Alfred Hitchcock’s Strangers on a Train confronts the concept of morality through the use of two seemingly different characters, Bruno and Guy. In the beginning, Bruno and Guy appear to be simplistically presented as contrasting individuals. Bruno being an insane murderous maniac, and Guy representing justice, fairness and an overall character of virtue. During the scene in which Bruno reveals to Guy that he had murdered his wife, Guy’s character begins to unravel. Hitchcock utilizes the use of light, camera angles and shadows to distort and cast doubt on who represents evil, and who represents good instead of direct dialogue in order to satisfy the MPPDA while still implementing a key literary theme of Patricia Highsmith’s Strangers on a Train.
This film adaptation of Strangers on a Train makes a direct distinction of who represents good (Guy) and who represents
…show more content…
Guy is shot at a low, oblique angle, foreshadowing a psychological uneasiness. This angle is an aid in illustrating Guy’s exit from his expected, typical and virtuous character. It seems as though this exit only remains within this sequence amongst a few others throughout the film, as the ending of the film completely bypasses Patricia Highsmith’s overall theme of Strangers on a Train.
In Hitchcock’s adaptation, Guy’s innocence is proven at the end of the film, and Bruno dies. This typical ending satisfies the MPPDA’s standard. Goodness prevails, and evil is defeated. In Highsmith’s novel, Guy actually ends up following through with Bruno’s plan, and murder’s Bruno’s father. Throughout the novel, it is slowly seen how Guy begins to cross from the side of good, into the side of evil. The killing of Bruno’s father is the final deed that confirms Guy’s shift to evil. Further, it asks the reader to consider that everyone is capable of committing evil, and that evil resides in