Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

2.5/4This is one of Hitchcock's earliest works and his first notable "talkie", but as a story, there is a lot lacking. The performance delivered by Ondra was impressive, and definitely the best on the set, as her hallucinations and trauma seemed very convincing. The fate of the story really rests on the lead's shoulders, and in Blackmail, it was a particularly heavy burden.The first 5 or so minutes is silent. You can see people talking, but no sound, only a score. Then, all of a sudden, our female lead steps in and the voices kick in. Her boyfriend is a cop, but she has dinner arrangements with an aspiring artist. When she goes home with him, he tries to rape her and as he does, she fatally stabs him. She quickly covers up any evidence that she was there, and makes an escape. Her boyfriend finds out and tries to cover it up for her so she won't get arrested, but an unlikely witness blackmails her.Interestingly enough, the plot never truly felt wrapped up. To my surprise, they didn't reconcile and establish the outcome of the case, and instead left it to the interpreter. It definitely isn't Hitch's best, even for the late 20's and early 30's, but it's definetely good in both the objective and subjective sense.

Hitchcock began filming the movie of "Blackmail" as another silent one. However, halfway through filming, he changed his mind and began from square one in making his talkie film debut. Many of the hallmarks of Hitchcock's best work are in evidence here. The camera work that illustrates the setting of each scene by being as descriptive as possible. A murder scene which is partly fuelled by or related to some kind of sexual interaction. An innocent character who has to clear his/her name after being wrongfully accused of a crime. In London, the girlfriend of a police officer is accosted by a man who invites her back to his flat on the grounds of wanting to paint her portrait. After rejecting his advances, the man attacks the woman. To defend herself, she stabs him to death. The way Hitchcock shot this moment, was to make it suggestive. We the viewers don't actually see the weapon used. All we see is one of the woman's arms reach from behind a curtain for any means to protect herself. Thus, we are left to our imagination as to whereabouts the knife is placed and the look of agonising pain on the man's face as he dies. The woman walks the streets of the city in something of a stupor after the traumatic events. What the lady doesn't realise, is that she was seen leaving the building by a man watching her. He is the one who discovers the body and attempts to blackmail the woman. There is quite a sinister scene at the home of the woman's parents. It is breakfast time, the lady has just returned and sits down with her family. She gazes into the distance as her mum keeps repeating the word "knife" during this scene. Hitchcock emphasises the character's trauma and distress as she is being constantly reminded of what she has done. No doubt it was her conscience speaking for her but the tension in that scene is all too clear. There is some marvellous photography as the police give chase at the end. Alfred Hitchcock had successfully met the challenge of making talkie films, although the man himself often stated that he preferred silent cinema as it was more pure.

Alfred Hitchcock's first talkie is an intriguing film, not entirely successful but still more enjoyable than some of the other films Hitch made around this time. The story starts with a woman cheating on her boyfriend, a Scotland Yard detective. When the man she's with tries to rape her, she kills him in self-defense. Afterwards a criminal who pieces it together blackmails her and her detective boyfriend.A little creaky but that's to be expected under the circumstances. The film started out being made as a silent before it was decided to turn it into a sound picture. In spots it reverts back to a silent (without intertitles). This actually works in the film's favor. There are some really nicely done lengthy sequences with no dialogue, such as her walk home after she's killed the guy, punctuated by a scream. Good acting all around. Nice direction from Hitch. The museum climax is excellent; an early example of the defining set pieces that would become a Hitchcock trademark. Definitely worth a look if you're a fan. Or even if you're not, provided you enjoy pictures from this period. Not everyone does, unfortunately.

Dating myself here. "His Master's Voice" was on the labels of RCA Victor records 80 years ago and even longer than that. My summary is woven from that slender thread - The heroine (Anny Ondra) had a pronounced accent and was dubbed. But even a dubbed-in voice didn't prevent her from nearly sinking the picture, as once again Ms. Ondra comes up short in the acting department. Recall, she was in "The Manxman" (1928) and displayed the same lack of acting skill.In "Blackmail", she is passable until the rape scene. Thereafter, she becomes catatonic and wanders in a daze for the rest of the picture. It was very unconvincing - how could Hitchcock put up with such an inept acting turn? The savior of the film is Donald Calthrop, the blackmailer in question, with a performance that turns an exercise in the ordinary acting-wise into something special.Oh yes, the story. This was a first-rate movie in all respects. It was taut and with very little down time, thanks to Hitchcock. It moves along quickly and is absorbing despite divulging the contents in the first half hour. Back to the acting - since this was the dawn of the talking era, it was overacted except for Calthrop, who struck the right chord and was convincing as well as loathsome. Anyone remember Cyril Ritchard? he was the murder victim, and a veteran of the stage and not often seen on the screen.May I offer an opinion? From a brutally realistic standpoint, why should the actions of a victim of a rape attempt be considered criminal, and didn't she do what she had to do to fend off her attacker? Sometimes in this world one has to do what one must, in order to survive - even if it is at great variance with society's, as well as one's own, code of ethics. Tough luck for the would-be rapist - justifiable homicide would be my verdict. Just my own thought. Most of the time my own thoughts wouldn't hold up in a court of law.