Top 5 Alfred Hitchcock Films

Other than perhaps Steven Spielberg, no name is more synonymous with the word “director” in mainstream thought than Alfred Hitchcock.  The man had what I believe to be the most prolific career of any Hollywood director, past or present, with about 66 credits to his name spanning a 50-year career.

Unfortunately, I haven’t seen all 66 of his films—I’m currently only at 25 (although I have seen all of his more highly regarded films).  Regardless, I felt that with two forthcoming films about Hitchcock (“Hitchcock” starring Anthony Hopkins, and HBO Movie “The Girl” starring Toby Jones), a top-5 list of my favorites of his filmography was in order.  Hope you enjoy.

5.  Psycho (1960)

The aforementioned film “Hitchcock” focuses on the story of the making of this film, which the director struggled to even get made, due to the nature of the source material.  Voted by AFI as the #1 horror film all time, the film follows a woman who skips town after stealing $40,000, and ends up at the eerie Bates Motel.  I won’t spoil it any further for those who may not have seen it, but everything that transpires is perhaps the genesis of the modern horror genre.  There are exactly four Hitchcock films that I believe to be better than this one, but Psycho will always be his most iconic. 

 4.  Rope (1948)

Hitchcock shot this entire 80-minute film in ONE take, which is probably the thing it is most remembered for.  But the story itself is probably one of the most oddly-intense narratives of any of Hitchcock’s films, which seems like it’s right out of an Edgar Allen Poe volume of short stories: Two young men strangle their "inferior" classmate, hide his body inside a buffet table in their apartment, and invite his friends and family to a dinner party as a means to challenge the "perfection" of their crime.

Jimmy Stewart, one of Hitchcock’s go-to leading men, stars as the young mens’ former school-teacher, who begins to catch on to their stunt, and pieces together the clues.  His performance is rock-solid, as always, but the true revelation here is the psychotic, yet magnetic performance of John Dall, the mastermind of the entire plan.

3.  Rear Window (1954)

Oh, Grace.

Speaking of Jimmy Stewart, he plays the central role in what I think is the most directorially creative film on this list, and also partly the titular inspiration for this blog.  In Window, a temporarily wheelchair-bound photographer progressively pieces together a crime that is taking place in his apartment complex, which he does from his bedroom window, through binoculars. 

The apartment complex takes on a life of its own through Jeff’s binoculars, as he observes the somewhat odd behaviors of all his neighbors.  Hitchcock lets the audience experience the voyeurism as Jeff does, through the lens of his binoculars.  We don’t know any more about the characters he is witnessing than he does.  This makes the film so much fun to watch, and it provides the suspense necessary for any good Hitchcock film. 

Grace Kelly plays Jimmy Stewart’s love interest, and I can say without hesitation that it is the most stunningly beautiful that anyone has ever looked on celluloid (I checked with the wifey—she agrees with me, so no offense taken from her). 

2.  Rebecca (1940)

The only Hitchcock film to ever win Best Picture at the Academy Awards, this flick based on Daphne Du Maurier’s novel of the same title uses one of Hitchcock’s ongoing themes in his films: the mysteriousness, and haunting nature of women (more on that in my #1 film).  This particular film concerns a young woman (Joan Fontaine) who marries a rich widower (Laurence Olivier, who’s great as always) and moves out to his mansion.  When she gets there, she finds that the memory and ghost of her husband’s dead wife is maintaining a strong and paranormal grip on the house and its servants.  The performance here that is normally singled out is Judith Anderson, who plays a creepy-as-hell housekeeper bent on making things a bit, shall we say, “difficult” for the new resident of the house.

