Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'hitchcock'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • TCM Message Boards
    • Message Board Announcements
    • Stickies (helpful TCM info)
    • TCM Backlot Local Chapters
    • General Discussions
    • TCM Programs
    • Films and Filmmakers
    • Information, Please!
    • Games and Trivia
    • Your Favorites
    • Classic Film DVD Reviews
    • TCM Program Challenges Archive
    • Off Topic Chit-Chat
  • TCM Film Festival Forum
    • General Discussion
    • Questions and Concerns
  • TCM Cruise Forum
    • TCM Cruise General Discussion
    • TCM Cruise Questions and Concerns
  • Kyle in Hollywood
    • Remembering Kyle in Hollywood
  • Genre Forum
    • Westerns
    • Film Noir--Gangster
    • Pre-Code Films
    • Cult Films
    • Silent
    • War Films
    • Adventure/Action
    • Cartoons
    • Comedy
    • Documentaries
    • Foreign Language Films
    • Horror
    • LGBT
    • Musicals
    • Romance
    • Romantic Comedies
    • Science Fiction
    • Shorts
    • Trailers
  • Technical Issues
    • PROBLEMS with the Message Boards
    • PROBLEMS with TCM.com

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 23 results

  1. Note: I have no idea how studio politics worked! And I know some of them were B-listers but I don't care. I think they're amazing. Sidney Poitier-I think they would get along well Carole Landis- We all know Hitchcock loved to cast blondes. And I'm sure he would find some way to make use of her athleticism Lizabeth Scott- Same reason I picked Carole Lauren Bacall Alan Ladd Eleanor Parker Frances Dee Barbara Nichols Vincent Prince John Garfield Robert Ryan Audrey Totter Jennifer Jones Leslie Howard Ruth Hussey Paulette Goddard Honorable mention Gail Russell-I want to put her on the list but I think she might be a bit too fragile
  2. Prof. Edwards In reverse order: Thank you for an interesting, enjoyable class. Now a day without a Hitchcock film has something missing (in a good way.) I watched F. W. Murnau's The Last Laugh available on DVD. If you do another Hitch class with TCM I strongly suggest Asking TCM to see if they can broadcast it. Really provides an insight into Hitchcock's inspiration and loyalty to an art form. Doesn't distract from giving The Master his due. Will you be repeating the course, how do I find out what & when future courses will be? And will Noir course be repeated? I wish I'd known of that and regret missing it. (That's 3 questions.) Thank you, and TCM, for this course. Wonderful to see cable living up to it's potential. Peter Lyte
  3. Hello, I enjoyed being part of the fan panel today, thought you might like my "lecture notes" - Walter Twitter handle: @popcornbytes Alfred Hitchcock and the James Bond films.pdf Alfred Hitchcock and the James Bond films.pdf
  4. The lecture videos are informative and I'm glad they're part of the 50 Years of Hitchcock course. The set reminds me of PBS talk shows: I don't watch Charlie Rose, but he comes to mind! The black background is more appropriate, however, for Hitchcock (and for film noir). Thank you to Dr. Edwards and to Dr. Gehring for giving us their time and expertise.
  5. The Decades television channel is binge-showing The Alfred Hitchcock Hour this weekend (August 5 to 6, 2017). Check your local listings!
  6. Hi Hitchcock50 students: The second Daily Dose is the opening sequence from Hitchcock's third film, his 1927 hit The Lodger. Watch the clip in the second daily module labeled JUN 27 module in Canvas, and then post your reflections and observations on this message board. Today's three prompts are: 1. Compare the opening of The Lodger to the opening of The Pleasure Garden - what similarities and differences do you see between the two films? 2. Identify elements of the "Hitchcock style" in this sequence? Please provide specific examples. Even if you are not sure if it is the "Hitchcock style," what images or techniques stand out in your mind as powerful storytelling? Or images that provide an excess of emotion? 3. Even though this is a "silent" film, the opening image is one of a woman screaming. What do you notice in how Hitchcock frames that particular shot that makes it work in a silent film even though no audible scream that can be heard. And what other screams like that come to mind from Hitchcock's later work?
  7. There is no doubt in my mind. I will always remember this course as one of the most informative and fulfilling experiences of my life. I have learned so much about Hitchcock and film-making in general it makes my head spin! I've already warned all my friends I will be boring them to death with my newfound knowledge. We've covered The Hitchcock Touch in so much depth. I thought I would challenge my memory and compose a list of 'touch points' I can use a reference when watching a Hitchcock film, or others for that matter. Feel free to challenge my list, add to it, or create your own. The Hitchcock Touch > The double chase > The wrongly accused man and mistaken identity > Ordinary people forced into extraordinary circumstances; need to depend on their own wits > Camera work 1. extreme and meaningful close-ups 2. tracking and dolly shots 3. high-angle shots > Unique editing style (nod to Soviet Montage) > The 'MacGuffin' > 'Avoid the cliche at all costs!' > Star Power 1. brings in audiences and money 2. brings in established personas 3. already on people's minds and in the press > Humor (Light and Dark) > Give the audience more information up front than provided the character on screen > Prominent locales > 'Evil may lurk in the most innocent places'. > Romance > Suspense and Horror genres laced with frequent psychological undertones Hitchcock Style Points, Motifs, and things to look out for: > Trains and transportation. > Keys. > Staircases. > Windows. > Mirrors and reflections. > Music that supports suspenseful editing and imparts emotion. > Color palettes that signal emotional and psychological response. > The icy blonde. > Carefully chosen wardrobes. > The cameo.
  8. Field_Trish

    Hitchcock 50 on Demand

    Oh TCM. You are really starting to get on my nerves. Why would you not put all Hitchcock movies currently airing live on the on demand option? I was so mad when I missed Rebecca but then thought I could catch it on demand. Then to my disappointment you didn't put that on there. Then of course I missed Notorious and you again didn't put that on demand either. That's so unfair! I know everyone nowadays has a DVR but I do not. How hard is it to just make these movies available on demand? Especially during Hitchcock class time. I get it that maybe other movies are ok to leave out but if you're offering a class you should make the movies available on demand. Also, why do you cut off the host closing remarks after a movie on demand? You didn't use to do this but now you are. Also annoying. Every time I hear Ben Mankiewicz say "we'll discuss more after the film" I get excited but only to find out to my disappointment once again that you did not include those 40 seconds on demand.
  9. Topaz was a little long, but it held my interest. The different European locations and the fact that it didn’t include any stars are sometimes mentioned as reasons not to like the film, but fewer distractions allowed me to focus on the story, which was a great mix of character details and international espionage. I thought it worked really well. I especially liked the overhead shot of Juanita de Cordoba falling, after being shot by Rico Parra, with her beautiful purple dress spreading out around her, as though it were a stand-in for her blood. And there are plenty of other shots/reasons to watch Topaz. Topaz reminded me of Hitchcock’s spy thrillers from the 1930s. They also didn’t have big Hollywood stars, but I enjoyed them, too. One of my favorites is Sabotage. If you enjoyed the earlier spy thrillers, I think Topaz is worth a look.
  10. I'm sad that the Hitchcock class is coming to an end as I have enjoyed it immensely and hope TCM will do the following: 1. Have ongoing classes like the Hitchock Class 2. Create a low cost online streaming site like Netflix... so more people including myself can watch TCM daily. I refuse to pay $140 in Long Beach, CA just to get 1 channel TCM. Crazy (I don't watch most of the mindless tv programming that is out there. Concerning the score to Frenzy. There are some interesting facts people might not know: Henry Mancini was originally commissioned to write the score to Frenzy. (The music survives) Here is a link so you watch the alternate version with Henry Mancini's score which I prefer to Ron Goodwin's (Who also wrote a very good score) Mancini's score to me is darker combining organ fugal counterpoint in a very 'stuffy' British style. I love the rich polyphonic writing. I find it interesting to think if Hitchcock was a bit more prolific in the later years if he worked with Mancini.. what kind of duo they would have been artistically? Mancini of course wrote themes like the Pink Panther, Charade, Mr. Lucky etc. I think as a composer he would have worked well with Hitch. Goodwin's score on the other hand works extremely well too with a patriotic hymn feel that is more upbeat and good natured. Hitch went with Goodwin as it created more contrast and dark humor. Ron was a British composer that scored over 100 movies. Alas he is not well known in America.
