Does anyone here like old movies?

[MFS62]

And there was the "best Hitchcock movie he never made" - Charade. (Directed by Stanley Donen) I wonder what Hitchcock thought of it.

Later

[Edgy MD]

There's a whole subplot of Hitchcock knockoffs and homages. Besides Charade, there's Wait Until Dark, Night Train to Munich, Dressed to Kill*, Twelve Monkeys, Le Boucher, Bell, Book, and Candle (a Hitchcock movie in virtually every way except suspense, so there's that), Les Diaboliques, and I'm sure there are many I'm forgetting.



* Is Brian DePalma the auteur of ripping off the style of other auteurs?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Vic Sage wrote: Vic Sage wrote: I can't find my Hitchcock essay in the archives. oh well. another moment lost, like tears in rain. i found it! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paramount: - "Blondes make the best victims. They're like virgin snow that shows up the bloody footprints." Hitch did 5 films with Paramount, which were all given a theatrical re-release back in the 1980s, before being distributed in the newly burgeoning home video market. 2 of these were two of his very best films, REAR WINDOW and VERTIGO, both with Jimmy Stewart at his most sexually disturbing and obsessed, verging on sado-masochistic. * Rear Window (1954) (AA nom/director) - Stewart & Kelly; darkly funny, disturbing rumination on voyeurism * To Catch a Thief (1955) - Kelly and Grant in light romantic thriller; urbane sophisticated entertainment. Kelly went on to become Princess Grace after the film * The Trouble with Harry (1955) - black comedy about a dead body, with a cute young Shirley McLaine; silly, pointless * The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956) - Doris Day sings "Que Sera, Sera" -- a ridiculous remake * Vertigo (1958) - my favorite cool blonde, Kim Novak, totally fetishized by Stewart (and Hitch). One of the greatest films ever made * North by Northwest (1959) - Grant and E.M.Saint, "wrong man", black comedy, Freudian sexual hysteria, thrilling climax on national monument, the crop duster... its Hitch at his absolute best * Psycho (1960) (AA nom/director) - Hitch crossed the line from suspense to pure horror (depending on your definition), reinventing the genre and making a fortune for his efforts... he waived his salary to take 60% of net profits when he produced it as an indie (nobody wanted to touch the project), but eventually distributed by Paramount

I know how much you like Vertigo. If you don't already know, it recently replaced Citizen Kane as The British Film Institute's best movie of all time. Me, I'm a Psycho guy. Heard of 78/52?

When the latest British Film Institute greatest-films-of-all-time poll came out a few years ago, it wasn't terribly surprising that an Alfred Hitchcock film had displaced “Citizen Kane,” which had occupied the top spot for several decades. But why “Vertigo”? If the importance of Orson Welles' classic had stemmed from the common view that it launched sound-era auteur cinema (especially in its influence on the young critics who would become the auteurs of the French New Wave), surely the Hitchcock film that had a similar game-changing impact was “Psycho.” That thought may well cross the minds of viewers of “78/52,” which, in providing a detailed analysis of the shower scene in Hitchcock's horror milestone, makes a persuasive case for “Psycho” as the film that jump-started modern cinema, not just in its startling fusion of sex and violence (which anticipated much about the ‘60s, off-screen as well as on) but also in a revolutionary use of film technique that would galvanize audiences and inspire filmmakers for decades to come. While Alexandre O. Philippe's film is essentially a big geek-out for cine-obsessives, it's one that makes you realize that “Psycho” is not the property of a coterie. That shower scene may be the best-known movie sequence in modern cinema. Endlessly imitated and parodied (and even remade shot-by-shot by Gus Van Sant), it's familiar material even to many casual movie fans as well as filmgoers generations removed from its shocking advent. That familiarity means that many viewers of “78/52” (the title refers to the three-minute scene's 78 camera set-ups and 52 cuts) will begin the film realizing they already know a lot about what's being discussed. The virtue of Philippe's approach is that it organizes an intelligent, analytic discussion that expands and deepens our knowledge by drawing upon commentary from the likes of Walter Murch, Peter Bogdanovich, Bret Easton Ellis, Eli Roth, Danny Elfman, Jamie Lee Curtis, Guillermo del Toro and others, plus vintage TV clips of Hitchcock interviews. Some of the most fascinating testimony comes from Marli Renfro, a model (and sometime Playboy Bunny) who served as Janet Leigh's body double in the shower scene. She recalls the scene's lengthy shooting, in which she was topless and offered to remove the “crotch patch” she wore; Hitchcock declined. Starting out, the film makes the point that the low-budget, black-and-white “Psycho” was a deliberate antithesis to the big, glossy, Technicolor star vehicles (such as “North by Northwest,” “Vertigo” and “Rear Window”) that made the 1950s Hitchcock's most successful decade so far. For this viewer, though, one of the most thought-provoking bits of contextualizing here comes in connecting the movie's theme of invaded spaces and unexpected attacks to the warnings that Hitchcock provided in films like “Foreign Correspondent” and “Lifeboat” of what he saw as the U.K. and U.S.' lack of preparedness for World War II. Although Philippe gives surprisingly little attention to how Hitchcock's popular TV show influenced “Psycho,” he does note that when the movie was done, Hitchcock considered it such a flop that he considered editing it down to an hour and using it on TV. Composer Bernard Hermann convinced him to do otherwise, and gave him the legendary score that helped the shower scene elicits screams from coast to coast. Peter Bogdanovich recalls emerging from the movie's first showing in New York feeling that he'd been “raped.” Shot in black and white and generous in its use of clips from “Psycho” and other movies, “78/52” looks at virtually every aspect of the shower scene—including the staging, the production design, the music and sound effects, the camera work, Saul Bass' storyboards, etc.—and marvels at how brilliantly integrated they were. The word “genius” is heard more than once, and the more the film shows us, the less even hardened skeptics will be likely to demur. Some of the most fascinating bits concern details in “Psycho,” showing how even minor design elements in the movie contribute to its overall tapestry of meaning and emotion. There's a discussion of the floral wallpaper in the Bates Motel, and a detailed analysis of why the Dutch painting of “Susannah and the Elders” that covers Norman Bates' peephole was the perfect rendition to connect the Biblical theme to Norman's state of mind. Philippe's interviewees also pay ample tribute to the subtle modulations in Anthony Perkins' brilliant and haunting performance as Norman. No one, though, wonders if his casting might have had something to do his status as a closeted gay man whose biography contained a dead father and domineering mother (similar casting questions of course could be asked of other Hitchcock films including “Rope” and “Strangers on a Train”). Perhaps unsurprisingly, there are no interviewees here who question the value of “Psycho” or its impact on the culture. That's because it's basically a fan's film, of course. But it's also testament to the power and mastery of a movie that, nearly 60 years on, still feels as modern, complex and cutting-edge as any film released in 2017.

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/7852-2017https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/7852-2017



https://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/movie/movie_poster/7852-2017/large_MV5BMTg2NjMzMDAxMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDkxOTY0MzI_._V1_SY1000_CR0_0_676_1000_AL_.jpg>



[YOUTUBE]rNHwKKdirxo[/YOUTUBE]

[Vic Sage]

i wanted to see that! It was on Netflix, then it was gone.

[Double Switch]

And there was the "best Hitchcock movie he never made" - Charade. (Directed by Stanley Donen) I wonder what Hitchcock thought of it.

Never having seen Charade before, barely recalling it, in fact, except for the Mancini pop tune of the same name, I borrowed it from the public library. I wonder just who thought this was anything like a Hitchcock movie? I surely don't.



This is the review I left on the library review blog:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This movie, touted as the best movie Hitchcock never made, is nothing more than a silly '60s caper flick featuring a too-old-to-be a-romantic-leading-man in Cary Grant and a lovely, if lightweight (not just thin) Audrey Hepburn.

• There is no McGuffin

• There is no icy blonde to conquer

• There is no compelling score, only a fluffy, if "hooky," pop-music theme from ubiquitous Henry Mancini

• The titles are a Saul Bass ripoff

There was, however, an obligatory and obvious scene of rear projection of Grant and Hepburn having dinner on a boat traversing the Seine. This was truly distracting.



There was no suspense at all as each thug's demise was completely telegraphed in advance, including that Walter Matthau was the actual crook, not Cary Grant.



There was some shameful scenery chewing from Coburn, Kennedy, and Glass. Kidnapping the kid was not an homage to the remake of The Man Who Knew Too Much. It was just a bit of madcap silliness.



Stanley Donen made a lot of pretty good movies. This was a pretty good movie, too, but it's not Hitchcockian by any stretch no matter how far you reach.

Edited January 25, 2020 by Guest

[Double Switch]

As long as I'm here, I have found a reason to need Netflix (but doubt I'll cave).

Toototaban!

[batmagadanleadoff]

Here's an oddity: "Charade" is in the public domain and has been since its initial premiere release. The film's makers forgot to put the copyright symbol on the film's print'', required under copyright law back then and so there's no copyright on the movie.

[Vic Sage]

Double Switch wrote: As long as I'm here, I have found a reason to need Netflix (but doubt I'll cave). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86ajK0EOq6IWhat Did Jack Do? Toototaban!

i watched that last week, out of curiousity. Its pure Lynch - weird, funny, perverse. Reminded me of ERASERHEAD.

[MFS62]

I saw 1917 today and it reminded me of a movie I saw in the 1950s.

It was a black and white war movie (Korea ?) in which a Colonel has to get a complex message to troops at the front. He calls upon a nerdy GI because the soldier has a photographic memory and can recite the message word-for-word. (I think it was because they could not use their radios.) He was to be accompanied by an experienced solder. The soldier briefly scans the message and then recites it, ending with "Good luck (signed) Colonel Lockwood".

It was a comedy/ army farce and I can't remember the actors or any of the stars. I thought the nerd was like a Sid Meton, but it wasn't.

Can any of you provide the title?

Please?

Later

[MFS62]

Found it!

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0195927/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_plhttps://www.imdb.com/title/tt0195927/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl



Later

[batmagadanleadoff]

Vic Sage wrote: Double Switch wrote: Would you tell me where those numbers come from? i found a website that ranked all of Kurosawa's films as an aggregate of IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, etc. Then i seeded them in each bracket accordingly, with slight tweaks based on my own assessments.

Apropos of the big Kurosawa discussion here a few months ago, TCM is running a 24 hour Kurosawa extravaganza beginning this Wednesday at 6AM. Wall to wall Kurosawa.

[Willets Point]

I should add TCM to my cable subscription, although I already have more than enough movies that I want to watch on streaming sources.

[Vic Sage]

https://static.rogerebert.com/uploads/movie/movie_poster/7852-2017/large_MV5BMTg2NjMzMDAxMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwMDkxOTY0MzI_._V1_SY1000_CR0_0_676_1000_AL_.jpg> [YOUTUBE]rNHwKKdirxo[/YOUTUBE]

i just found it streaming on HULU!

i'm checking it out this weekend.

[MFS62]

If you can get past the shtick of the host, the original Frankenstein will be shown on Svengoolie tonight.

Later

[Willets Point]

I put together a https://othemts.wordpress.com/movie-reviews/list of every movie I've ever watched (that I can remember) with ratings and links to movies I've reviewed, should anyone be interested.

[Frayed Knot]

Holy Shit!!

[MFS62]

Willets Point wrote: I put together a https://othemts.wordpress.com/movie-reviews/list of every movie I've ever watched (that I can remember) with ratings and links to movies I've reviewed, should anyone be interested.

Impressive and eclectic.

Silence of the Lambs 2 1/2 stars? I would have wanted to see how you reviewed it.

And, add Putney Swope to your next round of viewing.

Later

[Willets Point]

I saw it a long time ago. Movies with psychotic murderers as protagonists don't resonate well with me. The ratings are entirely subjective, obviously.



I've never heard of Putney Swope, but it looks good!

[LWFS]

We watched Young Frankenstein the other day.



Is it sacrilege to suggest that it's something of a museum piece at this point? It's painstakingly crafted, obviously, and what's funny is great, but it's MUCH slower and more airless than I remember it being.