dfwesley LIFEBOAT impressed me so much more the second time around, considering I was a kid the first time. Back then I thought Bankhead's kiss of Hodiak was the sexist thing I ever saw on screen.All the performers were superb. Character development couldn't have been better in every case. Much has been said about everyone except maybe Henry Hull. Here was a "bend over backwards to be fair", millionaire industrialist in a splendid performance, who changes his tune at the end.Oh, I wondered why Tallulah was immaculately alone in the boat, and how they miraculously avoided the shelling and collision, and how Nazi captain Walter Slezak was so deft removing a limb as a non-surgeon using merely a pocket knife, and other trifling incidents, but it didn't change my opinion one iota of this terrific film. For Hitchcock's extraordinary direction, splendid close up photography, and great story telling, it is hard to beat LIFEBOAT.

Dan1863Sickles Everyone remembers this as a Hitchcock film, and all of the reviews focus on how the great director shaped the material and gave every scene and frame his distinctive style. I saw this movie at the age of 12 and I loved it, but more than forty years later I'm really struck by the literary themes and the presence of great novelist John Steinbeck.There's a reason why they call this "John Steinbeck's Lifeboat."First I want to point out that this is a study of a group. Just the way THE GRAPES OF WRATH is about the Joads, and the Okies in flight, much more than about individuals like Tom or Casy, so in this story the lifeboat survivors are only meant to matter to the extent that they work together for common goals and uphold common values. In fact the one way the villain sticks out is that he's self- sufficient, able to keep his own counsel and do everything on his own. Steinbeck is always suspicious of individualism and even of individual strengths. The collective is everything to him, the survival of the group and not the triumph of the individual. At the same time, when you look at the terrible murder in the middle of the movie, it bears an uncanny resemblance to the end of OF MICE AND MEN. Willi the U-Boat Captain and Gus the doomed cripple have a very personal scene in which they sound a lot like George and Lennie! Of course the viewer can decide if Willi really felt any compassion at all for Lennie or if he's an evil Nazi through and through. But the arguments he makes for getting rid of Gus are those George makes about Lennie in similar circumstances. This movie reflects the great strengths of John Steinbeck's humanity and concern for the survival of the human community. It also reflects some of his weaknesses, particularly where the female characters are concerned. Tallulah Bankhead does wonders as Connie, the tough, hard-edged journalist, but it's fair to say that Steinbeck had a tendency to see women as either hard, vicious, and predatory, or weak, soft, and helpless. The young mother with the dead baby is presented as a pitiable victim but at the same time there's a sense of Steinbeck's vague distaste for the maternal instinct, since it reduces women to an animal-like state or to a state of total hysteria. It's no accident that the mother gets killed off early and that the hard, aggressive woman is not allowed much in the way of affection or friendship. Of course there is a romance between the British sailor and the nurse, but they are probably more Hitchcock's invention than Steinbeck's. Both are good comrades who keep a stiff upper lip, more English than American. To sum up, this movie is a Hitchcock classic, but it's also a fascinating look at the world view of a Nobel prize winning author who was then at the height of his powers.

alexanderdavies-99382 "Lifeboat" is quite a different film from Alfred Hitchcock. From a technical standpoint, it is more experimental and a lot of it works well. During the Second World War, a group of survivors from a shipwreck board a lifeboat and endure all kinds of hardship on the open seas. This includes some inclement weather and a German sailor who is picked up by the survivors. There is only one real star in this film, Tallulah Bankhead. She is amongst only a limited number of people in "Lifeboat." Henry Hull, Hume Cronyn, William Bendix are included. There are no extras and Hitchcock's customary appearance is restricted to an illustration in a magazine at the beginning of the film. Hitchcock is sharing the plight of the cast with the viewers by confining the film to a single set - that being of the boat. You sense the incredible difficulty and challenge of the characters as they try to maintain hope that they might be saved. There are no scenes which take place elsewhere. It was a risk as the pressure was on the director to sustain the public's interest. I believe he achieves this. The acting, direction and writing make you forget that the whole film was made on a soundstage. Your imagination does the rest. There are scenes of shock and some suspense once the German character joins the story. The ending is what I was expecting and I think it fits in with the tone of the film.

