That Hitchcockian touch

Registered User

01-02-02

Yep Holden that's the artwork i'm talking about I love it, like I said but a lot of people go off the front of boxes to get what there renting at the store and when i'm there telling someone to rent it they always pick it up look at it and say i'll think about it.

The only thing that I can think of is that it's the box that turns them off cause it's not like those glossy type style boxes that they make today with all those phrases on them "The movie hit of the year" or "this years blockbuster" it's just got really cool artwork on the front it's very simple.

here's the box that i'm talkin about.

Attachments

Click image for larger version

Name: 1.jpg
Views: 146
Size: 52.2 KB
ID: 36

Yoda

Administrator

01-02-02

You two crack me up. Personally I think such movies will open up the floodgates of jealousy and self-consciousness, potentially...so I don't think I'll be looking for a girl who approves of those kinds of things. That's just me, though.

Back on-topic: I think "What Lies Beneath" is a wonderful movie, and it did feel Hitchcockian to me. As Holden said, it KNEW it was going through all the motions...but that didn't take away from the enjoyment of the film. I was genuinely nervous at several points...they made Claire seem so very vulnerable.

L .B . Jeffries

Registered User

01-02-02

One that I love, that I think holds up to what it set out to be is Roman Polanski's Frantic . The central character played by Ford is some what close to the Jimmy Stewart and Cary Grant that so richly were a part of Hitchcock's films.

I think of this movie as a sort of The Man Who Knew Too Much/Notorious story wise but there is a lot to do with the way certain director's directed and Polanski has a some what different style so the movie takes different turns not always for the best but not always for the worst either.

I think it's one of those movies that got a bit overlooked when it came out and it hasn't really got anything new to add to the genre so I think it will stay pretty low key.

It's one of the DVD's I would like to see have a bit more to it instead of the bare bones one they have right now but that's only a hope.

have any of you guys seen this great little movie??

spudracer

I ain't gettin' in no fryer!

01-02-02

Just to save you the suspiscion of me maybe seeing it. I haven't seen it.

As a matter of fact, watched The Gift last night because you guys seem to want to compare it to What Lies Beneath. Personally, I liked What Lies Beneath better. The Gift made me glad I wasn't a southerner.

__________________
"I was walking down the street with my friend and he said, "I hear music", as if there is any other way you can take it in. You're not special, that's how I receive it too. I tried to taste it but it did not work." - Mitch Hedberg

Holden Pike

One Ornery Sumbitch

01-02-02

Frantic is a good one. It's not great, and I always expect more from Polanski, but it's solid. It didn't make much money when released in '88, at least not in America, and I would assume that's in large part due to Harrison Ford's main fanbase wanting more action and less introspection. Ploanski dared at that point to put Ford into a thriller without even one explosion. But they didn't go to see him in BladeRunner or The Mosquito Coast either, and I think those are two of the very best films of the decade.

Unfortunately Frantic has never been released letterboxed on video in North America, not on the cheap-o DVD or the old LD. I don't really care too much about extras, but the bare minimum I insist upon is the correct aspect ratio. Too bad.

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

Steve

Hulk Hands

01-02-02

Originally posted by TWTCommish
Back on-topic: I think "What Lies Beneath" is a wonderful movie, and it did feel Hitchcockian to me.

Ok, will someone explain to me what the first half of that movie had to do with the second?

Yoda

Administrator

01-02-02

Originally posted by Steve
Ok, will someone explain to me what the first half of that movie had to do with the second?

I can't really answer that, because I have no idea what problems you see with it. I'd say the burden of proof lies with you.

What bugged you about it? What inconsistencies did you see?

Steve

Hulk Hands

01-02-02

My memory of this movie is sorta hazy, I haven't seen it since I watched in the theater, but -

View Spoilers

WARNING: "What Lies Beneath" spoilers below

The entire first half of the movie seemed to be about Michelle Pfeiffer watching the neighbors, thinking the guy was a criminal...and then that goes absolutely nowhere, and we're thrown into that whole Harrison Ford wife-murdered thing. I didn't get it (and I thought it ripped off Rear Window to boot). What do the neighbors have to do with the ghost?

Yoda

Administrator

01-02-02

Here's a thread on the spoilers tag (it's easy, I promise):
http://www.movieforums.net/showthrea...&threadid=1495

Anyway, here's what I'd say in reply:

View Spoilers

WARNING: "What Lies Beneath" spoilers below

First off, the thing with the neighbors was misdirection. She's paranoid about the whole thing...it makes it that much more painful for us when someone tells her to relax, or to stop acting so paranoid, because we all know that, one way or another, she'll be revealed as having a good reason to be paranoid.

And yeah, it was a bit like "Rear Window" in a way: it's an homage of sorts if you ask me. It's definitely reminiscent of that, though...which is why It's been mentioned in this thread.

Holden Pike

One Ornery Sumbitch

01-02-02

View Spoilers

WARNING: "What Lies Beneath" spoilers below

Yes, the stuff with the neighbor is obviously and intentionally echoing Rear Window. Whether you want to call it homage or rip-off depends on how much credit you want to give the filmmakers. I think it's clearly an homage myself.

That whole plot strand is a classic red herring. To add to what Commish said, if you hadn't seen the trailer or in some other way had the basics of the plot ruined for you before hand, this would help to distract you, the audience, from the true root cause of the brewing ghost story angle.

In the context of the movie's narrative, this red herring sidetrack isn't without purpose. That building paranoia that turns out to be innocent clouds the Michelle Pfeiffer character from seeing what is REALLY happening sooner than she does. While the evidence, real and supernatural, seems to be weighing toward her husband being involved with the girl's disappearance, she keeps convincing herself that it can't be. Of course this is chiefly because this is the man she married and she thinks she knows him (to reinforce that feeling for the audience, he's played by Harrison Ford, and we know Harrison Ford is always the good guy), but also because she has already worked herself up into being absolutely sure the neighbor had killed his wife, and that turned out to be a complete misunderstanding.

Last edited by Holden Pike; 01-04-24 at 11:47 AM.

L .B . Jeffries

Registered User

01-02-02

Jennifer 8

Andy Garcia has always been the type of actor I love in some roles and in other he just doesn't do it for me, I just coundn't get enough of the guy in this one. I'm not going to give anything away cause it's such a well put together film.

One of the instresting things I found out later about the film was that the Director was responsible for one of the great comedies in my opinion in Withnail and I (1987). what makes that so intresting is that they are completely different movies and both are made very well. Bruce Robinson is also an outstanding writer he's penned screenplays for such movies as (Killing Fields, The (1984),Fat Man and Little Boy (1989) and In Dreams (1998))

Holden Pike

One Ornery Sumbitch

01-02-02

Jennifer 8 (1992) isn't bad, but between it and the similar Blink (1994), I'll take the latter. For the ultimate suspense thriller with a blind female protagonist, it's still gotta be the classic Wait Until Dark (1967) with Audrey Hepburn, Alan Arkin and Richard Crenna, which I'd define as much more clearly Hitchcockian than Blink or Jennifer 8. And as for a slick serial killer procedural minus the blind chick angle, compared to Fincher's SE7EN (1995), this movie is very minor. Jennifer 8 is good enough (helped considerably by ol' Connie Hall's cinematography), but I like those other three movies I mentioned much more.

I like Bruce Robinson's work, even though he's more or less retired (as a director anyway). But I consider Jennifer 8 a sidetrack execrsise in style and a Hollywood experiment for him, and not much else. Both Withnail & I and How To Get Ahead in Advertising are brilliant and unique, while Jennifer 8 is just another movie.

As far as what it owes to a Hitchcock kind of thriller, I don't think there's much there. Jennifer 8 is worth tracking down if you like the genre and haven't seen it before, but I don't think it's terribly special.

L .B . Jeffries

Registered User

01-02-02

Robert Benton's Still of the Night

The whole movie just screams Hitchcock for me at least and I love it. Nestor's Cinematography is absolutly incredible his lighting perfectly sets the mood of the movie to a tee.

I also think another added bonus to the film is it's script it's extremely well crafted and I'd say Benton is one of the best writer/director's from the 80's

and when I began this thread Holden you said something about how much you loved Roy well I love the guy too so while i'm on the subject of Roy I like to mention another great movie that he was in 52 Pick-up . while not close to some of the stuff John Frankenhiemer and Roy have done still a great entre into the thriller genre.

Holden Pike

One Ornery Sumbitch

01-02-02

Yeah I should have listed Still of the Night with some of the other Hitchcock homages. While it has some strong elements, they never come together for me. I admire Robert Benton very much, as both a screenwriter and a director, but I don't think this one is among his stronger works. I'd mix it in with Nadine and Billy Bathgate, projects of his with potential that never payed-off.

I like Frankenheimer's 52 Pick-Up considerably more, though it's still lacking something. Compared to the latter Elmore Leonard adaptations that finally worked, specifically Get Shorty and Out of Sight (and to a lesser extent Jackie Brown and Touch), it's easy to see how this film version misses some of the tone and style of the man's writing - even though Leonard actually worked on the 52 Pick-Up script himself. The world of Elmore Leonard is far too pulpy and underworldish to be considered Hitchcockian, even with the sometimes elaborate plotting and persecuted protagonists.

But besides all that, the film version of 52 Pick-Up always had one fatal flaw for me: why would anyone married to great piece of @ss like Ann-Margret have to go outside the marriage for sexual excitement?

Last edited by Holden Pike; 01-04-24 at 11:49 AM.

L .B . Jeffries

Registered User

01-03-02

I didn't say 52 Pick-Up was hitchcockian I just thought I'd mention it cause I was on the subject of Roy and yes I don't get it if he had a nice piece of tale swinging around why need some one else.

I also think that Still of the Night is better than Nadine but I haven't seen Billy Bathgate so I would be able to say on that one.

Nestor has always been one of the realistic lighting cinematographer just listen to the guy on Visions of Light and you know this guy was passionate about really light and how to show it throught the canon. so to me Still of the Night is a journey of magic were the cameraman makes all the differance for me.

Holden Pike

One Ornery Sumbitch

01-03-02

Most movies are better than Nadine.

I simply meant the level of disappointment for me was the same, in regards to what Benton is capable of vs. what he achieved with those projects. Even with Roy Scheider and the nice photography by Almendros, it's a miss of a movie for me. His Twilight is a movie I love and think was totally misunderstood and neglected (may as well have made it a third Harper installment), but Still of the Night doesn't work for me as a complete package.

L .B . Jeffries