Alfred Hitchcock - Director of the Month for November

[Djll]

No, SABOTEUR stars Robert Cummings and Priscilla Lane. Not a Homolka in sight. SABOTEUR is, like FOR COR, another wartime Hitch. I just finished it and it's got a lot of slow, preachy passages. Not the best.

[Phillip]

so i was correct, oscar homolka was in sabotage. i prefer that one to saboteur. you have to admit there are some excellent images in saboteur (the opening with all the shadows and the end on the statue of liberty). but i would agree: a bit preachy ... and hitchcock is obviously trying to evoke the 39 steps here ... but robert cummings and priscillla lane are no substitute for robert donat and madeline carroll. carroll's suspicion is as funny as it is vitriolic - lane is just plain bitchy.

hitchcock got a lot pressure to help "the war effort", so you can sort of forgive him for the preachy tone, but nonetheless, it does not hold up well.

[mark]

Sabateur is not one of his better efforts. although the sequence in the chinatown movie theatre is impressive.

i recently watched Stage Fright (thank you, TCM). just as good as ever. marlene dietrich and alistair whatshisname are wonderful. the use of flashback is fascinating and still ahead of its time - i haven't seen such an expert use of misdirection in a flashback in any film since. and the late-blooming romance is sorta wonderful.

i'd like to re-watch Under Capricorn. i watched it over a decade ago at some NYC film festival, a restored version. i was impressed with the how the film was basically composed of a series of very long takes. not sure what came first, but it's almost as if Rope was an interesting warm up for what hitchcock did in Capricorn. or vice versa!

[George]

all great films, all sitting on my DVD wall. I'd put in a good word for The 39 Steps and The Lady Vanishes. The progenitors of all the other films that followed.

[Phillip]

big echo on george's comment - add shadow of a doubt, rebecca and strangers on a train and you've got a pretty good crops section of pre-universal hitchcock.

[George]

and let us not forget the original The Man Who Knew Too Much, with Peter Lorre, my personal favorite of the two versions.

[Phillip]

yes, but i think you and i are alone in this particular assessment.

[George]

no doubt, if a bit sad. but while the Jimmy Stewart is slicker and in color, the first is the more interesting by far, and I really do enjoy Peter Lorre's performance. Not quite M, but it will do.

The second version spends far too much time showcasing Doris Day's musical talents while trying desparately to work them into the plot, and detracts from the film. In any case, the thought of listening to Doris Day sing "Que sera, sera" one more time is enough to motivate me to put a round into her kid's head myself, or at least a sock in her mouth.

[Phillip]

in his interview with truffault, hitchcock said that the remake was vastly superior, and on an entertainment level, you can see why he would say that - as you mentioned, the look of the film is superior if you're coming out of the age of black and white and into the future of color cinema and lush cinematography. the narrative is clearer and things just seem to run a lot smoother. but as kubrick was wont to say, "it's perfect, but it isn't interesting". for me it's kind of like comparing a brand new volvo with all the options with an early P1800 circa 1960. the older vehicle may have it's flaws, but it's a helluva lot cooler.

[George]

it's certainly more professionally done. I think it would have been tough for Hitchcock to state that his remake 25 years or so later in his career wasn't superior. and there are certainly things to like in it. but, it's not the best of his efforts and not the best Jimmy Steward Hitchcock effort either.

[Phillip]

agreed. and personally, i would rather be stuck in an elevator with a swarm of bees than have to listen to doris day.

[George]

hmm. well, maybe if she was singing in the elevator with the bees.

[Phillip]

i would watch that

[George]

I might even be willing to go as far as pay per view.

[Tom]

I much prefer the later version of MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH. Much much much MUCH. I posted some reasons earlier in this thread. Check it out...

[Phillip]

i thought i might hear from you on this subject. i remember your thoughts on this, but i will review your post so we can argue about it later when we have sharp objects within reach. :)

[Phillip]

George wrote: "I might even be willing to go as far as pay per view."

if she were still alive i might even pay to make sure it actually happened.

[mark]

Phillip wrote: "in his interview with truffault, hitchcock said that the remake was vastly superior, and on an entertainment level, you can see why he would say that - as you mentioned, the look of the film is sup..."

i think i have to agree with hitchcock! now i love the original, but the remake - to me at least - just exists on an entirely different level. the themes of repression & control, of wearing masks & becoming someone else, the dynamic betwen the two leads and the way that dynamic comments on relationships between the genders...so fascinating and absorbing to me.

[Cindy]

Phillip wrote: "yes, but i think you and i are alone in this particular assessment."

I 3rd this opinion. I was at least able to make it all the way through the Peter Lorre version. I have yet to do that with the James Stewart/Doris Day film, and I've tried several times.

[Cindy]

Phillip wrote: "big echo on george's comment - add shadow of a doubt, rebecca and strangers on a train and you've got a pretty good crops section of pre-universal hitchcock."

Does NOTORIOUS fit into this category?

[Cindy]

Phillip wrote: "in his interview with truffault, hitchcock said that the remake was vastly superior..."

Hitchcock must have been possessed by the same demon who took over Anne Rice's mind when she said Tom Cruise would be good casting in INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE.

[Cindy]

Phillip wrote: "if she were still alive i might even pay to make sure it actually happened."

If I recall, she IS still alive, although ancient now. So you'd better hurry.

[Phillip]

re: notorious - yeah, can't believe i forgot to list it.

re: doris - you are right - i thought she died a few years ago. she's still alive and doing her animal rights work. i appreciate that.

[Jim]

Reading this, I'm tempted to watch a few Hitchcock's I haven't seen in a while. My fave of his is still Marnie, but a lot of close seconds.

Whatever happened to these Director of the Month Polls?

[Phillip]

we became lazy

[Jim]

Phillip wrote: "we became lazy"

Agreed. ;) We need energetic people in this site.

[Phillip]

well, i think there was a time when some of us were really putting more energy into these kinds of things, but people didn't seem to respond, so we backed off. if there is interest in doing the director of the month thing again and people are up for it, i'm certainly willing to post something to get it rolling again.

[Jim]

Phillip, I have an interest in Director of the month, but i can't speak for the site.

Glad I clicked on this link, sat through Saboteur. A great film, hadn't seen in a while. Bottom of the writing credits, Dorothy Parker. I was surprised, but knew she did some movie script work.

[Phillip]

yeah, ms parker worked on that one, and the big sleep - i love her work!