North by Northwest

william · External Since: May 14, 2007 Posts: 69

I'm at the tail end of finishing a retrospective of
Hitchcock's films (I've seen 95% of them) and frankly
I don't think much of North by Northwest. I would like
to have a serious discussion about the film with
someone who admires it or even just likes it. In no
way am I a troll. You can check my website
(www.williamahearn.com) and see that I'm serious about
films. If nothing else, I am thorough and I want to
make sure that I'm not missing something that could
change my mind about the film.

Thanks,

William

Essays and Ramblings
<http://www.williamahearn.com>

sawakatoome · External Since: Apr 17, 2007 Posts: 7

Rather than get into a discussion about how we each feel about 'NxNW',
I wouldn't mind learning why you picked this particular film out.

First off, I guess, you say you've seen 95% of Hitchcock's films
(which, facetiously-speaking, means you've just one, *maybe* two
Hitchcocks left before you've seen all the extant ones). Is this your
own personal retrospective or is there a film festival or something on
someplace on Hitchcock that you're attending?

Fergal #.

On May 15, 3:34 am, william <williamahe... RemoveThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm at the tail end of finishing a retrospective of
> Hitchcock's films (I've seen 95% of them) and frankly
> I don't think much of North by Northwest. I would like
> to have a serious discussion about the film with
> someone who admires it or even just likes it. In no
> way am I a troll. You can check my website
> (www.williamahearn.com) and see that I'm serious about
> films. If nothing else, I am thorough and I want to
> make sure that I'm not missing something that could
> change my mind about the film.
>
> Thanks,
>
> William
>
> Essays and Ramblings
> <http://www.williamahearn.com>

william · External Since: May 14, 2007 Posts: 69

On May 16, 4:45 am, sawakatoome <sawakato....RemoveThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Rather than get into a discussion about how we each feel about 'NxNW',
> I wouldn't mind learning why you picked this particular film out.
>
> First off, I guess, you say you've seen 95% of Hitchcock's films
> (which, facetiously-speaking, means you've just one, *maybe* two
> Hitchcocks left before you've seen all the extant ones). Is this your
> own personal retrospective or is there a film festival or something on
> someplace on Hitchcock that you're attending?
>
The time it's personal. It's for my website. I write about film and
that's where the retrorspective is going. If nothing else, I do my
homework. This particular film was picked because I don't think it's
much of a film. There were two films that I needed to discuss. One was
Vertigo and the other was North by Northwest. I'm done with Vertigo
and I wanted to see what other viewers -- people who like Hitchcock --
saw in the film. It's that simple.

William
www.williamahearn.com

Old Movie Fan · External Since: Jan 19, 2005 Posts: 163

Hello William, and welcome to this almost inactive discussion group.
If you're expecting a consensus, especially on this film, or even
perhaps almost any other film, you won't find it here. Fergal and I
have already discussed N/NW at length since I also find it one of my
least favorite Hitchcock films.
The best part of discussion groups is sharing our differences of
opinion, and currently, Fergal and I are about the only ones who even
post on this group currently. That's too bad, because exchange of ideas
is how we can sometimes see things different. I've learned from reading
Fergal's comments, but there's still much that we don't agree on.

And that's as it should be. This is a discussion group, and healthy
debates are great.

Rich Wagner

william · External Since: May 14, 2007 Posts: 69

On May 17, 10:46 pm, BigMovie....RemoveThis@webtv.net (Old Movie Fan) wrote:
> Hello William, and welcome to this almost inactive discussion group.
> If you're expecting a consensus, especially on this film, or even
> perhaps almost any other film, you won't find it here.

That's true of all lists, I guess. My problem with NXNW is that it
just seems to be a mushmash of generic Hitchcock themes. Take the
innocent man on the run, a MacGuffin, the redeemable girl from
Notorious (that first appeared in Number 17), throw in a national
monument and Cary Grant, the endearing old man (in this case Leo G.
Carroll but sometimes Alistar Sim or someone else), a blond ice queen
and bingo, you have North by Northwest. It just seems so contrived in
terms of themes rather than plot of which there is little. It seems to
be a film made by committee.

William
www,williamahearn.com

Old Movie Fan · External Since: Jan 19, 2005 Posts: 163

For me, the films ending ruined the whole experience. After a
cliff-hanger climax (that's never concluded), the film concludes as if
the entire story never even happened? They really were never in danger,
were they? For someone whose followed the story carefully, and found
themselves holding their breath as the hero dangles in danger; it's
quite a slap in the face to see that the ending has nothing at all to do
with the story. Any 'good' Hitchcock film should make sense at the end.
Using common themes are apparent in most all films, and not just
Hitchcock. It seems from your comments that, that's where you're headed
with you study of this film.
Sometimes, the most fun is remembering where similar themes occurred.
The use of monuments, isn't really all that different from love triangle
themes, or any other over used, but effective way to tell a story. I
cannot watch any film without being reminded of others that I've seen.
Today's films seem to push special effects more than story continuity,
and the result is, I often have to wait for the action sequence to
finally end so they can get back to the story.
In the documentary about the making of this film, the most telling
quote IMO is where Hitch reportedly says something like, "We don't have
to make pictures any more" and goes on about how the audience doesn't
care, they just want to be thrilled by all the special effects that we
do. Sadly, this is actually what most of my friends look for in films.

For me, I've got to have a good story, and "North by Northwest" makes no
more sense that the impossible direction of the title.

Rich

John · External Since: Aug 09, 2003 Posts: 14

Well, I happen to love the film. It makes perfect sense to me. It's not
a movie meant to impress with deep meaning, but more of an amusement
park ride with Cary Grant at your side. Why ponder over your imagined
references to Greek mythology and father/mother figures? It's
Hitchcock's most amusing and overtly absurd film, his, and Ernest
Lehman's, playful parody of his own style. It's all masquerade, theater
and mistaken identity. The script playfully reminds us that Roger
Thornhill is acting on a stage on which he was thrown, on which he
didn't want to enter. You aren't to take it so seriously. Yes, the
themes and elements of past pictures are included, but there isn't a law
that says the artist can't do variations on his own themes.

The plot is simple; Thornhill is thrust into danger because of the
absurdity of coincidence, of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Victim to Van Damm and his henchmen, and victim to the governmental
agency that wants him to go on playing George Kaplan. Add to the mix a
woman with charms and deception, who Thornhill falls in love with, is
hurt by her deception, and then has to eventually save from death.
Forget the MacGuffin, it's unimportant.

As far as the ending goes, to me it's perfect. The happy couple have
left danger behind them without the audience really needing to see the
actual save and its immediate aftermath, returning on the same track
they came on together, returning to the same berth (a re-birth of
romance). Both now have returned to a sense of safety, legitimacy of
identity, intimacy, fidelity, and without any pretense.
"This is silly, Roger"
"I know, but I'm sentimental."
End of story.
This might be Hitch's way of saying it's all to be taken with amusement,
but it's a great trip getting there, isn't it? Oh, and the score by
Bernard Herrmann is worth three times the price of admission.

Old Movie Fan · External Since: Jan 19, 2005 Posts: 163

John wrote:
>The plot is simple; Thornhill is thrust into
> danger because of the absurdity of
> coincidence, of being in the wrong place at
> the wrong time. Victim to Van Damm and his >henchmen, and victim to
the governmental
> agency that wants him to go on playing
> George Kaplan. Add to the mix a woman with
> charms and deception, who Thornhill falls in
> love with, is hurt by her deception, and then
> has to eventually save from death. Forget the
> MacGuffin, it's unimportant.
>As far as the ending goes, to me it's perfect.

>This might be Hitch's way of saying it's all to
> be taken with amusement, but it's a great trip
> getting there, isn't it? Oh, and the score by
> Bernard Herrmann is worth three times the
> price of admission.

Thanks John,

Thanks for putting a whole different (and perhaps more correct)
perspective on Hitchcock's NXNW. You reminded us that it's all in how
you approach the film, that determines if you'll enjoy it or not.
Reading your comments reminded me that this story is so filled with
absurd behaviors that it was never meant to be taken as seriously as I
have done. It's more of a lampoon of more serious films, a concept that
I never thought of before.
Sometimes I've got to lighten up and just enjoy what I don't
understand.

"It's just a movie."

Rich

John · External Since: Aug 09, 2003 Posts: 14

To add to what I have already said, and what most already know; legend
has it that one of the original titles Hitchcock had in mind was "The
Man in Lincoln's Nose." Not something that a movie studio would want on
a billboard or marquee, but it lends us a clue as to original intention.

