Ian (Flash Review)Regarded as Hitchcock's first true feature film, he brings a lot of cleverness, tension and intrigue to the story. A story about a serial killer known as the Avenger who is speculated to be wearing a scarf. One day, during the London Fog, a man with a scarf comes knocking looking for lodging where a room is for rent. The woman hesitantly rents him a room but becomes increasingly suspicious. Has she just rented a room to a serial killer or is she being overly worried? Will the lodger be treated normally during his stay especially when he starts to fancy the woman's daughter? Hitchcock builds great suspense as the story unfolds with some creative camera trickery, effective POV shots all accompanied by stellar and moody cinematography. With this film, Hitchcock set the tone and themes for his outstanding film career.

thinbeach On Tuesday nights in foggy London, an at large man named 'Avenger' kills young blonde girls. Daisy, a fashion model who lives in a lodge with her parents, happens to be young and blonde, while a young man who dresses in the fashion of the Avenger, and goes out on Tuesday nights, takes up a room for rent in the building. One of Hitchcock's earliest features, he was already excellent at framing a murder, and Daisy looked pretty well cactus. But of course, no story would be so simple, and the Lodger was so obviously framed from the beginning you knew the twist was coming long before it did. At 90 minutes, that made the film a touch long, but it was also not without some moments of gripping suspense.I'm a sucker for fog on film and the outdoor shots were wonderfully atmospheric, while Hitchcock's gift for turning everyday inanimate objects, such as staircases and chandeliers, into haunts, was second to none. The scarcity of title cards - the ability to use images to progress the story - was to its advantage, and I'd also give credit to Marie Ault and Arthur Chesney, who were excellent as the Landlords. The rest of the cast had their virtues, though as was typical for silents, were a touch melodramatic.So even a young Hitchcock had talent for suspense, and the thematic elements on judgement gave at least some small depth to the thrill ride, albeit thanks to melodramatic turns at the end which were not to my taste. The love story also felt contrived. What did the Lodger do to make Daisy fall for him? And what did the Policeman do to make her turn against? Nothing, they were just cheap narrative devices, and unfortunately, more than once characters made these type of unbelievable decisions, which very conveniently helped build the tension. Of course the parents would leave Daisy on her own, despite their suspicions! Elsewhere some fairly gimmicky ideas are used, such as close ups on a fire-poker and butter knife, as if the Avenger is going to use them for something other than their intended purpose. And let's not forget the (lack of) subtlety in the ever-metaphoric chess game!Still, in the hands of a lesser director I can imagine this being quite forgettable, but Hitchcock managed to turn it into something better. I suppose anyone seeking this out nowadays is either a die-hard Hitchcock fan or a silent film fan, and it should prove enjoyable enough for people in those categories.

gavin6942 A landlady suspects her new lodger (Ivor Novello) is the madman killing women in London.We open with a shot of a woman's face in terror, which could very well have been Janet Leigh in "Psycho". Hitchcock walks a fine line between thriller and horror. In this film, he probably leans more towards "thrills" and "suspense", but there is always the horror lurking in the background -- a killer called the Avenger killing women! Who is next?There seems to be some debate over whether or not this was inspired by the Jack the Ripper murders, or is some kind of fictionalized telling of the story. The consensus seems to be that there is no connection, but it really makes no difference. Whether jack or any other killer, it is a scary thought to think a serial killer is sleeping where you live.Amazingly, the production company did not like what Hitchcock had created. How this can be is unclear, as "The Lodger" is definitely one of his better earlier films. For me, he would not strike gold again until "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (1934) and would be very hit and miss until the late 1940s. But history has vindicated -- Hitchcock is legendary and the names of the producers have been forgotten.

TheLittleSongbird The Lodger is not without its faults, the music does feel too bombastic at times and the ending is too tacky and too conventional. However, the film looks great, the foggy atmosphere, crisp black and white photography and expressionistic images add a lot to the suspense and story and enhances it too as well as holding up terrifically well. There's also a scene with Novello and June's kiss, and it is beautifully done. The story, loosely based on the infamous Jack the Ripper, is suspenseful and compelling with the suspenseful moments appropriately eerie. There are a few darkly funny moments too that are done subtly and the thriller aspects do thrill and are done audaciously. Hitchcock directs splendidly and in his distinctive style helped by a story that serves him well, the innocent in danger theme was a favourite of his and it shows. The acting is good, Ivor Novello especially in a performance that is ambiguous and creepy but also extravagant and sympathetic. June is alluring and Malcolm Keen has a character that is not as sympathetic and he doesn't hold back. Marie Ault and Arthur Chesney give solid support. All in all, a great film, the best of Hitchcock's silent films and possibly one of the best silent films as well. 9/10 Bethany Cox