Comments on Alfred Hitchcock Geek: Through the Looking Glass Darkly: Hitchcock's Purs...

Joel--the second best piece of writing, lol. Well ...

2011-07-12T15:53:12.343-07:00

Joel--the second best piece of writing, lol. Well contend though that Welles and Hitchcock were both cinematic purists, just coming at it from different visual and visual-structural strengths. It's fait accompli that Hitchcock was the artist who had a more pop sensibility about audience limits.

Hey Jeff- Thanks so much! Interesting connectio...

2011-07-08T15:10:55.755-07:00

Hey Jeff-

Thanks so much! Interesting connections. I'd FAMILY PLOT has so much more to offer than first glance reveals, eh?

Hi Andre - Thanks for your thoughtful and challe...

2011-07-08T15:02:48.633-07:00

Hi Andre -

Thanks for your thoughtful and challenging reply! You might have a point regarding TOUCH OF EVIL. I had been thinking of Welles' long takes that utilize an extreme depth of field to portray two sets of acions in counterpoint, as at the beginning of CITIZEN KANE. I was also thinking of Bazin's remarks, which pointed to Welles' long takes as a "democratic" approach to film making that gives the viewer a choice or a range of possible film experiences, while, as you correctly note, both Hitch's long takes and his montage style have a certain 'tyranny of vision.' (My words, his sentiment.)

For me, the difference is this: when I watch Welles, I feel like an astounded observer. When I watch Hitch, I feel like I'm present with the actors, interacting with them and with the director.

Of course, the long take was only one tool in Hitch's "pure film" bag of tricks. He spoke of PSYCHO (in general, but the shower scene in particular) as being a demonstration of pure film. In that case, montage created an experience inside the viewer's head that is only approximately analogous to the actual succession of images.

You made an interesting point here: "The notion of pure cinema- that is the organization of characters, mise-en-scene and camera moves in one contigious shot is an attempt to capture the uninterrupted "rhythm" of life- the timing of things within one uninterrupted shot." I think Hitch saw "pure film" as something beyond that, namely that he wanted to engage his audiences in a deeper sense psychologically. To 'arouse them with pure film,' perhaps to 'wake them with beneficial shocks as from a nightmare.' (Hitch's words, more or less.)

This is a fascinating discussion. There are, it seems, as many interpretations of Hitchcock's conception of pure film as there are Hitchcock scholars.

As usual an interesting post. I think it terms of ...

2011-07-08T13:41:43.595-07:00

As usual an interesting post. I think it terms of pure cinema you might have added The Birds since in terms of pure cinema it represents IMO the Eye of God, the visual sense so important to Hitch making his golden period run from Rear Window through The Birds. Also, in terms of pure direction I would point to Vertigo where Stewart like a director who remakes his actors (the famous cattle quote of Hitchcock) entirely remakes Novak into his fantasy figure. Elster also does this earlier in the film.

North by Northwest is an almost pure McGuffin adventure whose tracks on the 20th Century Ltd. were laid in Strangers on a Train his minor masterpiece just prior to the Golden period.Where he shows how motivations and plot lines can be changed at some switching station under the director's control.

Also, the relationship of Marnie to Psycho, where as I believe you pointed out on this blog half of the shock value comes from the score which registers emotion, Marnie with its splotch of red which elicits her hysteria (due to her murder of her prostitute mother's client) similarly represents human emotion boiled down to its elementary blood red representation (and Hitch's favorite vehicle, murder).

I liked your tracing Hitchcock's inspiration to Meliere and the Through the Glass Darkly reference that conjures up images of Ingmar Bergman with his film Through a Glass Darkly and Alice's Through the Looking Glass. The former reflecting the biblical idea of viewing reality from both sides of the mirror of life and death. Bergman an agnostic minister's son caught up like Hitchcock the (questioning) Catholic concerned with the existence of a life after death--the other side of the Darkened Glass.

Hitch's last film Family Plot with its connection to a medium questions whether in representing a pure art of film we can capture a glimpse of the other side or whether like the motivations of The Birds, God's purpose in the world, if he exists, must remain a mystery. Although Hitch provides the clues, like a murder mystery, in all his attempts at pure film art, particularly in his golden period with the tracks of exploring it and the essence of summarizing it in the pictures just prior to and subsequent to his golden period, Strangers on a Train and Marniem IMO.

Although I generally agree with much of what has b...

2011-07-08T12:50:49.398-07:00

Although I generally agree with much of what has been said here I have to come to the defense of Orson Welles and your comment that Orson Welles used the "long take" shot not for," purely cinematic purposes." The famous long take that opens Welles' TOUCH OF EVIL cannot be described as merely a theatrical effect. In fact, the opening long take of TOUCH OF EVIL (in both its restored and theatrical release versions) is a prime example of pure cinema. The camera weaves its way through a set to capture the point of time marked by an assassin's timebomb. Not to mention the other two "long takes" in the lovebirds apartment within the same film. If montage and editing organizes filmed elements in such a way as to emphasis details that would not have otherwise been noticed then pure cinema is just another means of hiding what has been organized. The notion of pure cinema- that is the organization of characters, mise-en-scene and camera moves in one contigious shot is an attempt to capture the uninterrupted "rhythm" of life- the timing of things within one uninterrupted shot. A comparision of this notion of time and pure cinema could be made between the Russian filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky who also shot in long takes, Michelangelo Antonioni who also used long takes and Hitchcock. Much more needs to be discussed on this fascinating subject.