I also see the film as strangely choreographic, with the title music
being a fandango (as described by Herrmann), and Cary Grant always seems
to move his body like a dancer to unheard music, dodging in and out of
situations with fluidity, also I recall the love scene on the train,
with Roger and Eve twisting along the wall together as though they were
in a slow waltz on a dance floor. Earlier in the film, Roger and Vandamm
meet with each circling each other from across the room, mirroring
movement like dancers on a stage.

Ernest Lehman's script is enormously witty, with some of the most
memorable and quotable lines from any Hitchcock film. Add to that, it
was Cary Grant's best film until the end of his career, one of his best
films ever. (I always wonder who had the amusing idea of having "It's A
Most Unusual Day" playing in the Plaza Hotel lobby just before Roger
enters the Oak Bar.)

Also, it was none other than Bernard Herrmann who introduced Hitchcock
to Ernest Lehman, feeling Hitchcock and Lehman would get along famously.

sawakatoome · External Since: Apr 17, 2007 Posts: 7

On May 20, 6:26 pm, West18j....RemoveThis@webtv.net (John) wrote:

> To add to what I have already said, and what most already know; legend
> has it that one of the original titles Hitchcock had in mind was "The
> Man in Lincoln's Nose." Not something that a movie studio would want on
> a billboard or marquee, but it lends us a clue as to original intention.

Sorry .. suddenly felt compelled to re-post something of mine from
early 2006 .. 'run-through of 'North By Northwest' by quotes':

"Say hello to the missus."
"We're not talking."

"Tell her 'I count the days, the ..."
"You sent that one last time."
"I did?! Well put 'Here's something for your sweet tooth, baby, and
all
your other sweet parts'. ... I know, I know."

"Come come come, I made him feel like a happy man; I made him feel
like
a Good Samaritan."
"He knew you were lying."
"Maggie, in the world of Advertising, there's no such thing as a lie,
there's only the expedient exaggeration. You ought to know that."

"Do I look heavy-ish to you? I feel heavy-ish. Put a note on my desk
in
the morning -- 'Think thin'."

"Who are you?"
"Mere errand boys carrying concealed weapons. His is pointed at your
heart, so *please*, no errors of judgment, I beg of you."
"What is this, some kind of joke?"
"Yes, a joke. We will laugh in the car."

"Oh, you didn't borrow Laura's Mercedes?!"
"No, I didn't borrow Laura's Mercedes!?"

"Roger, pay the two dollars."

"Goodbye Mr. Thornhill, wherever you are."

"To think how lucky I am to have been seated here!"
"Oh luck had nothing to do with it."
"Fate?"

"The three of you together -- now that's a picture only Charles Adams
could draw."
"It seems some of you fellows could do with a less training from the
CIA and a little more from the Actors' Studio."
"It seems the only performance you'll be satisfied with is when I
play
dead."
"Your very next role. You'll be quite convincing, I assure you."

"What happened?"
"Men like you."
"What's the matter with men like me?"
"They don't believe in marriage."
"I've been married twice."
"See what I mean?"

"Jump in, Leonard, the champagne's fine."

"Like our friends, I too believe in neatness. This problem is best
disposed of from a great height ... over water."

"That wasn't very sporting, using real bullets."

"This is silly."
"Yes but I'm sentimental."

Fergal #.

bigsilentfan · External Since: Jan 13, 2005 Posts: 564

Imagine............

We've had ten postings, by four authors, about one topic, and
lasting nearly a week.

That's some kind of record at this group, isn't it? I guess film
study is a very personal thing.

Rich Wagner

william · External Since: May 14, 2007 Posts: 69

On May 21, 7:44 am, bigsilent... RemoveThis @aol.com wrote:
> Imagine............
>
> We've had ten postings, by four authors, about one topic, and
> lasting nearly a week.
>
Is anybody interested in discussing Vertigo or Frenzy?

Old Movie Fan · External Since: Jan 19, 2005 Posts: 163

"Vertigo" is a pretty good film with just one questionable scene (Scotty
climbing up the steep stairway in the old apartment building). How in
the world did he manage to come back down if he had vertigo? Hitch
shows this view very clearly when Scotty races up, but we're left to
imagine how he was able to come down, especially as quickly as required
for the scene.

"Frenzy" hasn't been talked about much, but it also has a technical
hickup of sorts when the body is ejected from the potato truck stopping
quickly.

There's lots of interesting points in both, so being the new guy on
the block William, I'll leave it up to you.

In the past, I've built photo & text commentary on the film using
comments and stills from the movie in a website, one that can be changed
as we go along.

Rich

william · External Since: May 14, 2007 Posts: 69

On May 22, 6:46 pm, BigMovie....DeleteThis@webtv.net (Old Movie Fan) wrote:

> There's lots of interesting points in both, so being the new guy on
> the block William, I'll leave it up to you.
>
Frenzy, as far as I'm concerned, is one of the best flicks that Hitch
made in his later period. His on-location tracking shots in the open
market area (where his father worked) are such a nice break from his
usual bouncing rear-projections. The decision to use actors instead of
stars also helped this film. And no attractive ice queen as cinematic
hood ornament. Som excesses and some holes but an underrated film from
a director who tends to be overrated.

William
www.williamahearn.com

Old Movie Fan · External Since: Jan 19, 2005 Posts: 163

Have you ever seen the Dick Cavett Interview with Hitchcock when he
was promoting his 'new' film, "Frenzy?"

I found it interesting that, after Hitchcock carefully describes the
scene with the 'potato' truck to Cavett, Hitch seemed (at least to me),
a little disappointed when Cavett didn't ask the obvious question, "How
would a body pop out of the back of a truck that just slammed on the
brakes?" It's the well known theory, "A body (pun intended) in motion
tends to remain in motion......."
Knowing Hitchcock, he probably would have had a whimsical answer.

I'm game. Of all the Hitchcock's, this is one that I'm least familiar
with. I do have a copy.

Rich

Dr. Tom Snyder · External Since: May 27, 2007 Posts: 1

It may be Hitchcock's most entertaining movie, though it's not as profound
as "Vertigo" or "Rebecca," which is one of his most underrated.

"John" <West18john.TakeThisOut@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:3633-464EAFBE-496@storefull-3112.bay.webtv.net...
> Well, I happen to love the film. It makes perfect sense to me. It's not
> a movie meant to impress with deep meaning, but more of an amusement
> park ride with Cary Grant at your side. Why ponder over your imagined
> references to Greek mythology and father/mother figures? It's
> Hitchcock's most amusing and overtly absurd film, his, and Ernest
> Lehman's, playful parody of his own style. It's all masquerade, theater
> and mistaken identity. The script playfully reminds us that Roger
> Thornhill is acting on a stage on which he was thrown, on which he
> didn't want to enter. You aren't to take it so seriously. Yes, the
> themes and elements of past pictures are included, but there isn't a law
> that says the artist can't do variations on his own themes.
>
> The plot is simple; Thornhill is thrust into danger because of the
> absurdity of coincidence, of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
> Victim to Van Damm and his henchmen, and victim to the governmental
> agency that wants him to go on playing George Kaplan. Add to the mix a
> woman with charms and deception, who Thornhill falls in love with, is
> hurt by her deception, and then has to eventually save from death.
> Forget the MacGuffin, it's unimportant.
>
> As far as the ending goes, to me it's perfect. The happy couple have
> left danger behind them without the audience really needing to see the
> actual save and its immediate aftermath, returning on the same track
> they came on together, returning to the same berth (a re-birth of
> romance). Both now have returned to a sense of safety, legitimacy of
> identity, intimacy, fidelity, and without any pretense.
> "This is silly, Roger"
> "I know, but I'm sentimental."
> End of story.
> This might be Hitch's way of saying it's all to be taken with amusement,
> but it's a great trip getting there, isn't it? Oh, and the score by
> Bernard Herrmann is worth three times the price of admission.
>

william · External Since: Jun 04, 2007 Posts: 56

On May 27, 9:33 pm, "Dr. Tom Snyder" <titus....RemoveThis@roadrunner.com> wrote:
> It may be Hitchcock's most entertaining movie, though it's not as profound
> as "Vertigo" or "Rebecca," which is one of his most underrated.
>
And did Orson Welles lift that fire around the R at the end of Rebecca
for Citizen Kane or what? I agree about Rebecca . . .

William
www.williamahearn.com