Such a frustrating disappointment

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

'The Paradine Case' is lesser known and unpopular Hitchcock's film, and although it is better than one can assume based on reviews, but it definitely can't hold the candle compares with better movies from the 'Master of Suspense'. Alfred Hitchcock wrote the screenplay together with his wife Alma Reville before bringing playwright James Bridieto do polishing. Producer David O. Selznick wasn't satisfied and did lot of rewrites, usually rushing the new material on the set before shooting. That caused many clashes between Hitchcock and Selznick, and 'The Paradine Case' remained the last movie these two ever worked together. Hitchcock wasn't very passionate about the film anyway, so now we have this film that somehow is but it isn't. The skillful directing is there, but the story, although occasionally engaging, seems all over the place. Some scenes at the trial are outrageously ludicrous, like the breakdowns Louis Jourdan's and Gregory Peck's characters. Gregory Peck himself, who clearly tried his best, still felt out of place, and there was no real chemistry between him and Alida Valli to turn their relationship into fiery romance, but it was rather hissing balloon. Absolutely fantastic performances came from supporting cast, especially Charles Laughton, Ann Todd and Louis Jourdan to name a few.It is not bad movie, as the premise is interesting, the cast is great (although Gregory Peck and Alida Valli are clearly miscast, their performances alone aren't bad), the screenplay is too meandering, but besides those couple of really ridiculous moments it offers magnificent scenes (acting/writing/directing all perfect). 'The Paradine Case' is definitely worth to watch, even if it is one of the most 'hit and miss' movie of great Alfred Hitchcock.

I'm crazy about Alida Valli. I'd seen every film she's ever done except "The Paradine Case" until today that is. Today I met Mrs Paradine for the first time. Strangely enough it doesn't feel like Hitchcock it feels more like Carol Reed the director who gave her a major International hit with "The Third Man" a couple of years later. I fell in love with Alida Valli in the 1954 Luchino Visconti's tragic romantic epic "Senso". Now having seen "The Paradine Case" I see a glimpse of the woman in "Senso" where her actions, are also atrocious but govern by love. A love who will only lead to tragedy. Visconti showed us an Alida Valli that other than a great beauty was also a great actress. Hitchcock introduced her as VALLI in this film, a gimmick with very short legs. Here she plays the widow of a blind man that "allegedly" she killed. The casting of Gregory Peck is a major problem, maybe not for the box office in 1947, but it certainly detrimental to the suspension of disbelief, so needed in a thriller. Charles Laughton is superb in his few, short scenes. I wonder if Hitchcock himself was the inspiration for his role. A judge, a lascivious man with an roving eye for young pretty women. Ethel Barrymore plays his wife, to absolute perfection. Then, Louis Jourdan, beautiful of course, Charles Coburn, Ann Todd but, it is Alida Valli who gives this film that extra something. Considered a "minor" Hitchcock by most but not by me. 9/10

most of all, a very unnatural and again, very pretentious movie. the whole film just looked so badly scripted. watching it was like watching those characters on a staged theater. the poor dialog had forced every one in this film to act awkwardly and again, very pretentiously. peck's performance was one of the worst in his career. the young wife of the attorney already slept in a separate room. why all the couples in most of the films came out of that era were without any kids? why this specific director always wanted to show himself in all the films he directed as a passersby, a non-described person? and he walked out of the Cumberland train station this time. this film storyline was so flat and boring with a terrible scenario and plot, and the courtroom part was extremely boring too. there's nothing to be praised, no wonder it's been overlooked so far.

"The Paradine Case" is a dull, stiff melodrama by Alfred Hitchcock. Based on a novel by Robert Hichens, the film was produced by David O. Selznick, a man who delighted in churning out overproduced prestige pictures. Fresh off the failure of "Duel in the Sun", Selznick exerted an unusual amount of control on "The Paradine Case", his fingers strangling all life out of the picture. He even credited himself with writing the film's script. Hitchcock hated the film.Part murder mystery, part legal thriller, the film stars a wooden Gregory Pack as Anthony Keane, a defence attorney tasked with defending Anna Paradine, a woman accused of poisoning her blind husband. Hitchcock wanted Laurence Olivier for Peck's role, but Selznick disagreed. Selznick wanted Greta Garbo for Paradine's role – she was to come out of retirement – but those plans collapsed.The film's mostly a stagey melodrama, but several scenes allow Hitchcock to flex his muscles. A last act courtroom is imaginatively prowled by The Master's camera, and a sequence in a bedroom recalls Lila Crane's exploration of Norman Bates' bedroom in "Psycho". There are some loose connections to Hitch's other films – Peck's infatuated with and idealises women, as Hitchcock's male leads oft do, and a suicide is brushed aside like a certain Miss Lonelyheart in "Rear Window" – but this is otherwise a routine picture.Most of Hitchcock's films have weird, psycho-sexual stuff going on in between frames. Not so much "The Paradine Case", though it does have a defence attorney whose entire defence functions as a kind of projection of his own feelings toward his client. Peck essentially wills Anna into innocence in order to justify his own feelings toward her, jealously removes prospective lovers from her reach so that he may woo her himself. Even when Anna eventually admits to murder, we're never sure if she's telling the truth or is merely confessing so as to scar her attorney; we can't take her admission at face value. And like the characters in Hitchcock's "Notorious", selfish behaviour is constantly being rationalised as being selfless, characters helping others only in so far it benefits them, resulting in all kinds of weird power relationships.In typical Selznick fashion, the film looks garish, overly ornate and tackily expensive. This is a vulgar looking picture, in contrast to the sleek, pop-modernism/pop-Expressionism of Hitchcock's best films.6/10 - For Hitchcock completists only.