Nunca Beijes um Estranho

Overbaked nonsense from Warner Bros. is one steaming pile of clichés. Pro-golfer Paul Burke, separated from his wife and troubled by his perennial second-place status on the golf course, meets up with seductive woman-child Carol Lynley; she murders his main opponent and then blackmails Burke with the proviso he kill her psychiatrist in return (seems Carol has just been released from a mental institution and is due back for another stay at any moment). The tacky screenplay was "suggested by" Patricia Highsmith's book "Strangers on a Train", first filmed by Warners in 1951. This quasi-remake actually has an interesting set-up, but Burke looks dumbfounded throughout and overripe vixen Lynley is just ludicrous (the actress probably thought this kitten-with-claws number would showcase her haughty appeal, but instead she's cruelly exposed and completely without substance). This has to be one of the worst-edited films from a major studio I have ever seen, with redundant, laughable shots of streetlights changing and Carol Lynley going crazy with a reel-to-reel machine. The filmmakers know nothing about the world of pro-tournament golf, and even less about murder investigations and police business, giving this dunderhead opus a campy undermining which may play with fans of second-string cinema. *1/2 from ****

A pointless ,useless "remake":although he modified Highsmith's novel,-he told it so in the foreword he wrote for the novel-Hitchcock kept the essential and produced a classic thriller you can watch again and again,with lots of memorable scenes (the murder seen on the glasses,the keys,the merry-go-round which goes crazy,and more).Plus a first-class performance by Robert Walker.

"Once you kiss a stranger" keeps the last word,but there's no more train ,the action takes place in the world of golf;why not after all? But by doing so ,without any suspense ,with a dreadful cast (Carol Lynley as a woman-child is so weird we do not know if she seriously plays or she's having fun with a stupid part of a girl who wants to get rid of her shrink -if you kill my shrink,I will do away with the top golf champion,and you will be number one!-,the director produced one of the worst thrillers of all time.

It's to state the obvious to write that you'd better choose "strangers on the train" (1951).As for Lynley ,take "Bunny Lake is missing" instead.

Bikini beauty Diana is all about the murdering and the gallows humor. Her psychiatrist Dr. Haggis thinks that she's turning into a psychopath. She overhears him planning to lock her up in an institution and wants him dead. She decides to recruit professional golf player Jerry Marshall. She knows that he hates his superior rival Mike Wilson and tells him to kill each other's target. He doesn't take her seriously until she kills Wilson with Jerry's golf club. Now, she expects him to kill her doctor.

The plot is essentially Strangers on a Train. It starts off well enough with crazy Diana. I like that she's a hot and crazy chick. The beach is a perfect place to start the movie. It all goes really well until she gets her kill and the movie passes to Jerry. I don't know anything about Paul Burke. He seems to be a solid veteran character actor who lasted 40 years in Hollywood. He's no pushover but he's not a great leading man either. He needs to be the equal to Carol Lynley. She is so beautiful and has such a crazy role that he can't match her. Every crazy thing she does only serves to separate from him. The movie basically stalls as Diana passes the baton to Jerry. He is not compelling enough to keep the narrative drive.

This uneven variation on Alfred Hithcock's "Strangers On A Train" stays on the right track when its focus is on Carol Lynley: right from her striking Ursula Andress-like entrance from the sea in a tiny bikini, shooting a speargun at a little girl's beach ball (!), she creates a fantastic, psychotic character who taps into the secret male fantasy of being killed by a sexy, strong and crazy woman: it's probably a career-high role for her. Unfortunately, the film gets derailed by much less exciting scenes featuring the other characters, who are bland, as well as a tad too much golf. **1/2 out of 4.

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.