Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Moriarty looks at the amazing restored print of REAR WINDOW that USA FILMS is releasing to world... thank God!

Hey Moriarty... by WalkerEasterling	Jan 28th, 2000 05:20:21 AM
Where are those 90's reports you said you were going to do?
WOW COOL KICK ASS by batman1111	Jan 28th, 2000 05:33:49 AM
any other movies being restored by them
Hitchcock is overrated. by Cereal Killer	Jan 28th, 2000 05:58:53 AM
I haven't seen "Rear Window" but I've seen maybe a dozen Hitchcock movies on the big screen at the Englewood in KCMO (God I love that place) and I've mostly been disappointed in his films. I just saw "Vertigo" a few weeks ago and except for the first part between Jimmy Stewart and Barbara Bel Geddes I found the movie to be bland. I hate when they show the hero being obsessed with some woman even though the only attribute she possesses is an attractive face. The Kim Novak character is so dull that there's no way an intelligent man like Stewart would be so obsessed with her. Plus the fact that Novak is not that good looking. Her face has all the right attributes but lacks any emotion; like a china doll. Anyway most of Hitchcock's movie contain certain trademarks that bug the hell out of me. I don't like the way that he speeds up the film during any action scene so that it looks unnaturally fast. Watch the car chase scene in "To Catch a Thief" or the merry-go-round scene in "Strangers on a train." I also don't like the way his films seem to fall apart at the end. In "The Birds" Tippie Hedren and the others just quietly walk past the crazy crows to safety. I guess if everyone in town had just stayed still they'd have all lived. Or in "Strangers on a Train" the carousel gets speeded up so fast that it crashes. Gimme a break. I"ve also noticed that in all his films when a character falls down from a high place that it always looks fake. Check Martin Balsam's tumble down the stairs in "Psycho" or the fall from the Statue of Liberty in "Sabateur." I'm not saying that Hitchcock is a lousy director just that he doesn't seem like the God that everyone always calls him. I do love "North by Northwest" though. That film is damn near flawless. As for Jimmy Stewart, I really do miss him and I disagrre that he always plays the same character. Just look at the difference between his acting in the Frank Capra movies and in the way Jimmy is in his later westerns.
Rear Window just as relevant today by Lazarus Long	Jan 28th, 2000 06:00:39 AM
Why is Rear Window the perfect film to restore at this point in time? Look around and see how voyeuristic this society has become. Websites where you can watch girls in their dorm room, and an endless parade of idiotic home video camera shows only partially satiate the public's desire to see into other lives. What about the Highway Chase Pager that tells subscribers when a police chase in is progress so they can tune in on TV? The fact is that the more time we spend staring into our own little monitors, the less we are out on the street communicating with people in the old-fashioned way. What's the result of this lack of human contact? We fantasize more, we become even more curious about the lives of other people. Look what we subjected our current president to. Rear Window is a not-too-subtle (if you think about it) critique of the facination we all have with other people's private lives. It is a pretty warped view of society, but of course that was the beauty of Hitchcock's contribution to the arts. The filmmakers that are that popular today (hint, hint) are too afraid to shine a light on the ugly aspects of our behavior. Well, at least we have restorations to look forward to. This is a great companion piece to Vertigo, which brings the idea of obsession to a much more personal level. I happen to prefer Vertigo, because it is a lot more cinematic, more emotional, and less like a play. But Rear Window is probably the more entertaining film, it has a lot of comic relief, and is one of several films that showcases Hitchcock's ability to make a highly-charged experience on such a small set (Lifeboat and Rope are two others). Well I'll be catching this tomorrow afternoon, and I just hope this is able to approach the magnificence of the original Christopher Reeve tour-de-force. Ha. And has anyone heard about an upcoming restoration of Orson Welles' Chimes at Midnight? Any news would be appreciated, supposedly it contains the greatest (not largest) battle scenes ever filmed.