1.  Vertigo (1958)

I have to admit bias at the outset for the coming gushing over this film, since it sits comfortably inside my personal top 10 of all time list at #8.  But there is much to gush over here.  In Jimmy Stewart’s all-time best performance, he plays Scottie, a former detective who is contracted to do some private investigation work, tracing the wife of an old schoolmate.  After saving her when she falls into the San Francisco Bay, he slowly begins to fall in love with her.  To give away much more of the plot would necessitate spoilers, but the story that ensues is one of passion, obsession, a bit of voyeurism, and even paranormal, and it is all packaged inside the box of one of Hitchcock’s standard thrillers. 

It’s not difficult to make the case for Vertigo being the #1 film on any Hitchcock list.  The plot, much like the title implies, is off-kilter and eccentric, which is probably why it was not well received at the time, and failed to make much money at the box office.  There is a fascinating and genius 20-minute sequence near the beginning of the film, in which Scottie follows his subject around San Francisco (gorgeously shot by Hitchock, of course), containing almost zero dialogue and using beautiful images, and a wide array of lighting and colors. 

The use of color and light continues throughout the film to capture the vibrancy of Judy, Scottie’s obsession.  The video below encapsulates this perfectly (which is not spoilery out of context) in one of my absolute favorite scenes in film history (check out the corresponding screenshot in my banner at the top of the blog).

Vertigo recently toppled long-time champ Citizen Kane and claimed the #1 spot on the Sight & Sound Poll, what I think is the most prestigious film list out there, done once every ten years.  All hail the Hitch.

Review: Argo

Argo is the type of American film that Hollywood sorely needs right now.  Currently there are only a small handful of directors, including David O. Russell, Jason Reitman, Bennett Miller, and Tony Gilroy that are championing conventional, well-made adult dramas.  With Affleck’s first two films, he took on the crime genre, but with Argo I hope we can add him to the list of directors above.  Now don’t get me wrong, we all know I love auteurs like Malick, the Coens, and Tarantino, as much as anyone.  But in the new frontier of superhero franchises and animated 3D films, it’s nice to know that major studios will still throw a few dollars toward a down-the-middle political drama.  Maybe I’m being naïve, but I’d like to think there is a constituency of film-going adults out there that appreciate being catered to every once in a while.

Set during the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-1980, Argo is a declassified true subplot of that larger world event, in which six of the U.S. diplomats escaped the Iranians and found shelter at the home of the Canadian Ambassador.  This all takes place in the first scene of the film, and Affleck takes great care to make sure this movie starts off strong.  When the CIA finds out what has happened to the six Americans, operative Tony Mendez (Affleck) devises a plan to pretend to be a Canadian film crew scouting for locations in Iran, in order to retrieve the Americans.  This makes for an entertaining second act (Mendez engaging the help of Hollywood in order to make the film seem legitimate) and an intense third act (retrieving the Americans). 

The ensemble acting is probably the film’s best aspect.  Between all of the hostages, the various CIA and State Department employees, and the Hollywood producers, actors, etc. involved, this was a large cast to say the least.  The scenes with crowded rooms of political figures, intelligence operatives, or American diplomats had exactly the same smart, fast-talking aura of political films from the time period in which the film is set.

Alan Arkin and John Goodman get to ham it up as a big-time Tinseltown producer and makeup artist, respectively, and their performances are easily the best in the film.  Ben Affleck is serviceable, as he was in The Town, but I wouldn’t say it was a good performance.  I wouldn’t mind if he cast himself in a supporting role next go-around, as he has always been much better there than as a leading man throughout his acting career.

Where he does excel, however, is behind the camera.  The story is by no means full of “big” moments, and Affleck does not go out of his way to add any unnecessary bravado.  Rather, the film registers its impact in more organic ways.  It is extremely intense in the simplest ways—conversations in which Mendez must sell the legitimacy of the fake film to foreign officials is an arm-rest clutching tightrope act; ditto a scene where Mendez drives a VW bus through a rabid Iranian crowd in the streets of Tehran.  The final act of making it through customs under fake identities is similarly gripping, as well.

A great third effort for Affleck, and I think we can now say has made the transition from merely "promising" to someone in his directorial prime. 8.5/10.  

Review: The Master

“I have unlocked, and discovered, a secret. A secret to living in these bodies that we hold.”

                                                                                    -Lancaster Dodd, The Master

 

Freddie Quell (Joaquin Phoenix) sprints across a foggy cabbage patch, breathing heavily as he’s being chased, in a gorgeous tracking shot that reminded me I was in the hands of a director who knows his way around a camera. It isn’t totally clear how Freddie, a WWII Navy Veteran, ended up there in the first place, or why he is running. But it doesn’t matter. He’s running from himself as much as that particular situation. Over and over in The Master, director Paul Thomas Anderson returns to a shot of the wake behind a ship at sea, informing us of this aimlessness of character and narrative that we are viewing.

Skulking around on a pier somewhere, Freddie hops aboard a boat, and wakes up the next morning after apparently blacking out from his own brand of hooch. It is on board this vessel that he meets Lancaster Dodd (Phillip Seymour Hoffman), the charismatic leader of a group loosely based on Scientology but only referred to in the movie as “The Cause.” Dodd has clearly taken interest in Freddie, and subjects Freddie to an intense round of “processing,” an exercise in which Freddie is forced to answer a series of extremely personal questions without blinking, designed to force the subject into an intense self-examination.

Not really a spiritual group as much as a metaphysically and philosophically based group, The Cause is nevertheless used by Anderson as a treatise on religion (which, surprisingly, is not depicted nearly as poorly as one would imagine). Anderson has treaded religious ground before. In There Will Be Blood, his previous film, Anderson uses an oil tycoon and a rural church minister to explore both the competing and similar interests of American capitalism and religion. In The Master, there is a similar struggle between competing forces: man’s individuality and instinctual nature, versus his need for control and purpose.  Whereas in There Will Be Blood, the competing interests exploit each other to gain an advantage, here the two men both desperately want something that the other has.

It is this symbiotic give-and-take relationship upon which the film plants its flag and explores its themes. To that end, a quick word on the acting. This is, to me, the best all around acting in a film since...I don’t even know, probably Sideways in 2004 or even before that.  Joaquin Phoenix is the best he’s ever been, giving a performance that is threatening, physical, and altogether unpredictable.  Hoffman’s foil to Phoenix, however, is on a completely different level (for me).  This is the epitome of a controlled performance; yet he is also charismatic, gregarious, and just mysterious enough to make you question his motives.  This is a performance that will stick with me for a long time.  Amy Adams gives a similarly restrained performance as the woman behind the man, and she probably won’t receive much Oscar love for it, but it deserves to be rewarded nonetheless. 

The film never really explores what The Cause is really all about, and, although this is somewhat unsatisfying for the viewer, it is purposely left ambiguous.  For how often do our own religions, “causes” which we are knowledgeable of, leave us grasping for answers at times? One who claims to fully understand the metaphysical or spiritual realms of the universe we live in is either truly ignorant, or a fraud (like Dodd?).  This, then, is the irony in Dodd’s quote at the top and in many of his hollow methods and doctrines throughout the film.  

Nevertheless, there are a couple of scenes in particular that do go into detail about The Cause, containing excellent exchanges dialogue and debate. If I have one criticism of the film, it is that it the script is much sharper when it is exploring ideas rather than characters. But it is not meant to be sharp; it is meant to be visceral and raw, which it succeeds in mightily. This struggle is summed up in what is the most revealing line of dialogue in the film, as Dodd tells Freddie “If you figure out a way to live without a master, any master, be sure to let the rest of us know, for you would be the first in the history of the world.” Dodd, in a way, is right—no one has ever lived without a master. Could it be, though, the only Master we ever truly serve is our own selves? 

 

Top 10 Most Anticipated for Fall 2012

Kids around the country are back in school, I’ve had a few fantasy football drafts already, and soon enough the Pumpkin Spice Latte will be back, so I guess that means it’s time for me to write one of my favorite columns of the year: my Top-10 Most Anticipated Films for the Fall.  

10.  Argo (dir. Ben Affleck)

This was a last-minute addition to the list, as it is starting to play the festival circuit and already reeling in rave reviews.  Ben Affleck’s first two films (Gone Baby Gone and The Town) were the work of someone who really knows his way around the camera, and with each film he makes it’s becoming clear that he will be around for awhile, improving upon himself with his work.  Perhaps his best strength as a filmmaker, though, is his interest in telling great stories.  This true story about the Iranian hostage crisis looks to be as intense as it will be fun, and between the plotline and the supporting cast, I have no doubt this will be entertaining.   

9. Amour (dir. Michael Haneke)

(No Trailer Yet)

Okay, this list in general is surprisingly devoid of art-house films that none of my readers will end up seeing, so I had to throw at least one in here.  Bonus points for me, also, as this is a foreign film.  My relationship with Michael Haneke’s films is an odd one—no other director in the business can make me say “What the *bleep* am I watching right now?” more than he does.  They are not in any way “enjoyable” films.  Yet, his last film, The White Ribbon, is a recent example of a director who is in complete control of his work, showing the perfect balance of restraint and flair.  I look forward to seeing what he can do in this film—a relationship drama. 

8. Looper (dir. Rian Johnson)

(Trailer)

If all I told you about this film is that the words “Bruce Willis,” “Joseph Gordon-Levitt,” and “time-travel” are involved, wouldn’t that be enough to make you want to see it?  In all seriousness, the plot and trailer alone for this film didn’t really put it on my most anticipated radar, but I keep reading things about how the script is amazing, and the actors all say it’s the best project they’ve EVER been a part of, and things like that.   Additionally, it’s by the director of Brick, one of the most criminally underrated movies of last decade (which also starred Levitt), so this one definitely has my curiosity piqued. 

7. Skyfall (dir. Sam Mendes)

(Trailer)

I have very few hard and fast rules in life, but one of those is that I see every movie starring Javier Bardem.  Bonus points if he’s a villain and has a terrible haircut in the movie.  But seriously, I’m really excited for this next installment in the Daniel Craig-era Bond franchise.  Quantum of Solace was a massive disappointment to me after the success of Casino Royale, but the trailer for this film is stunning, Sam Mendes is directing it, and again, Javier Bardem is involved. 

6. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (dir. Peter Jackson)

(Trailer)

Between The Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers, Spiderman, The Hunger Games, and the upcoming ending to the Twilight series (FINALLY), this was definitely a banner year for fanboy films, and the The Hobbit should be a nice way to cap off all of this madness at the end of the year.  I would be lying if I said I was as excited for this film as I was for all of the Lord of the Rings films, only because The Hobbit seems kind of anticlimactic story-wise compared to the former, and it will be hard to make it feel like it’s not something we’ve already seen.  However, I do have faith that Peter Jackson has a few tricks left up his sleeve, and I will be there front and center and ready to be thoroughly entertained when this film is released on December 14^th.  Oh, and I just found out that an actor named Adam Brown is playing one of the dwarves in the film, so yeah, badass.

5. The Place Beyond the Pines (dir. Derek Cianfrance)

(No Trailer Yet)

Ryan Gosling should be in all the movies.  He continually improves upon his craft, while attaching himself to interesting and out-of-the-ordinary projects.  This film, from the director of 2010’s Blue Valentine, stars Gosling as a “motorcycle stunt driver who considers committing a crime to provide for his wife and family.”  Sounds a lot like another recent Gosling film...Drive.  But hey, what could be bad about that? 

 4. Django Unchained (dir. Quentin Tarantino)

(Trailer)

This film would probably be higher on my list, if A) Terrence Malick wasn’t making a movie this year, and B) I hadn’t heard so much about the production hell that this film went through.  Casting changes left and right, even during shooting, can’t possibly be good for a film.  But hey, it’s Tarantino.  His worst movie is better than most, and his best movie is better than almost every movie.  So I have no trouble looking forward to a western in which Leonardo DiCaprio is a theatrical villain. 

3. Lincoln (dir. Steven Spielberg)

(No Trailer Yet)

Putting this at #3 is somewhat a leap of faith for me, and I’m really holding out hope that Daniel Day Lewis starring as the titular 16^th POTUS will at the very least make a run-of-the-mill film into a very good one.  The ceiling for this film, on the other hand, is unlimited.   

2. To the Wonder (dir. Terrence Malick)

(No Trailer Yet)

I’ve spoken of my love affair with Terrence Malick on the blog before, and though he released another film just last year (The Tree of Life), he has only made 6 films in 40 years counting this one, so it is still a very notable event when a new film from him is released.  Ben Affleck and Rachel MacAdams star as lovers in what we can only guess is a romantic drama, because as usual with his films, plot details are quite thin at the moment.  Malick’s directorial style is extremely suited to love stories, and the portions of his films that feature love stories are always some of my favorite aspects of his films.  To The Wonder is dropping in at the Venice Film Festival this week, so I’m sure we will know more details and perhaps have a trailer in the near future.    Oh, and once again, Javier Bardem.

1. The Master (dir. Paul Thomas Anderson)

(Trailer)

I’m kind of going out on a semi-limb here, because as far as auteur directors go, PTA is certainly not one of my favorites, although I respect his work. I’m putting it as my #1 for several reasons.

(1) The cast is amazing, and Joaquin Phoenix and Phillip Seymour Hoffman look stunning                 in the trailer.

(2) I’m getting more of the “incredibly unsettling” vibe from the trailer that I so much enjoyed in Anderson’s most recent film, There Will Be Blood.

(3)Musical score by Johnny Greenwood (of Radiohead)

(4) Intense religious subject matter

The last couple of years when I wrote this column, my #1 most-anticipated film didn't crack my top-10 list for the year, or even get close, really.  I hope Paul Thomas Anderson's film can break this cycle, and I look forward to finding out when The Master is released on September 21.  

Review: 'The Dark Knight Rises'

“Bruce...don’t be afraid.”

These are the last words of Thomas Wayne to a young Bruce in Batman Begins as he lay dying, after being robbed and murdered in a dark Gotham alleyway.  As I watched all three films in Christopher Nolan’s wildly popular Batman franchise this past week, the thematic current of fear began to form in my mind as I watched the trilogy play out.  As the second act of The Dark Knight Rises comes to a close with Bruce climbing his way out of a daunting pit, I realized that perhaps the actions of Batman and Bruce Wayne were steered by this yearning to heed the words of his dying father.  In this way and many many others, Nolan gives us a more than satisfying conclusion to his Dark Knight legend.

When the story begins, Gotham has been safe for the eight years since the conclusion of The Dark Knight.  Batman has not been seen nor heard from after taking the blame for Two-Face’s killings, and Bruce Wayne has become an injured hermit, holed up in his rebuilt Wayne Manor.  The film begins with Commissioner Gordon’s speech on “Dent Day”, where he almost divulges the truth of what happened the night Two-Face/Harvey Dent died, and how Batman did not commit the murders. 

I appreciated that they brought this moral failing to the forefront of the conversation; although it is not until later that Gotham city finds out that Dent was the one who turned, it sets the table for one of the themes of the film: although Gotham is “safe,” its safety was built on a foundation of lies, and the “Dent Act” was mere political subterfuge by Gordon, et al, to keep criminals off the streets that Harvey Dent had put away while he was still alive.  So underneath the current of safety in the city, perhaps even a greater evil than the Joker lies in waiting—its own citizens.  It’s upon this shaky foundation that the villain Bane is able to emerge, and exploit the city, breaking Batman, Bruce Wayne, and the entire city down to their lowest possible state. 

Of course, the question that was on everybody’s mind after the success of The Dark Knight was, could Rises possibly be as good as its predecessor without the explosive presence of Heath Ledger’s Joker? My answer is a decisive yes and no.  The Joker was never going to be topped as a villain in this franchise, but after going back and watching TDK last week, the movie had several gaping weak spots for me that I thought Rises improved upon. 

For instance, TDK has some moments of bad acting by almost everyone except Ledger and Bale.  Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, even the great Gary Oldman could have been better coached by Nolan in spots, and a lot of the extras in the film should have been forced to take an acting class or two.  Contrast that to Rises, which is very well acted across the board (except for one noticeable glare, which I will get to in a little bit).  Bale shines here, and is given much more to do than in the previous film.  Hathaway is much better as Catwoman than I expected, and really gives a controlled, even performance.  Joseph-Gordon Levitt is also a standout, and inserts an emotional presence into the film that is perhaps more relatable for the audience than any other character in this series, as the everyman policeman Robert Blake.    

Because the Joker gave us the most entertaining moments of the series that couldn’t be recreated, I think Nolan and company smartly went a completely different direction with Bane.  As an expelled member of the League of Shadows, of which Bruce was also once a member, Bane knows how Bruce/Batman functions as well as anyone, and can exploit his weaknesses.  The Joker brought chaos into Gotham and Batman’s world, but he never had the ability to understand Batman in a way that could permanently bring him down for good; whereas Bane, although not as cunning, had the power to break Batman’s body and soul—first by breaking his back in a brutal fistfight, then by taking him to a foreign prison to rot as Bruce watches Bane destroy Gotham from the inside.

This film is by no means perfect.  Certain plot points seem slightly half-baked in order to make the story work out the way Nolan wanted, rather than letting them develop organically.  The character Miranda Tate in particular fits this bill, and her not unexpected turn as Talia-al-Ghul at the end seemed unearned, and perhaps even unbelievable.  This is the second film in a row for Nolan that he failed to direct Marion Cotillard to a good performance as the antagonist.

Also, Selina Kyle and Bruce ending up together at the end seemed little more than an assurance to the audience that Bruce was happy.  Their relationship was not established in a way that made this believable to me, other than a head-scratching kiss right in the middle of a countdown to a nuclear weapon’s detonation.  But overall, for a 167-minute film, the dense story all fit together very well, and I was thoroughly entertained throughout the runtime.  

A lot of people have talked about Alfred’s interactions with Bruce as being the most emotionally charged moments in the film.  Michael Caine does give his best performance in the series here.  Others have mentioned the last twenty minutes or so being the primary source of the gut-punching (and no doubt that it was gut-punching).  For me, though, the most emotional moments in the film came when Bruce is in the prison. This is where he finally begins to understand what it means to carry out his father’s dying wishes that he not be afraid. This is where, thematically, the film ties up the series the best. 

Until this point in the series Bruce doesn’t realize that his advantages have, to some degree, been holding him back: his enormous wealth and privilege, his superior physical form, a plethora of resources at his complete disposal, and his harbored anger concerning his parents’ death.  Only after all of those things were taken from him, could he begin to fully repair his soul.  Only after he has gone as low as he can go, was Batman able to Rise.

Epilogue:  Although I’m sad about Nolan’s Batman franchise being done, I’m excited to see where the director will take his career from here.  Between the Batman films and Inception, it seems like he is keen on making “big” films, and their success both critically and financially is undeniable.  But with all their success, his smallest commercial film, Memento, is still the filmmaker’s masterpiece.  I doubt very strongly he will return to that degree of art-house filmmaking, but I’d like to see him try his hand at something smaller, and perhaps even something more personal.  I’d like to see him go fresh with some of the actors he uses.  Regardless, he is still the only filmmaker whose movies I will see on opening day, every time, no questions asked; and I feel lucky to be right in his target audience during his run as a filmmaker.