mrroberts

To me *The Man Who Knew Too Much* is nothing more than Hitchcock's often repeated theme of mistaken identity or guilt by association. The bad guys see Stewart with the gov. agent and they just assume he (Stewart) has some relationship with him. And they don't know if in his dying moment the agent passed any information on to Stewart. He did say a few words, but Stewart has no idea what its all about. It could have ended right there but when the bad guys kidnap Stewart's child, he has no choice but to get involved and find out what this is all about. And he's caught between working with the bad guys or the cops. Sounds like North By Northwest, Saboteur, I Confess, (a definite underappreciated Hitch film), Strangers On A Train, and a bunch of other films. Ordinary man in extraordinary situation.

Fred, let me know if you ever find a "Linda" out there.

I was just looking up the classic Johnny Carson Tonight Show sketch with Jay Silverheels (a Canadian native did you know?) "Tonto in Toronto speak Esperanto" . I had a devil of a time learning how to properly pronounce "Mississauga" until someone said "how do you say Mississippi?"

Tom, I agree with you 1000% about *The Sea Wolf* . I wish it would get more airings and in a prime time 8 or 10 pm time slot. How about the great special effect scene at the beginning (the boat collision)? Rivals anything you can see today in a film. And for my money NO actor was ever better in films than Edward G Robinson and this is him at his best (the other actors in this film ain't bad either )

I too like to examine some scenes on a frame by frame basis, almost always to see how some stunt or special effect might have been done. Keep in mind though that in 1958 no filmmaker could have imagined that one day you and I would have the ability to do this "frame by frame" analysis. So as long as the scene played ok for the people in the movie theatre who cared about these little variations?

An excellent film for sure. Power was a very fine actor and it shows here. Dead at only 44, what a terrible loss for the movie industry and the public.

Dargo2, I just saw the "Rear Window" trailer. I believe that around 1965 "Psycho" and "Rear Window" were rereleased in theatres as a double billing. Sometime soon after that is when Hitchcock must have pulled "Rear Window" and the other films he had ownership of from distribution. Apparently Hitch and James Stewart must have had some kind of deal on the four films Stewart was in so Stewart was in on Hitchcock's "investment" plan. And "The Trouble With Harry" went along as well. There must be some confusion about the box office numbers listed in earlier posts here, U.S. numbers vs international numbers. It doesn't seem likely that "Harry" beat out some of the other Hitchcock films of that era.

I would have thought that Holden would have blown up a bridge as he did in a number of his other films. Or maybe one of Susan Strasberg's errant cigarette butts would have burned down half of the town. Hal would have saved Madge's mom from the fire and she would have changed her mind about him.

I just looked at the wiki entry. The film certainly was initially released in the U.S. (I believe I even heard Shirley MacLaine in an interview talk about it) but did not do very well. Hitchcock soon after acquired the rights to the movie, as he did with several other of his films). He was the one who then withheld the films from distribution. Rope, Rear Window, Vertigo, The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) , and The Trouble With Harry were the five films. Only after Hitch passed in 1980 and his estate was settled were the five films rereleased. I saw all five in an old theatre in 1983. Other than the initial release time in 1955 it doesn't appear that it was available for viewing very much if at all until 1983. Hitchcock considered the films an investment for his estate, the value increased as the films sat idle. Edited by: mrroberts on Sep 12, 2013 11:16 PM

I really like Kim Novak an awful lot, but Lee Remick goes off the scale for me. Lee would have been a great Mrs Robinson. If they had made that movie 10 years later Lee could have been Mrs Robinson and I could have been her "pupil".

"Harry" also gave the public its introduction to Shirley MacLaine, no small matter there.

Anytime Cagney wept, if anyone watching would have laughed or made some remark, POW, right in the kisser.

And this was right around the time Laughton's *Night of the Hunter* came out too. Boy, those 1955 audiences were dumb ! --- P S they were smart enough to go see Mister Roberts though Edited by: mrroberts on Sep 12, 2013 2:15 PM

When the lights went out Charles Bronson was in the tunnel and then he freaked out and then... Oh, sorry, wrong movie.

John2Bad's observations are so obvious, I feel really stupid for never seeing them before. I can't wait to hear his review of *Rebecca* and how it relates to Roosevelt's New Deal policies .

I'll have to ask my old girlfriend , Jaclyn Smith, what she may know about this. "Charlie", I mean Forsythe did work on the stage, did he ever sing in other films or plays? --- I first saw "Harry" back in the early 80's, one of the 5 missing Hitchcock's, saw them all on the big screen too. I liked "Harry" right away, but I can understand why it wasn't well received in America when first released in 1955. Firstly, it wasn't a typical Hitchcock film, audiences may have been confused or disappointed. Secondly, its a very British film, dry humor/wit, and most American audiences just didn't quite get it. In later years, like the 80's up to today, more people like it. Still, its always going to be one of Hitch's "lesser" films.

I rule off settings penalties here. Repeat 2nd down.

Fred, I think you mean "Butte", Montana Sorry I couldn't resist. But your point is well taken. And I never heard of Wiggins, Miss. I thought maybe you made that one up, but its for real. Edited by: mrroberts on Sep 12, 2013 12:21 AM

I'm starting to sound like my main man, Markbeckuaf.

This Saturday, get up bright and early, or set the recording machine. At 6AM est, its Eddie G vs Bogie in *Kid Galahad* . For years this film was shown as "The Battling Bellhop" because one of those 60's Elvis flicks was a remake and used the "Kid Galahad" title. Its good to see the Robinson/Bogart film has the proper title back. And following at 8AM est is one of Eddie's very, very best movies, *The Sea Wolf* . I love this film, probably in my personal top 10 of all time (if I ever try to actually compile such a list). Robinson is incredible (another snub from Oscar) and he has a top notch supporting cast to work with. All are very good, but its Eddie's film 100% .

Way back when , a long , long time ago, there was a little thread about Joel McCrea and him getting a SOTM honor. I made a small contribution to that effort and somewhere in my comments about Mr McCrea I mentioned the movie *Foreign Correspondent* being a favorite of mine and Joel McCrea having a lot to do with that. It's common knowledge that Mr Hitchcock, "good evening", wanted Gary Cooper for the role, but Coop said no. So, as seemed to be the pattern back then, if you can't get Coop get McCrea. I think McCrea was excellent in this movie and am disappointed that Hitch didn't call on him for some future part.

Given the title of this thread if one can't talk about Cagney, Canada, or Captain of the Clouds (3 choices there) then start your own thread please. And any comment that include 2 or more of the subjects above gets bonus points.

Maybe there's a connection between "Captain of the Clouds" and "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" ?

I think *I Confess* is a very unappreciated film. It deserves more airings because of that.

That damn Hitchcock , leaving all of these loose ends The best one for me is how Kim goes into the old apartment house (Valdez home) up the stairs and into the room, then when Stewart enters and talks to the landlady, Kim and her car magically disappear. And the old lady never saw a thing, unless she was in on the whole thing. Maybe she was another girlfriend of Elster's ?