Hitchcock Film By Film Thread

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by MLutthans, Aug 6, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Interestingly DePalma's films are almost as informed by Hitchcock as they are by Michaelangelo Antononi's ("Blow Up" being the most obvious film that he was eching with "Blow Out"). The Hitchcock influence may be stronger but that I think has more to do with the fact that Hitchcock made films much longer. Also, folks miss the fact that Hitchcock's style as a director in regards to form and content constantly evolved. While there are threads that link "Shadow of a Doubt" to "Frenzy" they are the works of one man in very different places in his life at the time. One has a thread of hope the other is darker suggesting we live in an unforgiving universe.

    Many people fail to take into account that DePalma had many of the same influences as Hitchcock in addition to being influenced by Hitchcock and others as well.

    DePalma also gets bashed for his jones for Hitchcock's films and techniques but as with any director he was clearly influenced by Hitchcock in many respects in a good way. His best films showed that influence in films such as "Sisters" but the ones that truly excel for me at least are films like "Carrie" where he find manages to marry the themes that fascinate him to the technique that fascinates him as well.

    I love the sequence built around the second murder "we see" in "Frenzy" where the camera floats down the stairs, out of the house and across the street as we see life completely unaware of what's happening. It's clearly influenced with its "floating" camera by Murneau who's "Sunrise" continued to be an example of pure cinema in Hitchcock's life. It's a brilliant and chilling moment more so than the brutal first murder we see in the film and its understatement because of what we've seen already makes it even more powerful because its all in OUR mind.

    I realize a lot of folks dislike "Frenzy" but part of that is that it doesn't fit the expectations of a Hitchcock film. That was also why "Psycho" got such mixed reviews at the time BUT it doesn't detract from its brilliance.

    In many respects we can think of "Frenzy" as a color counterpart to "Psycho". I love the "Frenzy" trailer which Hitchcock got the idea for.
     
  2. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    Yes, that's exactly the sort of thing I was blabbering about in one of the previous posts, in that the film as a whole may come across as crude or unstylized on the surface, but if you scratch a level or two down, there are some very elegant, advanced, subtle things going on within FRENZY. Rewatches are quite rewarding, as a result. Thanks for bringing out this specific and splendid example of what I was trying to point out.
     
  3. Slokes

    Slokes Cruel But Fair

    Location:
    Greenwich, CT USA
    Yikes! Apparently I conflated murder #1 (the victim praying) with murder #2 (the camera moving back and falling on a blank wall). I haven't seen the film in a while, and the two images, while strong in my mind, were not in the right context.
     
  4. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    I actually like Frenzy more than Psycho. Both films are a result of Hitchcock more or less kicking himself in the pants and pushing his technique in some new directions as well as further in some familiar directions.

    Regards,
     
  5. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    Family Plot Spoiler alert:


    One additional point I wanted to make on Family Plot is that the ending where Barbara Harris' character exhibits real psychic ability is not the total cop-out that some people think it is. In the scene where she is drugged by Devane and Black's characters, Devane mentions getting another jewel for his chandelier when they are dragging her to the holding cell. This at least leaves open the possibility that she absorbed this information actively or passively in her drugged-out state.

    On ther other hand, if the wink at the camera is what bothers you, I cannot offer a sufficient rationalization to make you feel better about that. :)

    Anyway, back to Frenzy...

    Regards,
     
  6. Johnny66

    Johnny66 Laird of Boleskine

    Location:
    Australia.
    'Frenzy' is Hitchcock's last masterpiece, and his most devastating depiction of everyday predatory cannibalism. It still shocks, even now. Some say it loses steam in the second half, but Rusk is certainly one of the most repellent - and entertaining - characters in the Hitchcock canon.
     
  7. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    IMHO, the best "Hitchcock villain" since Robert Walker in Strangers on a Train. I say that in the face of being an enthusiastic fan of James Mason's character in North by Nortrhwest.

    Regards,
     
  8. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    I think we'll be introducing the next film each Wednesday and Sunday (unless traffic deems otherwise), so if you have any comments still regarding Frenzy, speak up! Thanks to all those who are contributing.
     
  9. Turnaround

    Turnaround Senior Member

    Location:
    USA
    Brian De Palma used this in "Blow Out" and "Scarface", to different effect, and he blends it with his style to make it his own:

    In "Blow Out" -- When John Lithgow strangles a woman in the construction lot -- a victim whom De Palma tricks you into thinking is Nancy Allen -- the camera rolls out of the lot and across the street in one continuous shot to show Nancy Allen walking down the street carefree, outside where the killing is happening.

