Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Thu Nov 27, 2014 3:47 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Hitchcock 
Author Message
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
Notorious (1946) : 3 stars
A black & white spy thriller with Gary Grant and Ingrid Bergman, Hitch continues his cinema experimentation with camera shots from interesting angles and with the longest romantic kiss by the time between Grant and Bergman (with some intimacy tricks to keep the rule of 3 seconds in place). The espionage/love story is a bit slow paced for my taste but it contains some moments of great suspense as you might expect from its master director. A must watch from Hitch !
IMDB: 8.2 from from 47,394 votes (Top250#159)
Tomatometer: 92% (34 reviews)
Box Office: $24,464,742 ($291,220,000 Adjusted for inflation)
Cost: $ 2 million ($23,810,00 Adjusted for inflation)


Attachments:
Notorious_poster.jpg
Notorious_poster.jpg [ 28.45 KiB | Viewed 999 times ]

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)
Tue Apr 02, 2013 5:58 am
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
Rope (1948) : 2 3/4 Stars
A thriller film based on the play Rope (1929) by Patrick Hamilton , Hitch continues his cinematic experimentation this time with his first colour film which runs in real time. A murder story with some suspense and macabre entertainment, no my kind of entertainment though. James Stewart (playing a character to uncover the true) and John Dall (playing the brainiest of the murderers) duel of wits kind of made this film a bit worthy to watch.
IMDB: 8.1 from 57,845 voters (Top250#205)
Tomatometer : 97% (From 32 reviews)
Box Office: Unknown
Production cost: $1.5 Million ($14,450,000 Adjusted for inflation)


Attachments:
Rope.jpg
Rope.jpg [ 19.88 KiB | Viewed 947 times ]

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)
Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:48 am
Profile WWW
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 448
Post Re: Hitchcock
Ah, what a shame that I've discovered this thread just now, as it's a little bit too late to make any recommendations. Still, I love Hitchcock movies and have seen more than 30 of them, so I would like to recommend to you, nay, tell you to go and watch "Strangers on a Train" pronto.

As for ranking Hitchcock's ouevre, it's a bit too time consuming for me right now. I generally agree with the apparent critical consensus that "Rear Window", "Vertigo", "North by Northwest" and "Psycho" rank among his best work. So does the highly rated "Strangers on a Train". Personally, I think that "The Birds" is one of his finest (and critically most underrated) movies and would also argue that "Marnie" is excellent and (nearly) on par with his movies from the "Golden Period". "Torn Curtain" is also not as bad as it's made out to be, but it isn't very good either. I'm not enamoured by "Notorious", which is considered to be one of HItchcok's best, but "only" good in my opinion.

I've started to ramble like the cowboy in "The Big Lebowski" All I actually wanted to do is to let you know that there is a fantastic book-length interview by French film critic/ filmmaker Francois Truffalt with Hitchcok (I believe its English title is indeed "Truffault/Hitchcock"), which is a great read if you've seen Hitchcock's movies.


Fri Apr 05, 2013 9:49 am
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
Unke wrote:
Ah, what a shame that I've discovered this thread just now, as it's a little bit too late to make any recommendations. Still, I love Hitchcock movies and have seen more than 30 of them, so I would like to recommend to you, nay, tell you to go and watch "Strangers on a Train" pronto.

As for ranking Hitchcock's ouevre, it's a bit too time consuming for me right now. I generally agree with the apparent critical consensus that "Rear Window", "Vertigo", "North by Northwest" and "Psycho" rank among his best work. So does the highly rated "Strangers on a Train". Personally, I think that "The Birds" is one of his finest (and critically most underrated) movies and would also argue that "Marnie" is excellent and (nearly) on par with his movies from the "Golden Period". "Torn Curtain" is also not as bad as it's made out to be, but it isn't very good either. I'm not enamoured by "Notorious", which is considered to be one of HItchcok's best, but "only" good in my opinion.

I've started to ramble like the cowboy in "The Big Lebowski" All I actually wanted to do is to let you know that there is a fantastic book-length interview by French film critic/ filmmaker Francois Truffalt with Hitchcok (I believe its English title is indeed "Truffault/Hitchcock"), which is a great read if you've seen Hitchcock's movies.


