The Alfred Hitchcock Filmography - A Chronological viewing (16 Viewers)

[Matt Hough]

"The Most Dangerous Game" is a short story that I read in junior high school as a student and one that I taught for thirty years to my ninth graders.

 

[Nelson Au]

I guess my school curriculum did not include this short story in our reading assignments.

I should see if the story is in a book I have from college that is a collection of short stories.

 

[Mark McSherry]

The Most Dangerous Game was published in the January 19, 1924 issue of Collier's magazine. So technically, if copyright expires at 95 years, it is in the public domain. Amazon offers a Kindle version for a dollar. Also iTunes has an audiobook for 99 cents--- the story as written is ideal for that format.

 

[Nelson Au]

Yes, I saw the .99 cent book at iTunes as well and it’s a reasonable amount. And I looked at some of the text on the PDF copies online and the sample on iTunes and the text appears to be the same on the two paragraphs I checked.

I was never one for audio books but it might be fun to listen to!

 

[Nelson Au]

Suspicion
1941
99 minutes B&W 1.37:1
Cast:
Cary Grant - Johnnie Aysgarth
Joan Fontaine - Lina McLaidlaw Aysgarth
Cedric Hardwicke - General McLaidlaw
Nigel Bruce - Gordon Cochrane "Beaky" Thwaite
Dame May Whitty - Mrs Martha McLaidlaw
Isabel Jeans - Mrs Newsham
Heather Angel - Ethel - Maid
Auriol Lee - Isobel Sedbusk
Reginald Sheffield - Reggie Wetherby
Leo G. Carroll - Captain George Melbeck
Billy Bevan - Ticket Taker
Based on the novel: Before the Fact by Anthony Berkeley
Written by: Samson Raphaelson, Joan Harrison, Alma Reville
Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock
Production Studio: RKO Radio Pictures.

Viewed 6/1/19

Warner Archive Collection Blu Ray, 2016

Synopsis

Lina McLaidlaw (Joan Fontaine) is a shy young woman whose parents feel she has become a spinster. She meets a handsome obnoxious man on a train ride who who turns out to be Johnnie Aysgarth (Cary Grant). He immediately makes an impression by having to borrow money from Lina to pay for the first class section when the conductor tells Johnnie his ticket is actually a third class ticket. Lina quickly realizes that Johnnie is actually a notable society personality who often is photographed with the rich and famous.

Soon after, Johnnie realizes that Lina is from a wealthy family and charms her and sweeps her off her feet and they marry despite objections from her father. Johnnie quickly sets them up in a lavish house while Lina questions him on how they can afford all this and convinces him to take a job. However she slowly learns that Johnnie has been lying and keeping secrets. She discovers also that he’s been gambling a lot. Ultimately he runs into trouble and has to find a way to repay a large gambling debt. Slowly Lina begins to fear for her life.

Impressions

This film is back to form for Hitchcock as a psychological study. Similarly in-line with Rebecca and Joan Fontaine again in the role of the lonely and dowdy spinster whose swept off her feet by a handsome stranger with a secret life she ultimately uncovers.

This is actually the second time I’ve seen this film. I watched it the first time last year or year before while trying to see all the Cary Grant titles on the Warner Archive DVD before it was reissued on Blu Ray by the Warner Archive. So I didn’t have a fresh recollection on the ending.

As when I first saw it, I was struck with Cary Grant portraying a shady character in his first Hitchcock film. I guess for him, his later screen persona hadn’t been as long established so I wondered if this was considered against what he’d be typed as, a leading man whose an upstanding character in the comedies he’s been in. But looking back at the titles I have seen of his films, he’s been a gambler in Mr. Lucky whose out for himself, but turns out to at least have some positive values once he falls in love. Before that he was pretty awful cad in Madame Butterfly. Similarly before that he was a shifty character in Blonde Venus, though he wasn’t the lead in either of those films. As Johnnie, his character similarly is out for himself as a man who lives by borrowed money, gambling and creating a persona of a wealthy society man and eligible bachelor. In fact he’s a con man whose not cut out for a regular job and settling down.

