christopher-underwood I've always liked this film and I remember sticking up for it back in the day when many people were very sniffy about it. Having said that, looking at it after a gap of many years, I have to say it is very odd. Anthony Shaffer is the screenwriter and it has to be down to him that all the cast seem to behave in such a wooden way. Such is the caliber of personnel, that it should only be Jon Finch who gives a decent performance, raises a question. Shaffer also wrote Wicker Man and whilst I realise I risk being shot down in flames that is in many ways an odd film too. I've always thought that the seeming mismatch of dialogue and characters was the very thing that gave it that slightly unworldly feel. And I think its the same with Frenzy. The magnificent and colourful recreations of Covent Garden Market, as a fruit and veg market aside, there is an awkwardness, a coldness and detachment that has to be intentional because it makes it so unnerving to watch. The first killing is prolonged and ugly, preceded by a most difficult rape scene and although the second killing is fabulously understated, there is that near necrophiliac scene in the potato lorry. The film does not flow as magically as some of the earlier pictures but there are some majestic moments and although there is a little humour and almost giallo like moments, this is not really like any other Hitch films - or anybody else's.

Joropukki After seeing this impressive masterpiece for the third time I thought Sir Alfred Hitchcock's active career took place two or three decades too early with reference to his true nature. Here he was free from the constraints of U.S. puritanism of the Forties and Fifties. He was a modern here. He showed how to direct a shockingly macabre story with brilliant flair and impact, but also with a fine balance between slashing and insinuation. Frenzy was Ealing Studio stuff transported into future, as an emancipated variant of Baronets and Good Hearts – so British. Dear John (Carpenter), did you ever see this one? For some strange reason I kept on thinking of Freud all the while I was watching this. 8/10

Adam Peters (69%) One of Alfred the greats final films is a real sleazy treat for fans of his more exploitative side. Anyone wanting to know exactly why the likes of Dario Argento is often compared to old Hitch then this needs to be seen. What's best about this little gem is the fact that you can tell the old guy was having a bit of fun with it, he knows it isn't going to be his best or even close, so he fills this with nice touches of black humour, tonnes of bad language, and plenty of suspense. This is very much a middle of the pile addition, but the cast is good, it's very well structured, and it never allows itself to be taken seriously. Overall a good sit that is never boring to watch.

Hitchcoc I saw this the first time the year it was released. The friend I was with was not impressed. He kept saying that it was say over the top and contrived, that Hitchcock was throwing images at us as we writhed in our seats. Yes, he probably is the master at making us uncomfortable. He is expert at dramatic irony. He welcome his audience into his world. We know who the killer is but poor Jon Finch is hung out to dry just as Cary Grant and Robert Donat were. It's what he does. He doesn't just give us death; he shows the eyes of the murdered as the life goes out of them. He has us follow a poor young woman as she marches to her death, not knowing what is at the top of those stairs. He is also comedic, with the police detective suffering through his wife's awful experimental cooking. As codes changed, Hitchcock changed with them and was able to be much more graphic. This is not Hitch's last film, but, I believe, it is the last worth seeing. The conclusion is masterful and will have you gasping for breath.