Watch Gaslight For Free

Crappy film

it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

I did see the MGM remake years ago, but so much time has passed since I saw it that I have forgotten what it was like. I suspect that this original version is a lot better. For one thing, it runs at a lean 84 minutes while the MGM remake runs about a half hour longer. There is no padding - every scene serves a purpose. The story telling here keeps you interested even though viewers who have not heard what the movie is about before sitting down to watch it may be a bit confused at first as to just what is going on. (To those viewers, don't worry - everything becomes clear eventually.) The movie is well directed, with production values that stand up to major Hollywood studio movies of the time, and with a great deal of tension throughout. A lot of this tension has to be credited to actor Anton Walbrook - he is incredibly cold and heartless as the lead, and you'll find him simultaneously creepy and hateful... and hope he'll get what's coming to him. By the way, though the movie contains some themes mature for the time, by today's standards it's quite safe for kids, so it may be a good choice if you want to introduce classic cinema to your children - they won't be bored.

This is the original movie of this name. Most people are familiar with the 1944 American Version starring Ingrid Bergman, Charles Boyer & the screen debut of Angela Lansbury.Released in 1940 starring Anton Walbrook & Diane Wynyard this was as classic a tale then as it is now. I prefer it slightly over the American version as the storyline is a darker more abusive affair than America's. By the way Walbrook & Wynyard were big stars then & the acting is best in the British version.The story begins with a cruel & foul murder of an old woman knitting in her home. Young love causes a new bride to bring the husband she loves so dearly back to the house her murdered aunt had left to her years ago. No one had been willing to rent the place because of the evil crime. It stood empty & decaying for years despite it's location in Covent Gardens a very desirable location in London. The police had always been suspicious of the extensive damage done to the house & furnishings during the night of the murder & thought the old ladies rubies had disappeared with the killer.In this show it's all about the relationship of wife, husband, maid & the gems. Not to mention the old retired detective who remembered the case from back when & thought he recognized the wife's husband. A 5 star tale & well worth buying if you like your characters dark in a murder story. The disc I got had this 1940 version on 1 side & the 1944 American version on the other. Two worlds- One price. Enjoy!

This really isn't a bad movie, it's just that the remake improves on it in almost every way. A full half hour shorter, it begs the question: is it better to slowly build tension, or cut to the chase? While I didn't particularly mind that the entire courtship between the husband and wife was missing (i.e., most of the first act) I did feel like this was a little too rushed, getting straight to the beats of the plot without building that sense of dread and helplessness. Another thing the remake does (and I have no idea what the original text is like) is give the husband much better motivation to marry the woman in the first place. As for the casting, between Charles Boyer and Anton Walbrook, I'll call it a draw. Maybe even a slight edge to Walbrook, who seems a little bit nastier. Diana Wynyard is okay, but no match at all for Ingrid Bergman. Bergman just has a far more compelling screen presence, especially in the finale. Frank Pettingell vs. Joseph Cotten is a trickier comparison, because the characters are completely different. I think I like the character more in the original, but the performance more in the remake. Is it unfair to make these comparisons, particularly since this one came first? Yes, but I can't help it. One version is far more well-known and well-regarded, and for good reason. Again, not a bad movie, but the 1944 version does it so much better, and leaves little reason to watch this one.

There were plenty of clever films made in the thirties and forties.This is not one of them.It begins with the murder of an elderly lady, followed by the ram-sacking of her home.It fast forwards to many years later, with a very dull couple. The husband is played by Anton Walbrook, who is best known for his great role as the wise religious community leader in THE 49TH Parallel. Here, he is a dull, vicious clod, bullying his wife. It is a thankless role, and Anton does little with it.This is a snail's pace movie. Personally, I think the modern "arcade game look" is the worst possible cinema. But this slow pace comes in second. It will be tough for you not to fast forward. Only the most sedated people will be able to sit through it without trips to the kitchen. It is dull and plodding.The payoff is okay, for those who stick to the end. The minor characters help it out a bit. Still, watching this movie is an ordeal.