Harry, gotta disagrre with you about Grace Kelly. by Cereal Killer	Jan 28th, 2000 06:11:19 AM
I agree with your second choice of most desirable woman in a movie; Ingrid Bergman is absolutely breathtaking in "Casablanca" but first place has to go to Vivien Leigh as Scarlett O'Hara in "Gone With the Wind." Especially in the early scenes like the barbecue at Twelve Oaks. The way she mesmerizes everyone in the place with her beauty and charm while all the time she only has eyes for Ashley. And when we later learn that she's got guts and brains under all that crinoline and petticoats my heart pounds with lust and admiration every time I see that movie.
The third-best of Hitchcock's films by Stephen Dedalus	Jan 28th, 2000 07:41:03 AM
I still think NOTORIOUS is Hitch's number one film (Harry, you think Ingrid Bergman was great in CASABLANCA? HA!), with STRANGERS ON A TRAIN in a very close second (this is perhaps his most forgotten film amongst the public, so rent it now). James Stewart was used by Hitchcock as someone who could express fear better than anyone else, and in REAR WINDOW, that fear, of the neighbor in the opposite building, is greatened because Stewart is unable to move at all. It is an ingenious work, and I can't wait to see it.
Hitchcock's greatness distilled by zinger	Jan 28th, 2000 08:38:03 AM
I don't really want to shred the guy who found Hitchcock overrated, Vertigo bland, whatever. Hitchcock, this repressed, obssessed, marketing as well as directing genius created arguably 7 cinematic triumphs of suspense, morbid humor, and signature craftsmanship that are so often alluded to he has become in name cinematic vernacular. I am not saying anyone who does'nt agree are punk headed sophmores for life--It's understandable . You watch a film you,ve heard about all your life that is purported to exemplify movie greatness and your left flat. (This just happened to me with Citizen Kane, yeah Wells on top, very apparent-arresting shots, deep focus, oddly angled scenes conveying alienation until last 30 mins are all about the wife so indignant over discovering Kane has a mistress what a whining carpy I kept waiting for another snow globe to break and none too soon) Try not watching these classics as if it's required reading. With Hitchcock let his manipulative directing style seduce and unsettle. Then savor as if a fine wine quite possibly by reading about his techniques, his personal demons and his perspective on the language and power of film. Yes you are always going to collide with dated materials, SPELLBOUND is almost laugh out loud funny in its twisted take of diagnostic pschology at movies end, ROPE a wincing self loathing closet-gay minstral show, Doris Day sings "Que Sera" twice in Man Who Knew To Much all the way through (then it sticks in your head and you can't shake it..like whenever you hear My Sharona.ow!) FRENZY is reduced to breaking breadsticks at dinner table to echo fingers cracking from rigor- mortis which you see coming a mile away...oh and throw in odd camera pull backs and badly painted mattes, Hitchcock had his share of sloppy/lacksidasical film making. But revel when you discover those nuggets of genius, the crop duster, a menace from nowhere in North by Norhtwest, the collosal and brilliant set design of Rear Window and how each window is a portal into human lives that are knowing and often sad without a blip of dialogue, VERTIGO's sustained obsession bordering on the creepy and revolting--not bland but instead unsettling in the truth that for most of us his actions are indeed mirrors of our darker sides, just his taken to the next extreme---and even out and out failures like TOPAZ, worth checking out once, in this case,for the mobid, pitch black, sustained kitchen scene of Newman trying so desperately to kill a man, punching slamming stabbing, throwing intruder's body head first in oven to gas him ---only Hitch could put on screen how really hard it is to kill someone. There are at least a hundred that could be listed and by then all misgivings of continuity, sluggish pacing, a mistake here or there all take a distant backseat-to the audacity of genius.
Hmm by westegg	Jan 28th, 2000 08:55:06 AM
The Paul Newman film was TORN CURTAIN, not TOPAZ.
Hey Moriarty...indeed by StarBarella	Jan 28th, 2000 09:25:50 AM
Remember when Moriarty said he would have those other 90's reports up by the end of the week? That sure was funny.
