Hitchcock

..and why not?

Your five fav's

The Man who knew too Much
0
No votes
The 39 Steps
3
3%
Secret Agent
0
No votes
Sabotage
1
1%
Young and innocent
0
No votes
Jamaica Inn
1
1%
Rebbecca
5
6%
Foreign Correspondent
1
1%
Mr. and Mrs. Smith
0
No votes
Suspicion
1
1%
Saboteur
0
No votes
Shadow of a Doubt
7
8%
Lifeboat
1
1%
The Fighting Generation
0
No votes
Spellbound
2
2%
Notorious
3
3%
The Paradine Case
0
No votes
Rope
3
3%
Under Capricorn
0
No votes
Stage Fright
0
No votes
Strangers on a train
9
10%
I confess
0
No votes
Dail M for Murder
1
1%
Rear Window
11
13%
To Catch a Thief
0
No votes
The Trouble with Harry
1
1%
The Man who knew too much
0
No votes
The wrong man
0
No votes
Vertigo
11
13%
North by Northwest
10
11%
Psycho
10
11%
The birds
4
5%
Marnie
1
1%
Torn Curtain
0
No votes
Topaz
0
No votes
Frenzy
1
1%
Family Plot
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 87

User avatar
Rayge
Posts: 11332
Joined: 14 Aug 2013, 11:37
Location: deepest Devon
Contact:

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Rayge » 02 Sep 2017, 09:17

toomanyhatz wrote:Pained me to leave "North by Northwest" off. It's my number 6, and on a good day could replace any of the 5 above it.

Same here
KAT/COYS

You can't play a tune on an absolute

When the ball sleeps it dreams it is a Frisbee

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law. Love is the law, love under will

User avatar
!!VAPRANT!!
hounds people off the board
Posts: 14425
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: Hitchcock

Postby !!VAPRANT!! » 02 Sep 2017, 09:41

No votes for the last four (yet) ?

I enjoyed Frenzy a lot - although because of the time and the place, there's an inescapably tacky tone to the thing. You keep expecting Dick Emery to pop up.
Deewank wrote:By the way I gave you some Jelly Tots for your birthday and you didn’t give me ANYTHING

User avatar
Belle Lettre
Éminence grise
Posts: 15004
Joined: 09 Oct 2008, 07:16
Location: Antiterra

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Belle Lettre » 02 Sep 2017, 10:11

:lol: very true
Nikki Gradual wrote:
Get a fucking grip you narcissistic cretins.

User avatar
kewl klive
cultural defective
Posts: 14224
Joined: 29 Sep 2007, 00:32
Location: Petrus inhibito pompus

Re: Hitchcock

Postby kewl klive » 02 Sep 2017, 10:19

You are awful.
Lonely Kal wrote:John posted a picture of me which he'd doctored nastily.

Ho Ho Hodgson wrote:I know you think I pick on you.

Baldy K wrote:I'd love to meet Jeemo (no idea if he'd like to meet me).

User avatar
The Modernist
Posts: 9640
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Hitchcock

Postby The Modernist » 02 Sep 2017, 19:11

Hodgson wrote:No votes for the last four (yet) ?

I enjoyed Frenzy a lot - although because of the time and the place, there's an inescapably tacky tone to the thing. You keep expecting Dick Emery to pop up.


I like it a lot and was quite close to including it. I really like the atmospheric (pre-gentrification) Covent Garden location and Barry Foster is very good in it. It has some great set pieces and shots. The only bum notes are the scenes of domestic light comedy with the inspector and his wife, but its still a great film.

User avatar
Darryl Strawberry
Posts: 7070
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 21:10
Location: Under the watchful eye of the Clive police

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Darryl Strawberry » 02 Sep 2017, 19:25

No. Frenzy is the first clear step of his final decline. Many set pieces are laboured, the dialogue is clunky and the acting hammy.
The potato sack scene is classic Hitchcock, but not much else.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
John Coan, with nothing else to do, wrote:I just Googled his name!

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 4014
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Darkness_Fish » 02 Sep 2017, 20:13

Spellbound has the worst skiing scenes in cinema history, if memory serves, probably the least competent images Hitchcock ever put to celluloid. Frenzy is good because it's got such a really nasty, horrible edge to it, there is no glorification of the sexual killer here, unlike so many other serial killer films. The character is nasty, the sexual violence genuinely jarring and unsettling. Not one I care to watch very often, for that reason.
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
Darryl Strawberry
Posts: 7070
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 21:10
Location: Under the watchful eye of the Clive police

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Darryl Strawberry » 02 Sep 2017, 20:19

I may well be (as usual) in a minority here but it doesn't have a quarter of the menace of, say, Peeping Tom, which is over 10 years older.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
John Coan, with nothing else to do, wrote:I just Googled his name!

