mmallon4 The Prize is my second favourite Hitchcock film he didn't direct (my favourite being 1941's All Through the Night). It's not instantly engaging from the start as there is a lot of setting up to do but becomes more and more tense as the film progresses. In classic Hitchcock fashion, once the mystery kicks in your left scratching your head wondering is the protagonist just paranoid or is something fishy really going on.I consider The Prize one of Paul Newman's best films, giving him the opportunity to show off his not often exposed comedic chops. Newman is one of few select actors in which I can ask the question, "honestly, who doesn't like Paul Newman?"; does there exist a more likable screen presence? Likewise Edward G. Robinson's role is reminiscent of his part in The Whole Town's Talking, playing a duel role of characters identical in appearance but with polar opposite personalities; while the hotel setting rings a bell of MGM's own Grand Hotel some 31 years prior. plus when you set your movie in Sweden it seems inevitable that someone will mention Greta Garbo along the way. Hitchcock himself also never fully took advantage of the cold war. Torn Curtain, although I do think is underrated, is imperfect while Topaz is one of his dullest outings. It's satisfying to see a superb Hitchcockian thriller with a plot about West vs. East. North By Northwest has the auction scene in which Cary Grant makes a fool of himself to get caught by the police in order to get away from the bad guys; The Prize has the same scene but ups the ante with having it taking place during a nudist meeting and of course naturally of all the countries in the world to a nudist meeting, where else but Sweden. The Prize is not quite Hitchcock's greatest hits but it's the closet a film comes to being so. There are other allusions to other Hitchcock films including The Lady Vanishes, Foreign Correspondent, Saboteur and Torn Curtain. Hang on, that one didn't come until three years after this movie. Huh, was Hitchcock inspired by this Hitchcock clone/rip-off/ homage/whatever you want to call it. As far as imitations of someone else's work goes it doesn't get pulled of any better than this.

macpet49-1 It's a shame Paul Newman got this role. By this time, what talent he had as the next Brando was ruined by fame. He played himself largely, egocentric, bored, half drunk. This was who he was in real life by then. It is also why he needed the thrill driving he was doing so avidly. He had hit the top and it wasn't enough.The script was fine, the supporting cast was fine and it could've been a very good film for its time. Done in a Hitchcockian manner, the mystery takes you along in spite of the main star's glib portrayal of a washed up author who gets the Nobel prize whether he wants it or not. Newman acts like he's poking fun at the other actors working hard to keep the film afloat. Another example of too much too soon. These type of decisions (putting big stars in films to get rewards at the bank) would be the reasons the old Hollywood died, however, the new Hollywood which is run by bankers does the same thing yet. Largely, they take for granted the stupidity of the average film goer and they are correct. People go to the movies and see awful films as well because like Newman, they are bored.

David I absolutely enjoyed this 2+ hour-long movie, and the fact that, as others have mentioned, it's inspired by Hitchcock doesn't change anything.I liked Newman's character. A man who is more interested in women and drink rather than the Nobel Prize, who has a devil-may-care attitude towards everything, decides to endanger his own life when he realizes his colleague is in trouble. Maybe he does it partially because he is bored and partially because he has been writing detective stories for the past few years, but it is interesting to watch his behavior anyway.Although the plot is pretty simple, there is something that gets you hooked from the very beginning and doesn't let you go until the very last phrase. The film is very interesting, and the supporting characters play a significant role here.

Terrell-4 For a Hitchcock knock-off, The Prize is not bad at all. There's an amusing situation (not Lincoln's nostril but the Nobel Prize ceremonies), scenic tours (not of the Riviera but of Stockholm), a gaunt killer (not an imported assassin who knows music but a waiter), a long, terrifying fall (not Madeleine Elster but Paul Newman) a supple blond ice queen (not Grace Kelly or Eva Marie Saint but Elke Sommer) and a dashing hero (not Cary Grant but Newman). And in an odd sort of way, it's Paul Newman who is as much a drawback to the movie as a plus. Newman plays Andrew Craig, an American author who has run out of steam after two great books. He's been awarded the Nobel Prize for literature and has arrived in Stockholm, full of martinis and self-loathing, for the award ceremonies. Craig is on his way to becoming a lush. The Nobel committee has assigned him a keeper, Inger Anderson (Elke Sommer), to keep him out of trouble, away from the booze and to see that he minds his manners. She's not altogether successful. At the hotel, Craig meets Dr. Max Stratman (Edward G. Robinson), an émigré after WWII from Germany who is now an American citizen. Stratman is receiving the Nobel for physics. They chat and agree to meet for further discussion the next day. Craig also meets Stratman's niece, Emily Stratman (Diane Baker). Yet at the next morning's press briefing, where all the Nobel winners have gathered to meet reporters, Stratman acts as if he's never met Craig before. Only we know why; Max Stratman has been propositioned to defect to East Germany...and when he refused, he was abducted and replaced by his twin brother, Walter Stratman, from behind the Iron Curtain. It's not long before Craig catches on that something nasty is happening. Partly out of concern for Max Stratman, partly out of boredom, he sets out to answer the questions that keep popping up in his head. Along the way he finds a body, is pushed off a tall building into an ocean channel and nearly killed by a tugboat, is threatened and then almost run over by a car, finds himself in an eery psychiatric hospital and then, pursued by two killers, in a meeting hall filled with nudists. What can he do but take off his clothes to blend in? At the climax, he finds himself clamoring around the cargo holds of an East German freighter where only he seems to believe the villains have hidden Stratman. And all along he is either helped or hindered, take your pick, by Inger Anderson and Emily Stratman. It's easy to tell who the bad guys are, but not so easy to figure out which of the two women is playing a double game. While all this is going on, preparation for the Nobel ceremonies is taking place...the receptions, the rehearsals, the getting-to-know the other winners, some of whom turn out to play key roles, especially the two who have won the Nobel for medicine. They dislike each other intensely yet find a grudging friendship when they must work together to save a key character. Best of all is Leo G. Carroll as Count Bertil Jacobson, charged with making sure everything at the ceremony moves smoothly. Carroll, a veteran of Hitchcock films, is droll and understated. Why is Newman essential to the movie? Because he has star power, and we recognize it as soon as he appears on the screen. Hitchcock was at his best with strong, charismatic actors. Newman provides the same strength here. Why is he also a weakness? Because he's no Cary Grant. The Prize is the same kind of international adventure, romantic and stylish, as are To Catch a Thief and North by Northwest. Where Grant could effortlessly turn irony into amused charm, however, Newman turns irony more often into a kind of petulant sarcasm, especially when he's acting half in the bag. And where Grant and Kelly melted the celluloid, Newman and Sommer don't make many sparks. They're playful, find themselves in compromising positions, smile out a few hopeful double entendres, but it's all just pleasant acting. On the other hand, Edward G. Robinson brings a great deal of authority to his role. There's not much of him in the second half of the movie. In the first half, however, we get to see him as an avuncular, kindly and smart old man, someone we can believe would make a man like Craig become concerned about, and then as a cold-eyed, deliberate and not-so-kind character. All-in-all, The Prize is a snappy, reasonably fast-paced cold-war adventure, a lot of fun to watch. I enjoy it whenever I see it. I just wish Hitchcock and Grant had made it.