Thanks Unke. Your comment made me to see "Strangers on a train" which review comes ahead. As a curiosity and with not intentions of arguing, I would like to know your points about "Marnie" which despise having Sean Connery (one of my favourite actors) in there I found it very underwhelming . Roger Ebert also mentions Truffault book/interview about Hitch so I will be looking forward to read it some time in the future :-)

Cheers

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Sat Apr 06, 2013 9:50 am
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
Strangers on a Train (1951) : 3 Stars
A black & white psychological thriller film based on the 1950 novel of the same name by Patricia Highsmith. A psychotic wealthy socialite (Robert Walker) comes up with a perfect murder theory where two complete strangers (In this case the other stranger is a pro tennis player acted by Farley Granger) exchange victims in a plan when a murder is committed while the other stranger has a solid alibi, the plan makes sense as long as both parties agree to it which in the film (The psychotic tried to convince the tennis player in a train trip) did not happen lol I enjoyed how this murder premise develops with also some dark humour in it and occasionally interesting cinematic scenes (one in a tennis match comes to my mind) . The two men leads were perfectly cast. Hitch's daughter (Pat) has a support role here.
IMDB : 8.2 from 57,170 users top250#139
Tomatometer: 98% (from 42 reviews)
Box Office : $ 7 Million ($62,510,000 Adjusted for inflation)
Production cost: $ 1.2 Million ($10,720,000 Adjusted for inflation)


Attachments:
Strangers on a train.jpg
Strangers on a train.jpg [ 28.22 KiB | Viewed 882 times ]

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)
Sat Apr 06, 2013 10:19 am
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 761
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Hitchcock
I saw Strangers on a Train for the first time about a year ago. I thought it was good, but wasn't that impressed by it, at least not to the extent that I've been by, say, Vertigo or Dial M for Murder. Still, good film and a lot of neat visual techniques.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:32 pm
Profile WWW
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6386
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Hitchcock
unwindfilms wrote:
Strangers on a Train (1951) : 3 Stars
A black & white psychological thriller film based on the 1950 novel of the same name by Patricia Highsmith. A psychotic wealthy socialite (Robert Walker) comes up with a perfect murder theory where two complete strangers (In this case the other stranger is a pro tennis player acted by Farley Granger) exchange victims in a plan when a murder is committed while the other stranger has a solid alibi, the plan makes sense as long as both parties agree to it which in the film (The psychotic tried to convince the tennis player in a train trip) did not happen lol I enjoyed how this murder premise develops with also some dark humour in it and occasionally interesting cinematic scenes (one in a tennis match comes to my mind) . The two men leads were perfectly cast. Hitch's daughter (Pat) has a support role here.
IMDB : 8.2 from 57,170 users top250#139
Tomatometer: 98% (from 42 reviews)
Box Office : $ 7 Million ($62,510,000 Adjusted for inflation)
Production cost: $ 1.2 Million ($10,720,000 Adjusted for inflation)


If you're going to give a movie as excellent as Strangers on a Train a mere 3 stars, you need to explain why, broheem!

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:00 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1906
Post Re: Hitchcock
The general criticism I come across with Strangers is that it's a little soft compared to some other Hitchcocks. I'm not a fan of Farley Granger in general (he really brings down the potential of Anthony Mann's movie Side Street). Ruth Roman is also pretty forgettable. But the sequence which cuts between Bruno's sewer problem and the tennis match is just great. Strangers is one of Hitch's more literal outings in a career which would often venture into the abstract.


Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:42 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6386
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Hitchcock
MGamesCook wrote:
The general criticism I come across with Strangers is that it's a little soft compared to some other Hitchcocks. I'm not a fan of Farley Granger in general (he really brings down the potential of Anthony Mann's movie Side Street). Ruth Roman is also pretty forgettable. But the sequence which cuts between Bruno's sewer problem and the tennis match is just great. Strangers is one of Hitch's more literal outings in a career which would often venture into the abstract.


Soft? I think it's much harder than, say, Rear Window, even if it doesn't approach Vertigo

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:57 pm
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 761
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Hitchcock
MGamesCook wrote:
The general criticism I come across with Strangers is that it's a little soft compared to some other Hitchcocks. I'm not a fan of Farley Granger in general (he really brings down the potential of Anthony Mann's movie Side Street). Ruth Roman is also pretty forgettable. But the sequence which cuts between Bruno's sewer problem and the tennis match is just great. Strangers is one of Hitch's more literal outings in a career which would often venture into the abstract.


This is my main issue with the film. Farley Granger wasn't a strong lead, and he was constantly upstaged by Robert Walker.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:17 pm
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
JamesKunz wrote:

If you're going to give a movie as excellent as Strangers on a Train a mere 3 stars, you need to explain why, broheem!


Oh 3 stars is good, it means that I liked it and recommend to watch without any reserves (See my review). Now, to explain why "Strangers on a Train" was not a great movie for me then I have to give away spoilers:

[Reveal] Spoiler:
The screenplay was clever to start with and I liked that Hitch teased us that maybe a weak Guy Haines (Farley Granger) was going to take the swap murder deal for a while which would have made Bruno Anthony ( Robert Walker ) a bit less psychotic and more of a clever man but half way of the movie Bruno started to lose it and became more and more psychotic (making almost impossible to think that he was going to get away with the murder that he committed or even make an agreement with Guy) to a point that I was not sure If I was watching a dark comedy or a drama lol. At the end of the film just after Bruno died, Guy tells to a stranger that Bruno (after a huge mess they left behind in a struggle) was "a very clever man" and I thought to myself WTF? Bruno was almost totally psychotic at the end and Guy which was very flimsy from the beginning finished with this very weak line lol.

I would have finished the film by making Guy say "What piece of Crap was that man (Bruno)!" , I mean after all he went through ;-)


In brief, when the movie finished I was not blown away but I felt entertained to a point to recommend it.

Cheers

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:21 am
Profile WWW
Post Re: Hitchcock
Well I think that the Farley Granger and Robert Walker characters maintained their respective traits from start to finish.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Farley Granger never wanted in on the deal. He said: "yes, yes...!" to Robert Walker's "criss cross" murder swap on the train in a tone as if to "phoney-agree" with a nutcase and get rid of him. To make the point even stronger we see his "still wife" being a total greedy and manipulative bitch and Farley Granger being too meek and to mild mannered to do anything about it - murch less killing a stranger


I agree with the point that Walker upstages Granger all the time, but isn't the sociopath villain always more colorful than the mild mannered main character we are supposed to identify with? Sure in this movie the "hero" is even a weakling, but I guess that is the point.
I like the performances of Kasey Rogers and Patricia Hitchcock a lot - and the way they mirror (=eye glasses theme) each other in the mind of Robert Walker. This is great material.
Then there is Walker's mom who appears to be just as much a nutcase as her son.
Yes Farley Granger and his girlfriend/lover are rather inspid and weak characters, but on the other hand they get out of the way to let pure evil (Walker) smile its way all through the movie.
There are also a lot of great visuals. Right out of a nightmare. It's this vibe which makes this a Hitchcock classic.
I'll add half a star and make it ***1/2. Just my opinion.


Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:56 am
Second Unit Director

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:45 pm
Posts: 448
Post Re: Hitchcock
unwindfilms wrote:
Thanks Unke. Your comment made me to see "Strangers on a train" which review comes ahead. As a curiosity and with not intentions of arguing, I would like to know your points about "Marnie" which despise having Sean Connery (one of my favourite actors) in there I found it very underwhelming . Roger Ebert also mentions Truffault book/interview about Hitch so I will be looking forward to read it some time in the future :-)