The film leads to a very suspenseful sequence and ends with a twist I didn’t exactly see coming. The ending I read is not what Hitchcock wanted to do. But it’s a satisfying ending I thought. And this comes back to what I was saying earlier as that I’ve always thought of Cary Grant’s film characters as not always ideal positive characters, but at least he’s not going to cross a line. And that’s an interesting realization after taking a bit of a break from the Grant titles. I think of the more positive characters he’s played in the comedies he’s done then the negative ones. He’s also played a lot of shady characters from the 1930’s and 1940’s but at least had a heart. Spoiler: And without spoiling the ending of Suspicion, the studio could not allow his character to cross a line.

I thought Fontaine was again great as Lina as we can see her character go from naive and closed off to suddenly come out of her shell once she realizes that Johnnie is interested in her and romances her. That selfless love she has for Johnnie is constantly put to the test as she learns of more and more little lies and secrets. Eventually she discovers the partial bits of evidence to think that Johnnie wants to kill her for her money that it drives her to almost insanity and then the surprise ending. I thought Fontaine’s character in Rebecca was more interesting as she makes a change from being psychologically attacked to overcoming Mrs. Danvers and can engage with Maxim on an even level. Lina is constantly being put to a test with Johnnie’s actions, it wasn’t until the end that her character turns when she learns the full truth and she can meet Johnnie head on at an even level.

Finally, it seems we are seeing in each of the Hitchcock films a single iconic image that’s very much what you think of for that film. This film has the glowing glass of milk.

And by the way, I have not been actively looking for the Hitchcock cameos. I've seen a lot of them, but I've been more engrossed with the story so I often don't see them and I think I saw it here as Lina is walking by some shops along a street. Though I wasn't paying full attention for it.

 

[Nelson Au]

Saboteur
1942
109 minutes B&W 1.37:1
Cast:
Robert Cummings - Barry Kane
Priscilla Lane - Patricia "Pat" Martin
Otto Kruger - Charles Tobin
Alan Baxter - Freeman
Clem Bevans - Neilson
Norman Lloyd - Frank Fry
Alma Kruger - Mrs. Sutton
Vaughan Glaser - Uncle Phillip Martin (as Vaughan Glazer)
Dorothy Peterson - Mrs. Mason
Ian Wolfe - Robert
Frances Carson - Society Woman
Murray Alper - Truck Driver
Kathryn Adams - Young Mother
Pedro de Cordoba - Bones - Circus Troupe
Billy Curtis - Major / Midget - Circus Troupe
Marie LeDeaux - Titania the Fat Woman - Circus Troupe (as Matie Ke Deaux)
Anita Sharp-Bolster - Esmeralda - Circus Troupe (as Anita Bloster)
Jean Romer - Siamese Twins (as Jeanne Romer)
Laura Mason - Siamese Twins (as Lynn Romer)
Written by- Peter Viertel, Joan Harrison, Dorothy Parker
Directed by - Alfred Hitchcock
Production Studio - Universal
Viewed 6/8/19

Alfred Hitchcock The Masterpiece Collection Blu Ray box set, Universal, 2012

Synopsis

Barry Kane is an aircraft factory worker who is employed at the Stewart Aircraft Works factory in California. After one of his shifts, a fire breaks out and Barry is accused of sabotaging the plant. And also for the death of one of his friends who tried to put the fire out. When the authorities try to arrest him, he sets off on a chase to find a man who was at the factory the night of the fire. He believes he is the real saboteur.

Impressions

This is only the second time I’ve seen this film. I thought it was a good thriller with some fun sequences as Barry tries to piece together the conspiracy and find the enemy spies. Obviously this film was made right after the start of WW2, so the sabotage was seen as hindering the war effort

While on the run, I thought the scene when Barry finds shelter in the home of the blind man as an homage to Bride of Frankenstein. Later on the man’s daughter comes to visit and she discovers Barry is the man on the run and against her best judgment, helps him at her father’s urging. Of course this leads to some fun give and take as Barry eventually wins her over to his side and they both are on the run to find the real saboteur.

I’d seen stills and a clip of a sequence on the Statue of Liberty. It was cool to finally see what that was all about. This sequence made me think of North By Northwest. Saboteur feels like an early version of that later Cary Grant film. The climax shared by both films is the capture of the bad guys on a national monument. The way the sequence is filmed on Saboteur, it does really capture a sense of the dizzying height on the torch.

Looking back at Sabotage, the film Hitchcock made in England, there is an interesting difference in mood. Sabotage was dark and moody and had a real downer ending. Saboteur starts off similarly dark, but turns into a lighter romp as Barry tries to clear himself.

My main exposure to Robert Cummings, who plays Barry, is his later TV comedy work. So I hadn’t seen him do a drama. Priscilla Lane I’d seen earlier in Arsenic and Old Lace. It was very interesting to see a young Norman Lloyd as I mainly knew him from St. Elsewhere. Plus an appearance on Star Trek TNG, that’s a pretty long career! again its fun to see Ian Wolf in another appearance.

Lastly, it was interesting to see several films now where Selznick loans Hitchcock out to other studios.

 

[benbess]

I feel very mixed about Suspicion, because the ending doesn't really seem to flow from what came before.

But I really like Saboteur a lot.

 

[TravisR]

It was very interesting to see a young Norman Lloyd as I mainly knew him from St. Elsewhere. Plus an appearance on Star Trek TNG, that’s a pretty long career!

He was in a movie (This Is 40) a few years when he was 99 or 100 years old. May we all be as lucky as Norman.

 

[Nelson Au]

Wow, I looked up Norman. He’s 104.

 

[Nelson Au]

Ben, I can see you’re mixed reaction to the ending of Suspicion. I sort of wished I didn’t know what Hitchcock really wanted to do with the ending.

 

[Cineman]

Ben, I can see you’re mixed reaction to the ending of Suspicion. I sort of wished I didn’t know what Hitchcock really wanted to do with the ending.

I have always felt Suspicion ends the way Hitchcock preferred regardless of what he said in an interview. It is an entertaining anecdote to relate in an interview, something to talk about and consider. But, imo, that "other" ending would have made nonsense of the way Hitchcock directed that and almost every other movie. Our heroine, the character whose subjective POV we are directed to share throughout the movie, is supposed to have been fooled (presumably along with us) and the relationship tainted by her misplaced "suspicion", looking for and imposing the concept of "M.U.R.D.E.R" and a "M.U.R.D.E.R.E.R" where there is none to be found. For her to have been proven right by her brilliant interpretation of one highly inconclusive clue after another would have been weirdly unHitchcockian. Maybe fine for one of his 30 minute tv show stories. Let's say "cute" or "clever", but not worthy of the larger format of a feature film.

There was another feature film that provided the kind of ending some critics of Suspicion's ending wish it had; Jagged Edge (1985). IMO, when the big "reveal" came at the end of that movie, I felt like I'd just wasted a couple of hours wondering if he was or wasn't the killer and that it was kind of dumb, too simplistic and thematically thin, for it turn out that, sure enough, he was, just as every clue and piece of evidence laboriously laid out for the previous 110 minutes was telling us he was. Ho hum.

For my money, the implications in Hitchcock's Suspicion are far superior in terms of complex characters and Hitchcockian themes because of the ending that exists rather than the ending Hitchcock mused over and supposedly considered seriously enough to shoot. If given a green light by the studio to go either way, I still believe he would have chosen the ending that exists or else he would have had have to go back and reshoot a ton of other scenes that fed into that ending on a much higher and more complex level.

Something similar to if Max had said to his wife at the end of Rebecca, "Yes, darling, you were right all along. I loved Rebecca more than anything in life and you will never hold a candle to her. Sorry." WTF? Sure, if Hitchcock had gotten past Selznick to shoot such a scene, that would have made for a hell of an anecdote to tell in an interview. But it would have made nonsense and for a weird unHitchcocian waste of time for his every directorial effort in the movie up to that scene. Was Hitchcock really just pounding the "obvious" into our heads over and over again with almost every scene leading up to that hypothetical alternate ending? Really? Nothing more complex or interesting than that going on here?

I am not sure such a simplistic approach and conclusion exists in any other Hitchcock movie. Particularly with regard to the romantic relationship in the movie, they are so often about a main character (and us) getting it wrong all along, our expectations overturned and shown how we should not misjudge based solely on appearances or misled by a weakness in our and the character's psyche.

 

[Matt Hough]

I've always thought Saboteur was underrated. I've loved it from the first time I saw it, and I continue to enjoy it each time it comes my way.

During my recent internet interruption, Shadow of a Doubt on disc was one of the movies I watched with no access to streaming. If the interruption had gone on any longer, Saboteur would have been the next Hitchcock I chose to watch.

 

[benbess]

My ratings for the first six films Hitchcock did in America....

Rebecca: A+
Foreign Correspondent: B+
Mr. and Mrs. Smith: D
Suspicion: C+
Saboteur: A-
Shadow of a Doubt: A+

 

[Nelson Au]

Great post, Cineman. I think, based on the readings I’ve done, which isn’t a lot, that Hitchcock might have initially thought about these alternative endings, but during the writing process, the ending we see must have been the ending they worked on. Which goes to your point that Hitchcock has filmed all those scenes leading to the end, with the ending already in mind.

I liked Suspicion as the story moves along, we see more and more of Johnny’s lies and his secrets that he’s shown to be up to something, we just haven’t seen the whole picture yet to figure out what he’s up to.

It’s interesting that as I go through the films like this in chronological order, I’m seeing each film develop, intentionally or not, more these iconic images that become so identified with a film. The shot of the glowing milk in Suspicion, the shot looking down from the Statue of Liberty arm and flame from Saboteur. That’s a dizzying shot!

 

[Cineman]

Thanks, Nelson. I think the Scrabble game scene in Suspicion is a key to what is and has been going on in the movie. She sees some random letters on the table, idly selects the ones that happen to fit her conflicting mindset about Johnny; that she can't believe such a handsome, charming, popular and fun man would be interested in or could love a nervous kitten like herself, so there must be something amiss here. Then she is the one who puts together a supposedly indicting, accusing finger at him with her choice of carefully selected (edited?) letters to fit that mindset.

Of course, there is no way such a thing offers a real clue or evidence of murderous intent. But in her mind it does. And it was her mind that made it happen. In subtext, Hitchcock is essentially saying, "If this unhealthy "suspicion" keeps up, it will not only destroy this marriage but someone might get killed. It is that poisonous." And, as it turns out in the end, someone almost does get killed at the very moment of the marriage's near total destruction. So much of Hitchcock's rather obvious directorial decisions throughout the movie are based on leading us precisely to that conclusion. Perhaps mostly in hindsight. To have ended it with her suspicions being proven right all along would have meant those Scrabble letters were as possessed by the devil trying to tell her something as Ouija Boards are in other films, the kind of films Hitchcock would never be interested in developing.

However, I see where the water does get muddied a bit where there is an obvious stand-in/photo double for Cary Grant driving the car in the last shot of the movie. Maybe Grant was unavailable for that shot or there was some other reason he could not be present for it. But it makes the ending look like something tacked on long after principal photography was over. So that can lend credence to the idea that it was not an ending Hitchcock thought he was going to use until later. Still, that doesn't mean he didn't intend for it to end with Johnny not being what she suspected, only that he had not planned to use that shot as the one to end it that way.

 

[Nelson Au]

Shadow of a Doubt
1943
108 minutes B&W 1.37:1
Cast:
Teresa Wright - Young Charlie
Joseph Cotten - Uncle Charlie
Macdonald Carey - Detective Jack Graham
Henry Travers - Joseph Newton
Patricia Collinge - Emma Newton
Hume Cronyn - Herbie Hawkins
Wallace Ford - Detective Fred Saunders
Edna May Wonacott - Ann Newton
Charles Bates - Roger Newton
Irving Bacon - Station master
Clarence Muse - Pullman porter
Janet Shaw - Louise
Estelle Jewell - Catherine
Original Story by-Gordon McDonell
Written by - Thornton Wilder, Sally Benson, Alma Reville
Directed by - Alfred Hitchcock
Production Studio- Skirball Productions and Universal Pictures
Viewed 6/15/19

Alfred Hitchcock The Masterpiece Collection Blu Ray box set, Universal, 2012

Synopsis

Little Charlie Newton lives in the quiet town of Santa Rosa in Northern California. She feels restless and realizes what she and her family needs is a visit from her Uncle Charlie to shake things up. Simultaneously, Uncle Charlie decides to also come to visit the family for a short stay. However, Uncle Charlie has a secret that he’s trying to keep from the family, especially Little Charlie.

Impressions

Santa Rose,California,.....from Uncle Charlie.

This is only the second time I’ve seen Shadow of a Doubt. I’d seen it several years ago. What is interesting is that I had not seen Suspicion yet at the time. So upon this viewing so fresh after seeing Suspicion, Shadow of a Doubt is most definitely another look at the premise, except this time, there was no doubt.

The heroine, Little Charlie is named after Uncle Charlie and she feels a close connection with Uncle Charlie. You could say she idolizes him. So it is a shock as her belief in Uncle Charlie is tested upon initially discovering one of Uncle Charlie’s secrets.

On top of this, a couple of detectives have followed Charlie to the Newton home posing as representatives who are doing surveys of the typical American family for a magazine. Uncle Charlie is very opposed to be a part of this as he doesn’t want his photo taken. A romantic interest develops between Jack, one of the detectives, and Little Charlie who asks Charlie out for a date. At the end of the date, Little Charlie figures out that Jack is a detective and he comes out with the truth that he is investigating Uncle Charlie as a suspect for the Merry Widow killer.

This is terrible news for Little Charlie and its upturns her world. As she begins to figure out that Uncle Charlie just might be a killer, she starts to act out against him. What surprised me is the story then turns into a game of wits between Uncle Charlie and Little Charlie. The situation shifts as Little Charlie now is openly aware of Uncle Charlie yet has not let anyone know what she knows. So they each do what they feel they have to do.

It’s interesting as I had not noticed before that this film starts by introducing us to the main two lead characters by showing their surroundings and both are lying in bed and seemingly pondering their next steps. As the dialogue states, Uncle Charlie feels that he and Little Charlie are two of a kind, this was a cool visual to further make that point. So it’s interesting as they both go after each other, Little Charlie trying to scare Uncle Charlie to leave while Uncle Charlie tries to hurt Little Charlie.

I really liked this film. There again is a character with a secret that he must hide from others. And the innocent character accidentally discovers something amiss and seeks out the truth.

It’s ending was well done and has a satisfying resolution. There is no ambiguity. This is a really good thriller that starts off feeling very noir and then shifting to thriller and suspense.

Joseph Cotton is really good here as the charming and ruthless Uncle Charlie. He really oozes sense of sliminess and danger covered up by his charm. Teresa Wright is great as Little Charlie. She’s so enthusiastic to see Uncle Charlie and will do anything for him until she begins to learn the truth. I have not seen The Best Year’s of Our Lives in a long time. So I’ll have to see it again and check out her performance. Macdonald Carey was a surprise as I know his later work mainly from one episode of The Outer Limits and his long tenure on the daytime soap, Days of Our Lives. He’s in the early years of his career. It’s also interesting to see how Hitchcock likes to maintain a stable of players he reuses. In this film, we see Hume Cronin again.

The stories I read about this film is that it is Hitchcock’s first true American film. He really went to Santa Rosa to film it and the story takes place entirely in America.

 

[Matt Hough]

It's a credit to Little Charlie that even after Uncle Charlie makes several attempts on her life, she doesn't unmask him before the world in trying to save her mother from heartbreak.

 

[benbess]

Spoto's book The Art of Hitchcock has good analysis of the many formal pairings and doubles integrated into Shadow of a Doubt.

 

[Nelson Au]

Matt, that’s true about Young Charlie looking after her mother’s feelings. And I was thinking that the ending had a similar kind to Sabotage where the cop and girl only know the truth.

Ben, I was thinking about the pairings in Shadow of a Doubt after seeing your post. Let see:

Young Charlie and Uncle Charlie
Joseph and Herbie thinking of ways to murder the other.
The detectives, Jack and Fred
Young Charlie’s two girlfriends?

Not sure if there are more.

 

[Nelson Au]

Lifeboat
1944
109 minutes B&W 1.37:1
Cast:
Tallulah Bankhead - Constance "Connie" Porter
William Bendix - Gus Smith
Walter Slezak - Willy
Mary Anderson - Alice MacKenzie
John Hodiak - John Kovac
Henry Hull - Charles D "Ritt" Rittenhouse
Heather Angel - Mrs Higgins
Hume Cronyn - Stanley Garrett
Canada Lee - George "Joe" Spencer
William Yetter Junior - German
Original Story by - John Steinbeck
Written by - Ben Hecht, Jo Swerling
Directed by - Alfred Hitchcock
Production Studio - 20th Century Fox
Viewed 6/30/19

-20th Century Fox Special Edition DVD, 2005
-MGM Alfred Hitchcock Premiere Collection 8 Master Works, 2008 DVD Box Set
-Hollywood Gold Series Blu Ray, 2013 (import from Australia by Shock Entertainment, Region B apparently is region Free as it played fine on my Region A Oppo)
-Kino Lorber Blu Ray, 2017

Synopsis

During World War 2, a British ship in the Atlantic is involved with a German U-boat resulting in the sinking of both vessels. Survivors from the ship are pulled from the water and gather in one lifeboat. Constance Porter is the first survivor who was actually loaded onto the lifeboat by her porter before the ship sank. She’s an international journalist. Six other survivors come across the lifeboat who are picked up, these include a sailor, the radio operator, a nurse, a rich businessman, an engineer and the steward. Finally, they come across another survivor and once they bring him aboard, they discover he’s a German from the U-boat.

Impressions

I think this is the 4th time I’ve seen this film, the last time was about 2 years ago. Each time I viewed this film, the span of time was enough that I did not remember a significant sequence towards the end. The film explored each character and their points of view, their problems and who they are and what they became before the ship wreck. It became clear early on that Kovac was the leader type of the group. There was even a romance that brewed between Kovac and Constance and later between Stanley the radio operator and Alice, the nurse. As time went on, the German, Willi took over as he was able to convince the survivors which way was the right course to take to get to Bermuda. But Willi was secretly hiding a compass was really trying to get back to Europe.

Willi also reveals he was a surgeon before the war and offered to help Gus who has a serious leg injury that becomes infected badly and needs to be amputated. After some serious consideration, they allow Willi to do the surgery.

The weather, and a storm cause the boat’s supplies to become lost and the story then follows their efforts to survive without water and food. All the while, Willi seems to have no issue with energy for rowing the boat. Because he is hiding a bottle of water.

Upon this viewing it, I could see Hitchcock was also exploring the idea of a mob mentality. The group shifted their loyalties and positions later upon learning the truth of what becomes of one of the survivors. This leads the group to realize that they are perfectly capable of surviving on their own without Willi seemingly in command. I was reading there was considerable controversy as the film seemed to portray the German character in a better light then the American and British characters who were seen as subservient. But Hitchcock countered that this is an allegory to the Allies powers cooperating to overcome the Axis powers.

I didn’t quite understand the John Steinbeck connection. From what I can see, Steinbeck had a short story that Hitchcock wanted to adapt for the film. But I thought I also saw that it was a story Steinbeck had proposed to Hitchcock after Hitchcock asked Steinbeck to pitch a story.

This was an interesting film that also explored the concept of a confined set as cinema. The film takes place primarily on the lifeboat. This would continue in Rope, Rear Window and Dial M.

As for the cast, this is the first film I’d seen Bankhead in. I thought she was really good in it. She really had a gutsy character to play. She spoke so elegantly I thought she was British, but I realize she’s American. And off screen, she was quite a flamboyant character. Again Hume Cronyn appears in a different role from Shadow of a Doubt. With a British accent, that wasn’t too bad. Not sure yet if the other actors appear in later Hitchcock films. Though I am familiar with Bendix in other films. Though I’ve not seen them.

The Hitchcockian elements at first were not clear to me. There wasn’t really a MacGuffin. The main element I can see is Willi was the character with the dirty secret that the others discover. There is a murder. Was Connie the cool blonde? Perhaps.

By the way, I thought Hitchcock was clever in how he did his cameo by appearing in a newspaper print add for a weight loss drug!

This is the first time I’ve seen this film on the new Kino Blu Ray. Prior to knowing that a new Kino release was coming, I went to some effort to find a blu ray copy from Australia! It is the Hollywood Gold Series from Shock Entertainment. In 2005, I had purchased the 20th Century Fox DVD release. I recall the releases prior to the Kino disc were not the best sources. The beginning of the film was not pristine but the film got better after that. The Kino release improves upon those two earlier releases from my memory as I didn’t do an A-B comparison.