Doomsday's Andrei Tarkovsky Love Fest

I love Shadow of a Doubt precisely because it resolves the mystery at the halfway point. The tension comes from what Uncle Charlie might do to his niece, how she's going to defend herself, and whether or not the rest of the family will find out.

We now continue as....

Doomsday Burns Through His Alfred Hitchcock Blu-Ray Box Set

Rope (1948)

View count: Second time



The first collaboration between Jimmy Stewart and Alfred Hitchcock doesn't necessarily start off with a bang so to speak. Rather it's a scream followed by a pair of men strangling one of their fellow classmates. So begins Hitchcock's Rope, an adaptation of a play featuring two men, Brandon and Phillip, who murder their classmate David and hold a dinner party over his hidden corpse. It's not so much a suspense movie in that you're sitting on the edge of your seat waiting to see what happens. The deed has already been accomplished but now we sit through the dinner party with them. We wait to see if the body will be discovered and we also examine how these newly initiated murders will interact with their guests with literal blood on their hands. It's a movie about observation; we observe the villains as do the guests while also waiting to see who is able to figure out what's been done.

While Rope is yet another movie that has the theme of murder front and center it's not a suspense movie in the way that an audience might be used to. The antagonists, Brandon and Phillip, have already accomplished what they set out to do, now they have to get away with it. While they may share a murder between them, Brandon and Phillip are two wildly different characters. Brandon sees the murder as not only justified, he views it as proper. As such his focus isn't on the murder so much as using it as a form of daring entertainment. There's no reason to leave David's body in a trunk in the middle of their apartment but Brandon does so while the guests converse all around him. He uses the rope used to strangle David to tie up a stack of books. He even invites David's girlfriend and her ex-boyfriend just to bask in the tension he has created. Phillip on the other hand, while still a murderer, is almost a victim of Brandon himself. He is racked with guilt while Brandon carries himself with confidence. Phillip at several points almost gives them away while Brandon acts more and more brash and arrogant. They create a perfect storm that surrounds their crime and play off each other in their final attempt to get away.

Stewart's Rupert, a former teacher of Brandon and Phillip, is the third point of the triangle surrounding David's death. The relationship between Rupert and his former students is a little strange. It comes off as less of a teacher/student relationship, rather it's like two boys trying to impress their father. What started the two men down the road to murder was a lesson from long ago where Rupert told them that sometimes murder was justified when dealing with 'lesser' people. It's this small lesson in eugenics that made the two boys think that murder might be something worth trying which is one of the reasons why Rupert was invited in the first place. Stewart plays Rupert as a calm, almost melancholy character who is ultimately horrified by what took place and sees his clear role in what transpired.

Rope is a movie that's much more about interaction rather than following a traditional storyline. The film is based on a play and is very much filmed as such. It takes place in one specific setting with only a handful of characters. It's completely dialogue driven and Hitchcock keeps the cuts to a very low minimum. It's a good exercise in how to make a film based on a play while keeping it extremely loyal to the source material. While it might not move at breakneck speed or have a load of jumps and surprises, it's a slow sizzle of a movie that's still effective after almost 80 years.

We now continue as....

Doomsday Burns Through His Alfred Hitchcock Blu-Ray Box Set

The Trouble With Harry (1955)

View count: First time



In case it hasn't already been established time and again, murder is a very constant theme in Alfred Hitchcock movies. Whether it's about a wrong man on the run or a serial killer in the middle of a small, quiet town, people tend to wind up dead at some point in a Hitchcock film. The Trouble With Harry features another man who met a seemingly unnatural end only instead of trying to discover who the devious perpetrator might be we have a handful of characters trying to figure out what to do with our dearly departed 'Harry.' This is the first film in the current Hitchcock lineup that doesn't qualify as a thriller or murder mystery. The Trouble With Harry is a much more light-hearted affair complete with budding romances and comic relief throughout.

So who's Harry? Harry's dead. He's discovered on a hilltop by Captain Wiles (Edmund Gwen from Miracle on 34th Street) who's convinced that he killed him by accident while shooting at rabbits. As he's wondering what to do he quickly hides from a mother (Shirley MacLaine) and her son who come upon the body and instantly recognize him. Much to Wiles' surprise she's relieve that Harry is dead and heads back down the hill. Soon after Miss Gravely finds Captain Wiles with the body and she too is not terribly surprised by the killing nor by Wiles' admission of guilt. Rather infatuated with Wiles she invites him for tea and blueberry muffins (giggity!). An artist Sam Marlowe also stumbles across the body but is rather intrigued by Wiles' story and offers to help dispose of Harry. It isn't long after he's buried until those in the group starts to admit their roles in Harry's death and have their own ideas with how he should be handled. Eventually they discover the truth behind Harry's death but in doing so they put themselves at risk of being discovered by the small town's nosy deputy.

The Trouble With Harry, while more of a comedy than a thriller, still takes some of the elements present in thrillers and turns them on their heads. The question motivating everyone in the movie is what exactly happened to Harry? Over the course of the film we're given clues as to how each person may have been the culprit before learning that someone else may have played a role in his demise. In the midst of our journey to find Harry's killer we watch as our characters find themselves drawing closer to one another. In a way this can be viewed as sort of a dark romantic comedy where the catalyst behind everyone's passion is a dead guy.

Not every movie in a filmmaker's canon needs to be a work of high art of an attempt at making a masterpiece. Well, unless you're Stanley Kubrick I guess. Anyways, The Trouble With Harry isn't meant to shock or thrill you nor is it trying to reinvent or reignite any particular genre. It's a light-hearted Hitchcock movie that doesn't try to keep you on the edge of your seat but still incorporates those trademarks that made Hitchcock a household name. It's not a game changer nor is it a very remarkable movie at the end of the day but it's an above average mystery movie that succeeds due to its brisk and cheerful nature.

There are other examples out there.  Michael Haneke making two versions of Funny Games comes to mind.  There's also Heat, which was a remake of a Michael Mann TV movie called L.A. Takedown.  Otherwise it's usually from foreign directors trying to break into Hollywood by doing English language versions of the movies that got them noticed.  The US and Japanese versions of The Grudge are made by the same guy for example, same with the remake of The Vanishing.


As far as The Man Who Knew To Much, I like the original better.  It's less the work of a "talented amateur" than a "scrappy newcomer" and Peter Lorre is WAY better than the boring old guy in the remake (Hitchcock was not always great at giving his movies memorable villains).  Also there's no Que Sera Sera in the original, so that kind of automatically makes it better.  

As a few of you know I've been working at Universal Studios for the past couple years.  Lots of notable stuff here but one thing that's pretty cool is that Alfred Hitchcock's bungalow is just a little ways down from my office.  The Dino De Laurentiis Company occupies the building now but it's still pretty neat to be able to walk past a little piece of Hollywood history every so often.  You can't really tell based on the photo but there's a cutout of Hitchcock in the window second from the left.

A few of the people there wrote and produced the Hannibal tv show. Not sure what they do now since that's been cancelled. I know that in some places of the lot they still have reserved signs for Dark Universe. I don't quite know what those people are doing either.

We now continue as....

Doomsday Burns Through His Alfred Hitchcock Blu-Ray Box Set

Vertigo (1958)

View count: Second time



Like Rear Window, Vertigo is one of Alfred Hitchcock's most popular films starring one of his most talented collaborators. The fourth and final Hitchcock film starring Jimmy Stewart, Vertigo is a step in a wildly different direction for both filmmaker and actor. Yes, there's murder but murder isn't the focal point of the story. It's a dark, brooding, twisted movie where the affable Stewart plays against type as a man obsessed with a woman he hardly knew. It's a movie about a man's downward spiral as he watches his life crumble in pursuit of a woman out of passion and guilt. Of the movies watched so far in the Hitchcock box set it's certainly the most character driven and dramatic. It's easy to see why critics were turned off by it sixty years ago but it's one that people came to appreciate and after watching it for a second time I can easily admit that I've done the same.

