View movie

Play / Download (help)

(310.6 M)Ogg Video
(345.1 M)512Kb MPEG4
(1.3 G)MPEG2

All Files: HTTP

Resources

Bookmark

Alfred HitchcockThe 39 Steps (1935)

One of Hitchcock's earliest hits, The 39 Steps sees The Master unravelling the soon-to-be-typical plot of an innocent man on the run, trying to prove his innocence.


This movie is part of the collection: Feature Films

Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Producer: Michael Balcon, Ivor Montagu
Production Company: Gaumont Film Company
Sponsor: k-otic.com
Audio/Visual: sound, black & white
Keywords: Drama; Mystery; Thriller; Alfred Hitchcock
Contact Information: www.k-otic.com

Creative Commons license: Public Domain

Individual Files

Write a review
Downloaded 155,670 times Reviews
Average Rating:

Reviewer: James Y. - - July 3, 2011
Subject: The 39 Steps Review
Not such a great movie. The main guy isn't that righteous, seems like he's has inordinate affection for a married woman, and also lies freely.

Reviewer: asker - - April 8, 2011
Subject: great loveable film
one of his best movies.
the dedication for truth might prevail sometimes and mess up our mischievious schemes.
Also nice: man and woman chained together - performing their everlasting cat and dog game.
Nice nonsense political freedom speech - where everybody could agree in; but no easy way out or in.

though, friends, anybody wanting to use it as footage material - i've got a strange feeling about the copyright status...

Reviewer: slurryer - - March 11, 2011
Subject: A must watch
Totally enjoyed this. One of the things I love about older films is the subtle queues you get in the facial expressions or gestures. Today's movies move much too fast to spend time on subtle queues like that. This move is full of those subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) queues into what the character is really thinking. Watch the farm owner when his wife first walks into the room. He's already on guard. Wonderful directing. Many nice twists and turns in this movie. Just when you think he has found a sympathetic ear, the tables turn yet again. You won't guess how everything ties together until the final minutes. Highly recommended.

Reviewer: qrper - - January 31, 2011
Subject: one of my favorites
I think this is Hitchcock's best British effort. Zanuck was so impressed with it, he offered him a Hollywood contract. The rest is history.

Reviewer: Kodachrome - - January 10, 2011
Subject: The book is always better...
...but this is one of my favorite Hitchcock films.

I give it the big 5.

Reviewer: Dr Feel Rotten - - January 8, 2011
Subject: Why the uproar?
All movies made from books are someone's interpretation of what they have read. 100 people could read the same book and 99 will come to different conclusions 99 out of 100 times.
What one thinks of as great literature others may see as trite drivel so try judging on the movie, not the book unless you think you can do a better version with limited resources.

Reviewer: forprogress - - December 25, 2010
Subject: It's Not Either/or In Terms of the Movie or the Book
I have no problem with the concept that this was Hitchcock's best work from the 1930's. But, that this compares to his most mature work like Vertigo is ridiculous.

The byplay between Robert Donat and Madeleine Carroll is first rate and if this was the basis for reviewing the film, I would give it 5 stars (heck, I will give it 5 stars because it is excellent-- although I think it is a 4 star Hitchcock film compared to his later work. I also grant that Charles Bennett was an excellent screenwriter, who helped catapult Hitch to international fame.

Catch the reading of the book on Internet Archives read by Adrian Praetzellis. That I give 5 stars without reservation.

But, the film in terms of plotting does not measure up to the book in terms of a psychological thriller. Although, perhaps it does as an entertainment.

Reviewer: rabid47 - - November 27, 2010
Subject: Incomplete file
The MPEG4 has no ending.

Reviewer: NoSpillBlood - - August 14, 2010
Subject: It has been considered Hitchcock's best, you know
It may interest some of the posters here that earlier film writers, such as Herman G. Weinberg, considered this the best Hitchcock, and the rest so much Hollywood studio system gloss. In the post-Spielberg era of huge budget styling and pea-brained content, it's hardly surprising that this point of view has little traction any more.

Knowing this, however, I am rather surprised by the mixed display here of ignorance of history on the one hand, and the absurd yet insistent cliche that "it's not as good as the book" on the other. An early Hitchcock triumph, no question, it's still worthwhile viewing -- tautly written and directed, finely acted with small, telling glints of humanity of a kind that Hitchcock drifted away from over time for wilder set pieces. (The scene where Hannay enters briefly the quietly desperate lives of the crofter and his wife were once described -- by Charles Champlain, longtime LA Times film critic, no less -- as lifting this above the level of a simple "thriller". He put his money where his mouth was, including it among a short list of European films for screening in the landmark early 1970s PBS series Film Odyssey.)

I guess the standard take on this film has changed over time. Apparently not for the better. Maybe the fact that you can buy it at Dollar Tree on DVD for less than the cost of a bad hamburger hasn't helped it's reputation among the youthful ignorati who have never noticed that all black and white films are not the same film.