  11. My DVR malfunctioned the other night, and I missed the beginning of TCM's broadcast of Psycho, which means I missed the interview with the director of the documentary about Psycho! So now I am wondering if there is any way I can watch the interview. I am so disappointed as I have watched every Hitchcock movie which has aired this month (with the exception of The Birds and Jamaica Inn), but my DVR just picked the best film of all to malfunction during! Please does someone have a link to the interview somewhere? (And please don't suggest I join TCM Backlot. I do not care to spend $87 to hear one interview.)
  12. Good Day: I'm James Spencer, a musicologist from Long Beach, California. I wanted to create a panel discussion on the key points to Bernard Herrmann's score for Hitchcock's Psycho. Psycho is the most iconic horror score of all time and set the bar to inspire other horror film composers to compose in a similar style. Here are some key points about Bernard Herrmann's Psycho score: 1. Scored for only String Orchestra using the whole voicing range of instruments: violins I and II, violas, cellos and double bass. Each line of music often was divided into two parts to create 8 to 10 voice harmony. 2. THE HITCHCOCK CHORD: The iconic jolting opening chords of Psycho became known as the Hitchcock Chord. It is technically a minor triad [b-flat, D flat, F] with the added dissonance of a Major 7th interval [A] =Bb, Db,F A over an F bass. The chord is dissonant, jolting and also ambiguous. Major and minor together. The chord can represent the duality of the main character Norman Bates.. Passive/Aggressive, Masculine/Feminine, Gentle/Dangerous. The strings create the effect with sforzandi (forceful) down bow. 3. The Use of Minor 2nd intervals for tension and unsettled feeling. The use of minor 2nds or half steps is used throughout Herrmann's score. It creates tension, dissonance and an unsettled feeling. This device would inspire John Williams when he created his iconic minor 2nd theme for the movie Jaws. 4. The use of Augmented 4th Intervals: Diabolus in Musica. Known as the Devil in Music as early as the Medieval period, The augmented fourth interval for example C to F# creates dissonant tension. In the City scene of Psycho (the voyeur scene of looking at Janet Leigh/Robert Walker in the Hotel room. We get in the high register of the strings ambiguous Perfect and Augmented descending fourths. The effect is not romantic, but eerie, unsettling, icy and cold. Like the decision of Janet's character to steal the money. It psychologically sets up the feeling that something is wrong. 5. Shower Scene: Hermann makes use of a device known as glissando. That is when the string players slide their fingers up the strings. Down with knife like sharp down bows, the string players would slide up to strings to specified notes. Often a Major 7th apart (from the Hitchcock Chord) to create the terrifying effect. 6. Use of harmonics, the wood of the bow for bowing and pizzicato for effects. Bernard Herrmann uses all kinds of effects for tension and drama. Harmonics is created by barely touching the strings to create very high pure overtones. The wood of the bow instead of the horse hair can create metallic and airy effects, Pizzicato is plucking the strings which also creates additional depth of texture. 7. Repeated ostinato: The famous 16th not triplet followed by an 8th note motif throughout the movie creates the psychotic feeling. It is one of the most recognized motifs in all of move musical scores. Here is a link where TCM students may watch the actual musical score for Psycho with the music. Enjoy! Thanks for joining me and feel free to comment or add any points. This is obviously just the basic overview of some important points of the score. I included links (Sorry the files were to large to download. Psycho discussed by James Spencer: Psycho Score with Music: James Spencer jamesrspencer.com
  13. I confess to being more than a little disappointed with some aspects of Hitchcock 50. 1. Far too many of the early British films. Those of us who love Hitchcock would naturally want to believe that every one of his films is a masterpiece. Personally, I think that about 80% of his films from The Man Who Knew Too Much to Family Plot are somewhere between very good and masterpieces, and I'm including in that number some I don't particularly like, like The Wrong Man, The Birds, and The Trouble With Harry. Except for The Lodger, the rest of the silents are darned near unwatchable--flashes of the emerging Hitchcock style buried in a soggy morass of exaggerated acting and silent film cliches. And, to be candid, a lot of The Lodger is silent film cliche as well. 2. Strange omissions and inclusions, besides the early films. Why no Sabotage (a critical film in Hitchcock's development) or To Catch A Thief? Why Number 17, the only interesting bit of which is the final sequence? Why Mr. and Mrs. Smith, except to prove that Hitchcock had no sense for screwball romantic comedy? If it was necessary to be comprehensive--show all of the surviving films. 3. If I may paraphrase Casablanca--of all the Hitchcock experts in all the world, why on earth have a preening little nonentity like Alexandre Philippe, except possibly that there may be a TCM financial interest in his documentary? His commentary has been, to put it charitably, banal, where it has not been inaccurate. For example--Madeleine Carroll is not the first Hitchcock blonde. Anyone forget June Tripp in The Lodger--not to mention all the blonde victims? Or Anny Ondra, in The Manxman and Blackmail? Making a point of milk in Suspicion and Spellbound (two instances does not a repeated trope make) and no mention of the repeated trope of vertical movement followed by a fall from a great height--suggested in The Lodger, present fully developed in Blackmail, Foreign Correspondent, and Saboteur, to note the obvious ones. Guys, you can do better.
  14. Thanks to this course, I scored 100% on this Revolvy quiz on Hitchcock. See how you do. https://www.revolvy.com/main/show.php?id=119&qno=0
  15. I appreciate the lecture on film noir by Dr. Edwards. It gives clarity to what makes film noir "film noir." I have seen a number of the better known and lesser known films noir, courtesy of TCM, especially when the theme of the evening or month is film noir. That said, I feel the Dr. Edwards is trying to prove a point that isn't there. Hitchcock has long been a sort of genre or type of film unto himself. If I were to put a film noir such as "Kiss of Death" or "Double Indemnity" side by side with any of Hitchcock's films (and let's use "Shadow of A Doubt"), I would be hard pressed to see the similarities. The typical film noir lives in a world of darkness (and I don't just mean lighting, though that contributes strongly to it). Hitchcock's characters for example, don't inhabit the same world of "The Killer's" Swede, or "Kiss of Death's" Tommy Udo. These characters live in a dark world, and are doomed from the start; or they are so unrepentantly bad as to deserve their fate. More importantly, these characters are usually the central focus of the film. Hitchcock rarely had characters such as these, with maybe the exception being Uncle Charlie in "Shadow of a Doubt." But I can't think of any other examples of character such as him - and having them as a central focus. You would never believe Cary Grant as a bad character, "Suspicion's" suspicions notwithstanding. Even in that film, there's always been the rumor that Grant's character was indeed supposed to murder his wife, but that Hitchcock and / or the studio balked at that ending. To that end, the vast majority of Hitchcock's leading characters were the innocent "wrong man" or "the wrong people in the wrong place at the wrong time." See "Sabotage," "North By Northwest" or either of the productions of "The Man Who Knew Too Much" for typical examples of that scenario. There's also a gritty realism to films noir that Hitchcock never worked in. (Well, maybe "The Wrong Man," which does have a procedural realism to it. But even there, Henry Fonda is the typical Hitchcock "wrong man" character.) Hitchcock was more interested (as we have seen in the prior lectures) in creating his own reality (not realism) in his films. After too many years of watching film, especially Hitchcock and numerous examples of film noir, I'm going to stick with the belief that Hitchcock films were a genre unto themselves, and that it's too much of a stretch to consider them related to film noir.
  16. Note: Because this thread discusses the ending of a film, of course there are SPOILERS. Suspicion is notorious (pun INTENDED) for the changed ending from the book. The producers, concerned about Cary Grant's image, demanded the change. In the book, Johnny (Cary Grant), is a murderer, while in the movie, he is not a murderer. Most people, including Hitchcock himself, complain about the change, and feel that by Hollywood imposing a happy ending it weakens the picture. I am in a minority for two reasons, one obvious, and one perhaps not. Firstly, I agree with the producers, in that I myself wouldn't really want to see Grant as someone who could murder someone as sweet as his wife, Lina. In all of Hitchcock's American films, there are only two star turns as a murder: Shadow of a Doubt, and DIal M for Murder. Jimmy Stewart and Cary Grant never played murderers in Hitchcock. If fact a great bulk of his output featured an innocent man accused of a crime, having to clear himself. However, my MAIN reason, and one which may not as obvious, is that to me it actually makes the film much more interesting. I try to imagine a film where Johnny is really a murderer, and this is what I see: --- A woman marries a man, and slowly discovers clues, bit by bit, that make her REALIZE he is a murderer, and will eventually murder her. OK, that's not bad, but pretty conventional. It is like any other mystery, where clues are found slowly leading the protagonist to the solution. Now let us look at the film: --- A woman marries a man, and slowly discovers clues, bit by bit, that make her BELIEVE he is a murderer, but in the end finds out she is wrong. Now the film becomes psychological - it becomes a matter of perception vs, reality. Whenever she sees some information, it is filtered through her perception that he may be a bad man which leads her to INTERPRET it as a clue proving his guilt. --- He brings her a glass of milk. The reality: it is to help her sleep. She perceives it as being poisoned. --- Beaky dies from drinking. The Reality: He was with others, who didn't know his problem with drink, and couldn't have dissuaded him to stop. She perceives it as a murder by Johnny, who knew this particular problem. --- Racing along the cliff in a car, he lunges at her. The reality: she was shrinking away from him, and he was reaching for her to pull her back in the car. She perceives it as Johnny trying to push her OUT of the car. These are just a few examples of incidents where something happens and Lina's mind interprets it into something else. Each thought reinforces her belief that he is a murderer, so each further incident falls even more strongly under that perception. I am quite sure Hitchcock, having no choice but to make him innocent, went in this direction, but few ever seem to mention it. People usually just complain about a 'Hollywood Ending'. This type of difference - psychological vs conventional - to me makes it much more interesting, There are times when outside forces, good or bad, can cause a change in the film that is positive. In Spielberg's 'Jaws' the troubles with the mechanical shark forced Spielberg to re-envision moments, and suggest the shark rather than outright show it, until later in the film. Most people know this and agree it greatly improves the film, making suspense, and building up the eventual entrance of the shark to one of the great moments in all of cinema: "I think you're gonna need a bigger boat." I must admit I never read the original book (Anthony Berkeley Cox's 'Before the Fact') either before or after seeing this film. The reason I posted this as a separate thread is because 'Suspicion' was not shown in any of the Daily Doses in the TCM/Ball State University film course '50 Years of Hitchcock', and I wanted to express my opinion on this matter and see if others agree, disagree, or haven't yet considered it.
  17. I understand why Hitchcock liked to use movie stars. It was a quick way to connect a character to the audience without having to provide a lot of exposition. It can also change the denouement of the movie. (I am thinking specifically about Ivor Novello vs Laird Cregar in The Lodger and Cary Grant in Suspicion.) So my question is... if you don't have a sense of the persona of the stars in the movie, how do you make that connection, understand the motivations of the characters, and see why Hitchcock chose to end the movie the way he did?
  18. I created this topic for those in the 50 Years of Hitchcock class that wanted a deeper examination of the masterpiece ROPE (1948). Though it was mentioned by Professor Edwards, I was sad that there were no clips/discussion questions as I feel this is an incredibly important film in Hitchcock's oeuvres. This is Hitchcock's first color film and the story is based on the 1929 play by Patrick Hamilton (with the same name). The brilliant Arthur Laurents did the screenplay. The story is loosely based on the real life 1924 murder of a 14 year old boy named Bobby Franks by University of Chicago students: Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb. (gay lovers). This is the first movie Hitch made with Sidney Bernstein for Transatlantic Pictures as well as another first... Hitch's fist technicolor masterpiece. Hitch brilliantly cast John Dall as Brandon Shaw and Farley Grainger as Phillip Morgan. THIS IS THE FIRST HITCHCOCK MOVIE TO STAR JIMMY STEWART as Professor Rupert Cadell (The university housemaster to Brandon and Phillip. The story centers on the gay lovers Brandon and Phillip who stranger to death their former classmate from Harvard in their swanky Manhattan penthouse, and then hide the body in a trunk where they serve a dinner buffet on. They commit this ghastly murder as a crime of intellectual and aesthetic superiority by committing "the perfect murder." The guests at the dinner party are unaware of the murder which builds the wonderful tension for the audience. The guests include the victim's father Mr. Kentley played by Cedric Hardwicke and Aunt--Ms. Atwater (Constance Collier) --the mother of the victim can not attend due to a flu. The fiance of the dead victim is there (Joan Chandler) playing Miss Janet Walker and the awkwardness of being reunited with her former lover Kenneth Lawrence (Douglas Kirk) was was also the best friend of the murder victim David Kentley (Dick Hogan). The plot set up is intense and intriguing. Hitch's Manhattan skylight miniature set is spectacular.. and he keeps the camera continuing moving in long takes which add to the amazing tensions and fluidity of this movie. Truly masterful. Brandon and Phillip's idea for the murder of David originated with a conversation with their prep school housemaster Rupert. The gay subtext is marvelous yet rarely discussed even by Hitchcock scholars. Brandon and Phillip are both elegant, snobbish and "superior (aka bitchy queens). Brandon continually through the movie tempts fate by edging others on which is how Rupert eventually figures out the murder. Phillip's nervousness and guilt take over as well. My favorite gay subtext is the use of gay composer Francis Poulenc's quirky Moment Perpetuel (Mvt 1) theme. As Phillip (Grainger) continues to play this quirky and self absorbed tune.. the tempo gets more hurried...the music gets even more and more nervous. It reminds me of the French folk song that the murdering girl plays on the piano over and over in the Bad Seed.. Hitch uses Poulenc's music for the opening shots and at the end of the movie to tie the theme to the nervous energy of the murderers. The evening progresses into a continual cat and mouse until the final where Rupert discovers the body and the cops approach. ---- This was one of HItchcock's experimental American films. 1. First color/technicolor 2. Long unbroken camera shots for several long minutes at a time 3. The whole movie shot on a single set (the living room of the Manhattan penthouse) 4. There was almost no editing on this movie. TRULY AMAZING 5. The walls of the sets were on rollers so they could be easily moved to accomondate unusual camera angles and character placements. Crew men had to constantly move furniture around. 6. Great detail was placed in the apartment from tablecloths, china, flower arrangements, pillows etc. Very intricately done. 7. The cyclorama of New York skyline backdrop was the the largest used up to that time. The subtle lighting changes are spectacular. It even included the Empire State and the Crysler building in the back set. Hitch though of everything even chimney smoke. The clouds were made of spun glass and also changed shape throughout the movie. Hitch also broke his cameo chain.. and actually appears TWICE in this film personally! 1. The first is in the opening scene he is walking on the street in front of the apartment building where the murder will take place. 2. About 55 mins into the film if I remember.. we see a billboard with Hitchcock's profile for a weight loss product called Reduco. (the same weight loss product used in his cameo for Lifeboat. I am amazed that most people who have watched the film numerous times never catch this. ------ Gay subtext: As a gay film historian myself and musicologist... gay viewers are starved to see gay characters on the screen in classic movies. In the 1920s-1930s, most gay characters were "screaming queens" added for comic relief. The departure for Brandon and Phillip being cool calculated murderers but also debonaire, intelligent, elegant, and wealthy was a huge departure in screen history. Though Hitchcock could only "hint" at the gay relationship.. He does it in a way that is so symbolic, coded. Both Farley and John understood the characters and we can view the gay subtext in their mannerisms, and facial expressions. It is truly brilliant to watch on the screen. Homosexuality was indeed controversial on the screen.. yet this is not the first time Hitch had homosexual characters. We see Ms. Danvers in Rebecca and her obsession with the first Mrs de Winters. We see the gay traveling duo in The Lady Vanishes. Hitch always pushes the gammit of human interaction. Hitch's brilliance got many subtext pass the Hay's code. What was tragic is the film did not play as well at the box office.. Many "conservative" cities banned ROPE due to the gay subtext. There is a subtle hint to that Brandon might have been romantically involved with Rupert (Jimmy Stewart's character).... though Jimmy did not play the role that way... there are film scholars that point out specific lines. I have watched the movie again and again.. and do see the possible love triangle between Brandon Phillip and Rupert. Phillip is nervous and intimidated by Rupert through the movie and there seems to be an underlining jealousy when Rupert and Brandon are off together. Screenplay writer Arthur Laurents even wrote that he wanted Rupert to be gay for the movie. Those who want more on this look up on the internet Gay subtext in ROPE to find many articles on Arthur Laurent's take on this movie. From Laurent's bio: “Laurents’ life’s energy was spent with other men. The specific context and the moment of time in which he was living, in terms of secrecy and when information could be shared about homosexuality, are very important to understanding the characters.” Pat Hitchcock also remarked "Yes they are all gay.. Jimmy had a field day with that one." It is interesting that Hitchcock originally wanted Cary Grant for the role of Rupert. I would have preferred that myself.. as Cary Grant was gay in real life and had a longtime romantic partnership with Randolph Scott. Cary is also sexy compared to Jimmy. The sexual tension between the men with Cary in the equation would have been far more interesting. Jimmy's portrayal was intellectual but lacks the sexual intrigue of the original play. Hitchcock also wanted Monty Clift instead of John Dall (this would have also been interesting casting as Monty was also gay in real life. John and Farley however were marvelous and bold for 1948 .. you see the relationship in the looks they give and body language. The sexual tension as John describes the murder almost like an ****. I would love Professor Edwards comments and insights as well as anyone in the Hitchcock class would like to comment on their insights. I hope this helps those that might not be familiar with ROPE or would like to explore this fantastic movie further. I'm always saddened that his movie is nearly Always brushed over in Hitchcock classes. Why? Is it because most American audiences prefer the later works like Vertigo and Psycho? Is it because the gay subtext seems controversial to some? Is it that because it HItch's first color movie.. he hadn't perfected that medium yet? Is it that it didn't do as well at the box office? Comments? Insights? Thanks for joining me.
  19. Although it's only the beginning of a very long course, filled with over 40 of Hitchcock's films, just as notable should be the films that are not being shown over the course of the next month. Whether for lack of time, lack of rights, lack of materials, or lack of interest, there are 13 films directed by Alfred Hitchcock that will not be shown. (This is assuming that the list of films that TCM provided is comprehensive.) They are as follows: The Pleasure Garden (1925) The Mountain Eagle (1927) [this film is lost, which explains its absence] Easy Virtue (1928) Champagne (1928) Juno and the Paycock (1930) Elstree Calling (1930) Mary (1931) Waltzes from Vienna (1934) Secret Agent (1936) Sabotage (1936) Young and Innocent (1937) Under Capricorn (1949) To Catch a Thief (1955) Personally, I'm most sorry about Under Capricorn, especially after learning that New Yorker critic Richard Brody holds it in such high esteem (and, of course, Ingrid Bergman). And, most baffling is the exclusion of To Catch a Thief. I've also included a link to a particularly good print on YouTube of Young and Innocent and a link to dailymotion for Under Capricorn. Thankfully, a number of these films are available through the openculture link that the course provides. What do the rest of you think? Any thoughts on any of these films? Any especially worth seeking out for non-completionist reasons?
  20. Identify a scene in a Hitchcock film that made you smile, giggle, or laugh! My nominee is a couple of seconds in the "fire outside the restaurant" scene in The Birds. In the midst of the chaos caused by the attacking birds and the gasoline-fueled fire, a buckboard comes flying around the corner, with no one at the reins! It's straight out of a TV Western. I think Hitchcock was doing what he always did in a film: amusing himself, and welcoming anyone in the audience who noticed the joke to laugh along with him. It's at 2:53 in this clip:
  21. Can you remember all of Hitchcock's film titles? https://www.sporcle.com/games/g/alfredhitchcock Can you recognize this Hitchcock cameos? https://www.sporcle.com/games/nscox/alfred-hitchcock-cameos-a-slideshow FWIW, Sporcle is a very addictive, trivia-oriented website. Check it out since they have countless of trivia games for just about any topic.
  22. Recently my wife and I stayed a night in Bodega Bay, CA so we could visit the site of Hitchcock's 1963 film, The Birds. The inn we stayed at loaned us a DVD of The Birds and a DVD player. The young woman who set us up in the room was quite knowledgeable about the film, even though I don't think she was born yet when the film was released. The cafe burned down some time ago and the phone booth was a prop. But the school is still nearby in the town of Bodega. It is a private residence now but you can take a picture of the outside. The jungle gym was never next to the school. It was imported into the film using movie magic long before CGI even was thought of. Those camera people and technicians were geniuses. While there, I bought a book by Tony Lee Moral entitled The Making of Hitchcock's The Birds (2015). I very much enjoyed reading it and it was very informative. Bodega Bay is very much worth the stop if you happen to be going up Highway 1 north of San Francisco.
  23. ATTENTION CANADIAN HITCHCOCK FANS: I don't know if this is an error of the listing of the movie version, but: SILVER SCREEN CLASSICS is scheduled to air the 1927 film The Lodger starring Ivor Novello in the title role as directed by Hitchcock. I saw this recently for the first time on youtube with a horrendous soundtrack that had singing of two songs -one near the beginning of the film - and one near the ending of the film. This really ruined the suspense. I don't know if the movie airing tonight has a different soundtrack or not. They my even have the wrong title version listed. (ie, might be 1944 version) Any way, I am recording it. I wanted to let people who get Silver Screen Classics get a heads up anyway.

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us