Indie Visual Member since Dec 20th 2005 1168 posts
Thu Mar-16-06 02:05 PM
5. "I rented them for a week, so if there's something "amazing" I missed," In response to Reply # 1
I really want to watch them again and catch it. I'm not hating on Hitchcock - I just want to understand his art. I think it's something I've overlooked or misunderstood. Whatever, could someone please answer the original question?
23. "RE: I rented them for a week, so if there's something "amazing" I missed..." In response to Reply # 5
>I really want to watch them again and catch it. I'm not >hating on Hitchcock - I just want to understand his art. I >think it's something I've overlooked or misunderstood. >Whatever, could someone please answer the original question?
Indie Visual Member since Dec 20th 2005 1168 posts
Thu Mar-16-06 02:37 PM
12. "WTF. Dude I searched the archives and the most I found was" In response to Reply # 11
Frank Longo's Hitchcock post, and that sucked ass. So would could kindly pull these posts out of your ass and post them here so we can continue... thanks.
Indie Visual Member since Dec 20th 2005 1168 posts
Thu Mar-16-06 02:38 PM
13. "I try to keep an open mind. I saw the films and didn't get them on my ow..." In response to Reply # 11
Now I want assistance. If I still don't get it then fuck it. God, you all have the worst manners. Did you walk in on your parents fucking or something?!
16. "The "assistance" you're looking for can't be found here" In response to Reply # 13
>Now I want assistance. If I still don't get it then fuck it. > God, you all have the worst manners. Did you walk in on your >parents fucking or something?!
Either you like something or you don't. Way I do it is, if I like something I study it to figure out why I like it, why it works for me, and what other movies and material have those same elements. If I don't like it I move on.
While it may be possible for you to research and figure out why other people like something, no one can tell you tell you anything to change your mind. And, most importantly, I believe it is impossible for one posts or even a couple posts to give you the information, analysis or perspective you need to do the type of critical reassessment you seem to be asking. I think pretty much everyone else here, to varying degrees, is in agreement on this. So it's pointless to keep asking.
15. "RE: I don't understand how "The Birds" and "Vertigo" are that good..." In response to Reply # 0
I haven't seen Birds since I was kid so I can't explain that one but I will attempt to explain Vertigo. This is from my knowledge. I'm not a super film snob or anything.
The reason why I think you don't like Vertigo is because of lack of perspective. I personally still think Vertigo is very well made movie but it may seem dated to you but Hitchcock's ability to tell a story is amazing. I mean did you really see the twists that the story took and if you did it is becuase you were looking for it or conditioned by the way movies are made now.
Jimmy Stewart is really good in the film and this is during his stretch of edgy film roles. He was playing against type which is someting most actors don't try to do today.
The ending was shocking and again if you weren't shocked by it it is becuase now alot of movies try to do that. Hitchcock was also very innovative in his camera shots and use of technology. You should watch the making of doc for more insight. Again if you were not impressed it is because you're spoiled by seeing those techniques used by everyone now.
If you went back 15 years ago and someone showed you a machine that allowed you to play movies on your tv(the vcr) and it didn't have special features you would say what is the big deal but remember that everything has a foundation and Hitchcock is major part of that for film.
Also watch more Hitchcock and also name some movies you like made before 1980.
Apocalypse Now (1979) Citizen Kane (1941) Dr. Strangelove (1964) The Godfather (1972) The Godfather 2 (1974) The Quiet Man (1952)
^ Those are generally my favorite movies made before 1980. And thanks for the answer, I plan on rewatching both Vertigo and the Birds again (mostly for symbolism&camerawork, now).
21. "RE:" In response to Reply # 19 Thu Mar-16-06 04:07 PM by Shawn Maxam
Cool and for everyone hating on you you seem to have good taste in film.
But really watch the making of or behind the scenes docs if they have them Idid that for Dial M for Murder and Rearwindow and it opened up a my mind to alot of the subtle things that Hitchcock does and how he tells a story.
18. "i thought The Birds was pretty scary... when i was a kid" In response to Reply # 0
i haven't watched it again
but i think it's ingenious it makes something as everyday as birdlife terryfying
hitchcock always does that... like in Pyscho, it's fucking terrifying just when the hero goes up stairs to the DARK LANDING... lol. that's exactly what being a kid is like, you're scared to go to dark places even in your own house. sometimes you might brave a venture into a dark area like the top of the stairs and feel all heroic about it. and with The Birds, that seen when the woman goes into the attic room, i got a hell of a fight. or when they came down the chimney, lol.
as a kid birds are the most familiar wildlife, but they're very much a look-don't-touch animal, in fact you rarely get a chance to touch them, plus you never know their mood (like you can tell easily if a dog is happy)... so for the birds to 1. turn out to be hateful/evil and 2. surround and overwhelm you, ahieves a sort of archetypal fear
-------------------- Why do you choose to mimic these wack MCs? Why do you choose to listen to R&B?
"There are obviously many things which we do not understand, and may never be able to." Leela
24. "a serious answer to your question" In response to Reply # 0
>I really don't. Someone explain this to me....
Vertigo is Hitchcock at his best. It deals with a theme he explored several times in his career, that of the everyman suddenly caught up in the middle of a conspiracy or event in which he is controlled by forces greater than (or unseen by) himself. But unlike "North By Northwest" with its focus on action and the conspiracy itself, "Vertigo" really examines the inner torment of the everyman fallen into the trap. It's much more about the psychology of the issue.
In Vertigo, the Jimmy Stewart character has the rug pulled out from under his feet, and all thanks to that wealthy shipping tycoon who exploits Stewart's weakness in order to get away with murder. Stewart's character finds himself in the middle of an elaborate con game. He's a pawn. Nothing is what it seems. The reason he's hired isn't real. The girl he falls for isn't real. It seems to me his vertigo, those dizzying, spinning effects, represent not only his problem with heights, but his disoriented and confused place in the world which has just revealed itself to him. And then consider the way he tries to hang on to the false world rather than face the real world (which he is unable to do). . . he tries to make-over the blonde's double. . . turn her into his previous obsession. It's pure desperation.
By the end of the film, Stewart's character is completely lost. He doesn't recognize the world anymore. It's a very unhappy ending.
The greatness of the film is in the masterful way Hitchcock and Stewart transmit all this to the viewer. It's a masterpiece.
Vertigo is a dark film that tells us something about 1950s america that doesn't exactly match up with the picture of happy suburban conformity we see and hear about so often.
Many other american films in the last years of the 1950s tapped into the darker side of things as well. Some of the best from those years being Orson Welles' "Touch Of Evil", Vincente Minnelli's "Some Came Running", Douglas Sirk's "Written On The Wind", "Imitation Of Life" and "Tarnished Angels", Anthony Mann's "Man Of The West" and quite a few others.
You might say it was one of the high points in American Cinema.
29. "I was stating an opinion on the film" In response to Reply # 28 Thu Mar-16-06 05:38 PM by Call It Anything
Hitchcock leaves enough open to interpretation, whether intentionally or not, that after Madeleine/Judy fell (not jumped), Scottie committed suicide. That was what I was refering to. It's an occasional topic of discussion among film school people and the like.
31. "see, here's my problem with this thread" In response to Reply # 24
and not to pick a fight or anything.
But if you watch Vertigo and dislike it enough say it "sucked ass", I seriously doubt that the above post (which is concise yet on point) would significantly change your opinion on it.
Not that one can't have a change of opinion on a movie; I don't think anyone here would argue that.
25. "It would've helped your cause if you stated why you didn't" In response to Reply # 0
think they were "good" and "sucked ass."
Was the story boring or uninteresting?
If so, that is still not the only criteria to judging a film...despite the weakness of the story, whatever it may have been, was it communicated effectively? Or was it sloppy and incoherent like a student film?
What were Hitch's intentions? Did he successfully communicate/fulfill them?
If you don't know what his intentions were, did you guess what it/they was/were...and did he communicate/fulfill them?
Even if Hitch didn't hammer his intentions home, did he at least incite you enough to think about it?
Was the acting terrible?
Camera work is not just tracking shots, crane shots, whip pans, hand held work, focus shifts....framing/composition (what's in and not in the frame) is part of it. Not every single moment in a film has to have camerawork that has symbolic implications or stylistic signature that is somewhat independent from the narrative happenings or emotional expression of the moment.
Were you not affected just the slightest at any moment? No feelings of anticipation, fear, surprise, fulfillment, etc.? Not even a tiny jolt when the woman jumped into the bay?
Interesting enough for me to keep watching in the case of The Birds. Vertigo lost me somewhere after the first successful suicide attempt.
>If you don't know what his intentions were, did you guess what >it/they was/were...and did he communicate/fulfill them?
I felt Vertigo dealt with seeking ideals. I felt the Birds had something to do with some outer force taking revenge on the people within the story whenever they displayed their insecurities or fears.
>Even if Hitch didn't hammer his intentions home, did he at >least incite you enough to think about it?
Yeah. I think the messages of Vertigo and The Birds are profound, but I still don't understand why he had to make it into a movie. I would have just left well enough alone and left the damn novels alone.
>Was the acting terrible?
Now, I think this is why I disliked both movies. I thought the acting was great in most cases except for the male leads in both films. The dude is Vertigo sounded like Barney from the Andy Griffin Show... I just couldn't get over the accent and bring preformance.
>Were you not affected just the slightest at any moment? No >feelings of anticipation, fear, surprise, fulfillment, etc.? >Not even a tiny jolt when the woman jumped into the bay?
No, not at all, except for the final scene when the nun comes out of the shadows and the woman commits suicide. That and the moment when the husband throws his wife off the belltower where the only suspenful moments in Vertigo, imo. In the Birds, I was scared, and as I ramble on I'm begining to like it more and more. But Vertigo - no, I still don't appreciate it at all.
32. "son, please logoff forever....." In response to Reply # 27
>Now, I think this is why I disliked both movies. I thought >the acting was great in most cases except for the male leads >in both films. The dude is Vertigo sounded like Barney from >the Andy Griffin Show... I just couldn't get over the accent >and bring preformance.
41. "beyond what other folks said, consider the historical perspective" In response to Reply # 0
and the actors.
JIMMY STEWARD was the JIM CARY of his era, kinda. likable, all american, salt of the earth kinda... VERTIGO is a fucked up movie in any era, but in the time it was made, it was semi groundbreaking, ESPECIALLY when you consider a guy like J.S. playing the lead role.
it would be like jim carey being the lead in BOOGIE NIGHTS or something.
THE BIRDS gets props again for the fact that it was the first movie (that i know of) of its era to deal with NATURE OVERWHLEMING MAN and use definitive horror elements to do it.
^^^ my two cents ^^^^ <--- NEW ART!! NEW ART!!! NEW ART!!! * all comments made about women apply to the formerly single TOREZ only
42. "RE: beyond what other folks said, consider the historical perspective" In response to Reply # 41
I'd peg Jimmy Stewart as a lot closer to Tom Hanks. Jim Carrey got famous through crass humor on In Living Color and later talking out of his ass in Ace Ventura. While he's on his way to becoming a distinguished actor, he's still only 10 years removed from looking for a sacred bat in a corny sequel. The man has never been nominated by the Academy.
Jimmy Stewart made a career playing the pleasant do-gooder with a heart of gold. Stewart was nominated 5 times and won once. He was firmly established at that point as his break out role of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington was almost 20 years prior to Vertigo.
While Tom Hanks did not have the most distinguished start to his acting career, the number of highly acclaimed dramatic roles he's had over the last 15 years has mostly erased the memory of him in his youth dressing up as Buffy and trying to fuck a mermaid. His roles like Forrest Gump, Jim Lovell, Andrew Beckett and John Miller have given the kind of "truth, justice and the American way" vibe that Stewart had there. He has been nominated 5 times and won twice.
It's possible that Jim Carrey could get to that point, but I think right now he's at least 5 years and 2 big roles away from that.
43. " ** THE BIRDS **" In response to Reply # 0 Sat Mar-18-06 05:29 PM by MONIQUEE
I know you could have done this yourself, but because of my experience today, I went on a search after reading your post.
First and foremost,my search began because of a scenario told to me about the Live Birds. Did they attack Ms. Hedren (?) .
I always beleive it is up to me to know what is "good" to / for me for whatever reason . The Birds was "good" to me, and scary. Although it was "good", it left me wondering what was the reason for the attacks.
What was "good" to me is the work Hitchcock did with the BIRDS in the movie. Plus a few characters in the movie (only remembered by the last link).
HITCHCOCK definitely had me wondering if THE BIRDS would "turn" on us.
THE BIRDS: (scroll down)
" curiously Hitchcock fails to develop the characters or define their context in the story " .
DVD MOVIE CENTRAL Review By Michael Jacobson (long) Film **** The Birds "....... In the end , does the lack of explanation hurt the overall film ? For some it does , but I don't personally think so...."
((((( Today's Black Bird Experience )))) Saturday, March 18 , 2006
Approximately 2 hours ago, I was looking out my kitchen window There stood the largest Black Bird I've seen in my yard The Black Bird was darker and shinier than the nite The Black Bird's stomach section was full The stomach was impregnated full and the Black Bird Strutted, circled around upon the ground WideeeeSpreadedd the Longest tail I have seen on a Black Bird in my yard Stunned by the large Black Bird I failed to see the smaller Black Bird against the fence Seemingly being stalked by the large Black Bird Sudddenly the larger Black Bird no longer looked impregnated It backed up and the smaller Black Bird flew away As this occured all the other Black Birds were wildley circling high TODAY's BLACK BIRD EXPERIENCE
I did not think of the movie THE BIRDS until I read this thread.
Hmm. Was HITCHCOCK on to something (?). LOL. Guess I was in as much Schock as the day I saw the movie. And. Left me wondering if there was more BIG BLACK BIRDS coming down to attack us. But never thinking about the movie. THE BIRDS.
48. "i didn't care much for vertigo, either" In response to Reply # 0
i kind of see how it's regarded as classic, but watching it, i found it boring and laughable, especially when the main character asks the "new" girl to do all this stuff and she kind of blindly takes it. and midge is a worthless character, who isn't developed very well, and then kind of left out to dry as the story never returns to her. the ending was cool though.
49. "RE: i didn't care much for vertigo, either" In response to Reply # 48
The reason that she "blindly" takes it is because she loves him and she wants him in her life and she's thinks she's willing to accept this awkward role.
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Pass The Popcorn 
.jpg)