Reviewer: viv0411 - - January 12, 2010
Subject: where are subtitles?
i am not native english speaker. please provide subtitles.

Reviewer: wellcopes - - November 28, 2009
Subject: Not the best
of Hitchcock, but is a good one.

Reviewer: andrew bruch - - August 18, 2009
Subject: The 39 What?
Broadly speaking: if you see the film before you read the book, you'll think Hitchcock was a cinematic genius and the book pales in comparison.

If you read the book first, you'll have my reaction and that of others reviewing this work.

Personally, I find Hitchcock's treatments of Buchan's work and that of Eric Ambler (A Coffin for Demetrios converted to The Mask of Demetrios) to be less than stellar when taken as representations of the books. Taken on their own merits, they're fine. However, I do take issue with calling *this* movie the 39 Steps. The title is an absurdity playing off, presumably, the novel's popularity, and undoubtedly it left poor Mr. Buchan in bed roiling with an ulcer.

The only similarities between this film and the book are the name of the protagonist, the title, and the fact that some of the action takes place in Scotland. The 39 Steps could be a hard book to adapt to the screen because the conceit of the book relies on what would become known - in later years - as the Stanislavsky method of acting - in order to confuse and defeat one's enemies. Hannay on the run from the police and the spies, has to pretend to be a road repairer, has to adopt a Scottish brogue, and has to mess himself up to such an extent that even his enemies don't recognize him when they stop to talk. If that were to be shown on screen, it might very well not be believable - mostly on account of the fact that we're so used to actors acting and, given that trait, given the style of acting in the early Hitchcockian times, it might be quite difficult to believe the switch. . . I honestly do not believe that to be the case. What is more likely is that Hitchcock found it too difficult to compress the 10 or so encounters in the book down to 90 minutes.

Another major difference in the two works is the attitudes of the people Hannay encounters in his adventures. Film: no one believes him, truly not even his earstwhile companion handcuffed to his wrist (she has to find out for herself). In the book, he manages to convince several people of his innocence well before the climactic resolution. I don't know that either scenario should be more true to life than the other. However, the woman in the film is annoying and unsympathetic because she appears so unreasonable. If she appears unreasonable, it might just be that she's not a very realistic person. Which would argue for contrivance on Hitchcock's part: he wanted to write a film where no one believed his protagonist and everybody was out to get him.

Reviewer: Ella_Greggs - - March 2, 2009
Subject: Improves Upon the Book in Character, Emotion and Suspence
To each is own, I suppose, but I've also read the book and I think Hitchcock and Charles Bennett, who adapted the book for the screen, have added some much needed drama and humanity to the story. I was stunned to read the novel and find nothing remotely resembling the film's great climactic scene in the music hall, with Robert Donat shouting desperately, "What are the 39 Steps??" as the police close in on him. Or the tender, poignant encounter with Margaret (Peggy Ashcroft), the lonely Scottish wife who braves her husband's wrath to protect our hero. Hitchcock and Bennett made so many changes to the story that perhaps the movie and the book should each be taken on their own terms and not compared. For example, they added love interest Pamela and changed the 39 steps, which in the book are, well, merely a flight of stairs, into something more mysterious and sinister. "The 39 Steps" is a great, suspenseful yarn, with dynamic, droll and engaging performances by Robert Donat as our bewildered but resourceful everyman hero, and Godfrey Tearle as the menacing, half-pinky'd villain. Hey, you gotta love a half-pinky'd villain.

Reviewer: beretrane - - January 4, 2009
Subject: Why not just make it like the book?
How could this even be called "The 39 Steps"???

The book is great. This is a pathetic, washed out, unnecessarily reduced plot.

Good Grief.
Not worth the time.

Reviewer: Jason Cangialosi - - November 2, 2007
Subject: Stairways in The 39 Steps
In Hitchcock's Blackmail, Rich and Strange and The 39 Steps, a featured man and woman ascend a stairway to symbolize a turning point in the dynamics of their relationship. The ascents not only serve character developments, but voice Hitchcock's view of relationships. If you want to read more about this symbolism in the 39 Steps visit:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/12992/alfred_hitchcocks_stairways_of_attraction.html

Reviewer: spake-aisy - - June 1, 2007
Subject: "TITZ!"
I said,"TIT'Z!"

Reviewer: jimelena - - April 9, 2007
Subject: Not bad
Cloak and dagger with lots of twists and turns.
You should watch it.

Reviewer: thogatthog - - February 9, 2007
Subject: Problems
The mpeg2 (1340Mb) seems to be defective: I've tried it on several media players but without success.

The mpg (324Mb) works OK, but this print has been cut by about four minutes. (Note in case of panic when you start it: there's about 30 seconds of blank screen before the movie starts.)

Reviewer: George_Kaplan - - January 15, 2007
Subject: Masterpiece!
Hitch's first truly great film--this is one of the treasures of the IA!