sharky_55 Alfred Hitchock's Lifeboat will almost immediately draw comparisons with Sidney Lumet's 12 Angry Men. Both almost exclusively take place in a singular location. Both focus on a group of characters confronted with moral dilemma and how their biases, experiences and emotions bubble under and take control of them. It is unusual then, for Hitchock's film to be the lesser one in the art of suspense. 12 Angry Men had a remarkable ability of building up tension within the space and through Lumet's manipulation of focal length, and then finally washing away the heat and stress with rain. Lifeboat floats more breezily along, because inherently there are large gaps that the plot demands to have, being lost at sea. The setting holds it back; it is not nearly an incisive a demonstration of space and composition as something like Rear Window, and because filming at sea was not viable, the characters seem to be half-removed from the background of the endless oceans. Sure, the frame and the boat is continually rocking, and they are pelted with water and wind during the storms, but because Hitchock lacks the ability to pull out (or even swivel around), the master shot is always locked in, and the boat seems to be rooted to the small spot of water, hardly moving at all.Still, the absence of the traditional score is a nice touch, in that the characters are left with only the soft, incessant lapping of the waves throughout to haunt them. So they can see as far as the eye can see, but it is only water, water and more water, so like the juror's room, the setting closes in claustrophobically, and gives rise to all sorts of conflict. The problem is simple: the American and British are asked to share a lifeboat with a German sailor, only moments are both vessels have been sunk. Opinions immediately start flying about; once a German always a German, the Nuremberg defense, the American vs the Christian way of thinking. Radioman Sparks thinks he should be subject to the proper authoritative procedures, whereas the Army nurse Alice can't understand why there must be so much killing in the world (baffling then, to end up in this line of work). The older, venerable characters are set up as the moral compasses; the good Christian Rittenhouse, and the worldly columnist Connie Porter. And so Hitchcock must inevitably engineer the downfall of their grace and goodwill.The characterisations are muddled because apart from the clear path set for these two, the other inhabitants of the boat mill about in the background and don't change much (including the literal milling about of the steward Joe, pushed to the metaphorical back of the boat and only called upon to utilise his 'natural' light fingers). The crewman Kovac is initially the most volatile of them all, even more villainous than the Nazi they have just pulled aboard, and takes charge of the boat's direction only because of his own ignorance and spite (even if he is right). Later, out of his compassion for his friend, he finally relents, but after that is content to simply sit back and watch the proceedings play out. There are little bursts of littler consequences; the anger of card cheating fizzles out almost immediately, and Connie loses her mind for a split second...only to be lying in the lap of Kovac the next. There is some drunken attempt at philosophising from Gus, but the most intriguing character must be the German, Willi. Walter Slezak has the sort of face you might trust, if it were not for the circumstances, and his jovial, ever-smiling outlook while rowing against the current almost allows the others to let their guard down. Willi has mastered the knack for pretending he isn't listening in on the English quarrels, so as Hitchock layers the profiles of his cast so that they are all facing the camera, there he is in the background, with a determined absent-mindedness about his expression, constantly swiveling and marvelling at the empty sky. It is a triumph in blocking for such a limited space, and Slezak dominates it. He sings merrily all day, not even a slight sign of tiring, and in the night cruelly goads a man to seek the depths of the ocean for relief ("Remember your name is Schidmt"). Critics were not happy about this, especially in the midst of the war. How could a Nazi be so resourceful, so sneaky, so clever? But Hitchock respects his villain, building him up as someone who could be an ally in a desperate time, and also making him despicable enough to warrant the fury that sends him overboard with a few solid whacks of the boot from the gentle industrialist Ritt. An inhuman act surely, but is it justified? Very tricky indeed. One last question: does the directorial tag of Hitchock ultimately hurt or better it?