We are very lucky at the beginning of this millennium. Oh, and H by Mickey Finn	Jan 28th, 2000 09:41:09 AM
We are SO lucky to be able to experience classic films in restored prints that have a decent amount of distribution. Apart from the joys of the restoration process itself (the job those boys did on Vertigo and Lawrence of Arabia was breathtaking - THANK YOU FILM RESTORERS AVERYWHERE), the fact they get to be seen at a fair number of cinemas is astounding. Sure, there have always been fleapits and repertory cinemas showing Casablanca at 1am every Wednesday for 40 years, but a restored film is now a real EVENT, a cause for reassesment - take the Excorcist reissue. Now, as for Naughty Sauce, who thought Hitchcock might sometimes be overrated, his endings fizzled out - look, we're used to a fairly standard structure in films now: premise, set of events, resolution. Vertigo is actually all the more disturbing for the way its second half revisits the events of the first half and undermines them. The ending of the Birds is astounding because it is so ambiguous - they escape, but the Birds have won - and even apocalyptic (sorry if that sounds painfully obvious, but I like it). Incidentally, a recent film that also didn't follow a usual dramatic pattern (its peak was in the middle) was Eyes Wide Shut, which pissed people off, but I liked it. And as for Zinger, who disagreed with Naughty Sauce, you're being even more of a snob. Everybody likes to say 'oh well, this film and that film were Hitchcock's failures,' and attack Frenzy for its harder edge, but I thought the gallows humour in the breadsticks snapping scene was a complete hoot. And it's precisely BECAUSE Rope is such a godawful Harvard gay psycopath dinner-party-from-hell set-up that it's so great. (Not that I'm saying everything Hitchcock did was good - just that a lot of false assumptions are made when trying to establish a canon of good Hitchcock).
Oh, and by the way, influences... by Mickey Finn	Jan 28th, 2000 09:41:17 AM
...That bit in Rear Window where Grace Kelly steps into focus was copied by David Lynch THREE TIMES. Once in Eraserhead (the Lady in the Radiator coming into focus), once in Blue Velvet (Sandy stepping out of the dark to meet Jeffrey) and once in Lost Highway (Bill Pullman and Patricia Arquette stepping in and out of the light before Patricia Arquette gets 'killed' (or does she?)).
Why the hell do people label Torn Curtin a failure? by Mean Ween	Jan 28th, 2000 10:17:54 AM
Leonard Maltin did, and someone above did also. Why? What was wrong with it. I didn't find it to be a work of genious... but I did find it to be a helluva lot more entertaining and suspenseful than alot of the other modern day crap labeled as "classics" by contemporary critics.
uninformed opinions by happydude	Jan 28th, 2000 10:17:58 AM
I am the first to say everyone's opinion is equally valid. Matter's of taste cannot be argued so let's all just lighten up and let everyone have their say. However, anyone who says Hitchcock is overrated just doesn't know what they are talking about and just didn't suspend their hyperkinetic-mtv-jumpcut imaginations long enough to look at his films in their own context. I pity you.
God Bless Restorations! by All Thumbs	Jan 28th, 2000 11:28:04 AM
I'm not going to attack the guy who said Hitchcock was overrated (though I would LOVE to set his little heart straight, I won't). I made that mistake once when a friend of mine told me the same thing about "Gone With the Wind" and we aren't friends anymore because I got so vicious. (and for some other reasons I won't go into) I think the problem is not the viewer themselves, but how they look at viewing these films. They see them as a majority of children and teens in school see classic works of literature (amen to the required reading comment from above!). Another thing to remember when viewing some of the older films, especially silent films I found, is that you have to remember some technological limitations and also remember that acting styles differ over the years. What was popular in, say, the 20's and 30's is not the style used and is popular today (you know, the "I'm a big star who plays myself in a movie because people don't have any imagination to see beyond the pretty face..." ok, I digress).
HITCH AND JIMMY by SCOTT1458	Jan 28th, 2000 11:56:24 AM
Jimmy was one of the greatest. Pure and Simple. Not only was he a great actor, but he didn't need to have a new and different vagina on top of his face every other day to make him happy. He was a family man and served his country. Fuck the guy was a General in the USAF for cripe's sake. How many other "artists" can say that? And Hitch, we all know they don't make them like that anymore. Sure he had some misses, but so did Kulbrick and even my buddy Raimi. gotta go, jack of all trades with Bruce is comming on soon.
moriarty by Ted Terrific	Jan 28th, 2000 12:16:22 PM
Hey - I'm still trying to pass a kidney stone. I'm sitting here and I need something long (winded) to read. O Evil One - get off the pot and give is Part 2 of your 90's retrospective.
Long, Naughty, and SPFX in Hitch's films... by agentcooper	Jan 28th, 2000 01:37:25 PM
Well, first of all, I have to say that I'm in shock that I actually agree with Lazarus Long about something. He makes the point that in our voyeuristic society RW is more relevant now than ever. Well said. Now, if you'll just stop slagging Spielberg and Lucas every chance you get, life would just be peachy. As for Naughty Sauce, (Some of these names kill me) the technical problems of the Hitchcock films that you mentioned were actually quite cutting edge for their day. King Kong's stop motion looks little primitive to today's movie goer, as do the mattes around the X-wings and TIEs in the original version of Star Wars-A New Hope. Hitchcock actually invented a great number of the visual techniques used in his films, or at least championed them. He hated filming on location, much prefering the control of the studio set, and frequently used whatever new special effects he could in order to stay there. Any films with special effects will eventually look dated. If the story is strong enough, though, we tend to look past this.
Absolutely the best. by RobinP	Jan 28th, 2000 01:46:12 PM
I always thought that I'd never see a better Hitchcock movie than "Psycho"........until I saw this on network tv here in the UK last Easter........thank God I had the foresight to have the VCR running. This is easily one of the best films of the past century, Stewart and Kelly at their very charismatic best. The remake with Chris Reeve.......sorry, but it was as redundant an effort as Gus Van Sant's Psycho. When will they learn that it's not merely the script.......but having the right people on both sides of the camera as well that creates the magic.
Kids Today... by gilmour	Jan 28th, 2000 03:19:59 PM
I laugh at kids who think all films made before 1995 suck ass. You can't compare old classics to today's films. But yet people do that sucks! Rear Window IS a classic and Hitchcock Is a genious and Psycho is my personal fav. of his.
Don't forget the writer! by Duke Ray	Jan 28th, 2000 03:51:56 PM
REAR WINDOW has one of the best, if not the best, written and constructed scripts Hitchcock ever worked with. The structure is immaculate, the dialogue witty and sharp. Let's not cowtow to the director-biased "auteur theory" so much that we forget John Michael Hayes, the talented screenwriter who adapted Cornell Woolrich's novel for the screen so brilliantly.
2 cents by Shaft9876	Jan 28th, 2000 04:44:29 PM
Vertigo is Hitchcock's greatest film, maybe as good a film as has ever been made. Rear Window is his next best. A big reason why in both cases...Jimmy Stewart.
Hitchcock is not overrated by bhitch	Jan 28th, 2000 05:28:26 PM
Some on this talkback say that Hitch is overrated or that the techinques that were used 30-50 years ago looked fake. Well no kidding some of the special effects look fake NOW...you must be open minded about films that are older and think about what iind antiquated equipment thay had to use. Pay attention to the story...which most of the time is the strongest element in a Hitchcock movie. Unlike %99 of all movies that are put out today he worked and reworked on the script with his wife and/or the screenplay writer until he thought it was as perfect as could be. The actual writing and storyboarding were the most fun to him. Good references for hitchcock are "Hitchcock on Film with Francis' Traffaut" there they discuss every film he had done until that point (Frenzy I think) and the movie "Dial H for Hitchcock". And in "The Birds" if you don't get the idea that the birds no longer have to attack (because they have the upper hand in the human/bird relationship)then maybe you need to stick with a movie that you don't need to use your brain ....Pokemon come to mind.