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 4014
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Darkness_Fish » 02 Sep 2017, 20:23

Shadow of a Doubt
Rope
Psycho
Rear Window
The Birds

I only plumped for The Birds to round the list off, probably because I've seen it more than the other contenders (Lifeboat, Vertigo, Dial M for Murder, North by Northwest, Rebecca, Strangers on a Train). Probably my favourite director, especially since The Coens seem to have forgotten the art of film-making. I think there's probably only Family Plot from the films I've seen that I'd actively avoid watching again.
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 4014
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Darkness_Fish » 02 Sep 2017, 20:25

John Co(a)n wrote:I may well be (as usual) in a minority here but it doesn't have a quarter of the menace of, say, Peeping Tom, which is over 10 years older.

I really don't get the praise for Peeping Tom, I find it entirely risible. There's a man trying to kill me lugging a fucking massive camera around with a spike on it - should I stand still and scream, or walk slowly away and hail a taxi?
Saving my holier-than-thou nonsense for a more deserving cause since '82

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 26168
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Hitchcock

Postby toomanyhatz » 02 Sep 2017, 20:34

Darkness_Fish wrote:
John Co(a)n wrote:I may well be (as usual) in a minority here but it doesn't have a quarter of the menace of, say, Peeping Tom, which is over 10 years older.

I really don't get the praise for Peeping Tom, I find it entirely risible. There's a man trying to kill me lugging a fucking massive camera around with a spike on it - should I stand still and scream, or walk slowly away and hail a taxi?


It's been a long time, but I remember this being my reaction at the time. As a metaphor, it's a pretty damned obvious/simplistic one.
sloopjohnc wrote:I know I picked the Diamondbacks, but they were the wildcard. Next teams will be a little tougher.


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017!

User avatar
Jeemo
Posts: 20169
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 23:17
Location: ????

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Jeemo » 02 Sep 2017, 23:28

John Co(a)n wrote:No. Frenzy is the first clear step of his final decline. Many set pieces are laboured, the dialogue is clunky and the acting hammy.
The potato sack scene is classic Hitchcock, but not much else.


You could say that about a few of his films though.
Image So Long Kid, Take A Bow.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 28391
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Matt Wilson » 03 Sep 2017, 00:49

Marnie is the beginning of the end.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22565
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 03 Sep 2017, 01:05

I recently watched Family Plot. It was pretty great!
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 26168
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: Hitchcock

Postby toomanyhatz » 03 Sep 2017, 01:29

I think his last two are a lot better than most of his 60s ones (Psycho and The Birds excepted, of course).
sloopjohnc wrote:I know I picked the Diamondbacks, but they were the wildcard. Next teams will be a little tougher.


1959 1963 1965 1966 1974 1977 1978 1981 1988 2017!

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 10166
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Sneelock » 11 Sep 2017, 19:05

Family Plot & Frenzy better than "Topaz" and "Torn Curtain"?
I don't have a problem with that.
"Wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns.”

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 10166
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Sneelock » 11 Sep 2017, 19:32

I took:
Foreign Correspondent
Shadow of a Doubt
Notorious
Strangers on a Train
& North by Northwest.

at first blush I intended to pick a film from each of what I consider his "periods". you'll notice his "British Period" isn't represented at all. oh well, best laid plans. I guess I just decided to go with my bread-basket instead. I think he hit the ground running with his Hollywood films. He is especially getting that "wrong guy / guy on the run" thing down to a science by the time of "Foreign Correspondent" which I think is a dandy movie.

He told Truffaut that he wanted Gary Cooper but I can't imagine me liking it better. I probably like Gary Cooper better than I like Joel Mccrea but I LOVE Joel Mccrea and I think he has that puzzled expression that makes these movies so easy to get caught up in. I guess I can lump this together with "North by Northwest". probably his most famous and confident wrong guy on the run movie. it's slick, it's lean. the bad guys are just bad enough that you like watching them fall to their deaths. People that want to make movies are told they need to plan things ahead. I think few films do this better. the writer says Hitchcock told him scenes he wanted to do: rushmore, plane in cornfield, helping somebody and finding a knife in their back. He said his job was to string it all together. the right and left side of the brain working together in a romantic thriller. I think it's pretty special.

Hithcock was often very confident but the twitchy drummer in "Young and Rich" or the sniper waiting for the cymbals to crash in the "Man Who Knew too Much" remake seem like highlights. North by Northwest feels like a highlight reel pretty much from beginning to end.

Notorious might be my favorite in the batch. I think the performances are topnotch and the show-offy direction is all clever and manipulative in a way that moves the story and characters forward. I don't think any other actress was as good as convincing me she was in love with her leading man (I.Bergman) C. Grant's natural likability works a long way towards redeeming the fact that he is really pretty cold to her early on. I think everything works just so and reaches a wonderful conclusion.

I'll lump "Shadow & Strangers" together too. the most interesting guy in the movie is an unrepentant psychopath. Both go from light to dark in a way that I find very engaging. Both are pretty likable guys when you get down to it. I like how the main character in each is sort of trapped - an unwilling accessory.

Strangers is as confident as N by NW in a lot of ways. the "big ending" bugs some people but I think it's perfect.

I love Hitchcock. I've been meaning to get to this thread for a while. I try to go to the movies a lot and a lot changes. Our tablets and phones and game consoles are having an undeniable effect on our attention spans. Still, this guy who figured out how to make audiences hold their breath in the silent era was really on to something. I think, in many ways it is still a very modern approach. He shows you things and you figure them out. You feel very proud of yourself for figuring it out.
A lot of this stuff still works and will continue to work if we can continue to give something our undivided attention for over an hour at a time.
"Wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns.”

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 10166
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Sneelock » 11 Sep 2017, 20:21

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:I think it's pretty clunky. It relies on a kind of false Freudian notion that identifying trauma is the same as healing it. The characterizations are a bit stock too. Then there's the strangeness of the Dali imagery in the dream sequences. It doesn't really work, but it's beautiful.

All of this said, I completely get it leaving a strong impression. It haunted me for years too. So despite my criticisms, I actually get why you might rate it really highly.


I love "Spellbound" and think it has a lot going for it. First and foremost there's that Ingrid Bergman falling in love thing I already mentioned. Then there's Gregory Peck. I think his unusual quality helps the far-fetched aspects of the film considerably. Certainly the film takes a lunk headed approach to Freudian psychology but I think that's something movies can do so long as they don't contradict themselves. the rules the movie makes for itself are the rules up to a point. If Freddie kills us while we are sleeping in a "Nightmare on Elm Street" movie then we will die. If Gregory Peck remembers then he will be cured. sure, it's stupid but if you keep watching you either buy into it or keep it at arms length. Either way I think it's rightly regarded as one of Hitchcock's classics.
"Wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns.”

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 10166
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Sneelock » 11 Sep 2017, 20:26

Clyde Gash wrote:No. Frenzy is the first clear step of his final decline. Many set pieces are laboured, the dialogue is clunky and the acting hammy.
The potato sack scene is classic Hitchcock, but not much else.



I like the way he poisons our mind against Jon Finch early on. I like his performance myself and think it's one of the best things about the film. Also, I think the locations and so on - the "old fashioned" aspects of the film make for an interesting counterpoint in what is certainly one of his most unpleasant films.

according to many sources the "prayer/rape" scene was a scene Hitchcock had been wanting to put in a movie at least since the late sixties. well, LOL, how screwed up is that?

I like Frenzy. I think Hitchcock is enjoying certain freedoms of the era but still showing those same skills I talked about before which date back to the silent era. showing us something before the character sees it - that sort of thing.
"Wear your big boots and jump on the garbage clowns.”

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22565
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: Hitchcock

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 11 Sep 2017, 21:41

Sneelock wrote:
Davey the Fat Boy wrote:I think it's pretty clunky. It relies on a kind of false Freudian notion that identifying trauma is the same as healing it. The characterizations are a bit stock too. Then there's the strangeness of the Dali imagery in the dream sequences. It doesn't really work, but it's beautiful.

All of this said, I completely get it leaving a strong impression. It haunted me for years too. So despite my criticisms, I actually get why you might rate it really highly.


I love "Spellbound" and think it has a lot going for it. First and foremost there's that Ingrid Bergman falling in love thing I already mentioned. Then there's Gregory Peck. I think his unusual quality helps the far-fetched aspects of the film considerably. Certainly the film takes a lunk headed approach to Freudian psychology but I think that's something movies can do so long as they don't contradict themselves. the rules the movie makes for itself are the rules up to a point. If Freddie kills us while we are sleeping in a "Nightmare on Elm Street" movie then we will die. If Gregory Peck remembers then he will be cured. sure, it's stupid but if you keep watching you either buy into it or keep it at arms length. Either way I think it's rightly regarded as one of Hitchcock's classics.


Yeah...you can't fault Hitchcock for not holding to the internal logic of his films.

I like Spellbound. It's a good film. I don't know how highly I rate it in the canon of Hitchcock's films, but even the floor is pretty high in that arena.
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image