive. Such "the sinister underbelly of small town America" movies were common during the 1950s ("Larger Than Life" etc), and would go on to inspire modern fare like "Blue Velvet" and "American Beauty".

8/10 - Worth one viewing.

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.

Still a crashing bore after all these years

[bob_meg · 4/10 · 25 November 2008]

I have to chuckle when I read some of the over-the-top raves this film has gotten from supposedly American viewers.

The Trouble With Harry will only work for you if you're a fan of:

A) British drawing room humor B) French slapstick/farce C) Hitchcock's --- and a rabid one --- who vehemently believes he never failed at anything

This is one of the rare instances when the studio idiots were actually right when they told Hitchcock not to embark on this project. It's a British movie made from a British novel with a distinctly European sensibility that posits that the back and forth burying and unearthing of a corpse for nearly 100 minutes is just the most hilarious thing ever. Because he's dead, you know? And since death is such a grim concept that everyone --- everyone, right? --- feels uncomfortable with, you just *HAVE* to laugh at it --- cause it's so freaking hysterical. Did you get that? Did you?

OK, I know I'm being obnoxious here, but that's about how subtle this film is, and unfortunately unless you have the sensibilities described above (most of which I believe are akin to coming from a specific geographical area), you're in for a very tedious viewing session.

I could say the same thing about Richard Linklater's "Slacker," which is one of my favorite films of all time, and which I consider to be quite brilliant. Notice that both films have virtually no plot and rely on very specific culturally-inundated humor --- but Linklater's humor is self-referential and Hitchcock's is not.

And that --- I think --- is why most people don't get Harry. To most Americans who equate humor with Woody Allen and Seinfeld (not Jerry Lewis and Benny Hill), the Trouble With Harry is he's...boring.