"To Catch a Thief: Hitchcock's worst film?"

I ran across this http://www.filmwad.com/the-worst-movies-by-the-best-directors-2198-p.html


which features the "Worst film" by a major director. I kind of feel this guy is waaaayy off base ("War of the Worlds" Spielberg's worst film? He's made ones that are much worse than that). This guy names "To Catch a Thief" as Hitchcock's worst film. Clearly he's not seen everything the master of suspense made. While "Thief" is relaxed and no masterpiece, it has some charming moments. The new DVD looks pretty good. I do have to agree about "The Godfather III" being a disaster but, again, Coppola also directed films that were far worse.

Any thoughts?

 

He did correctly select the worst Peckinpah film - "The Ballad of Cable Hogue".

 

It's better than most of the films cited. Hitch has a much better ratio of great to average/bad than Spielberg. I don't think he ever made a film that wasn't at least pretty good, so trying to name his worst is a bit of an exercise in silliness. I thought Black Dahlia was a nice comeback for DePalma, and much prefer it to Untouchables or Casualties of War. Didn't even see Bonfire of the Vanities. Wouldn't give it as high marks as Carlito's Way, but it's in that ballpark. But DePalma is a director whose ratio of great to average/bad has been steadily decreasing thoughout his career. The remake of Cape Fear by Scorsese was pretty bad, but Bringing Out the Dead was unwatchable. Godfather III could never have approached the greatness of I and II, two of my top ten movies of all time in all probability. Coppola deserves some kind of award for having the gumption to even try. Ballad of Cable Hogue is minor Peckinpah and it's a gentle film, but I believe it's far from his worst efforts. I guess it's fun to make a list like this, but like any other opinion you have to consider the source. I don't think this site speaks with significant cinematic authority.

 

Love the original Cape Fear ... never bothered to see the remake ...

As to your original ? ... To Catch a Thief ... is one of Hitchcock's weaker films ... but not sure it's the weakest w/o doing some research ...

 

Family Plot anyone?

 

I liked Family Plot but I'd nominate Topaz or Torn Curtain though.

 

I would agree that Torn Curtain is a weaker film by Hitch but the sequence where Paul Newman tries to kill the East German agent by sticking his head in an oven almost redeems it.

Most of the films that he made after The Birds lacked cohesion. It didn't help that he lost most of the team (or alienated as he did with Bernard Herrmann)that helped create his triumphs during the 50's early 60's.

I actually thought John Micahel Hayes script was quite witty for Thief even if the material isn't Hitch at his best.

 

I would agree though that "Cable Hogue" is probably Peckinpah's worst. I don't think that "Cape Fear" is Scorese's though. It's certainly a film for hire (much like Coppola's "Peggy Sue Got Married" or "Gardens of Stone" but it's far from either his best or worst. It sits comfortably in the middle. "Gangs of New York" certainly could fall into that category for all of its imaginative first half. The second half falls.

 

I'd have to agree with a bunch of those. I don't believe that Cape Fear is Scorsese's worst....I'd save that for Boxcar Bertha. I, too disagree with the Hitchcock choice. Tarantino has done worse than Death Proof, which I thought was pretty good. Lastly, I don't think Scott's worst movie was Matchstick Men.

As a side note, I have absolutely no problem with film critics....I love film critics.....but I abhor that style of criticism. It always seems so unnecessarily nasty and makes me want to ask the author what movies he's ever directed.

 

Add the sappy remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much to that triumvirate.

Grace Kelly over Doris Day every time.

 

'Topaz', most definitely.

'To Catch a Thief' is intentional fluff (no matter how many film theorists will attempt to argue otherwise), and an excuse to watch Grace Kelly for 1 1/2 hours.

 

I've never needed an excuse for that.

 

Definately not his worst!

 

"Rope" is a lot worse than "To Catch A Thief"!

 

They're a number of his films that are not as well known that are far worse than any of the films mentioned (except for Family Plot): Jamaica Inn, Under Capricorn, The Paradine Case, etc.

 

When I first got a laserdisc player, in 1982, To Catch A Theif was one of the first movies (and the first Hitchcock) that I bought. I have always loved it.

 

The scene with Cary Grant and Grace Kelly with the fireworks going on in the background is one of my favorite Hitchcock scenes.

 

I think Strangers On A Train is Hitchcock's worst movie.Certainly the most overrated.As for Scorsese,i'd agree that Boxcar Bertha is his worst film.King Of Comedy and After Hours are overlooked brilliant films.As for Cape Fear i think Scorsese's remake is every bit as good if not better than the original.

 

By George, I think ya got it!

And--let's face it--an excuse for an exotic locale, still another Hitch film with Cary Grant...it's very light indeed, and all the more enjoyable for being breezy, sexy, and cool, without getting too heavy(the subplot, fortunately, is just about meaningless).

 

No.

It's "Rope".

That film makes me want to punch someone.

 

Apparently Hitch couldn't find a film editor, so had to make do with 10-minute takes...what a bummer....

 

I always thought this was one of Cary Grant's and Grace Kelly's better films they ever did. And both these superstars in the same film! ...and beautifully filmed and well directed.

 

My thought as soon as I saw the thread title..

And I like "Rope"...

 

"What will you have--a breast or a leg?"
I would've done a long "hobbina hobbina Hobbina" if that was me in the car with her.

The Paradine Case, for me, is unwatchable.

 

Absolutely no offence, but I think you're crazy!

'Rope' is an exceptional film, both fascinating as an experiment and as a piece of true cinema in its own right. Sure, Hitchcock couldn't snag Cary Grant, and (some) people get annoyed at the tracking into the rear of an actor (the length of the camera mags at the time), but I don't think it detracts from the film in any way whatsoever. Jimmy Stewart is bizarre in the role (and he can play it convincingly - his 'Everyman' screen persona is here perversely inverted by Hitchcock, and, indeed, Stewart himself!) and John Dall is incredible as 'Brandon'. Hell, the whole cast is fantastic, and (contrary to some opinions), I think the slow burn tension is unbearable.

Quite honestly, I have never understood those who downgrade the film. Yes, even Arthur Laurents (screenplay), on the DVD documentary, criticises the film - but I think everyone is way off base.

'Rope' is an incredible achievement in every way.