Critics’ reviews

Marnie (1964)

8 reviews from 8 publications. Critics’ score 60: 3 positive, 2 mixed, 3 negative.

Back to our review of Marnie

60
Positive
3
Mixed
2
Negative
3

The reviews split almost evenly, with as many critics dismissing Marnie as admiring it. Where praise lands, it lands on Hitchcock’s direction: even The New Yorker, which finds the film trashy and badly acted, enjoys his abrupt, showy visual storytelling. Tippi Hedren draws steadier support, with Empire singling out her scenes with Marnie’s mother and the injured horse, and Variety calling her credible while blaming Hitchcock for giving her too little to vary.

The reservations cluster around the film’s finish and its surfaces. Time Out notes the common complaint that it lacks suspense; Radio Times warns that the artificial sets and back projection will not suit everyone; Variety finds the climax misses its point, and Sight and Sound thinks the whole thing falters after a promising opening. The spread is wide, from Slant’s view of it as Hitchcock’s defining late work to reviews that find the performances and later stretches rough. The admirers tend to read it as psychology rather than as a thriller.

Slant Magazine
17 February 2006 · ★★★★/4 · Fernando F. Croce
100

Croce regards Marnie as Hitchcock’s definitive late-period masterpiece, praising its daring psychological and formal experimentation. He singles out the hunting sequence for fusing the film’s themes and visual language into a powerful turning point.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 March 2007 · Kim Newman
80*

Newman finds the film a compelling Hitchcock thriller, with Hedren’s performance making the strongest impression. He particularly praises her work in the scenes with Marnie’s mother and the injured horse.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · David Parkinson
80

Parkinson calls the film one of Hitchcock’s more fascinating misfires. He notes that its artificial sets and back projection may not appeal to everyone.

Read the full review →
The AV Club
29 March 2002 · Keith Phipps
60*

Phipps calls the film essential viewing for Hitchcock admirers, though it can be a slog on its own terms. He singles out its queasy honeymoon-rape scene as a grotesque parody of marriage rites.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· GA
57*

The review notes that the film is often criticised for lacking suspense and resists classifying it as either a thriller or psychodrama. It singles out the film’s similarity to Vertigo as connected to that lack of suspense.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1963 · Variety Staff
40*

The review finds the film’s character study intriguing but ultimately clouded, with a climax that misses its point. It praises Tippi Hedren’s credible performance while faulting Hitchcock for giving her too little variation.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
18 July 2024 · BFI
30*

The critic finds the film disappointing, especially after its promising opening, as the performances and story falter. The economical opening is praised, while the critic faults the later technical roughness and the film’s failure to resolve its competing aims.

Read the full review →
The New Yorker
24 July 1964 · Edith Oliver
30*

Oliver finds Marnie trashy and badly performed, though she enjoys Hitchcock’s bracing, showy filmmaking. She singles out his abrupt visual storytelling as invigorating even when the film is at its worst.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate