ALFRED HITCHCOCK

[MissGoddess]

Well, I definitely want to watch all of Battle Cry now...I caught about ten minutes on my lunch break one day...I was sucked in I admit, but I didn't record it, too bad. I never would have thought Walsh directed it.

Konny, I'm going to put Stage Fright on now and write more later. I love what you and Wendy wrote.

[JackFavell]

MissG - Battle Cry isn't great, but it's not bad, and I just found myself lolling around in it's soapy storyline, I didn't want to stop watching for some reason. Walsh does a good job in a genre that I would not have thought him comfortable in.

I can't wait to hear what you have to say about Stage Fright.

[MissGoddess]

You're right, I didn't want to stop watching Battle Cry either, though I didn't know what the movie was called or anything about it. It was a scene at a party where Nancy Olsen basically confessed to Van Heflin she was pregnant, I think, with Ray's child. Heflin had just told her she reminded him of his wife so I don't know if he changed his mind after that revelation or not.

I realize now that Stage Fright really does have so much more in it, more complexity than I ever realized. Tying in nicely with the whole theme of lying was when Jane Wyman arrived at her father's place with Richard Todd, Alistair Sim says he hates lying and insincerity more than anything. And yet he's about to go down the same path of deceit they all do. There again were all the multitude of camera set-ups and point-of-views that I wanted to absorb but I never would have finished the movie if I kept stopping to rewind and play each scene over again!

I think Stage Fright has one of the best opening credits ever, with the "Safety Curtain" rising over London.

This was the first time I paid more attention to Marlene's character at the end. I'm a little confused, I had previously thought she was innocent of any crime, but now I think Todd may have been telling the truth when he said she had intended to use him to kill her husband. But why? Did the movie ever explain why she wanted him dead? So she could be with that stage door Freddie? Hmmm. What happened to divorce? "Instant Divorce", I suppose.

Unlike some and maybe even Hitch himself, I have no problem with the "false flashback", maybe because I've seen movies since then that used it, including most effectively, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. I do think Hitch probably regretted it publicly because he may have gotten hammered over it (know how that feels, Konway? ).

I thought "Ordinary Smith" (Michael Wilding) and his role was almost exactly like that of John Loder in *Sabotage*. The pleasant detective who falls for the heroine who is hiding something from him.

And this is definitely my favorite Alistair Sim role. He's too funny.

[Konway]

SPOILERS

I don't know if anyone noticed this. O in Michael Wilding's Wilfred O. Smith. This is a reference to David O. Selznick. This O idea was used again in North by Northwest - Roger O. Thornhill

I believe the inner intentions of Charlotte Inwood (Dietrich) were mentioned by Jonathan Cooper in the end. Charlotte knew the disturbed side of Jonathan Cooper. She knew he was a person who couldn't control himself when he gets into a rage. She knew because Jonathan told her about the girl he killed in his past due to his violent angry nature. Charlotte knew Jonathan was in love with her. But charlotte wasn't love with Jonathan. She was using him to kill her husband so that she could get away with Freddie Williams.

Yes, Miss G. I certainly know when I get hammered over a subject. I hate when people leave no room for others to interpret. Let's get back to the subject.
Alastair Sim says he hates lying and insincerity more than anything. I think this is the same case with Wilding's Smith. He gets very upset about the fact that Eve lied and stayed very insincere to him. But Eve tells him that she wasn't lying in the taxi and she truly was falling in love with him during that moment. I don't think Hitchcock was trying to show the depth of romance in that scene. I think Hitchcock was simply showing sincerity of that one romantic moment in the cab that lies between several lying moments of the film.

I think the music by Leighton Lucas was trying to convey the unique sincere moment of the romance in the cab since we are watching lies and lies throughout the film.

[MissGoddess]

konway, excellent about the music, I get it now and that makes perfect sense. The movie really is a very good moral lesson about the harm that comes from deception, even when the person's motives are innocent. That's why I like his movies I guess, there's so much to discover, so many things you have to look closely for.

[JackFavell]

I am sure you are right, Konway, that the sincerity is more important than the love scene, and I really like the music played. In fact, I really like all the music in this movie, it sets the right tone.

I believe, though I still haven't found a copy of the movie to look at yet, that the cab scene is the one in which Wyman faces her own lying, and how she has hurt him. It's as if she is looking in the mirror and seen Marlene there instead of herself. I think her closeup reveals it, as Michael Wilding is talking. I am not really sure how Hitch makes this clear, that Marlene is Wyman's doppelganger, but to me anyway it was crystal clear. I particularly like the music there, I'm glad you brought it up. it's such an honest scene that it moves me very much, but I think the music has a lot to do with it.

At the same time, there is the interesting comparison of Michael Wilding and Richard Todd, since they are the two men she has become involved with and must choose between.

In the scene where Eve starts the whole charade, changing into another character as the maid, she looks at herself in two mirrors, each on the opposite side of the room. Hitch doesn't make a big deal of it, but it sets up a reflexive mirror idea to me that is kind of subliminally planted in the audiences mind. The reflection of a reflection...anyway, the funny thing is, Eve can't see her own reflection when she looks at it, because she is wearing thick glasses. There is even a wonderful shot of her staring in the mirror, and we see what she sees - a blur, then she takes the glasses down onto her nose and things come back into focus. It's a joke, but it is very much a portrayal of what Eve is like in the movie - she has blinders on about Richard Todd (aren't we all blinded by love?), but more importantly cannot see herself, or her own deceptive actions.

In other words, once she dons the costume, from that time forward she cannot see how her own duplicitous actions affect others.

[MissGoddess]

That's super! I love your "doppleganger" theory...and the bit with the glasses and the mirrors...it's so suggestive of what you say.

I also have another question: Why was Eve crying after she "entrapped" Marlene at the end? I would have thought she'd felt great since it's what she was after all along. Was she crying for Todd, or because she was feeling guilty toward Marlene who had just been very kind to her?

[JackFavell]

Wow. I absolutely don't know. I can't remember it well enough to make an educated guess. I think perhaps she actually kind of liked Marlene, but I'm not sure... I'll have to see if I have a copy. I can't find it on Netflix or youtube. I'm so bad now I'm not sure I ever recorded it. I think I did.

[JackFavell]

Hey it just occurred to me...

Once Eve dons her costume as the maid, it's like the costume wears her. It's a mask you can't take off which to me seems the height of horror. Mr. Sardonicus.

[MissGoddess]

True! She's stuck with her "role" and there's no understudy to pass it off to.

And your doppleganger could almost be a triple-ganger, since Eve's "costume", at least initially, is basically a copy of Nellie's look with the glasses, dowdy clothes and cigarette dangling from her mouth.

[JackFavell]

Oh my gosh, that's for sure! Great point! I didn't think of that.

[Konway]

SPOILERS

I think Eve was crying, because Charlotte said that Jonathan killed her husband. Charlotte said that Jonathan wanted her name kept out of it. But Eve wouldn't believe it, because she believes Charlotte killed her husband. Not Jonathan. Although Eve doesn't love Jonathan anymore, still she wants him safe and sound.

By the end, we also know that Charlotte was only telling half of the truth to Eve.

By the end, we know through Smith and finally Jonathan the entire truth. Through Jonathan, we know that Charlotte was only using him to get what she wanted. By using his weakness, Charlotte ended up pushing Jonathan into a severely disturbed position. Like you pointed out MissG, this foreshadows Psycho in great detail.

Doppelganger theory is interesting, because Playwright James Bridie worked on Stage fright by providing additional dialogue. It was James Bridie who also told Hitchcock to cast Alastair Sim. Its a great suggestion. James Bridie wrote the screenplay for Under Capricorn. Jack Favell pointed out this long time ago - "In Under Capricorn, the characters were in kind of a rondelay, with each taking the other's place at different times."

I know Hitchcock always liked putting characters in impossible positions. In Stage Fright, She is trying to save Jonathan who is a fugitive from justice and she is in love with Smith who is a police officer who is looking for Jonathan. This is the same case in several other films of Hitchcock. In Foreign Correspondent, Joel McCrea (Johnny Jones) is in love with Laraine Day (Carol Fisher) and he is trying to help in hanging her father (Marshall). In Murder (1930), Herbert Marshall is intensely in love with a girl whom he sent to hang by saying she is guilty. In North by Northwest, Eve loves Roger O. Thornhill, but she was forced to push Roger into a position (cropduster scene) where she can't help him at all.

[Konway]

SPOILERS

Here are the vampire references in Shadow of A Doubt (1943).

1) When we are first introduced to Uncle Charlie, he is lying on his bed, arms folded across his chest, suggestive of a vampire lying in his coffin.

2) As the landlady lowers the blind and the light disappears from his face, Uncle Charlie rises as though waiting to commit his crimes under the cover of darkness. This image is also interesting to note, as the blinds are traditionally drawn where there is a dead man in the room.

3) Jack Graham asks Ann to tell Catherine the story of Dracula.

4) Uncle Charlie comes from Philadelphia, "Pennsylvania." Dracula comes from "Transylvania."

5) Telephathic communication between Young Charlie and Uncle Charlie is connected to the relationship between Mina Harker and Dracula.

6) 'The same blood runs through our veins' does have a connection to the 1931 film--Dracula says the exact same line in reference to Mina when he and Van Helsing have their "battle of wills" to prove he now has power over her.

7) Women are attracted to Uncle Charlie.

8 - The fact that he remains unseen on the train is a lot like Dracula's trip from Transylvania to London.

9) Uncle Charlie is also killed on the train RETURNING to the east, much like how Dracula dies returning to the east.

A Hitchcock admirer named CabmanGray wrote this "The film is mainly about the loss of innocence, but it's deliberately loaded with vampire references. Uncle Charlie is often seen in his bed/coffin during the day, but when young Charlie finds out who/what he really is at the library, then SHE sleeps through the next day until nightfall. This suggests that she has become a little more like Uncle Charlie now that her innocence has been torn away. In other words, she is becoming a little more like the waitress (Louise) in the bar scene who has clearly lost her innocence about the world long ago. I've always considered the waitresss as an "undead" victim. Some viewers have asked "why does the waitress talk like that?" Well, she's supposed to sound like that. She's no longer an innocent or naive about the world as young Charlie is. They say the waitress is talking like a zombie (no emotions). That, of course, is the whole point! "for a ring like that I'd just about die" she states. Well, she is somewhat dead, at least on the inside. Hitchcock, Thornton Wilder and Alma Reville are basically saying that when you lose your innocence, then you lose a little bit of your soul as well. Uncle Charlie is seen as a kind of plague on the small town, but he doesn't invade their homes to drain their blood, instead he corrupts the minds of the young by taking their innocence from them."

[Mr. Arkadin]

SPOILERS

Here are the vampire references in Shadow of A Doubt (1943).

1) When we are first introduced to Uncle Charlie, he is lying on his bed, arms folded across his chest, suggestive of a vampire lying in his coffin.

2) As the landlady lowers the blind and the light disappears from his face, Uncle Charlie rises as though waiting to commit his crimes under the cover of darkness. This image is also interesting to note, as the blinds are traditionally drawn where there is a dead man in the room.

3) Jack Graham asks Ann to tell Catherine the story of Dracula.

4) Uncle Charlie comes from Philadelphia, "Pennsylvania." Dracula comes from "Transylvania."

5) Telephathic communication between Young Charlie and Uncle Charlie is connected to the relationship between Mina Harker and Dracula.

6) 'The same blood runs through our veins' does have a connection to the 1931 film--Dracula says the exact same line in reference to Mina when he and Van Helsing have their "battle of wills" to prove he now has power over her.

7) Women are attracted to Uncle Charlie.

8 - The fact that he remains unseen on the train is a lot like Dracula's trip from Transylvania to London.

9) Uncle Charlie is also killed on the train RETURNING to the east, much like how Dracula dies returning to the east.

A Hitchcock admirer named CabmanGray wrote this "The film is mainly about the loss of innocence, but it's deliberately loaded with vampire references. Uncle Charlie is often seen in his bed/coffin during the day, but when young Charlie finds out who/what he really is at the library, then SHE sleeps through the next day until nightfall. This suggests that she has become a little more like Uncle Charlie now that her innocence has been torn away. In other words, she is becoming a little more like the waitress (Louise) in the bar scene who has clearly lost her innocence about the world long ago. I've always considered the waitresss as an "undead" victim. Some viewers have asked "why does the waitress talk like that?" Well, she's supposed to sound like that. She's no longer an innocent or naive about the world as young Charlie is. They say the waitress is talking like a zombie (no emotions). That, of course, is the whole point! "for a ring like that I'd just about die" she states. Well, she is somewhat dead, at least on the inside. Hitchcock, Thornton Wilder and Alma Reville are basically saying that when you lose your innocence, then you lose a little bit of your soul as well. Uncle Charlie is seen as a kind of plague on the small town, but he doesn't invade their homes to drain their blood, instead he corrupts the minds of the young by taking their innocence from them."

Interesting post. I don't know why you are "getting hammered" for this at TCM--the film has been poked and prodded from many different angles--why not this one? You also make valid arguments and perhaps more importantly, make them interesting to me. As a person who is not a fan of Stagefright (we'll go round and round on the ending sometime--I promise!), you've made me want to give it another look, and that should be the whole point of any discussion board. Welcome.

[JackFavell]

I love this idea! You know, I think it is most successful in the argument about the waitress, who we can assume was only recently almost as innocent and happy go lucky as young Charlie. She's obviously tainted, 'dead' as you so well put it, and at so young an age. She even seems a bit mesmerized with Uncle Charlie, and even more so by his ring - the spoils of his evil. She can't look away.

That scene has always seemed oddly familiar to me, and I think this explains it. The girl is so much like those walking dead women in the horror movies, or "the next victim' types who become fixated on Dracula like a poor mouse hypnotized by a snake...

I think Eve was crying, because Charlotte said that Jonathan killed her husband. Charlotte said that Jonathan wanted her name kept out of it. But Eve wouldn't believe it, because she believes Charlotte killed her husband. Not Jonathan. Although Eve doesn't love Jonathan anymore, still she wants him safe and sound.

By the end, we also know that Charlotte was only telling half of the truth to Eve.

By the end, we know through Smith and finally Jonathan the entire truth. Through Jonathan, we know that Charlotte was only using him to get what she wanted. By using his weakness, Charlotte ended up pushing Jonathan into a severely disturbed position. Like you pointed out MissG, this foreshadows Psycho in great detail.

Doppelganger theory is interesting, because Playwright James Bridie worked on Stage fright by providing additional dialogue. It was James Bridie who also told Hitchcock to cast Alastair Sim. Its a great suggestion. James Bridie wrote the screenplay for Under Capricorn. Jack Favell pointed out this long time ago - "In Under Capricorn, the characters were in kind of a rondelay, with each taking the other's place at different times."

I know Hitchcock always liked putting characters in impossible positions. In Stage Fright, She is trying to save Jonathan who is a fugitive from justice and she is in love with Smith who is a police officer who is looking for Jonathan. This is the same case in several other films of Hitchcock. In Foreign Correspondent, Joel McCrea (Johnny Jones) is in love with Laraine Day (Carol Fisher) and he is trying to help in hanging her father (Marshall). In Murder (1930), Herbert Marshall is intensely in love with a girl whom he sent to hang by saying she is guilty. In North by Northwest, Eve loves Roger O. Thornhill, but she was forced to push Roger into a position (cropduster scene) where she can't help him at all.

Gosh, I can't believe you found that quote from me on Under Capricorn! I must have been really on the ball that day.

I think you are perfectly right about why Eve was crying in Stage Fright. Now that you write it, it brings me back to the ending of the film and I can remember it happening as you say it did. I have no problem with the ending, it doesn't bother me at all.

Part of the fun of Hitchcock is the way those impossible situations play themselves out, in a sort of poetic circle.