by
3.93 of 5 stars
Cornell Woolrich. His name conjures a maelstrom of nerve- shattering suspense spawned by the stark, cynical landscape of urban America in the 1930s... read full description

reviews

Dec 21, 2009
Jennie rated it: 3 of 5 stars
The edition I have was published in 1984 and includes four other "short novels." Which seems weird to me, because the whole book is about as long as what I would consider a short novel. I guess this is why I'm not in charge of naming books.

I think this book was spoiled for me because the blurbs on the back that described each story gave me enough information to figure out the ending long before I actually got to it. I'm not sure how I'd feel if these blurbs hadn't spoile More...
Mar 16, 2008
Austin rated it: 5 of 5 stars
Cornell Woolrich is probably best known as the guy who wrote the story that became Rear Window (and possibly, to a lesser extent, the guy who wrote The Phantom Lady). As a pulp writer who make efforts to break into Hollywood, it's probably fairly difficult to pay the bills, but fortunately his economic suffering is out gain.

Originally published under the name "It Had To Be Murder," the published story of Rear Window differs from the film in key ways. But, keep in mind, More...
0 comments like (1 person liked it)
Jul 30, 2011
Mike rated it: 5 of 5 stars
REAR WINDOW, which watches Hal Jeffries confined with a broken leg to a tiny apartment that only allows him to survey the daily lives of his neighbors across the courtyard?until he discovers one of them is a cold-blooded murderer and that he's the next
Oct 13, 2010
Tris rated it: 3 of 5 stars
I really enjoy the sort of short stories that Hitchcock chose for his "Stories for Late At Night" Twilight-Zone-esque collections, and these would fall into that niche. Woolrich, who wrote under several names, really stands out because he writes so well.
Feb 07, 2012
Ging rated it: 2 of 5 stars
Rear Window got me interested right away. Then, the narrator irritated me somehow with his confidence. Plus, I hate how he withholds the information. Hitchcock's movie version is much more entertaining. Still, the adaptation owes its success to this inventiveness of this short story.
Oct 15, 2010
Timmy rated it: 3 of 5 stars
Excellent build up, but endings are melodramatic letdowns for the most part.
Jul 06, 2009
Charles rated it: 4 of 5 stars
A fine collection of short stories. Woolrich is a classic.
Jul 27, 2010
Brandon rated it: 5 of 5 stars
Worth the read for the story Three O'clock alone.
Nov 16, 2008
Nepomuceno is currently reading it
Estou lendo a versâo em Português do autor que escreveu um conto que deu origem ao filme "Janela Indiscreta", de Alfred Hitchcock. Recomendo bem o conto "Três horas", até agora o melhor. O conto da janela é um pouco diferente do livro, mas interessante compará-lo com o filme. Uma boa distração.
Dec 05, 2008
Kersten rated it: 5 of 5 stars
I fun quick read.
Mar 21, 2008
Tosh rated it: 5 of 5 stars
Really the ultimate narration about the nastiness of being a voyeur and what happens when you 'watch' too much. Creepy and very entertaining read. Woolrich is something else. The Hitchcock film version is very close to the book. Those two share the same hobbies!
May 23, 2009
Mohammed rated it: 5 of 5 stars
A very atmosphere strong story. Woolrich has a literary quality that made a story with a simple premise much more.
Apr 20, 2008
April rated it: 4 of 5 stars
I am a huge Hitchcock fan, so I enjoyed reading this short story that the movie was adapted from.
Mar 22, 2009
Laura rated it: 3 of 5 stars
A rarity, a movie I like more than the book! Of course, the book is actualy a 40 page short story.
Feb 22, 2012
James-clifton marked it as to-read
Feb 20, 2012
Amber marked it as to-read
Feb 19, 2012
Lucas rated it: 5 of 5 stars
Feb 19, 2012
Emily marked it as to-read
Feb 15, 2012
Peter rated it: 4 of 5 stars
Feb 14, 2012
Lizzy is currently reading it
Feb 14, 2012
Martha marked it as to-read
Feb 12, 2012
Bej rated it: 4 of 5 stars
Feb 07, 2012
Phillip marked it as to-read
Feb 07, 2012
Jack marked it as to-read
Feb 06, 2012
Luke rated it: 4 of 5 stars
Jan 29, 2012
Tonko marked it as to-read
Jan 29, 2012
Sonanewton marked it as to-read
Jan 28, 2012
C. rated it: 5 of 5 stars
Jan 27, 2012
Bonnie marked it as to-read
Feb 06, 2012
Michelle rated it: 3 of 5 stars