content: This is a story with a modicum of drama except for a small dog (surprising given the starry nature of the human cast), close to nonexistence suspense, and muddy sound recording compounded with hard to understand dialog (English accents and all that). Gielgud's performance as the hero is mostly one dimensional (when you can understand his delivery); as the heroine, Carroll's "acting" ranges from chatty to zombie; and Lorrie's delivery is over-the-top ham (and, quite frankly, an embarrassment) as he portrays the "good-guy" killer. All this is in marked contrast to the achievements of the fourth principal performer, Robert Young. Young provides an acting tour de force as the subject matter of the film. He makes the film his own!There are some gee-wiz (for the time, 1936) special in-camera/editing effects which were then fast becoming (and would continue to be) a Hitchcock trademark.Not one of Hitchcock's masterpieces, but not one of his disasters either.WILLIAM FLANIGAN, Ph.D