Knuckleheads Return

Members
  • Content count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Knuckleheads Return

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Kansas
  1. Who would be Hitchcock's new Bernard Herrmann? Who would be his Edith Head? What contemporary writer would Hitchcock have loved to collaborate with? ​ There are so many highly talented and creative people in the current movie industry that this is a very difficult assignment. However, I have selected three candidates to be Hitchcock's modern collaborators. For music I have selected Howard Shore. He is a two time Academy Award winner. He created the music for The Hobbit​ series and all three of the Lord of the Rings​ films. He also created the music for ​Silence of the Lambs and The Aviator​. He has also tackled several comedic films to include the ​Saturday Night Live Christmas​! I think he would have the versatility and range to meet Hitchcock's needs. Being able to collaborate with Peter Jackson gives him great credibility. For costume designer I have selected Lindy Hemming​. She is an award winning costume designer. She won the 2000 Academy Award for the film Topsy-Turvy​. She has been nominated for eleven other awards. These include such films as ​Dark Knight, Batman Begins, and Harry Potter Chamber of Secrets. She has also done two James Bond films. For writer I would recommend Michael Connelly​. He is known for Lincoln Lawyer, Bloodwork and Bosch.​ I think his style would suit Hitchcock.
  2. To try and capture as many of these Hitchcock inspired films will be a herculean task. Imdb has an interesting list at: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls071418428/ which gives 97 Hitchcock films not directed by Hitchcock. One of my own favorites is Duel​ from 1971. How much more of German Expressionism can you get then a 5,000 gallon fuel tanker following you with malice and being unstoppable. Man versus machine! Can't leave out Bogart's ​Dark Passage ​from 1947. A few others from the list mentioned above are ​Play Misty For Me, Jaws, Abandon Ship (Tyrone Power 1957) , and ​Witness For the Prosecution (Tyrone Power innocent man indeed). BBC's 2016 spy thriller "Secret Agent" with Toby Jones. 1993 sci-fi Lifepod... sorta of Lifeboat ​in space.
  3. Re censorship: Could someone please explain?

    Hard to believe but the term Hot Box originally was used by the railroad industry to describe a problem with overheating bearings. Wikipedia defines it as :"A hot box is the term used when an axle bearing overheats on a piece of railway rolling stock.[1] The term is derived from the journal-bearing trucks used before the mid-20th century. The axle bearings were housed in a box that used oil-soaked rags or cotton (collectively called "packing") to reduce the friction of the axle against the truck frame. When the oil leaked or dried out, the bearings overheated, often starting a fire that could destroy the entire railroad car (and cars coupled to it) if not detected early enough" Interesting choice for a club's name?
  4. My question is: Why do you think Hitchcock detested method actors? Was it a question of control or lack of control? I'd enjoy some specifics. Thanks.
  5. 1. How does the opening of Frenzy differ from the opening of The Lodger? Feel free to rewatch the clip from The Lodger (Daily Dose #2) for comparison. ​Frenzy opens almost like a travelogue. We have the initial postcard like image of the Thames flowing through London. We than see the crowd gathered on the side of the river listening to the politician. We then have the line "Look!" and the crowd diverts their attention to the dead body floating along. We see the cameo of Hitchcock very early in this film. He is even wearing a bowler hat to fit right in to the London scene. The Lodger​ is different in that we see the victim first in a close up of her face than a crowd forms and gathers around to look at her body. In Frenzy​ there are reporters present but they are covering the pollution speech while in The Lodger the reporters are covering the murder of the "golden haired" girl. In The Lodger we don't see Hitchcock until a little later in the opening when he is on the telephone with his back to us. The body floating by in Frenzy does not rate a close-up like the face of the victim ​in The Lodger. In The Lodger the crowds are made up of poor London folk but in Frenzy ​they appear to be of a higher class in London society. Obvious differences are the use of sound, color and the use of the titanic aerial shot. 2. What are some of the common Hitchcock touches that you see in this opening scene? Be specific. ​A few of the common Hitchcock touches that I see are the crossing symbolism that is exhibited by the tugboat steaming across the Thames from right to left; the red and white striped graphics used in the title ​Frenzy; using an exotic setting (London); the strong use of music to set a rather British theme; close-ups used to draw attention i.e. the man who hollers "Look!" and the ladies near him and of course the Macguffin which is the whole deal about pollution in the Thames and fighting it! 3. Using Frenzy as an example, what thoughts do you have about the various purposes Hitchcock had in mind when he created his opening scenes? In the Daily Doses, we have focused on opening scenes, so there should be patterns or strategies you have noticed over the course of opening scenes spanning Hitchcock's 50 year career. ​ I believe that some purposes that Hitchcock had in mind when creating his openings were to draw the audience in and get them hooked as to what is this all about; get the audience's curiosity up; use an exotic place to get attention; plant the seeds of the Macguffin; introduce us to certain characters (unfortunately in The Lodger and Frenzy they are dead); interject some hints about the film through the use of the opening graphics; his use of music to help set the tone and finally make us realize that this is a Hitchcock film!
  6. Based on the opening sequence alone, what do you feel you already know about Marnie as a character? In what ways does Hitchcock visually reveal her character through her interaction with objects.​ ​ We learn that how she looks, how she dresses and how she appears are very important to Marnie. Her hair, makeup and color coordination must be just perfect. We see that she has good taste in her clothes and accessories. They are of very high quality and from name brand boutiques. She has a real fashion sense about her. She has plenty of cash in her possession. She is changing her identity is this scene. She changes her hair color, loads every stick of her previous identity into the grey suitcase and than ditches it all in the locker at the train station. She does not plan to return to it as evidenced by ditching the key. She changes her name and selects a new Social Security card to go along with this change. This of course leaves us with many unanswered questions as to why and who is she really. Is she involved in criminal activity? Is she a secret agent? Notice that each of her fake id's have a first name that starts with the letter "M"... ease to remember or an homage to ​Dial M for Murder? Objects are very valuable and important to Marnie but if necessary she can walk away from them all. 2.How does Hitchcock use Bernard Herrmann's score in this scene? ​ Hitchcock uses Herrmann's music to add to the mystery as to who Marnie really is. We hear horns and strings playing variations on the same theme over and over again. After Marnie has locked the train station locker the music stops and all we hear is the announcer listing the train departure schedules as Marnie shoves the locker key into the drain. There is no train station sort of theme as we heard in Strangers on a Train​. We just hear this theme which may be Marnie's theme over and over again. 3. Did you see any variation in what Hitchcock is doing with his cameo in this film, and what do you think that variation means? ​ In the previous cameos, we have never seen Hitchcock make eye contact with the audience. Usually he is walking across the set as in ​The Birds, boarding a bus or sitting at a desk with his back to us. He usually strives to be there but not to be noticed, not to be too obvious. The variation in Marnie​ is that Hitchcock goes to the point of making eye contact to make sure we don't miss him. As far as its meaning I can only conjecture that Hitchcock is trying to have fun with this cameo. Perhaps Hitchcock is saying "look I know that you won't settle down until you have spotted me.. so alright here I am... you can't miss me, I looked right at you! Now lets get back to watching ​Marnie.​" His television openings may have really emboldened him.
  7. In what ways does this opening scene seem more appropriate to a romantic comedy than a “horror of the apocalypse” film? What do we learn about Melanie (Tippi Hedren) and Mitch (Rod Taylor) in this scene?​​ ​In the opening scene we have the playful interchange between Mitch and Melanie. When mistaken for a clerk in Davidson's Pet Shop by Mitch, Melanie decides to have some fun and string him along. Instead of saying "Sorry, I don't work here" (which I am sure many of us have experienced) Melanie acts the part as a less then knowledgeable clerk. Mitch, upon realizing that he is being had, decides not to tip (not Tipi) his hand and continues to play along. This indeed becomes a flirtatious interlude just like in a romantic comedy of the classic period. We also have the first bird "expert" trying to explain the odd behavior of the seagulls to Melanie. 2.How does Hitchcock use sound design in this opening sequence? For example, how are the sounds of birds used to create a particular mood and atmosphere? The first scene is on the streets of San Francisco with the appropriate traffic and street noises i.e. Cable car gongs, motorcycles roaring, cars passing and feet walking on the sidewalk. However, we hear over this the sounds of the seagulls... something is stirring them up, something perhaps ominous. Once inside the Davidson's Pet Shop, the sounds of the birds are more peaceful and docile. Canaries, "red birds", love birds all merrily chirping and cooing with an occasional screech thrown in. The store counter clerk does remark about the possibility of a storm at sea upsetting the seagulls to account for the loud sounds emanating from them in the sky. 3. The opening scene contains a famous Hitchcock cameo. Describe the cameo and if you think it has any particular meaning in relation to this scene. ​ ​The cameo shows Hitchcock and his own two Sealyham terriers Geoffrey and Stanley walking out of the pet shop. They must have been out for a walk and have just popped into the shop to look around. They appear to have not purchased anything. Hitchcock and crew walk out of the store and head to the left along the sidewalk. Possible meanings... dogs are truly man's best friend through thick and thin. Another hint may be that its time to "get out of Dodge" because mayhem is ahead.
  8. Psycho opens with title design by Saul Bass and music by Bernard Herrmann. This is their third collaboration for Hitchcock, including Vertigo and North by Northwest. How does the graphic design and the score introduce the main themes of this film? With only Saul Bass' graphics before us for the opening and Bernard Herrmann's music we begin to experience a feeling of frenzy; a sense of fleeing with no destination in mind; a jumbled storm inside our brain and finally a sense of no peace!! 2. As the titles end, we have three shots of Phoenix, Arizona, and a very specific day, date, and time: “FRIDAY, DECEMBER THE ELEVENTH” and “TWO FORTY-THREE P.M.” What is Hitchcock seeking to establish with such specificity? Also, why do you think Hitchcock elects to enter the hotel room through the semi-closed blinds from the outside? Does this shot remind of any other Daily Doses we have watched? Giving us the location, specific day, date and time is in keeping with one of Hitchcock's touches i.e. giving the audience plenty of information perhaps more then the characters know. This is not completely correct for this scene because obviously the characters know the location and date etc. but we are in on the fact it is 2:43 pm and that "check-out" time at the hotel is 3:00 pm. Only 17 minutes away. Hitchcock may also be trying to let the audience know that this is a contemporary story not years ago or as Dr. Gehring said "not set in Transylvania". This is a story set in the now! Giving such specific day, date and time also supports Hitchcock's rule about no one allowed into the movie once it has started... the timetable has begun. Entering into the room through the window enhances that theme of voyeurism, we are not just a peeping Tom but rather a full watcher as we seat ourselves in the armchair just inside the window and through the POV shots we are definitely in the room with the Marion and Sam. This scene is almost a mini-Rear Window ​opening. We are not looking at several windows but just one specific one...again Hitchcock's use of specificity in this film. 3. In the remainder of this sequence, we are introduced to Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) and Sam Loomis (John Gavin). The scene pushed the boundaries of censorship, especially considering our last Daily Dose for North by Northwest was edited for a line of risqué dialogue. Since this is the opening scene of Psycho, how does the hotel room scene function as a way to establish Marion Crane as a main character? Defend your answer. ​In an era when Lucy and Ricky could not be shown even having a double bed in their bedroom but only twin beds, we see Marion and Sam together on the hotel room bed, We see at various stages of undress ( Marion in bra and slip) with the obvious conclusion that they have made love right before we snuck in. We understand that Sam is cheating on his spouse with Marion who is single. I believe that the scene establishes Marion Crane as a main character by having her inform us that this has been a repeat ongoing relationship and not just a one time hook up. We also learn that Marion cannot continue with this secret affair and that this is "the last time" and that she is in control of the situation and is bringing their relationship to an end. She is effecting the plot as a main character.
  9. Even at the level of the dialogue, this film is playing with the idea that two Hollywood stars are flirting with each other (e.g. the line, "I look vaguely familiar.") How does our pre-existing knowledge of these stars function to create meaning in this scene. ​ As discussed in the class lecture, Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint are perfect in being complimentary to each other. They both bring their respective images as stars into this scene and we of course build onto this with our pre-existing knowledge of who they are and how we see them. Cary Grant is the suave, handsome, elegant gentlemen and Eva Marie Saint is also beautiful, elegant and sexy. Since the two stars compliment each other so perfectly we find it so easy to follow along with their flirting and hope that they are successful. There is minimal action in this scene, so any deviation from the overall pattern of focusing on the faces of the two leads will have increased significance. In that sense, discuss how Hitchcock uses the R.O.T. matchbook as an important piece of acting business (or as a prop) in this scene. ​ The R.O.T. matchbook provides Roger and Eve with an opportunity to flirt a little more. Roger being gallant and offering to light Eve's cigarette. She inquiring about his monogram tries to figure out a bit more about him. Finally, as he lights her cigarette the acting business leads to her steadying his had, bringing again closer to her and than blowing out the match. I wonder if Hitchcock's years with UFA in Germany may have given him the idea for this bit with the match. In the "olde Germany" if a gentleman lit a ladies cigarette and she blew out the match, this was the signal that she was interested and would follow along with him to his room. Who can say for sure. How is Hitchcock using sound design in this scene? Consider music and other background sounds in your answer. ​We have the constant clickity caick of the train on the steel rails, we have the various musical themes by Bernard Herrmann which range from light dreamy to romantic to one of the reoccurring themes of the film, and we have the sounds of silverware clinking at appropriate times. Case in point is the clanking of Roger's silverware when Eve mentions "but you haven't eaten yet" as the Trout is delivered.
  10. Describe what you think this film will be about simply from the sounds and images in these opening credits. Even if you have seen the film, try to focus on these sounds and images themselves and “the story” (or if not "the story," the mood and atmosphere they are establishing) that this sequence is communicating to the audience. Just want to interject that this is my favorite Hitchcock film. What's not to like Kim Novak and Jimmy Stewart being directed by Hitchcock and oh did I fail to mention San Francisco in the 1950s! WOW!! Based on the sounds and images I think that the story is going to be about a beautiful sophisticated woman who is psychologically troubled. The spinning graphics (evocative of hypnosis), the dissonant music and the emphasis on the woman's eye support this view. In your own estimation, what is the single most powerful image in this title sequence? Defend your answer. ​ I think that the experimental use of the computer graphics is cutting edge and exciting for the 1950s but to me the most powerful image is that of looking into the woman's eye just at the point where we see the "Directed by Alfred Hitchcock". It has always been said that "the eyes are the window into the soul / mind" and I think that this makes it the most powerful image as we begin the film. How do Saul Bass’ images and Bernard Herrmann’s score work together? How different would this sequence be with a different musical score? The combination of Saul Bass' images and Bernard Herrmann's score play off each others strengths. The topsy turvy spinning world is brought forward by Bass' graphics and Herrmann's dissonant music adds to the spinning by never letting us grasp on to a mellow theme but rather jolts us with blaring brass instruments etc. whenever we try to settle down to the opening music. The opening is trying to prevent us from getting comfortable in our seats. I think that a different musical score would have caused friction between the graphics and the audio. A mellow little theme song running through just would not have fit in with the images that were appearing on the screen. What would have been worse would have been the introduction of a theme song with words over the opening. Hitchcock captured the psychological dilemma to come in this film by wisely selecting Bass and Herrmann help him create the opening to Vertigo​.
  11. How would you describe the opening camera shot of this film? What is Hitchcock seeking to establish in this single shot that opens the film? Whose vantage point is being expressed in this shot, given that Jeff has his back to the window? ​ I would say that Hitchcock is trying to have the POV shots explore the environs that can be seen from Jeff's apartment with each of us realizing as the shot continues that the vantage point is ours. We are the "watchers"! What do we learn about Jeff in this scene without any pertinent lines of dialogue (other than what is written on Jeff’s leg cast)? How does Hitchcock gives us Jeff’s backstory simply through visual design? ​Without any pertinent lines of dialogue, we learn the backstory that Jeff is immobile and in a wheelchair; we learn that he is an action photographer by profession; we learn that he has taken some very famous / exciting photos; we learn that he also takes portrait photos and that some of them have been used on a "Life" type magazine's covers; we learn that the negative he has blown up must be someone special to him since she is on one of the covers; we learn that he may have been injured due to attempting an exciting photo as evidenced by the destroyed camera that he has kept as a reminder. Does this opening scene make you feel like a voyeur or, at a minimum, remind you of being a an immobile spectator? What feelings does Hitchcock elicit from you as his camera peers into these other people’s apartments? ​ ​I know that Dr. Edwards has tried to not use "Voyeurism" to describe Jeff and us so I will use the terms "spectator", "watcher", "viewer" and yes even "peeping Tom" to describe how we feel as this scene unfolds. The funniest feeling is that we are not only seeing what Jeff sees but we also see Jeff and his apartment ! We are watching the watcher! We get the sense of wanting to know more about each resident that we see. We want to know who they are, what makes them tick, what is their relationship with the others around them and we also want to learn the full story on Jeff! Bonus question: if you have seen the entire film before, do you agree with Hitchcock that this film is his most cinematic? I am afraid that I can't disagree with Hitchcock. If he believes "Rear Window" to be his most cinematic film then it is. Note to watchers (viewers): ​Watch for Hitchcock's cameo. Hint: ​Think clock repairman and composer's apartment.
  12. In how many ways does Hitchcock play with or visually manifest the metaphor of “criss cross” or “criss-crossing” in this introductory sequence. [For those who haven’t seen the film yet, the idea of “criss cross” is central idea in this film, a theme Hitch sets up from the opening frames of this film] Be specific. ​ "Criss cross" (CC) ...We see of course the CC of the railroad switching tracks as we POV shot the arrival of the train into Union Station in Washington DC; We see the diamond emblem which is sort of a CC on the cabs that Bruno and Guy arrive in; we even see that the cab doors open differently CC at the curbside (Bruno's open to the left while Guy's opens to the right); we see a CC in the direction that Guy and Bruno walk along inside the main concourse of the train station (one walks from viewers left to right, the other walks from the viewers right to left); each actor CC at the entrance gate to the track for boarding of their train; Bruno wears black and white wingtip shoes which is a CC of colors to me; when Bruno shakes hands with Guy he uses both hands that CC Guy's hand. Bruno has a tie that has come printed lobsters facing left and some facing right as a CC; they each cross their legs when they finally sit down --CC; and finally Guy is wearing a CC pattern crosshatch sort of necktie. Another Criss Cross is the casting that Hitchcock used. Farley Granger had played one of the Loeb-Leopold killers in Hitchcock's Rope​ whereas Robert Walker was the squeaky clean actor from such films as the "Private Hargrove" series and Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo . The audience discovered that Hitchcock criss crossed them on who was good and was evil In this film! Even in this brief scene, how does Hitchcock create a sense of contrast between Guy (Farley Granger) and Bruno (Robert Walker)? Consider everything from camera work, to clothing and shoes, to dialogue and speech, for example. Hitchcock uses several techniques to create the sense of contrast between Guy and Bruno: We see initially their shoes and of course Bruno wears the flashy two tone shoes whereas Guy wears just plain one color shoes; Bruno is super outgoing with flair whereas Guy wears more conservative clothes; Bruno wears a "Lobster" printed design tie with a "Bruno" name tie clip; Guy wears a sweater vest and a ordinary tie just peeking out from his sweater vest; Bruno dominates from body language to posture to speech while Guy is more inward and quit. We see close-ups of Bruno like when he shows Guy his "Bruno" tie clip. Guy's dialogue so far is pretty near non-existent... he can't get a word in against Bruno's smooth talking. Even the characters names make a point "Guy" simply rolls off your lips without any great effort whereas "Bruno" is said with force and noise. While the visual design gets the most attention typically, how does the Dimitri Tiomkin score function as part of the mood and atmosphere of this opening sequence? ​ The musical score from Dimitri Tiomkin utilizes a varied selection of instruments to open the picture. We hear violins, trumpets, trombones, and cymbals. Tiomkin uses heavy motifs, blaring fanfares and some music that is almost comical to help set the mood, there is the sense of motion, this sense of activity and this sense of hustle and bustle as these to men move to their accidental meeting. Note to viewers: ​Watch for Hitchcock's cameo in this film...Hint:​ Think double bass fiddle and train station.
  13. What Hitchcock "touches" do you see in this early scene from the movie?​ ​ As pointed out in the lecture, we see Hitchcock's use of very tight close-ups particularly of Ingrid Bergman in this scene. We also see his "crazy" use of the camera in giving the upside down shot of Cary Grant. We learned from Dr. Edwards that Hitchcock had used this technic in the British film ​Downhill. He also uses some POV shots as if we are looking through Alicia's eyes to include seeing upside down. How does Hitchcock choose to light, frame, and photograph his two stars in this scene? What are some of the contrasts that Hitchcock trying to set up between these two characters through art direction, costume, and cinematography? We see Hitchcock film the early shots of Cary Grant in less light almost in darkness with him wearing a dark business suit. We see Hitchcock film Ingrid Bergman in light with extreme close up shots and wearing the clothes she had worn the night before. The backgrounds in this scene are out of focus, again emphasizing that we as the audience should be focused on Grant, or on Bergman or both but shouldn't be concerned with the background set. We see Cary Grant as standing perpendicular in this scene and for most of it we see Bergman horizontal. Are we to view this as Grant being dominant and Bergman being vulnerable or subservient? Based on this scene (or the entire film if you have seen it already), reflect on the casting of Cary Grant and Ingrid Bergman. Does this scene conform to or challenge their well-known star personas? ​As discussed in some of the class materials Ingrid Bergman was the most popular star in Hollywood in 1946. She never played a "bad" woman before so this casting by Hitchcock challenges her well-known star persona. Being a "party girl" with drunken hangovers is not her style. Cary Grant is viewed as the sophisticated gentlemen yet in this film he is he is cast has the "heartless" spy master. This is also against his usual persona. I am of the opinion that big stars enjoyed leaving their usual persona to work for Hitchcock and to in essence be challenged. Note to viewers:​ Watch for Hitchcock's cameo in Notorious. ​ Hint: Party guest at the champagne table
  14. What Hitchcock "touches" do you see in this opening sequence? Moreover, what do we learn about or know about the couple through the scene's visual design: the props, the set design or dressing, the decor, the camera angles, the lighting, etc? ​ We hear the childlike calliope style music that helps us to realize that this is a comedy. Initially, I thought that the setting was a couple on their honeymoon in a hotel but as the scene unfolds we discover that this is a married couple held up in their bedroom trying to make up for the last three days! We see that they are sloppy beyond belief, that they are well to do based on the elegant furnishings in the room, the high quality of the china and silverware, the fact that they have servants and of course their talk about "the Yale Game". The man appears bored waiting on his wife to wake up but he doesn't seem to dare bug her. We learn that Mr. Smith is a prominent lawyer. We also learn that this is not the first time that they have had to make up. The lighting seems to reveal that this is broad daylight. The camera angles seem to give close-ups to Carole Lombard as the key figure in the scene. Her look of fear?/concern? when she hears the door slams and thinks Mr. Smith has left her in violation of the rules of making up. 2. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: the opening sequence of Mr. and Mrs. Smith is a typical "Hitchcock opening" based on openings you have seen so far in the other Daily Doses? Why or why not? I am going to play devil's advocate and state that I don't think that this is a typical "Hitchcock opening" based on the others that we have seen. Some of the other typical Hitchcock openings were very fast paced, almost frantic. Some were set in exotic places, some were set in public places like theatres and music halls and some used POV shots to introduce us to such places as Manderley. As we saw in The 39 Steps​ we do however learn several things about Mr. & Mrs. Smith in the opening scene as addressed in the response to question 1 above. 3. What do think about the casting of and chemistry between Carole Lombard and Robert Montgomery? Do you think both are well cast for this "comedy of remarriage?" Why or why not? ​ As the lecture has indicated, Carole Lombard was known as a screwball comedienne but Robert Montgomery was also known for many roles in light comedy films of the 1930s. He even would sing a cappella in many of his comedy films. I think the pairing was a good one. Matching one comedian with another allowed them to play off each others strong points in comedy. Montgomery could certainly portray himself as hen pecked even though he was a born leader as evidenced by his service in World War 2 in the US Navy as a Lt Commander. In this scene in the film we see him being a different person around Carole Lombard as opposed to snapping his fingers to get a response out of Sammy, the law clerk, who arrives with the documents that need signing. ​Note to viewers: Watch for Hitchcock's cameo in Mr. & Mrs. Smith Hint: ​The building where Mr.& Mrs. Smith reside.
  15. As mentioned in the curator's note, this scene operates as a prelude to the main story. What do learn about the character of Uncle Charlie in this prelude? Be specific​ We learn that the name Uncle Charlie is using is " Mr. Spencer" (real or fake name?). Early middle age. He is a passionate smoker of cigars (he savors them), He has plenty of money and he doesn't really care about it (way it lays around the room). He is a dapper dresser, maybe even a dandy but there is something shabby about his dress too (note the hole in the back of his suitcoat). Uncle Charlie has a temper as evidenced by the glass throwing incident. If he is a criminal he is bold about his crime in terms of no fear..."Nothing on me!" Being set in WW2 America we don't know if he is a criminal, a wronged man or a spy. 2. In what ways does this opening remind you of watching a film noir? If it doesn't remind you of a film noir, what makes the opening here different from the opening of a noir film like Siodmak's The Killers? (Note: If you haven't seen The Killers, it is fine to answer this question in general terms about your own personal expectations) ​As discussed in the notes, the first thing that hits me about the opening of this 1943 film and the 1946 "The Killers" is the completely different treatise on basically the same scene a'la Hemingway. In Hitchcock / Wilder version, we see the "man in the bed" as a fighter, he is not going to give in / up, in fact he is bold in presenting himself to the two "friends on the corner". "Nothing on me!" ​ In Siodmak's treatment in "The Killers", Swede (Burt Lancaster) is fatalistic, he knows he is a dead man, he doesn't even want to attempt any resistance even when warned. Swede just waits for the door to open and the shots to finish him off. Hitchcock's opening is set in the daytime. Siodmak's in the dark of night. We don't see any interaction with the two guys in Hitchcock's version. We only learn everything from the landlady. The menace if there is not as great as the real menace in Siodmak's version. The killers threaten and boldly hunt down Swede whereas in "Shadow of Doubt" the two guys just wait around across the street on the corner and then eventually follow Uncle Charlie. The differences in the music are evident also...Hitchcock uses a reoccurring lite motif in the "Merry Widows", Siodmak uses an intense drum beat mood to ratchet up the tension. ​3. As we move into Hitchcock's Hollywood years, his scores will take on more importance than they did during the British years. Music will play a big role in Shadow of a Doubt. The film's score is by Dimitri Tiomkin, the first of four film scores that the composer will create for Hitchcock. What effect does the Tiomkin score have on the mood, atmosphere, and even the pace of this opening scene? ​ Tiomkin's score ​controls the mood, atmosphere and even the pace of this scene. We start out with a light motif followed by the "Merry Window" theme which will reoccur throughout. We also have spots of no music at all... and this silence effects the mood also. We hear deeper themes with drums and challenging notes that let us know that Uncle Charlie is angry and is headed to a showdown. His throwing of the glass has an appropriate musical signature.The music adds tension to the later parts of the scene. To be honest I could hear the kind of Tiomkin musical themes that he would later excel at in "High Noon". It sounds like Uncle Charlie is heading to a showdown in this unnamed town a'la Will Kain in Hadleyville. ​"Do Not forsake me cause Ya got nothin on me!" Note to viewers:​ Don't forget to look for Hitchcock's cameo. Hint: train to Santa Rosa

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us