Hitchcock is the greatest. by WesReviews	Jan 28th, 2000 06:09:54 PM
How many other directors made bonfide classics all the way from the silent era to the 70's? I can't think of anyone else. My personal favorites are pretty much in tune with everyone else's (Psycho, The Birds, North by Northwest) but I also believe that Rope is really underrated. While Michael Douglas and Gwynneth Paltrow provided an interesting movie with A Perfect Murder, lets not forget that Hitchcock's original Dial M For Murder was much better. Vertigo is the greatest motion picture ever made. Period. Strangers on a Train has what is perhaps the most creepy villian ever portrayed onscreen, and one of the coolest death sequences that Hitchcock ever created. I could go on forever about Hitchcock, but you guys know how great he is. Oh yeah, try to find a copy of Rebecca if you want to see a really good, haunting drama. Hitchcock rocks!
Does anybody know when and if this movie is getting a wide relea by WesReviews	Jan 28th, 2000 06:50:20 PM
I know right now its only in limited release, but I was wondering if they were planning on giving it a wide re-release ala Gone With the Wind. I hope so, because our theater right now did not get Rear Window and I want to see this film very badly on the big screen. Does anybody know if its getting a wide release nationwide? You know any specifics, Harry?
Send Me Some Email! by user id indeed!	Jan 28th, 2000 07:31:45 PM
This is off the subject,but if you wanna email me,please do.It makes me feel special.I'll talk.If you need somebody to lean on.And please don't email me to say things like"You suck"or "You're a dick".That erodes my self-confidence.Oh,and if you're about to post something along those lines,I beat you to it.You fuckin loser!!What a dumbass!Nobody wants to talk to you,retard.There.I just saved you five minutes of typing.You're welcome.
PSYCHO! by gilmour	Jan 28th, 2000 07:57:48 PM
To say that Martin Balsam's fall from the stairs looks so fake just pisses me off. Thats the best F/X Hitchcock could have possibly used in 1960. The scene was very shocking at its time. STOP COMPARING MODERN DAY FILMS TO CLASSICS IT MAKES NO SENSE! BTW "Man On the Moon" was a great film? you must have seen the European version or something because that film was a failure.
24 Hours Later He Wonders "did i type topaz?" by zinger	Jan 29th, 2000 12:11:02 AM
...mmmm that would be a yes...oh the shame...................
The major flaw of REAR WINDOW! by Vulcan Bob	Jan 29th, 2000 04:03:11 AM
What kind of a moron would rather look out a window than have sex with someone as beautiful as Grace Kelly?! Think about it!
saw it today... by Lazarus Long	Jan 29th, 2000 05:03:57 AM
god, what a great fucking movie. It's sad that all we get today in terms of "thrillers" is brain-dead crap like Double Jeopardy. I mean with that, you get to stare at Ashley Judd for 2 hours, but here you get Grace Kelly AND a good film. All I have to say is that SPOILER ALERT!!! Raymond Burr looking up at the camera/Stewart after seeing the ring on Grace's finger is possibly the most frightening moment in cinema history. You already have the whole moviegoer/voyeur metaphor in place, so it is like you are caught looking as well. The sound effects of Thorwald coming down the hall make you shudder in fear no matter how many viewings you've sat through...END SPOLIERS. I was a bit diappointed with the colors...I guess that comes from enjoying the restoration of Vertigo so much. I did read one review that pointed out the colors in Vertigo came out much better on the DVD, so we can possibly expect an improvement on this one too. Amazing how much one can do with so little dialogue. You barely hear any of the neighbors speaking, and yet you come to understand and care for most of them. That's an achievement in itself. Today's directors rely too much on obvious generic dialogue to propel their stories along, and many of them seem to think that "visual storytelling" is just blowing up a building or crashing a car. Perhaps the generations that were comfortable watching silent films had an edge in that they already knew you could achive cinematic goals without words. Having said that, the script of Rear Window is perfect, filled with as much humor as the suspense provided by Hitchcock. Stewart makes a fairly disturbing (at times repulsive) character still one you're rooting for, and too bad girls attractive like Grace Kelly (not that many come close) aren't as adventurous. Oh well, I'll probably be back to see it again in a few days. If anyone sees this for the first time I suggest you check out the restored Vertigo, which as someone pointed out before, may be the greatest film ever made. Think I'll watch it right now...
