Movies to Study: Psycho

There are many reasons why Hitchcock's 'Psycho' is one of the best films ever, but I think one of the real treasures of the film is the performance by Anthony Perkins. He has a very boyish quality that plays perfectly with the relation to his mother, and we have no trouble believing that his best friend is his mother. But what makes a role great is that when watched repeatedly, things are always taken in new and different ways.

The first time watching the film, one sees him as an innocent victim to a sheltered life and an overbearing mother. He cares about her, cleans up her mess, and really did kind-of like Marion Crane. Then, when you watch it for the second time, it's much clearer. He is a great liar to strangers, but when we know what's going on, it seems so obvious. This also works, though, because his character, Norman Bates, really is innocent of murder; what he's guilty of is covering up his mother's crimes. He clearly doesn't enjoy having to send Marion's car into the swamp, but there's never a question that he wouldn't.

Norman Bates, so often calm, only trips up once, and that's when Arbogast comes to question him. He stutters, which is an obvious tell, but Norman still escapes because he subconsciously tosses the onus to his mother--and obviously she's not going to incriminate anyone. Later, in the third act when Sam and Lila visit to check it out, Norman is back to form, and despite getting caught, plays until the final beat.

The film is also a master of subtlety and coincidence. In the third act, a few times, the Sheriff attempts to explain the situation to Sam and Lila, but they cut him off or he gets sidetracked. Because of this, our curiosity is prolonged until the final scene where we get an secondary school psychology lesson. Questions arise before this point: Did his mother fake her death? Was someone else killed and buried instead of her? What does Norman mean when he says she's 'invalid'? Just who the hell is walking around the house in woman's clothes? And it all makes sense, back to the very beginning, when Norman said he liked to stuff birds. He mentions the chemicals that preserve them, which he clearly used on his mother's corpse.

One of my favorite lines comes from Norman (who else?): "She just goes a little mad sometimes. We all go a little mad sometimes." On the first run, we assume he's just defending his mother. Why should he put her in "some place"? He belittles Marion and makes her feel cruel for even suggesting such a thing, but OH, the sweet irony of those words. Norman is literally 'mad' in the film, which is a mean twist on its own, but every other character also goes a little 'mad'. Marion steals $40,000, Arbogast walks in on an old lady who he knows he shouldn't barge in on (both on legal terms and from Norman's verbal contributions), and Sam not only becomes stand-offish with Norman, but almost seems to be making the switch from Marion to her sister. Lila appears to be the only rational person in the film, because even though she busts into the house and finds Mrs. Bates, wouldn't any sister do the same?

One could make the case for Sam as they have for Lila: Wouldn't any lover do anything to save them? I doubt it, because as we saw in scene one, Sam won't marry Marion because he's got alimony. I don't know about you, but if I cared so much about someone, I would want to marry them no matter how much money I did or didn't have. But Marion cares about him; that's why she stole the $40,000.

There have been many essays written on Hitchcock's direction, and I feel no need to rehash those here. But when his mastery of storytelling came together with this perfect script and these great actors, it made one of the best films of all time.

Continue reading...

This is Awesome

I've hated on the film 'Disturbia' (not to be confused with the highly addicting song by Rihanna) ever since I heard about its premise because I don't like Shia LaBeouf and it's a plain ripoff of 'Rear Window.' And who would want to remake 'Rear Window?' It's a perfect movie.

In this post I call it out, as well as show similarities of the director's next project to 'North by Northwest.'

Today, /Film reports that Spielberg and DreamWorks may be sued over 'Disturbia' for its resemblance to 'Rear Window.' I like Spielberg, and I like DreamWorks, but I don't like this film or director or Shia, so this is great.

Continue reading...

A Lesson From Hitchcock

I'm currently reading a biography of Alfred Hitchcock (the one by Charlotte Chandler). It is great so far, and I would encourage any fan of film to give it a chance.

Not only was Hitchcock a master director, but a caring person. But who cares about that, really? What I've found interesting is his 'ticking time bomb' theory to his movies. This structure revolves around the audience always being in-the-know, on the edge of their seat waiting to see when the shit on screen will hit the fan. One of many examples is in Notorious (one of his best), when Sebastian figures out his key was missing, yet Alicia and Devlin think they may have gotten away just yet. Or better yet, one step before, when Sebastian has not yet found his missing key, but we know he will. And we know he will figure it out. The anticipation is half the fun.

Let me search for a more common example, since I'm sure many readers have not seen Notorious. How about The Departed. The only real, true curve ball is that Costello is an informant. But that's not too shocking. Yet we spend a majority of the movie waiting, dying for the scene where Leo DiCaprio and Matt Damon throw down. There are no tricks, just raw human instinct, leading to a huge climax (wow, major unintended sexual innuendo).

Hitchcock always said he did not like surprises because they made him feel out of control. I agree, and understand, but after the cut I will list some examples where a surprise worked (and as expected, there will be a couple spoilers).

I'm not simply talking about a 'twist ending,' either. No Sixth Sense or The Usual Suspects.

A good example of a great movie with hidden motives is Casino Royale. We don't know Vespyr Lynd is in it for Le Chiffre, we don't know Mathis is in on it as well, and but that is the way of James Bond films, and it works well.

A movie revealing hidden motives will usually use this plot point to propel the third act. If it is revealed too early, it will fall short, and too late, it will seem gimmicky. Keep that in mind. It's all right to hide information from the audience, but waiting until the last breath is hard to pull off.

Continue reading...

I Think I'll Just Watch North by Northwest Again

Funny, this is by the director of Disturbia -- another mimicry of a Hitchcock film. Let's see how many more classics he can ruin!

Continue reading...

Last night was a pretty amazing TV night. TCM was showing Vertigo and Rear Window back-to-back, as well as Project Runway on Bravo (with Ricky going home, thank God). Two of Hitchcock's best flicks (plus I still have a crush on Grace Kelly), and some great television.

And as a transition, Vanity Fair has done some amazing photos in their new issue. Modern actors posing in some classic Hitchcock moments. I highly suggest you check it out.

The best:

Charlize Theron (great in pretty much anything)
Marion Cotillard (I luff her -- luff, two F's)

The worst:

Scarlet Johansson (bad choice)
Renee Zellweger (just bad in general, looks nothing like Kim Novak)

The rest are pretty good. I don't even mind Seth Rogan as Cary Grant... and that is a huge downgrade.

Continue reading...

Very quick mini-reviews:

Cabaret (1972) - IMDb

I like a good musical, but for some reason Cabaret didn't do it for me. The songs were entertaining, the acting was pretty good, the movie paid attention to details and was very pretty, but the fact I had to look at Liza Minelli for 2 hours was a huge turn-off.

She played a great Sally Bowles and I was laughing at some of her lines, but she looks like a 12 year-old boy and it's hard to buy into her being somewhat of a prostitute.

This movie was good in visuals and good on paper, but the feel and mood just wasn't doing it for me.

Rating: 7/10

How to Marry a Millionaire (1953) - IMDb

A feel-good comedy about three girls who move to New York and rent out a high class apartment in hopes of marrying millionaires, until unfortunately (or, fortunately, depending on how you look at it) they find that money and love don't always mix.

Highly predictable plot, but still enjoyable because of some good one-liners and nice eye candy. Even though she's on the posters and DVDs, Marilyn Monroe isn't really the star of this picture, she just has some cute jokes about how she's damn near blind without her glasses (most of which seem commonplace now, but back then were original).

It's all build-up until the last scene where all the ladies have all the men, and though it's expected from about ten minutes in, it's a very satisfying ending.

Rating: 7/10

North by Northwest (1959) - IMDb

Alfred Hitchcock. Cary Grant. Eva Marie Saint (hint: On the Waterfront).

Amazing script. About 10-15 minutes too long for my tastes, but maybe that's because I was watching it when I was tired. Who's to question Hitchcock anyway? What a genius.

See this movie.

Rating: 9.25/10

Continue reading...