A Quick Guide to Alfred Hitchcock

 I grew up with classic movies. Sure, Die Hard is a Christmas movie, but that’s right next to The Bishop’s Wife and The Man Who Came to Dinner and Christmas in Connecticut.

So when a friend of mine asked me for the best of Alfred Hitchcock, I was confused. He had only seen Psycho and The Birds. Really? Those are not necessarily his best work. I’m not a fan of either film. And the Daphne Du Maurier story for The Birds is just a touch too dark and unbelievable a conclusion.

It’s time for a quick word on Alfred Hitchcock, who practically invented much of what we associate with modern thrillers, including several camera techniques … but someone else will have to explain those.

Hitchcock directed 68 films in his lifetime. But, some of these are silent films, and I have little patience for those (I got through Metropolis, once). Some of them (like Blackmail, for example) are old, and the print is garbage, with poor audio and visual quality. Some of them are like Marnie (1964): too much psychobabble, no real plot, even if it did feature Sean Connery.

One of the things you will see in these films is that Hitchcock did like his women with a spine. Whether it’s giving our leading lady a rifle or putting her at odds with a whole trainload of people, even the damsels in distress are interesting. Granted, Hitchcock’s wife was his partner in crime for most of his career, so that will do it. You could even see that she was his guiding light, because when she wasn’t involved in a project, the film suffered for it.

The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934):

Just watch the original The Man Who Knew Too Much. I need to specify, because Hitchcock himself remade this later in life. The remake featured Doris Day and Jimmy Stewart, and it’s not the best.

The original 1934 film had Peter Lorre… apparently, he was enough of a draw that they put him on the film poster.

The premise simple: A vacationing couple in Switzerland find themselves embroiled in espionage when they hear the dying words of a spy. To make certain they don’t talk, Peter Lorre and company kidnap their kid.

Watch this if only for the finale. Because the moral of the story is don’t f*** with mother.

The 39 Steps (1935)

This has been remade, repeatedly, by lesser people over the years.

This stars Robert Donat, a brilliant actor who was so good, if he had been healthier, Errol Flynn wouldn’t have had a career: (People wanted Donat to be Robin Hood and Captain Blood, and a few other major characters in Flynn’s CV, but Donat couldn’t pull off the athletic nature of the roles.)

Story: Richard Hannay takes home a beautiful woman in distress. She tells him she’s a spy, and he laughs it off. During the night, an enemy agent slips in and kills her, leaving Hannay holding the bag. In order to stop the smuggling of military secrets, Hannay has to find the spy ring while being hunted by the London police force.

This was a brilliant bit of work by Hitchcock. I tried reading the original novel, which opened with an illuminati-style cabal provoking War Wars. Hitchcock had a lot of work to take an easily dated novel and turn it into something lasting.

The book did not age well, but the movie still holds up.

Secret Agent (1936)

To begin with, Ashenden was dead.

But don’t worry, he got better.

The government has faked the death of a World War I hero to recruit him as a spy.

This may be the youngest you will ever see our hero, John Gielgud. There’s also Peter Lorre (as a good guy … sort of…) and Robert Young. It’s solid. I wouldn’t give it a high priority, but at least give it a shot if you trip over it.

The Lady Vanishes (1938)

Another one that people have tried (and failed) to remake (twice).

Simple premise: A young woman on a train befriends a little old lady. When the young woman takes a nap, upon waking, the little old lady is just gone. Another woman has replaced her. Everyone in the train compartment has no idea what she’s talking about—not the passengers, the staff, no one.

The only person who believes her is some jerk from her last hotel who she’d been feuding with since she met him. Soon, it becomes a matter of two of them against the entire train. Unlike most of Hitchcock’s finales, this ends with a pretty massive gun battle. There’s even a good bit of comedy in this one that few people associate with Hitchcock unless you’re familiar with him.

It helps that this stars Michael Redgrave and a whole host of character actors.

This was based off of a novel by Ethel Lina White, who also wrote the novel The Spiral Staircase was based on (all four times).

Jamaica Inn (1939)

This is going to be an odd one. This is based off of a Daphne DuMaurier novel—she also wrote the original stories for The Birds and Rebecca. This one revolves around a gang of criminals in 1819 who arrange shipwrecks for fun and profit.

This young woman is Maureen O’Hara. Our villain is Charles Laughton. And, if I recall correctly, the sort-of romantic lead was Robert Newton, long before he chewed the scenery as Long John Silver. He may have even been sober for this film.

This was an odd one, largely because Charles Laughton was so clearly crazy, even our damsel in distress realizes it.

This was eminently watchable. But not necessarily his best. I’d definitely recommend seeing it once.

Rebecca, 1940

This is one of a handful of films that I tolerate Laurence Olivier in. Also stars Joan Fontaine.

Fontaine plays a new wife, and her husband has secrets, as well as a creepy housekeeper. But most of all, the entire estate is haunted by the ghost of his dead wife. (Not a literal ghost, it’s not that kind of plot.)

Again, another watchable Hitchcock, but I don’t think it’s worth keeping, unless you’re into that sort of thing. But I’d definitely give it a watch at least once if I were you.

Foreign Correspondent (1940)

This film is pure fantasy. You have to believe that journalists are people. I know, but try to suspend your disbelief.

It’s 1939, and Journalists are up against German spies. This film stops short of being full propaganda. But it has Joel McCrea (start of numerous westerns), George Sanders, Edmund Gwen, Eduardo Ciannelli (Gunga Din), etc.

Again, give this one a watch. I’m still on the bubble with how this one ranks. But it’s good. I watch if every time it’s on television, so I see it at least once a year.

Saboteur (1942)

This is very important: This film is Saboteur. It has no relationship to Sabotage, which is a completely different film, and one I don’t recommend.

Robert Cummings plays Barry Kane, a simple worker at an airplane factory. When he’s framed for murder, he has only one lead: the real saboteur is a man named Fry, played by Norman Lloyd. The film feels almost like a love letter to America as Kane travels from sea to shining sea, trying to hunt down the spy ring behind the attack, before they can strike again. Along the way, he ends up with Priscilla Lane (Arsenic and Old Lace) as a sidekick, in a very strange enemies-to-lovers subplot (And you know that Priscilla Lane has some star power if she’s getting top billing.)

This might be one of the better ones—top ten, if not top five. I have 100% kept this one in my collection. And if you aren’t familiar with the end … well, Hitchcock does like his high places for a reason. And this one ends on top of the Statue of Liberty.

And you can’t neglect to mention some of the cute bits added by Dorothy Parker.

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

Joseph Cotten plays Charlie Oakley, and he’s come home to be with his family! He is especially looking forward to being with his favorite niece, Charlie Newton.

There’s only one little problem: dear uncle Charlie may be a serial killer. The only one who suspects him is his niece.

Another tense thriller, Shadow of a Doubt is littered with character actors from Hume Cronyn to Henry Travers, and other people who make you go “I know the face, but not the name.”

Again, I’m on the bubble with this one. But I still watch this film every time it comes on, so that should tell you something.

Lifeboat (1944)

This is a piece of World War II propaganda with a collection of survivors from a torpedoed merchant ship. Everyone is tired, tense, and mistrustful … especially when they pick up another survivor: one of the crew members of the U-boat that sank their ship.

Give this a watch mostly to see how you can make something that is obviously propaganda, but still quite good. Granted, I have only watched this once, and came away with the sense that it was enjoyable. But I felt no inclination to watch it again.

Hitchcock is apparently good enough that he can make a product from John Steinbeck watchable.

Spellbound (1945)

I’m not certain, but I believe this is where Hitchcock fell in love with psychology. Freud, Jung, yadda yadda. Ingrid Bergman is a psychologist at a hospital. The brand new head of the hospital is Gregory Peck. They start having lunches. They fall in love…

The problem? Peck isn’t who everyone thinks he is. Hell, Gregory Peck isn’t even who he thinks he is.

But if he isn’t the new hospital director, where is the real one?

Despite some strange turns, this was a solid entry in Hitchcock’s body of work. The dream sequences are very esoteric, but the artwork is by Salvatore Dali, so who cares?

And the final sequence is a unique sort of tense, because it’s entirely held at gunpoint, from the gunman’s point of view.

This also stars John Emery, Leo G. Carroll (The Man from UNCLE), Norman Lloyd, and other character actors.

Notorious (1946)

This one is a little dark. Even for Hitchcock

Cary Grant is playing a spy, sent to recruit notoriously loose woman Ingrid Bergman. Along the way, as he sobers her up, he eventually falls in love with her.

Then the assignment comes down. Ingrid Bergman’s mission is to seduce and marry Claude Rains, one of a ring of “German scientist in South America”—IE: fugitive Nazis in Argentina who are experimenting with Uranium (never spelled out, but it sounds better than “MacGuffin element”).

I recommend watching this at least once to make your own judgement. This is a Hitchcock built around unpleasant characters fighting evil characters. It’s like John le Carre if he had a morale center. Still, I’m not certain I like it.

But again, if you’re trying Hitchcock, try this one.

Rope (1948)

If you remember the Leopold and Loeb case, two teen boys commits murder for one reason: because they could. They think they’re the ubermensch, and they’re going to gloat about it.

In this case, the killers are played by John Dall and Farley Granger, and neither actor looks like a schoolboy here. And after they kill their victim, they stuff him in a trunk and have a dinner party, with the trunk as the centerpiece. And the entire film focuses on them keeping their nerves together as the party continues, and only their professor, Jimmy Stewart, can catch them. It turns into a cat and mouse game in one room.

Rope is technically impressive on top of being highly entertaining. This is basically a filmed play, presented as one long continuous take. It’s not one take, but a trick of editing. However, it’s all shot in ten-minute takes instead of three-minute takes.

It’s like the film Compulsion, without the anti-death penalty nonsense crammed down your throat.

Stage Fright (1950)

Eve Gill (Jane Wyman) is in love with a boy, a fellow actor who is involved with an older leading lady (Marlene Dietrich). When he tells Eve that the leading lady has killed someone and set him up for murder.

This one is almost a straightforward murder mystery … in the sense that Agatha Christie murder mysteries are straightforward.

As is usual for Hitchcock, this means that no one is trustworthy, almost everyone is a suspect, at least one person is deranged, and there’s going to be a creative use of something innocuous that turns into a deadly weapon.

It even has a cameo by Alistair Sim (A Christmas Carol, Green is for Danger).

I recommend Stage Fright.

Strangers on a Train (1951)

Brought to you by Patricia Highsmith, the author who created The Talented Mister Ripley.

Tennis Player Guy Haines (Farley Granger) has a problem with his wife—she has routinely stepped out on him since they were married, and now that she’s pregnant, she won’t divorce him, even though he’s found love with someone else. While on a train ride, his compartment companion Bruno Antony (Robert Walker) has an idea he’s been toying with: The Perfect murder.

The Perfect murder would be if two killers swapped victims; it would be perfect because the person who commits the murder would have no motive.

Guy has his wife, and Bruno coincidentally has an old, rich father who just won’t die.

Guy smiled and nods, like you do with any nutcase who accosts you on the train.

But then, Bruno follows through with the plan “they” agreed on. Now Bruno has is waiting for Guy to kill Bruno’s father. Or else.

This really is one of the best of Hitchcock’s films. I’m not sure if it helps that Raymond Chandler was brought in to work on the script (depending on who you listen to, Chandler may or may not have had any input on the final cut).

And somehow, Hitchcock made a marry-go-round threatening.

100% recommend

I, Confess (1953)

I keep forgetting that Hitchcock was Catholic. But then there’s this.

Father Michael Logan hears the confession of a murderer. First problem: the victim is a man who married Logan’s ex girlfriend (played by Anne Baxter, The Ten Commandments).

Second problem: Logan has been framed for the murder, but he can’t say anything under the seal of the confessional.

Also stars Karl Malden (Patton) and Brian Aherne, this film never gets old. And somehow, he keeps a film that’s largely a court drama pretty intense. Definitely recommended.

Dial M for Murder (1954)

Damn, this was enjoyable. This is also basically a filmed stage play, with a few extra touches here and there.

Premise: Grace Kelly has been cheating on her husband, Ray Milland, with a writer (Robert Cummings). Ray Milland blackmails an old school friend to murder her while he has an alibi.

This is fun on multiple levels. Ray Milland is having a ball as pure evil, trying to destroy his wife and anyone around her. He’s evil and he’s having fun. Grace Kelly is, as always, Grace Kelly. She looks frail and willowy, until she has to stand up for herself. Then fun things happen.

Also along for the ride is John Williams (no relation to the composer of the same name), playing the homicide inspector. Again, this is another actor having fun.

This was enjoyable all around. I definitely recommend it.

Rear Window (1954)

This is almost a three-actor play, and almost entirely character driven, even though it’s a murder mystery.

James Stewart is a photographer who has broken his leg. Wheelchair bound, he has nothing to do but people watch from his courtyard apartment window. And then he sees a murder—or so he thinks. The only person he can rely on to do the legwork is his girlfriend, played by Grace Kelly.

But what happens when the killer starts hunting them?

Also starring Raymond Burr, this is probably what they use to try to teach Hitchcock in film class, if they ever get around to it. It’s a well written, claustrophobic little tale, based off of a story by Cornell Woolrich, who specialized in claustrophobic little tales.

To Catch a Thief (1955)

John Robie (Cary Grant) used to be a thief. After using his skills to aid the allies in the war, he’s retired. But when the cops think he’s returned to the life, he has to prove his innocence.

There are two stars in this movie, Grace Kelly and Monaco (yes, Grace Kelly met her future husband while filming this). There is a surprising amount of romantic comedy in this. This is basically Cary Grant trying to prove his innocence, while Grace Kelly is pursuing him, thinking that thievery is terribly romantic.

It’s fun, and technically amusing. Especially when the fireworks go off … literally.

The Trouble with Harry (1955)

Have you ever had a comedy that was so dark you almost felt bad for laughing? That’s this movie. The entire movie. It’s a comedy from start to finish.

The premise is simple: an old man is out shooting, and has found a dead body. Thinking that he’s killed the man, he quickly buries the body. But when someone else pops up thinking that she killed him, the situation spirals out of control.

The trouble was Harry is that he just won’t stay buried.

This is a dark comedy, and I love it. It’s probably darker than Arsenic and Old Lace and The Hospital.

And yes, this does star Shirley MacLaine. Don’t let that put you off.

Vertigo (1958)

One of my father’s favorites. Just because the ending was an utter Train wreck and full Greek tragedy.

I’m not sure I recommend it. It’s a very slow burn. And you don’t know it’s a mystery until halfway through.

See it at least once. There is a lot of psychological thriller here, but not so much that you’re breaking out the Jung.

North By Northwest (1959)

Cary Grant again.

Roger Thornhill is an ad executive is mistaken for a spy dogging the steps of a communist spy ring, led by George Mason (and Martin Landau playing Oddjob).

Once Thornhill is framed for murder, he’s on the run, hunted by spies, and he has no idea what’s going on. On a train, he runs into Eve Kendall (Eva Marie Saint), and this turns into a very strange romance / spy thriller.

There’s also Leo G. Carroll, who is the spy master who may know what the Hell is going on.

This is the one best known for an assassination attempt with a crop duster, and its ending at Mount Rushmore. Because Hitchcock loves high places and tourist traps.

Family Plot (1976)

This one was … okay. A pair of con artists, posing as psychics, must find the relatives of their mark, a millionairess who wants the family around her before she kicks off.

And these two put in a lot of legwork, and find her relatives.

Problem? The relatives are criminals who run a kidnapping ring.

I must admit, Family Plot was very surprising, especially after the poor quality of his previous films, Marnie and Frenzy … And Topaz wasn’t much better… And Torn Curtain … could have been better. It was cruising along so well, and then there was the long boring bus ride (who am I kidding? Even Hitchcock didn’t like it, with Newman fighting him every step of the way, and Julie Andrews not clicking with Newman on screen… ugh.).

Anyway, Family Plot. Do I recommend it? Sure. It’s not bad. I won’t put it up there with Strangers on a Train. But give it a watch. It may be the only time you find Bruce Dern as a hero.

And this is the last film Hitchcock did, but there are a few more I want to throw in.

Honorable Mentions

Arabesque and Charade

These are the two best Hitchcock movies that Hitchcock never made.

Charade (1963)

Regina Lampert (Audrey Hepburn)is a newly minted widow. Her estranged husband has been murdered. Their fortune has been liquidated and disappeared.

Suddenly, five men appear in her life. Three of them are clearly killers (including George Kennedy and James Coburn). A fourth man is a spy who tells her that her husband stole a pile of Nazi gold with three other men, and they want their cut. The fifth man is Cary Grant, and we’re not entirely certain what he’s doing here.

This is a wonderful little game of who trusts who, and the answer is: nobody.

Arabesque (1966)

This one stars Gregory Peck and Sophia Loren. Peck plays a university professor who specializes in hieroglyphics. He is kidnapped by a group of spies to translate a cypher, and is left on a highway, pumped full of hallucinogenics, and left to die (as opposed to Cary Grant being pumped full of alcohol and dumped on a highway and left to die). Spy shenanigans ensue.

This is so Alfred Hitchcock, this script was even written for Cary Grant. And there are more than a few notes lifted directly from North by Northwest.

Oh, and it’s the same screenplay author as Charade. I’m going to have to to watch it again. But it’s been a year.

---

So, that’s it. I think that’s more than enough of a sampler. If you want to try out other Hitchcock work—such as his silent films or his television work—please do. You’ll find something you’ll like.

I also spent the better part of a week putting this together, so do me a favor and buy a book? Or if you’re one of the people who have read all my books, please leave some reviews.

My books