can i get a release date? by L'Auteur	Jan 29th, 2000 03:33:34 PM
I already knew REAR WINDOW was being re-released. I already knew that the movie fucking rocks. I already knew that Princess Grace is one of the finest babes ever. What I didnt know (and still dont) is WHEN THE FUCK IS IT COMING OUT? Thanks, and one more question: Anybody have an opinion on the technical quality of the NOTORIOUS dvd? Its my second favorite Hitch film (after the obligitory PSYCHO) and I want to get it but I just feel like most of these Hitch dvd's are half-assed. Anyone got it? Care to comment?
GOD FUCK THE QUEEN!!!!!!!! by golgo-14	Jan 29th, 2000 06:25:36 PM
England sucks. You can't win a war without us unspohisticated farting yanks there to save your ass. Instead of kissing up to that old dyke queen you have you'd be doing a sieg hiel to the Fuhrer right now if it wasn't for America defending your ass. We're colonizing Mars and you so-called sophisticated people are still worshipping a Queen who pays little or no taxes. Princess Di? Who cares about that spoiled bitch? So what if she died in a car crash? That rich spoiled bitch could never stop whining, I'm glad the paparazzi shut her up. America is 2-0 against your poor excuse for a country. Revolutionary War not a war? What the fuck kind of history textbooks were you reading in school? The war lasted 7 years and hundreds of thousands of people died in it. We were on the side of right and beat your ass. The English broke a couple of Nazi codes? So fucking what? Neville Chamberlain, the typical English coward, chose to appease Hitler prior to the war by giving the Nazis land. What a brilliant idea! Ever see Braveheart? A bunch of Scottish hillibilles armed with clubs and hammers defeated your army. You English think you so much better than everyone, not just us Americans but also the Irish, Indians and the rest of the world for that matter. The biggest mistake America ever made was dropping the bomb on Hiroshima, we should have dropped it on London instead. We wouldn't have so many whiny British actors in movies today. They only good thing that ever come out of your shitty little island was the Spice Girls.
What I had hoped for by Kiwi-1	Jan 29th, 2000 08:16:35 PM
I adore their restored version of Vertigo. I first saw Vertigo on video, in the old bleached version - wonderful film, but looks bad. A few months later I saw the restored at the movies, and the difference is incredible. I have seen it a dozen times since then, at the cinema and on video, and the memories of that ugly first video are now gone. And now I get to see an equally beautiful Rear Window, on the big screen, and in a couple of months I can throw out my old second-hand copy for a brand new widescreen restored version. Amen to that. ***** http://vertigofilms.homestead. com/
Hitchcock by ultraman	Jan 29th, 2000 11:10:14 PM
Hitchcock was the best director ever. He creates masterpieces time and time again North by northwest Vertigo, Psycho and countless others. The scripts were fantastic and His timing was incredible something today's filmakers no nothing about. Even his tv show was great. I wish Hitch were alive today to see the crap the studios put out. He'd die instantly of embarassment and would probably open the doors to people who have talent. Talent do you think today's actors are like a Jimmy Stewart or Grace Kelly. These were stars and you knew it.People went to see these films to see them and what they were wearing. Who cares what Sandra Bullock is wearing. Everybody today has no talent and is a flavor of the month. We do have a few very few. But I shudder to think when Spielberg and Arnie and Bruce and some others aren't around who are going to fill their shoes.
DVD DVD DVD DVD DVD DVD DVD DVD... get the point? by Spaceman Spiff	Jan 30th, 2000 12:55:38 AM
Thank goodness I live near a major city, otherwise I wouldn't have a prayer of seeing this. But for everyone else not near NY, LA or the three of four other places lucky enough to get it, could the AICN team perhaps use it's muscle to find out when the heck it's going to pressed onto DVD? Stories change by the hour.
I know Hitchcock by L'Auteur	Jan 30th, 2000 12:57:00 AM
Masterpieces...greatest ever... true art of suspense...better than today's crap...masterpiece! ...genious... classics...and every other cliche i can think of to make it look like i know what im talking about. Two thumbs up!
First the theatres, then video and DVD by rubinator	Jan 30th, 2000 01:29:35 AM
After they re-released Gone With The Wind in the theatres..... they released it on tape and DVD. I am looking forward to having a copy of Rear Window in my DVD collection.
I'm directing a new porno movie called Rear Endo by SnifflesQ	Jan 30th, 2000 11:55:37 AM
Looking for stars and starlets. Email me if you want to participate in a groundbreaking work. We'll have triple penetration, multiple money shots, and the voice of the late Alfred Hitchcock narrating. I'm aiming to earn the very first quadruple-X rating. It'll be bigger than Elvis, I'm telling you.
FUCK YEAH BABY!!!!! by user id indeed!	Jan 30th, 2000 10:22:21 PM
RAMS BABY!!!SUPAHBOWL CHAMP-EE-ONS!!!!!!OH HELL YEAH!!!!!!!!!!
golgo-14 RANT by Vulcan Bob	Jan 30th, 2000 11:00:18 PM
I am LAUGHING MY ASS OFF over that one. What in the world did that have to do with "REAR WINDOW" or movies in general? I'm laughing so hard I can't see the screen through my tears. OW! Gotta go my sides are hurting.
Defending myself. by Cereal Killer	Jan 31st, 2000 06:06:38 AM
Since I got flamed by a few people on this talkback and even received an E-mail calling me a dumb ass for daring to insult Hitchcock, I feel compelled to defend my position. First, I misspoke when I said I was disappointed in most of Hitch's movies. After looking at a list of his films that I've seen (17 in all) I see that I was only really disappointed in four of them. The others may have had an element or two that I didn't like but it wasn't enough to taint the entire picture. Let me say that out of the 17 Hitchcock films I've seen, all but one of them was on the big screen. "Sabateur" I saw on video but the rest I saw in a theatre like they should be seen and I saw them all for my own pleasure not because someone made me or as part of a class. I wanted to love them all and for the most part I enjoyed them but I found flaws in them all and that was what I wanted to point out. Calling Hitch overrated was over the line. I really meant that he was not perfect as many seem to feel he was. I stand by the individual points I made about certain films and will attempt to reinforce my opinion here. First, here's a list of all the Hitchcock films I've seen. THE THIRTY-NINE STEPS, SABOTAGE, REBECCA, SUSPICION, SABATEUR, SPELLBOUND, NOTORIOUS, THE PARADINE CASE, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, DIAL M FOR MURDER, TO CATCH A THIEF, THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH, VERTIGO, NORTH BY NORTHWEST, PSYCHO, THE BIRDS and FAMILY PLOT. The four films I was most disappointed in were THIRTY-NINE STEPS, PARADINE CASE, VERTIGO and THE BIRDS. To the guy who said I didn't understand the ending of "The Birds" and should stick to Pokemon; your explanation for why the birds didn't attack doesn't wash and sounds like something you read instead of an opinion you came to on your own. If the reason the birds didn't attack was because they were now the dominant species and didn't have to then that should've been made more evident. As it is, how did Tippy Hedren and the others know that the birds wouldn't attack? Their experience with the birds gives no indication that they'd leave them alone. Tippy Hedron had absolutely no reason to believe that she could safely tiptoe past them to safety and her doing so just makes the whole film look foolish. I was mostly disappointed with "The Birds" because it's supposed to be a horror film but it's not the least scary and the audience I saw it with laughed their asses off at the ridiculousness of it. "Vertigo" and "The Paradine Case" suffer because both movies ask us to believe that a heretofore intelligent man would turn his life upside down for an obsession with a woman who has no positive attributes except an attractive face. Both men fall for women who show every indication of being mentally unbalanced and who demonstrate not a single appealing personality trait. And yet both these guys keep pursuing even after they have reason to believe that these women are involved in murders. It might be plausable if Kim Novak had given Jimmy Stewart some reason to think he had a chance with her or if the woman in "Paradine" hadn't played every scene like a ballbusting bitch but in both movies we're given no reason to empathize with these women and therefore no reason to understand why these men would be so obsessed. In the case of "Vertigo," I thought Stewart had much more chemistry with Barbara Bel Geddes and I did enjoy their scenes together. "Thirty-nine Steps" mainly suffers from an implausable set-up. It makes no sense that the bad guys would use the memory guy to memorize the thirty-nine steps when it would've been much easier to just copy down the steps themselves. I mentioned in my earlier post that many of Hitchcock's films fall apart at the end and I'll reiterate that the end of "Strangers on a Train" is ridiculous. That the cops would open fire in a crowded amusement park and that a guy falling on a lever would cause so much damage to the carousel is just not realistic. It's so outside the realm of believable behavior that it derails the film. "Strangers" is only saved by the outstanding portrayal of the bad guy. I also criticized the fakiness of Martin Balsam's fall down the stairs which was defended by someone saying that Hitch was limited by the special effects of the time. I disagree. Any good stuntman could've taken a believable tumble down those steps and it would've looked real. If Yakima Canutt could do a somersault underneath a speeding stagecoach in "Zorro's Fighting Legion" in the thirties then a tumble down the stairs should've been an easy day for somebody. Lastly, I criticized Hitch's habit of speeding up the film during any action scene. This too was defended by using the excuse of limited technology. This doesn't wash. There is no technological reason for there to be a different film speed during a car chase or foot chase nor is there an artistic reason for it. This happens in so many of Hitch's films that it can't be dismissed as accidental either. In "To Catch a Thief" there's a car chase in Monaco and the cars are shown moving in an unnatural way when it would've been better to show them moving at regular speed. By speeding up the film Hitch undercuts the suspense and takes us out of the moment. This happens again during the foot chase in "Thirty-nine Steps" and Cary Grant's drunken drive in "North by Northwest" among others. I am not a person who judges old films by the standard of todays filmmaking abilities. I don't expect "King Kong" to have the same level of realism as last years' "Mighty Joe Young." Even with all the problems I've found in Hitchcock's films I agree that the man made some incredible movies and some of his scenes are amazing; the shower scene in "Psycho," and damn-near all of "North by Northwest" and I'll keep going to see his movies every chance I get. However I think some of us revere him more because we think we're supposed to and not based on his body of work.
GOLGA IS TRAILER PARK TRASH!!!! by gilmour	Jan 31st, 2000 08:53:14 AM
Leave the queen alone you sack of shit!
Anyone seen FRENZY? by Stephen Dedalus	Jan 31st, 2000 09:58:39 AM
This is Hitchcock's second-to-last movie, and the only one he made that garnished an R rating. It's not a classic like NOTORIOUS, STRANGERS ON A TRAIN, VERITGO, REAR WINDOW, etc, but it is still very entertaining and somewhat underrated. Look for a terrific scene where the murderer has to wrestle with a dead body in the back of a potato truck. The only entry in Hitch's career, with the possible exception of PSYCHO, where he was able to let out all of his violent urges.
nuart had a shitty print by jerebo	Jan 31st, 2000 11:55:25 AM
i excitedly went to see this at the nuart in l.a. last nite. I was quite disappointed at the quaility of the print. it seemed faded and not as vibrant as critics have been saying. i went to see the vertigo restoration a few years back and that was a much better print. furthermore, the house lights came up at a crucial scene in the film, distracting from the suspense. at least they had trailers for connery bond films and american psycho. peace

Talkbacks

Moriarty looks at the amazing restored print of REAR WINDOW that USA FILMS is releasing to world... thank God!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks