While I think that Alfred Hitchcock's reputation is a bit bigger than life, he really did make some terrific films. One of his better ones was "Strangers on a Train"...a classic is every way. So, in light of his reptuation, the ubiquity of this movie on TV, and how famous this movie is, you wonder WHO thought it was a good idea to remake the film! Yes, some lunkhead decided it was a good idea to remake such a famous film...and the results, predictably, are inferior in almost every way.
When the movie begins, it's obvious that the movie is going to be anything but subtle or clever. The script and director establish VERY early on that Diana (Carol Lynley) is a sadistic nut! I am almost surprised they didn't just have her act just like Cruella De Ville...it was THAT unsubtle and silly. And, more importantly, this isn't handled with the deftness Hitchcock used in his version. Yes, Diana is vicious and evil....and about as obvious to everyone as can be. In contrast, Robert Walker in "Strangers on a Train" SLOWLY was revealed to be disturbed...and it's one of his best acting roles. As for Lynley....well, she's pretty.
If you care, and I certainly didn't, the film is mostly the same story but with a HUGE twist...the innocent man is a pro golfer instead of a pro tennis player....what a HUGE change! Well, I hope you're picking up on my sarcasm here!!!
Overall, a terrible film when you can't help but see how inferior it is in every way to the source material. I cannot think of a good reason to watch it other than to admire Ms. Lynley in a bikini (she looked far nicer than Walker would have in a bikini) or if you want to see a ham-fisted version of an excellent original.