    In "Scarface", the chainsaw scene -- When the drug dealer pulls a chainsaw on Al Pacino, the camera rolls out of the apartment and across the street to show Pacino's friend flirting with a girl in a bikini while waiting on Pacino. It breaks the tension, but keeps the viewer hanging ... THEN De Palma takes you back into the apartment to see the rest of the chainsaw terror.

    In the beginning of this "Frenzy" scene, the camera zooms in on the woman's face, then she turns around and out of the frame to reveal the killer's face, standing behind her. De Palma also uses that trick, like in the end of "Raising Cain".

    De Palma has also borrowed elements from "Family Plot". Offhand at this hour, I can think of the trenchcoat and sunglasses disguise showing up as the slasher in "Dressed to Kill".
     
  10. Turnaround

    Turnaround Senior Member

    Location:
    USA
    Oh, another element borrowed by De Palma from "Family Jewel". At the very end of "Snake Eyes":

    Over the closing credits, De Palma does a slow reveal of a jewel hidden in a construction site.
     
  11. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    Next Film: TOPAZ (1969)

    TOPAZ came out in 1969, and I'm not going to be able to add much to the discussion on this one. I last saw it 15 or 20 more years ago, and I remember that it left me completely flat, but I was also watching on television (a commercial-free broadcast on the PBS station in Seattle), not in a theatre.

    A couple of little personal comments:

    1. One of my all-time favorite theatres was the Southcenter in Tukwila, Washington, a suburb south of Seattle. The theatre featured a 32x90, DEEPLY curved Cinerama screen, and was, in fact, the final 70mm Cinerama theatre built in America, possibly in the world, being owned by United Theatres, which was connected with Pacific Theatres of Los Angeles, which by that time owned the Cinerama name. IIRC, the theatre opened on January 3, 1970, and the opening engagement was Hitchcock's TOPAZ. (It seems odd to me that a company would build a theatre with 70mm 6-track capabilities, then grand-open the place with a 35mm 1.85 mono film, but that's what they did.)

    2. Just last week, at the Northwest Film Forum in Seattle, TOPAZ had a week-long run in 35mm. Sadly, I missed it, and it's not likely to ever play here on 35mm again, so it's a chance lost to see the film in a proper presentation.

    Trailers for TOPAZ can be seen here.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From wikipedia:

    Topaz, director Alfred Hitchcock's 51st movie, released in 1969. It is a Cold War and spy story, adapted from the book of the same name by Leon Uris.
    It stars Frederick Stafford, Dany Robin, Claude Jade, Michel Subor, Karin Dor, John Vernon, Michel Piccoli, Philippe Noiret, John Forsythe, Roscoe Lee Browne, and Per-Axel Arosenius.

    Plot

    When a high-ranking Soviet intelligence officer defects to the West with a story of an agreement between the Russians and Cubans and the existence of a mole within the French intelligence service, CIA agent Nordstrom (John Forsythe) enlists the aid of his friend and French agent André Devereaux (Frederick Stafford), encouraging him to accompany his daughter Michèle (Claude Jade) on her honeymoon with journalist François Picard (Michel Subor) as a premise to get him to New York. André accepts, but his wife Nicole (Dany Robin) is worried for him.
    After managing to get hold of some seriously damaging papers from the visiting Cuban official Rico Parra (John Vernon), in New York to appear at the United Nations and staying in Harlem to show solidarity with "the masses", sneakily of course, a concerned Devereaux jets off to Cuba and catches up with his mistress Juanita de Cordoba (Karin Dor), who is now secretly involved with a local underground movement, whilst also being involved in another way with Parra. Parra discovers that she is in the underground from a tortured underground member. Parra confronts Juanita, and shoots her to save her from being tortured to death. In one of the film's most memorable shots Juanita is seen from overhead, her dress spreading out on the floor like a bloodstain (although it is purple not red) as she falls. Devereaux then is recalled to Paris, where he attempts to get to the bottom of the whole leak problem. Michèle wants to reconcile her parents.
    Nicole cheats on André (after his Cuban affair) with the man who proves to be the leader of the spy ring, "Topaz", Jacques Granville (Michel Piccoli), their old friend from their days together in the French Resistance. François goes on to find out who "Topaz" is by interrogating NATO official Henri Jarre (Philippe Noiret). A short time late Michèle finds the murdered Jarre. André and Michèle return to Nicole's, where they find that François is missing. A short time later François arrives and shows a drawing of Jarre. Nicole knows him and tells André, that Granville is the head of "Topaz"...
    In the original ending, there was a duel between André and Jacques. This was panned by audiences, and Hitchcock changed the ending to one in which Jacques apparently shoots himself off-screen (since no footage of his doing so existed).[1] Another rejected ending had Jacques escaping on an Aeroflot flight to the Soviet Union.
    [edit]Cast

    Frederick Stafford as Andre Devereaux
    Dany Robin as Nicole Devereaux
    John Vernon as Rico Parra
    Karin Dor as Juanita de Cordoba
    Michel Piccoli as Jacques Granville
    Philippe Noiret as Henri Jarre
    Claude Jade as Michele Picard
    Michel Subor as Francois Picard
    Roscoe Lee Browne as Philippe Dubois
    Per-Axel Arosenius as Boris Kusenov
    John Forsythe as Michael Nordstrom
    Edmon Ryan as McKittreck
    Sonja Kolthoff as Mrs. Kusenov
    Tina Hedström as Tamara Kusenov (as Tina Hedstrom)
    John Van Dreelen as Claude Martin
    Donald Randolph as Luis Uribe (as Don Randolph)
    Roberto Contreras as Muñoz
    Carlos Rivas as Hernandez
    Roger Til as Jean Chabrier
    Lewis Charles as Pablo Mendoza
    Sándor Szabó as Emile Redon (as Sandor Szabo)
    Anna Navarro as Carlotta Mendoza
    Lew Brown as American Official
    John Roper as Thomas
    George Skaff as Rene d'Arcy
    [edit]Reaction

    The film was not particularly well-received or successful at the box office. Hitchcock changed the script shortly before the beginning of the filming and the distributor Universal forced a different ending to the one preferred by Hitchcock[2]. For Topaz, Hitchcock engaged the 19-year-old French actress Claude Jade from Truffaut's Stolen Kisses. She and Dany Robin, cast as her mother, would provide the glamour in the story. "Claude Jade is a rather quiet young lady," Hitchcock said later, "but I wouldn't guarantee [that] about her behavior in a taxi".
    Some critics liked Topaz. New York Times critic Vincent Canby in 1969 wrote of Topaz: "Alfred Hitchcock at his Best" and put the film on his "Ten Best" list for 1969. In 1969, Hitchcock won "Best Director" for Topaz from the National Board of Review.[citation needed]
    [edit]Criticism

    Some American critics said that there was no Hollywood star in the movie—no Bergman, no Grant; the cast did however include renowned international film stars (Jade, Piccoli, Noiret), whose previous successes had been primarily in France. Some attribute Hitchcock's casting choices to the negative experience the director had working with Paul Newman on Torn Curtain.
    [edit]Alternate endings

    When American Movie Classics aired the film in the 1990s it included alternative endings filmed by Hitchcock, which had been kept in the Universal vaults.[citation needed] The "Masterpiece Collection" DVD released by Universal restores a number of deleted scenes and uses the ending in which Jacques escapes. All three endings appear as extras on the DVD, together with an "Appreciation" by Leonard Maltin in which Maltin discusses the deleted scenes and alternate endings among other things.
    [edit]Hitchcock cameo

    Hitchcock's signature cameo appearance occurs 32 minutes into the film, at the airport: he is seated in a wheelchair as he is being pushed by a nurse. She stops, and he nonchalantly stands and greets a man, proceeding to walk off screen with him.


    Real-life influences



    The film begins with a Russian KGB agent defecting along with his wife and daughter. It was based on that of Anatoliy Golitsyn.
    André Devereaux was based on French agent Philippe Thyraud de Vosjoli of the SDECE.
    "Juanita de Cordoba" is loosely based on Castro's daughter Alina Fernández who fled Cuba and defected to America. Castro disowned her for her treason. This is not the case in the novel and as such is highly questionable.
    The red haired army captain known as "Hernandez" is based on Manuel Piñeiro.
    Fidel Castro makes an uncredited appearance in the film along with Che Guevara. While in Cuba, Deveraux attends a Castro rally in order to keep up the appearance of his official cover, that of a French trade attaché. The film spliced in actual footage of a real Castro rally of the era to add to the realism.
    The French title is L'Étau (English : ~bench vice, ~stranglehold), to avoid any reference to Topaze, a most very well known French opus by Marcel Pagnol (play in 1930, first film version in 1936 with Arnaudy in the title role, second film version in 1951 with Fernandel in the title role). In the French script, the topaz gemstone is even replaced by "l'opale" (opal).


    ------------------------------------------------

    Caption I found on another site:
    "Look at all those people fleeing the theatre!"
     

    Attached Files:

  12. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    (Slightly off-topic, but here's a shot of the interior of the Southcenter Theatre -- mentioned in my previous post -- taken from the booth in 1981 by my friend Craig Hyland, formerly of Videophile in Seattle.)
     

    Attached Files:

  13. benjaminhuf

    benjaminhuf Forum Resident


    Like the pic of this theater much better than I liked the movie. I don't think I can stand to sit through Topaz again. It's amazing they had a revival of this dud. I think it was even worse than Family Plot. There were a few interesting scenes, such as the one where a woman in a striking dress collapses at the bottom of some stairs. But overall this was just not Hitch's kind of film. Something went very wrong from the get go on this one. I recall that the author (Leon Uris?) had a painful encounter with Hitch in trying to write a script. Hitch was rather solipsistic and basically went off on various monologues for days at a time. I think Torn Curtain, weak though that movie is, is better than Topaz...
     
  14. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    Torn Curtain and Family Plot are unquestionably better than Topaz. They are not even in the same league of dullness. The real question for those skimming the bottom of Hitch's Hollywood output is whether Topaz is worse than The Paradine Case or Under Capricorn.
     
  15. benjaminhuf

    benjaminhuf Forum Resident

    This is an easy one for me. I'm one of those freaks that actually likes Under Capricorn, although I realize it's seriously flawed. I'm also one of those freaks who likes parts of Paradine. So, for me, this is an easy question.

    I don't know all of the British films, and so can't really comment on them, but why don't we all try to list our top 5 Hitchcock duds from 1940 on....Topaz is definitely on the list for me.....
     
  16. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    I dare anybody to host a triple feature consisting of Topaz and any other two films from that list. Euthanasia is looking better all the time.

    It is stunning how those who can create such magnificent works of art -- as Hitch surely could -- were capable of creating such painfully bad "product," as well. Maybe Norah Jones was inspired by late-career Hitchcock when she did her third album.
     
  17. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    My bottom 5? Any 5 films from the post-Psycho era, except Frenzy. (Yes, I'm including Marnie and The Birds in there, although I suppose they are about 1/4 step above the others). One thing that really gets my goat about those films is how dated they look and sound, coupled with some pretty cardboard acting, coupled with (in most cases) lousy music scores, coupled with photography that is two or three steps down from the glory days of VistaVision in the 1950s, coupled with color palettes that look like Universal TV movies, coupled with scripts that rival ROBOT MONSTER (slight, intentional exaggeration), coupled with horrible rear projection shots (even for the day).

    I see zero inspiration in these films, but heck, if I was heartbroken over losing Grace Kelley and tried to re-create her with the likes of Tippi Hedren, I'd lose the spring in my step, too.
     
  18. MLutthans

    MLutthans That's my spaghetti, Chewbacca! Staff Thread Starter

    By the way, has anybody bothered to check out those interviews at the bottom of post #42 in this thread? I tend to think of Hitch as being quite dour at that point in his life, but to the contrary -- he was quite cogent and out-and-out funny in spots. Time well spent.
     
  19. albert_m

    albert_m Forum Resident

    Location:
    Atl., Ga, USA
    Topaz is flawed and it certainly could have been done better, but I still enjoy watching and the story. Watching it, I think it could have been more contemporary in style (a little more dark as by 1969, Hitch could have been able to do that) instead of being exactly like a movie produced in the early 60s. There are a few great Hitchcock visuals though
     
  20. BradF

    BradF Senior Member

    Location:
    SW Ontario
    Topaz. I like it a lot. Great set pieces. Good suspense. No Grant or Bergman, still, no complaints from me about the acting. Philippe Noiret especially is brilliant.

    The farewell scene at the airport is a let-down. The suicide ending works best for me... the way I saw it at the theatre and presented intact on the German edition DVD.
     
  21. Oatsdad

    Oatsdad Oat, Biscuits, Abbie & Mitzi: Best Dogs Ever

    Location:
    Alexandria VA
    I think "Topaz" is decent but it suffers from a sense of anonymity - it just doesn't feel like a Hitchcock film to me, or at least it doesn't feel like one HE made. It could've been from a Hitch imitator. It's a good flick overall but not anything memorable...
     
  22. Mine-In order of awfulness.

    1. The Paradine Case-When Gregory Peck was asked if he could destroy any film he was in, this is the one he picked as the worst he had ever appeared in.
    2. Topaz-Boring a sin that affected few Hitchcock films
    3. Marnie-I realize there are a lot of fans of this psychoanaytic clap trap--I'm not one of them. Robin Wood makes an impassionated case for this movie and he's wrong.
    4. Torn Curtain-Except for the brilliant sequence where Paul Newman murders a man by stuffing his head in a gas oven, it's one that has not aged well at all.
    5. The Wrong Man-I admire the film and what Hitchcock was trying to do here it's just dreadfully dull to me. Henry Fonda gives a solid performance as does Vera Miles in a thankless role. Based on a true story by the way which goes to show that true stories don't necessarily make great movies.
     
  23. benjaminhuf

    benjaminhuf Forum Resident

    wayneklein: Interesting list. And I know you really know your Hitchcock.


    Here's mine:
    1. Topaz--boring to the point at times it's like nails on a chalkboard
    2. Mr. and Mrs. Smith--boring, not very romantic, and not funny (which is esp. painful because it tries sometimes)
    3. Family Plot--as has been mentioned, rather like a tv movie
    4. Suspicion--Tough here, because I love Cary Grant and Fontaine. It has some great moments too (milk scene, etc.). But to me and a lot of other people it seems to fall apart in a very bad way at the end. I don't know, maybe I'm being too hard on it. But I remember when I saw it 15 years ago saying to myself that I hoped never to see it again.
    5. Torn Curtain--boy do I want to like this one, but I just can't. I'd rather try to sit through this one again than any of the others on this list though.

    dishonorable mentions:
    Frenzy has a huge fan base from people I respect, but I just can't stomach this one. I can't really put it on my list because I've never been able to sit through it. And I can sit through (with difficulty) things like Gangs of New York, and so I'm not completely squeamish...

    Paradine is a terrible mess. There's no chemistry between Peck and Alida Valli, which is key to the whole picture. But somehow the one time I watched it I still enjoyed watching Peck at times, and Charles Laughton is interesting. There are a few other interesting bits as well, but it is pretty bad. And it's amazing they spent about the same money on this one that they spent on North by Northwest. It just doesn't seem to be up on the screen anywhere.
     
  24. Johnny66

    Johnny66 Laird of Boleskine

    Location:
    Australia.
    Yes, I really think he's reaching like all hell in the (later edition of) 'Hitchcock's Films' when he writes about 'Marnie'. Hitchcock intended for the rear projection to be hokey? Ooook.

    'Topaz' is a good example of the decline of the studio era, and the kind of cinema that the 'new' Hollywood would expose as the garbage it was.
     
  25. For what it's worth even though I named "Paradine" it's really a Selznick film; he produced it and wrote the screenplay (often rewriting scenes the day of shooting and keeping Hitchcock and the crew waiting). Hitchcock objected all around to the casting (except for Charles Laughton who he had worked with before and knew he would chew the scenery just the way he needed). He kept himself occupied with planning his camera moves and the knowledge that his contract with Selznick was ending AND that he would finally have the freedom to make the films he wanted (in fact during his Hollywood years when he was under contract to Selznick Hitchcock relished the chance to be loaned out to other studios and directors--he would have unpreceded freedom compared to Selznick and be able to make films the way he wanted for the most part. He particularly enjoyed working at Universal and enjoyed working on "Lifeboat").

    I like moments in "Suspicion" but hated the whole "monkey face" nick name and loved the original planned conclusion where Grant's character DOES kill her only to post a letter to the police unaware that it implicates him in her murder.

    It would have been a far more interesting and better film IMHO.

    As for "Frenzy" I understand. It IS a difficult movie to sit through in many respects and is Hitchcock's most brutal and cynical film. It reminds me much more of "Strangers on a Train" but doesn't exhibit the same weaknesses. On the other hand, it's not something you can sit and watch just for entertainment value like you can "Train".
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine