User reviews

This is a rattling good post-war thriller.It features customs duty evasion, adultery, espionage, murder, robbery in fact the screen writers attempted to include almost all the major crimes in their script (apart from sex crimes which were denied by the prevailing film code on film producers).The film is mainly played out on the romantic "Orient Express" with an international cast as it journeys from Paris-Simplon-Venice-Trieste across the Continent of Western Europe.Trains are a favourite location for thriller writers and several famous films were made with them as a backdrop: "The 39 Steps" (1935), "The Lady Vanishes" (1938), and "Night Train to Munich" (1940) all of which I can recommend to 1940s film buffs.

I have quite a few films from the 1940s, my favourite era.If fans want to see the principal players from "Sleeping Car to Trieste" cast in leading roles, they should attempt to obtain the following films: Derrick de Marney - George Grant, a younger actor in Hitchcock's "Young & Innocent" (1937), Jean Kent - Valya, still playing rather sadistic roles in "The Browning Version" (1951), Albert Lieven - Zarta, more sympathetic as a portrait painter in "The Seventh Veil" (1945), Paul Depuis - Det.Insp. Jolif, a French Aristocrat in "Madness of the Heart" (1949) & "Passport to Pimlico" (1949), Bonar Colleano - Sgt. West, virtually playing the same role in "The Way to the Stars" (1945), Finalay Currie - Alistair MacBain, such a versatile actor, try the convict in "Great Expectations" (1946) with John Mills, David Tomlinson - Tom Bishop, his best role was as one of the "Three Men in a Boat" (1953).Finally, Alan Wheatley is indelibly imprinted on my memory as the dastardly Sheriff of Nottingham in the 1950s British TV series "The Adventures of Robin Hood" starring Richard Green.

The plot without spoilers has already been indicated by other reviewers so I will restrict my comments on the acting.In the main it was very creditable and it has an interesting mix of international stars.The action never lets up but with the 1940s moral code in place, you know the guilty must eventually receive their comeuppance.In todays politically correct climate I am always fascinated by how often actors in these 1940s films light up and drink copious quantities of Scotch.It makes a refreshing change and reminds me of my youth when steam was the norm on railways.I rated it 6/10.P.S. I was born in 1946.

A combination of Allan MacKinnon's inspired adaptation, and good casting and direction add up to a rare example of a remake being as entertaining as the original. Albert Lieven as Zurta may lack the physical menace Conrad Veidt brought to the part, but his persona as a charming ruthless assassin is succinctly established within the first couple of minutes as he murders in cold blood prior to strolling nonchalantly away. Alan Wheatley was a sound choice as the double-crossing furtive character of Poole, in a role not dissimilar from the one he'd played in Brighton Rock shortly before. Gordon Harker's hearty golfing bore is replaced by two characters, David Tomlinson's well-meaning but thoroughly obtuse Bishop, and David Hutcheson's garrulous patronising Denning, ponderously lecturing the chef how to make 'Roly-Poly Pudding'. Paul Dupuis' Inspector Jolif is a big improvement on his counterpart in the original. The 'MacGuffin' of the politically explosive stolen diary is quite an advancement on the stolen painting in Rome Express, making a more convincing reason to warrant the involvement of the bullying McBain, as well as providing the establishing scene in the embassy, although the motivation of Jean Kent's enigmatic spy Valya is never really explained. Plenty of sly humour too all adds up to an entertaining ninety minutes or so.

As an American, I am always interested to see how Americans are portrayed in European films, particularly films made prior to WWII and in the years immediately following it.

The American in this film is portrayed as a vulgar contrast to the more sophisticated Europeans on board the train. He is a boozing, whistling, skirt-chasing Italian-American GI with a New York accent. (Why are they always from New York?) He is contrasted with the British passengers in two notable ways: First, his passion for the fairer sex is more overt and he comes across as wolfish in his pursuit of the young women in the film. This is contrasted with the discrete way in which the adulterous British couple on board the train are conducting their affair. When the two young French woman spurn his attempts to have a drinking party with them in their sleeping compartment, one says to him "We no longer wish to be liberated!" or words to that effect. This is a revealing statement about how the American military presence in postwar Europe was wearing thin the patience of Europeans.

Second, the magazines this American GI reads are prominently displayed so as to ensure that the audience can see them. They are the standard popular American mediocrities of the day: Saturday Evening Post, Life Magazine, etc. This is contrasted with the more scholarly (albeit boring) readings of bird-watching Britisher sharing his compartment.

Overall, the American in this film is the stereotypical boorish American so common in European films of this era. His portrayal, however, is not worse than Hollywood's stereotypes of Europeans.

Please note that this is not a criticism, but rather an observation. Americans are not singled out for criticism; the film traffics in several stereotypes (the cheapness of Scotchmen, for example) and does so mainly in a vein of comedic irony. Even the British get their own send-ups in this film.

There is something about trains as a setting for crime, espionage, and mystery. Agatha Christie used it in several of her stories, the most notable being turned into the film "Murder On The Orient Express". Other choice examples include Hitchcock's "The Lady Vanishes", Carol Reed's "Night Train To Munich", "The Great Train Robbery" (with Sean Connery), and "Break Heart Pass". The historical settings of some of these stories dim any possible contemporary relevance from when they were made, but some of them remind us of the latter. Hitchcock and Reed's films were definitely aimed at the threat of Nazi Germany. And this film, "Sleeping Car to Trieste" was definitely set in post - 1945 Europe, and hinted (somewhat broadly) at what was the country that the train's hidden cargo was aimed at.

Albert Lieven and Jean Kent are foreign agents who steal a valuable diary from an embassy in Paris. Allan Wheatley is an accomplice, to whom the diary is passed by Lieven. But two unexpected problems arise. First, Lieven had to kill a servant in the embassy to complete the theft of the diary and get away. Secondly Wheatley has doubled crossed his partners, and is fleeing (via the Orient Express) to sell the diary for a large sum of money. Lieven and Kent soon have found out where to find Wheatley, and pursue him. However, they are soon involved with not only tracking down Wheatley (who is hiding out in a train compartment) but with an adulterous couple, an idiot friend (David Tomlinson) of the man in the adulterous couple relationship, a wealthy, autocratic writer (Finley Currie) and his beaten down secretary, a bird watcher, a French police inspector, and the train's cook (Gregoire Aslan) who is going through a purgatory listening to a cooking "efficiency" expert from England who knows nothing about making edible food. The film follows the twists and turns until the showdown moment when Lieven and Kent may get the stolen diary back or not.

I'm not a spoiler so I won't ruin the conclusion for viewers (who won't be disappointed). My concern here is what is the historical edge to when the film was made (1948). Lieven and Kent are from an Eastern European country, and Lieven cannot get into the country for some political reason (which Wheatley is counting on). But the diary would (if published) hurt the current regime (although it might cause another European War). What is this country, and why does it seem in the interest of the west (represented by the French inspector) for them to retrieve the stolen diary? Obviously the answer is the setting in the title: "Sleeping Car to Trieste". "Trieste", the last "western" European city/stop on the Orient Express, is on the border of Italy and Yugoslavia. In 1948 Yugoslavia was one of the Communist states set up by Russia following the end of World War II. But that year, it was becoming apparent to England and France (and the U.S.) that Yugoslavia was not going to be a robot creation of the U.S.S.R. Under Tito that country was struggling to practice socialist doctrine but not to automatically jump to Russian demands. As Yugoslavia is mountainous, and far from Russia, it could get away with this. But Yugoslavia was made up of six or seven nations, and if they were set at each other's throats the system would collapse. It was to the interest of the west to help (quietly) prop up Tito.

It fits into the plot on several levels. Lieven held military rank in the country prior to 1945. He must have been an officer in the Chetnik forces that Tito and his partisans defeated and decimated. He has no love for that regime, and if the published diary destroys it all to the good (and who cares about the European consequences - Yugoslavia, the creation of the Serbs after World War I, was built from the ruins of 1914 Europe due to the Serbian assassination of Franz Ferdinand). The country that resulted, though, was really a difficult balancing act (note how quickly it has collapsed in the years since Tito died in the 1980s). As Finley Currie comments in the film it is a crack-pot country, as opposed to say France, Spain, England, or Holland. This is actually wrong. Conflicting nationalist movements bother France, Spain, and England to this day - it's just that the people seem more homogeneous on the surface. But Currie, supposedly a world peace advocate but actually a blow-hard, has been insulted by being denied entrance to Yugoslavia by the government. He is venting his frustration with his comment. The movie flows very quickly, and is a solid entertainment. As such I recommend seeing it to anyone who wants to see a good film of intrigue.