Stewart plays John 'Scottie' Ferguson, a recently retired detective whose last case almost got him killed as he hung from a ledge. Due to his newfound acrophobia which triggers his vertigo he leaves the police force only to get a call from an old college friend. He asks Ferguson to follow his wife Madeleine, a woman he thinks may be possessed by one of her long dead ancestors. Ferguson tails her and before long saves her life as she attempts to drown herself in the San Francisco Bay. They talk, they fall in love but she ultimately climbs to the top of the bell tower at the San Juan Bautista Mission and throws herself to her death. Wracked with guilt, Ferguson plunges into a deep depression until he meets another woman, Judy, who reminds him of Madeleine in every way. He forces his way into her life and asks her to alter her appearance so she can start to physically resemble Madeleine, but in doing so he learns a terrible truth about Judy and her involvement in Madeleine's death.

Upon it's release Vertigo was pushed to the side by critics and I did the same thing when I first watched it so many years ago. I can't tell you what it was that didn't sit well with me, I just remember not enjoying it all that much. Maybe it's the difference between being a teenaged, novice and self-proclaimed movie buff and an older, more seasoned film goer but to put it simply Vertigo is a great film. Maybe both critics and myself were expecting something different from an Alfred Hitchcock movie rather than a movie that's as somber and dramatic as it is. From what I've read, it was also hard for critics and audiences to buy the idea of a noticeably aged, gray-haired Jimmy Stewart, by that point pushing 50, playing the romantic lead against one of Hitchcock's blonde bombshells. That said, there's so much to appreciate from Vertigo on so many levels that it's kind of a shame that it took until now for me to give it another crack.

Aside from the character interactions and the overall themes of the movie, Vertigo is a very visual film. Hitchcock has been known to employ all sorts of camera tricks and visual effects that were popular at that time. Once again he uses the settings not just as locations but makes them seem as though they're useful characters with a purpose, this time employing the cities of San Francisco and San Juan Bautista. The rear projection and matte paintings, again while commonly used at that time, seem obviously dated to someone watching today but I see their obviousness as a stylistic trademark. The opening credits as well as the nightmare sequence that's an introduction to the third act also seem so simple, almost primitive compared to today's effects but it's what makes it work. The main effect used in the nightmare sequence is just a changing of the lens color giving it a strobe effect. That's it. That's all that needed to be done in order to get it's point across. Likewise when Judy is first shown to be dressed as Madeleine she's out of focus giving her a godlike aura, something that's not to be believed. The use of effects in Vertigo are many but aren't overdone. They're used just enough to give it the effect that Hitchcock desired and it's done in such a way that while it's not impressive today, they still help the feature feel unique.

Whenever I do these little retrospectives, whether it's the Coens Bros. or Martin Scorsese, there's always at least one movie that sticks out as something special, one that I had either never seen or didn't appreciate if I'd watched it earlier. I think that happened here with Vertigo. As stated earlier, if anything it makes me disappointed that it took me until now for it to really register with me after so many years of not really caring enough about it to watch it again. It makes me wonder if there are any other classic or even modern films that I tossed to the side that would do me good to give another go. I'm sure there are films like that for all of us, films that we'd strongly reconsider if we would just sit down and watch them. Unfortunately it's impossible for us to know what those are until we actually take the time to turn them on but when we find them it really is a special kind of feeling. Not to sound emotional or overdramatic but I'm really looking forward to watching Vertigo again in the very near future. As of now it's certainly the best of the Hitchcock movies I've seen through my current revisiting of his works and when I sit down to watch it again in the coming weeks it could very well land somewhere on a favorites list of mine.

It's a film defined by its music. If you strip away Bernard Herrmann's score, it's a movie that's 75% padding. You could tell the whole story as a 40-50 minute pilot for an HBO or Netflix TV series. The older you get the more patient you'll be and can absorb the scenery and music.



Didn't stop the James Bond movies.



Hitchcock's effects have held up remarkably well compared to his peers. I think audiences would be impressed because it's not what they expected.

True, then again people certainly noticed that a 56 year old Roger Moore probably should have hung his hat up a couple movies earlier than A View To A Kill.



I think one of the reasons they hold up is because they actually help serve the story. There's not a lot of gimmicky or needless sfx. Even the nightmare sequence works because the simple camera tricks do exactly what they're intended to do.

We now continue as....

Doomsday Burns Through His Alfred Hitchcock Blu-Ray Box Set

North By Northwest (1959)

View count: Several times



This is the first time watching North by Northwest against the backdrop of other Alfred Hitchcock movies. It's among the higher tier of his works along with Psycho, Rear Window, et al. and as a suspense film is works very well even by today's standards. While it's not as bold as Vertigo it's a movie that takes what Hitchcock does best and does it probably better than he had ever done it previously. I think that's what makes North by Northwest a success but it also feels like that's a double-edged sword. It feels exciting, energetic, it's light-hearted but suspenseful. It just doesn't seem like it's taking many risks. I have my thoughts on it which I get into later and it's not uncommon at all for filmmakers to go back to making the movies that they're known for. We all need a hit sometimes. It just prevents North by Northwest from standing apart as much as it could have despite how fun it might be.

Hitchcock once again casts Cary Grant as his leading man Roger Thornhill. Like Jimmy Stewart in Vertigo, this is the fourth and final time that Grant appears in a Hitchcock film although this is the first and only one that appears in my box set lineup. It also wasn't long after that Grant retired from film acting altogether making only five more movies after North by Northwest. Once again employing the 'wrong man' motif, advertising executive Thornhill is mistaken for a government agent George Kaplan by a spy ring who attempts to kill him. While trying to clear his name he's implicated in the murder of a UN diplomat and crosses paths with a beautiful woman who goes out of her way to keep his identity a secret. As he pulls the thread on uncovering the spy ring and proving his innocence he finds himself in their headquarters found right at the top of Mt. Rushmore, the perfect place for a Hitchcock climax.

When I say that it's my first time watching North by Northwest against the backdrop of other films, what I mean is that I usually would watch it independently like we all do with almost all other movies. Rarely do we sit down and decide to marathon or binge watch on a particular actor or director. What I've realized having watched a half-dozen other Hitchcock movies before is that in a way North by Northwest, while a fun and energetic movie, feels like a step back for Hitchcock. That however is completely understandable considering that Vertigo was met with much skepticism and criticism upon it's initial release. I don't know of the production schedule for either movie and I would assume there might be some overlap since they were both released a year apart but I think it would be understandable that Hitchcock might be a little gun shy after trying something so different. Naturally after a seemingly large failure it would probably be best to go back to the well and that's what North by Northwest feels like. That isn't to say that it makes for a bad movie, not at all, it's just following the formula that Hitchcock had spent almost thirty years establishing. Thornhill might be my favorite leading man in a Hitchcock film to date. He's brash, arrogant and completely self-absorbed. He talks about his failed marriages while clinging to his equally odious mother who also thumbs her nose at him. He uses his secretary to take care of any and all of his personal needs and social calls. It's when he's finally kidnapped and manages to escape death that people start regarding him as someone worthy of respect but that isn't due to his character, it's only because of his status. It's only when he finds himself on the run from the law after being framed for murder does he start really relying on his own instincts as well as the kindness of strangers(?). Then there's the crop duster chase which gave us one of the most historic and memorable images in film history. That aside, it's a pretty fun little sequence watching Thornhill try to escape from being machine-gunned via crop duster in his pressed suit that he takes such pride in. And it wouldn't be a Hitchcock movie without a good climax, this time as Thornhill and his new gal attempt to scale down the literal face of Mt. Rushmore while being pursued by the always great James Mason and a very young Martin Landau. At least this time it made a little more sense than the climax of Saboteur.

North by Northwest is considered to be a standard of the spy/thriller genre, a top tier Hichcock film and classic film altogether. I think much of that enjoyment comes from the strengthening of standard Hitchcock themes and the end result is something that's standout but not significantly original. If you were to make a list of top three or top five Alfred Hitchcock movies North by Northwest could easily sit on the list and probably stand apart from the others. Compared to the rest of his films though it seems like much of the same, only better.

We now continue as....

Doomsday Burns Through His Alfred Hitchcock Blu-Ray Box Set

**GOING OFF BOOK!**

Spellbound (1945)

View count: Second time



Spellbound is the second movie in this non-box set flashback at earlier Hitchcock staples. Produced by famed David O. Selznick, it marks the first time the two had collaborated since their Academy Award-winning Rebecca. Selznick was a producer who was notorious for involving himself as much as possible in almost every aspect of the films he was producing. He's also famous for bringing Hitchcock to Hollywood from England in the late 30s launching his career stateside. Seeing as Hitchcock was also known as a meticulous director himself it was natural for the two of them to clash frequently. In some instances, like Rebecca, it was a clash that produced a great film. Spellbound might not hit the heights of Rebecca or many other Hitchcock movies but it has its own qualities that help it stand out. It's a movie that relies heavily on the concepts of psycho-analysis while incorporating most of the Hitchcockian film principles, murder, the wrong man, etc. Also present is the ever increasing sex appeal that Hitchcock loved to slide in there, an easy task as the characters in this movie lived in close quarters at a mental hospital. There are many visual allusions to sex that I'm sure in the mid-1940s were giving people at the ratings boards a massive hard-o...uhh headache.

Ingrid Bergman plays Dr. Constance Petersen, a respected but stone-hearted psychologist at the Green Manor hospital. Her superior, Dr. Murchison, is retiring and they expect the arrival of his replacement, Dr. Anthony Edwards (Gregory Peck), very quickly. When he arrives he and Dr. Petersen instantly hit it off and he unlocks the door to her heart as shown by a series of doors that are opened the moment they kiss. Things go south though when they learn that Dr. Edwards is an imposter and that the real Dr. Edwards had disappeared. The 'imposter' flees the hospital but the smitten Dr. Petersen is hot in pursuit, hoping to discover who he really is an his connection to Dr. Edwards. With the help of her mentor Dr. Brulov they discover through dream interpretation that there's a deep, tragic secret that this imposter is hiding away that that secret holds the key to discovering what happened to Dr. Edwards and more importantly who really did it.

In short, Spellbound has some unique ideas especially for a film of that time period but ultimately many of its conclusions seem overly convenient and a little shallow. I think it was a noble effort for Hitchcock to make a movie that's a literal psychological thriller and featuring an amnesiac and a psychologist as the people on the run is a neat idea. The whole concept of someone believing that he's the man who he supposedly murdered is right up Hitchcock's alley. It's when we reach the third act though, when all the running is done and it's time to wrap things up, is when things begin to feel rushed and easy for the characters. Over the course of the movie we want to know who Gregory Peck is and it seems to be unveiled over the course of a few minutes and a very easy-to-interpret dream sequence. The 'twist' is also introduced in the last ten minutes of the movie and while it affects the outcome it feels forced and again, convenient. If the idea of 'maybe the person pulling these strings is someone we know' was introduced earlier it would have given us the idea that it's building to something even if it would have been predictable. When we discovered who Gregory Peck was the whole mystery behind the movie was solved which made the final discovery of who the real perpetrator was feel out of place. It doesn't sink the movie but it doesn't help it either. It reinforces Spellbound's place as a Hitchcock movie that's worth seeing but isn't at the top of any best-of lists.

I thought I was in the paternity thread and got super confused.