Cheers


Hello unwindfilms and thanks for your interest in my humble opinion on ‘Marnie’, which I (perhaps alone) think is actually a very good Hitchcock movie.
You’ve actually already mentioned the primary reason for my appreciation of ‘Marnie’, which is Sean Connery or rather his character, who is really interesting. On first sight, he is presented as the hero of the story, a white knight coming to the rescue of poor old Marnie from convicton in a court and trying to cure her from cleptomania and frigidity by offering her a stable relationship in a wealthy environment. We as the audience sympathise with his quest to find out which trauma caused Marnie’s psychological damage.
Upon closer inspection, though, it is clear that he is a creep, a psychologically disturbed person, perhaps even more so than Marnie, who has all these fits when she sees the colour red or hears thunderstorms and this compulsion to steal from others. When Marnie applies for a job at Connery’s company, he is already aware of her having stolen from another company. Once she is found out to have attempted another theft from Connery’s company, he blackmails her into marriage. On their honeymoon, he tries to “cure” her frigidity by raping her a remarkably filmed scene, by the way which results in her suicide attempt. This is dark stuff, perhaps the darkest material Hitchcock has ever touched apart from ‘Vertigo’.
Sean Connery was probably the only actor who could have played this character. In the mid-60ies, he was a suave and charming screen presence with whom you just had to sympathise. But he also showed a brutal and mean streak under the surface, which made him convincing as James Bond as well as in this movie. Tippi Hedren is also pretty good in ‘Marnie’, although she doesn’t have to stretch her acting skills that much.
I also like Bernard Hermann’s score, which is one of his best Hitchcock scores, in my opinion. The few suspense scenes (or rather theone suspense scene) are, of course, filmed very well and show Hitchcock’s dark sense of humour. In reviews of ‘Marnie’, I have read the criticism that its effects are dated from the red tinge to the screen when ‘Marnie’ has a fit to the obvious matte painting showing a harbour in the end, but that doesn’t bother me because I don’t feel that ‘Marnie’ is actually meant to be realistic. It is more of an expressionist movie and follows in the tradition of the dream sequences in ‘Spellbound’ or ‘Vertigo’. I concede that the psychology of the movie is very simplistic, but that is true for many Hitchcock movies.


Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:30 am
Profile
Director

Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:44 pm
Posts: 1489
Post Re: Hitchcock
very excited to see this. admission for all 9 is available for $85

Quote:
n partnership with the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences, LACMA is proud to be the Los Angeles venue for this monumental touring series that presents, for the first time ever, all nine of Alfred Hitchcock’s surviving silent films in gorgeous new digital restorations from the British Film Institute. This series includes Hitchcock’s directorial debut—The Pleasure Garden, made when he was just 25—as well as beloved masterworks such as the expressionistic The Lodger and his seminal thriller Blackmail. The series tracks how Hitchcock’s style developed over three short yet productive years as he transitioned from an UFA-steeped upstart to a world-class British auteur. Launching with the little-seen seaside melodrama The Manxman—featuring a new score written and performed by Stephen Horne—The Hitchcock 9 is a rare opportunity to experience the fascinating evolution of a cinematic genius.


http://lacma.org/series/hitchcock-9


Thu Jun 06, 2013 2:35 pm
Profile
Post Re: Hitchcock
Always great to know that Hitchcock movies are being preserved and restored in the very best way possible.
I am happy to know that such masterpieces as "Vertigo" and "rear Window" had been restored with analog technology in the 90s before it was too late.
The current technology is storing the new digital hi res data in high quality hard drives. If there is a budget, pristine and very low-fade 35mm backups will also be made to be stored under the best conditions possible, since any digital format might become obsolete, and software to read it might be hard to come by in decades from now, whereas 35mm has been "tried and true" for roughly an entire century - and it needs fairly simple (and existing) equipment for playback or transfer.


Thu Jun 06, 2013 4:16 pm
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
Foreign Correspondent (1940) : 3 Stars
Joel McCrea stars as a daring reporter sent to London by the editor of his newspaper with the mission of reporting facts not haunches or possibilities. He soon find himself mixed up with spies in Europe. This film well directed and the second of Hitch in USA has some memorable scenes, the most spectacular and very convincing considering the year about the crashing into the ocean of a trans-oceanic clipper air plane bound for America.
IMDB : 7.7 (10,364 votes)
Tomatometer: 93% (from 29 reviews)
Box Office : $1,598,435 (Only in USA) ($26,597,615.88 adjusted by inflation)
Production Cost : $1,484,167 ($24,696,220.84 adjusted by inflation)


Attachments:
Foreign Correspondent.jpg
Foreign Correspondent.jpg [ 23.81 KiB | Viewed 443 times ]

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)
Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:17 am
Profile WWW
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
My Ranking so far


