Acensbart Excellent but underrated film
Deanna 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.
Ian (Flash Review)Far from his world-famous films, this is an early silent Hitchcock directorial effort. An older bachelor chap with thick sideburns is on the hunt for an available female suitor so he can remarry after getting antsy after attending a recent wedding. Meeting with a friend, they concoct a list of woman for him to schmooze up. Gags are had by his brusque approach, especially in the era of abundant pleasantries and eloquent formalities and you learn he doesn't handle rejection very well. This being silent, amusements come from exaggerated facial expressions as well as his brash zingers in the title cards. I can now check off another film from the Hitchcock film catalog.
Syl If you loved Sir Alfred Hitchcock and his contributions and services to the film industry, you should see all of his films for study and preservation. This is one of his early silent films. If you have the patience to watch a two hour silent film, it's not that easy. We're so used to speeches and conversations that we forget to watch and see their facial reactions in the early age of cinema. This film is more comedic than dark and dramatic. While the story is more farcical, it is nice to see Hitchcock have a sense of humor since he became more known for the macabre in his films. It is not hard to believe that film audiences didn't laugh and enjoy this film in the cinema in 1928 long before the Great Depression. Still, I would watch it again if I had too. It's not a bad film. You wouldn't know Hitchcock directed it.
Tim Kidner The DVD version I have of 'The Farmer's Wife' is part of five disc 'The Hitchcock Collection', that range from this 1928 silent onward.It is also the poorest DVD of the bunch, both in terms of technical quality - and I'm talking mostly of the poor transfer than the actual film-making and the story itself. The transfer quality is noticeably soft but flicker and blemishes are well controlled but the sound, unusually for a significant 'silent' is also disappointing, the classical music accompaniment still being in mono, whereas most have been re-recorded in modern stereo by now. I cannot say what standard other releases etc are.These aspects mean that the story never really comes alive and create a barrier to full enjoyment of the film. With very few written notice boards telling us what's happening it's mostly guesswork and we just end up watching lots of people moving about quickly.I do enjoy a good Silent film but the genre can get tedious when they're not top-notch - and this very early Hitchcock just isn't. As for the direction, it's proficient but simply workmanlike and does all it should for this type of period comedy drama, so anyone looking for clever camera-work, or even a hint at copying what the leading German directors of the time were doing, will be disappointed.I'm also very aware that I'm only watching it because it is a Hitchcock and because I'm reviewing it, which isn't necessarily a good thing...
Michael Rhodes For me Alfred Hitchcock has always been a hit or miss director and in this case he is definitely a miss. The film is about a farmer named Samuel Sweetland whose wife dies so he starts looking for another wife to take her place. Throughout the film he ends up asking five different women to marry him which really makes the viewer feel like Samuel is simply looking for a wife just to have a wife rather than him actually having any genuine feelings for the women. The story is really boring and extremely predictable. For the movie being around one and a half hours it really feels like it drags on with a lot of unnecessary parts.The acting is another flawed part of the film. Jameson Thomas plays Samuel but he really doesn't create enough emotions for the character. He just seems like a guy who keeps trying to go after one lady after another so you really don't feel that he has enough feelings for these people for you to care. He also insults every woman that turns him down which really doesn't help you sympathize with Samuel. Lillian Hall-Davis plays Araminta Dench (a housekeeper) and she does the best acting job in the movie but not as good of a job as she did in The Ring (1927, Hitchcock). All other actors in the film with the exception of Gordon Harker as Churdles Ash (a handyman) do a horrible job which doesn't help this movie at all.There really aren't any special effects shots in the film. As for the music, it is really bad and is hard to listen to. None of the music seems in the right place and even when it is the music is truly horrible and hurts my ears beyond belief.Even though Alfred Hitchcock has provided so many movies that I have enjoyed over the years this is one of his biggest duds. The story is predictable and boring, the film feels far to long, the acting is really bad, and the music makes me want to mute the television. So this film really isn't worth your time no matter what your interests are. For a worthwhile Hitchcock silent film check out The Ring (1927, Hitchcock). Score: 2/10