... on a train maneuvering to obtain a stolen diary with international implications. The main cast is Jean Kent, Albert Lieven, Derrick De Marney, and David Tomlinson, with many others in an ensemble cast that tries its best to weave together a half dozen stories, not all of which are interesting. De Marney I expected the most from, as I liked him in Hitchcock's Young and Innocent (1937), but he has matured here into blandness. Lieven I didn't know at all, and he is good and savage as the head spy. Tomlinson with the jug ears is always fun to watch, the pip-pip cheerio Brit.

However -- and it's a big however -- this is a remake of Rome Express from 1932, and it doesn't have near the excitement and suspense of the original. The original had Esther Ralston and a ton of Hitchcock actors: Gordon Harker, Donald Calthrop, Joan Barry, Cedric Hardwicke, and Frank Vosper. Most importantly, it had Conrad Veidt as the head spy. Good as Lieven is in the remake, he can't top Veidt, and really no one could. Veidt gives a strange shading to the most innocuous lines -- he's the kind of villain who would knife Granny if she got too nosy. (He also resembles Bruno Hauptmann somewhat -- I wonder if audiences in 1932 made that connection.)

The 1948 version is good, but the 1932 version is more fun to watch. Both have a killer climactic scene in the train's luggage car -- a chance for both Veidt and later, Lieven, to shine.

I believe this is a remake of the film Rome Express.

In the beginning of this film, we see Zerta (Albert Lieven), a foreign agent, steal something from the Paris Embassy. He then throws it out the window to the waiting Karl. Valya (Jean Kent) is also at the embassy and an accomplice. They are to meet Karl the next day, but he stands them up. Realizing he is going to sell whatever it is for more money, they take off attempting to find him.

They find out that he is on a train headed for Zagreb. That's when the fun begins. Karl is upset to find that he does not have his own berth, which he has to have in order to a) stay hidden; and b) hide what he stole.

There are a bunch of characters involved - a couple secretly committing adultery, a friend of the man part of the couple (David Tomlinson) who wants to play cards and drink; a wealthy snobbish man (Finlay Currie) and his harried assistant; a bird watcher who won't shut up; two French girls who take advantage of an American soldier to avoid customs; the chef, who has to listen to an amateur cook that won't shut up.

Eventually we learn that the object is a diary that, if published, could start another war. Karl finally manages to get a berth alone, only to be moved from it after he's hidden the diary. The adulterous man would like his girlfriend to come to his berth, but he's stuck with someone else unexpectedly in his berth.

Sooner or later, they all play their part in retrieval of the diary.

Entertaining post-war film, well-directed.

Two spies board a train in pursuit of their partner, who has absconded with a politically explosive diary one of them stole from an Embassy party the night before. A solid thriller/drama that largely ignores the cat-and-mouse potential of its plot in order to focus on the characters - of which there are far too many (six characters, all of whom are there purely for comic relief, are completely dispensable). This is the only movie I can think of in which you will see a man accidentally stab himself in the back...

Sleeping Car is a remake of the very good 1932 Rome Express with Conrad Veidt providing a much more sinister and intense Zurta in that one than Albert Lieven does in this remake - to his credit, though, Lieven does exude a debonair, charming sliminess, and I like both actors' widely different takes on the role.

Lieven is actually better suited to the role of Zurta than Veidt would have been, since the tone of Sleeping Car is lighter, despite the biting satire overall. Rome Express, while absorbing, is by comparison somewhat flat and humorless. The action and dialogue in both are crisp, fast-paced without being frenzied; the subplots in Sleeping Car are more entertaining.

Scottish actor Finlay Currie is in both. He's a fast-talking American show business promoter in Rome Express, and an overbearing author in the Trieste version. Urbane actor Paul Dupuis is more satisfying as the detective Jolif in Trieste. He has classier, funnier lines, and comes across as a three-dimensional sophisticate. In Rome Express, the role is a dull mish- mash attempted by Frank Vosper.

Not to be missed is the fun performance by always-watchable Jean Kent, in full control of her role.

Overall, Trieste corrects some of Rome's plot weaknesses, as well as adding life and humor, If you have a chance, watch both of them. They're both enjoyable.

I am a person who rarely likes remakes...that is, unless there is something horrible about the original and the remake takes care to correct this. In the case of "Sleeping Car to Trieste", it's a remake of "Rome Express" though I prefer the original and think the remake, though good, is unnecessary.

Three spies manage to steal a diary that might provoke a war (how exactly you never know). But one of the spies is greedy and disappears with the diary. He takes a ride on the Orient Express but doesn't realize that his angry partners are also aboard! Not surprisingly, the end result is pretty bloody.

This film is good...and if you haven't seen the original it should be a satisfying movie. However, it's also a bit uneven and much of the early portion on the train drags a bit. Fortunately, it does pick up and WHAT AN EXCITING ENDING! Well worth seeing and not bad at all.

This a delightful detective thriller, made in the inimitable British post-war manner. The cast is comprised of more than a dozen unusual characters who have taken the Orient Express to Trieste. A few of them are innocent and charming, but most of them are law-breakers on one level or another, their crimes ranging from evading customs duties to adultery, theft, assault, and murder.

The plot concerns a stolen diary, but the real action is trying to figure out who is in whose compartment at any given time, because as the police move in on the murderer, the matter of timing and alibis becomes of paramount importance.

The documentary shots of the train itself are exemplary. If you are a train buff, you will greatly enjoy this crude, lumbering, noisy hunk of iron, a giant boiler on wheels, barreling down the tracks as the people inside change compartments, eat, drink, and plot their petty and grand crimes.

When "Rome Express" came out in 1932, sound cinema was still in its early years, and there was a sense of discovery as the filmmakers were becoming increasingly familiar with the new possibilities of the medium: the film did indeed feel like a train ride. This relatively close remake (some characters are dropped, others are added, but the essentials of the story remain the same) is an agreeable diversion, but after several talkie-train-set-mystery-comedies in the 16 years that passed in-between (even Sherlock Holmes was in one, "Terror By Night"), it doesn't have the same novelty value. It does have its merits, though: it does a very good job of spreading its focus among a diverse array of major and minor characters whose paths crisscross, and some of the roles are arguably better-casted here; for example, I preferred this sardonic French inspector to the previous one. **1/2 out of 4.

Albert Lieven (Zurta) and Jean Kent (Valya) pursue Alan Wheatley (Karl) aboard the Orient Express. The object of their attention is a diary which Lieven must recover and leave the train with before he reaches Trieste.

The film needed to go in either the comedy direction or the thriller direction. As it goes, it combines both which is frustrating. The final moments on the train are quite shocking given the rather lame humour which we have been fed during the previous hour and forty minutes. The ending seems out of place in this otherwise frothy adventure.

Most of the actors are irritating. They play comedy roles that never make you laugh, except once – lawyer Derek De Marney (George) comes out with a classic laugh-out-loud moment when he presents his 3 theories of how someone has ended up dead to policeman Paul Dupuis (Inspector Jolif). It's the best moment of the film and we re-winded it twice! The best in the cast are Lieven and Kent, who play it straight and provide the thriller part to the film – the reason to watch it. Some characters are actually completely superfluous to the story – the bird watcher, the GI, the French cook and the British cook. There are too many characters providing comedy parts.

As a whole, you watch to see what happens but it gets boring and the Brits speak in that ridiculous posh way that makes you cringe, and it basically helps to portray them as twerps. Not what is required for a good thriller.

This is a remake of 1932's Rome Express, which is a far better film and stars the seedy and sinister Mr Dane Calthrop. This version is slow and plodding, and the humour is mainly heavy handed. There is an unnecessary subplot about an Englishman trying to explain English cookery to a French chef (I'm not going back to the Good Old Days - I remember that food).

Best things about this version are David Tomlinson as the old schoolfriend who turns up inappositely, and Hugh Burden as the put-upon secretary. The McGuffin is a diary containing secrets that might start a war with an unspecified country, rather than a stolen painting. The adulterous couple are sexless as only the English can be.

Jean Kent is always worth watching, but whoever designed her frumpy wardrobe should be condemned to selling long underwear in British Home Stores. That hat with the two horns - or are they ice cream cones? There is a subplot about two French girls who are smuggling model hats, and they are rather good, as is Bonar Colleano as a wisecracking American soldier. His wisecracks really are funny. His mate the birdwatcher is good, too.

But overall - it's as stodgy as an English suet pudding.

Usually you can rely on a train to provide for a great vehicle (sorry!) for a crime thriller, and this one uses the most famous of them all - the Orient Express - as the base for this chilling, semi-comical, espionage drama. It's all about the search for a stolen diary that contains secrets that could cause quite an international conflagration. Thing is, it's not just one nation that wants this book - and soon our train becomes quite a perilous hotbed of double crossing and red herrings. Finlay Currie casts aside his usual biblical rod and delivers quite a charming effort as the curmudgeonly author "MacBain" and for me, he stood out in this quite well paced drama. It's got a lot of "Rome Express" (1932) about it, and the strong cast lead by Jean Kent ("Valya") and a very dapper, if maybe just a little on the wooden side, Albert Lieven keep the adventure exciting with lots of shots of this luxurious train and the conclusion is effectively disguised to keep us nicely in the dark. It's perhaps just a touch too long, but I still think it's as good as the original and well worth a watch.

Sleeping Car to Trieste is pretty much a standard post-war British spy thriller set on The Orient Express with all the usual sets and train mock-ups. Nothing too cerebral but light entertainment when you have nothing better to do.

Stories and adventures aboard the international train. There's the stolen diary, which must not fall into the wrong hands. There's the couple who aren't really a couple, just trying to find some time alone. There's the bird man, and the army guy. And every now and then the conductor and border police come through to stir things up. When the diary goes missing, things really heat up! It's a fun story. Directed by john carstairs. I've seen several of his films, and enjoyed them, including the saint in london. According to wikipedia, this is a remake of rome express. I'm sure you noticed that finlay currie is in both versions of the film! Based on the story by clifford grey. Agatha christie's murder on the orient express didn't come out until 1934!

I cannot praise this film enough: screenplay, acting, direction and cinematography absolutely first class. The sophistication and delicacy of acting, especially by Jean Kent is something that virtually has gone extinct in the modern era of crude, vicious gun-toting, ham-fisted brutes that populate American cinema. There is one memorable scene after another. The first scene between Derrick DeMorney and Rona Anderson can only be described as exquisite. And the comic touches! Eves Chanteau, David Tomlinson, Finlay Currie, Hugh Burden are a bow! Just a delight.

I had never heard of Director John Paddy Carstairs, but on the strength of SLEEPING CAR TO TRIESTE, I have to rate him far above average. He manages to extract superlative performances across the board from an international cast of not particularly well known actors.

One of his main achievements is the atmosphere that he manages to inject into a train trip, and the merit of that has to be shared with the wonderful cameraman, Jack Hildyard, whose B&W photography is exquisite beyond words.

Derrick de Marney, a good but not overly talented actor best known for his part in Hitch's YOUNG AND INNOCENT (1937) was the only name I recognized in the cast. I must now add the names of Albert Lieven, Grégoire Aslan, Finlay Currie and, especially, Paul Dupuis as the consummate multi-language speaking detective Jolif, all pull off memorable performances.

Superb dialogue, logical and gripping script. Must-see masterpiece. 10/10

The impressing thing about this much neglected and underrated train thriller is its marvelous web of polyphony - many characters are involved, and they all have a vital part to play. Albert Lieven is the regular villain who starts off with a cold blooded murder, and he is no ordinary thief. We never get to know what state secrets or what country this is all about, but that's not important. Lieven gets cheated, as so many villains do by other villains, and the cheat gets away on a train to Trieste from Paris, so Lieven and his accomplice Jean Kent, as smart and false as ever, have to follow along on the same train, where there are many other passengers, of course, and some of them have other secrets to hide, business to get away from or just a need for a jolly ride, like David Tomlinson, here early in his career, who actually steals the show, drinking whisky all the time and insisting on playing cars with everyone who hasn't the slightest interest in it, but who finally becomes the catcher in the rye, unintentionally, but with glory, among delightfully young French girls trying to slip through the customs with all their Parisian hats. Finlay Currie as an awesome Scotsman of some fame traveling around giving boring lectures happens to accidentally get involved, as so many others, and it is difficult to say who of all these characters makes the best performance. Outstanding is also Paul Dupuis, the only genuine Frenchman on board, with a penchant for disturbing jazz music, and Derrick de Marney, going for a vacation from his wife with a young charming mistress, (Rona Anderson). I think though I would give the prize to David Tomlinson as (accidentally) the most important character of all for his sheer stupidity, which he shares though with the poor Hugh Burden, easily confused with Naunton Wayne, being the same kind of character, here bullied as Finlay Currie's secretary but eventually doing something about it. It is brilliant polyphony all the way, extremely entertaining, and with the obligatory suspense and excitement gradually building up around yet another murder.

Entertaining intrigue on a train, this is somewhat similar to, and the next best film of its type after Hitchcock's "The Lady Vanishes". There are a few unnecessary characters, but they don't spoil proceedings.