_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Sun Feb 09, 2014 6:23 am
Profile WWW
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6386
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Hitchcock
unwindfilms wrote:
Foreign Correspondent (1940) : 3 Stars
Joel McCrea stars as a daring reporter sent to London by the editor of his newspaper with the mission of reporting facts not haunches or possibilities. He soon find himself mixed up with spies in Europe. This film well directed and the second of Hitch in USA has some memorable scenes, the most spectacular and very convincing considering the year about the crashing into the ocean of a trans-oceanic clipper air plane bound for America.
IMDB : 7.7 (10,364 votes)
Tomatometer: 93% (from 29 reviews)
Box Office : $1,598,435 (Only in USA) ($26,597,615.88 adjusted by inflation)
Production Cost : $1,484,167 ($24,696,220.84 adjusted by inflation)


You forgot to mention the terrific last scene

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Feb 09, 2014 9:57 am
Profile
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 5:22 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Hobart Australia
Post Re: Hitchcock
JamesKunz wrote:
unwindfilms wrote:
Foreign Correspondent (1940) : 3 Stars
Joel McCrea stars as a daring reporter sent to London by the editor of his newspaper with the mission of reporting facts not haunches or possibilities. He soon find himself mixed up with spies in Europe. This film well directed and the second of Hitch in USA has some memorable scenes, the most spectacular and very convincing considering the year about the crashing into the ocean of a trans-oceanic clipper air plane bound for America.
IMDB : 7.7 (10,364 votes)
Tomatometer: 93% (from 29 reviews)
Box Office : $1,598,435 (Only in USA) ($26,597,615.88 adjusted by inflation)
Production Cost : $1,484,167 ($24,696,220.84 adjusted by inflation)


You forgot to mention the terrific last scene


you mean

[Reveal] Spoiler:
when Loraine Day pushes Joel McCrea to tell the story even if involves describing her father as a traitor and then Joel tricking the US Captain ship (supposedly to play neutral) in passing the story to his newspaper editor. That was clever , particularly for the time :-)


or the very last one

[Reveal] Spoiler:
when Joel is radio broadcasting while London is being bombed

_________________
The pen is truly mightier than the sword
The Joker (Batman - 1989)


Mon Feb 10, 2014 4:51 am
Profile WWW
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6386
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Hitchcock
unwindfilms wrote:
JamesKunz wrote:
unwindfilms wrote:
Foreign Correspondent (1940) : 3 Stars
Joel McCrea stars as a daring reporter sent to London by the editor of his newspaper with the mission of reporting facts not haunches or possibilities. He soon find himself mixed up with spies in Europe. This film well directed and the second of Hitch in USA has some memorable scenes, the most spectacular and very convincing considering the year about the crashing into the ocean of a trans-oceanic clipper air plane bound for America.
IMDB : 7.7 (10,364 votes)
Tomatometer: 93% (from 29 reviews)
Box Office : $1,598,435 (Only in USA) ($26,597,615.88 adjusted by inflation)
Production Cost : $1,484,167 ($24,696,220.84 adjusted by inflation)


You forgot to mention the terrific last scene


you mean

[Reveal] Spoiler:
when Loraine Day pushes Joel McCrea to tell the story even if involves describing her father as a traitor and then Joel tricking the US Captain ship (supposedly to play neutral) in passing the story to his newspaper editor. That was clever , particularly for the time :-)


or the very last one

[Reveal] Spoiler:
when Joel is radio broadcasting while London is being bombed


Oh the very last one. Filmed during the Blitz itself, it still can make the hairs on the back of my beck stand up:

All that noise you hear isn't static - it's death, coming to London. Yes, they're coming here now. You can hear the bombs falling on the streets and the homes. Don't tune me out, hang on a while - this is a big story, and you're part of it. It's too late to do anything here now except stand in the dark and let them come... as if the lights were all out everywhere, except in America. Keep those lights burning, cover them with steel, ring them with guns, build a canopy of battleships and bombing planes around them. Hello, America, hang on to your lights: they're the only lights left in the world!

One of the all time, best movie-ending lines there is as the film fades to black.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Mon Feb 10, 2014 7:32 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 61 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr