North by Northwest (1959)...

[iamwhatiseem]

We watched this last night. Bonzi seen it many years ago, I had only seen bits of it.
Great movie. Like always when watching movies made 70+ years ago, you have to suspend modern sensibilities and just enjoy the story.
You would think Hollywood would have remade this at least once.

 

[White 6]

We watched this last night. Bonzi seen it many years ago, I had only seen bits of it.
Great movie. Like always when watching movies made 70+ years ago, you have to suspend modern sensibilities and just enjoy the story.
You would think Hollywood would have remade this at least once.

I doubt they could make it better.

 

[1srelluc]

Great movie.

The "vintage" movie and TV channels are enjoying a ratings surge, nothing monumental, but folks are tuning in more due to the steady stream of woke trash that network and cable/streaming services are putting out there.

Add to that the cluster-fuck of new-release Hollywood movies where you don't know where you can find them. Is it at the theater or on some streaming service or both? Folks just want some entertainment and don't feel like running around Robin Hood's barn to figure it out. Hopefully it will sort itself out.

 

[TheParser]

Fantastic movie!

The film looks so crisp!

And, of course, its ending is something else.

Quite naughty was Hitchcock, the director.

A man and a woman enter a train sleeping compartment. The movie ends by showing us a long train entering a tunnel.

(When there is censorship, it forces one to be creative.)

 

[Ringtone]

We watched this last night. Bonzi seen it many years ago, I had only seen bits of it.
Great movie. Like always when watching movies made 70+ years ago, you have to suspend modern sensibilities and just enjoy the story.
You would think Hollywood would have remade this at least once.

Hitchcock classic.

 

[TheParser]

It also includes a big blooper that was left in the film.

In one scene, a bunch of people are eating in a big room.

One of the bad guys shoots off a gun in the room.

The film, however, shows a boy cover his ears BEFORE the shot goes off!

Don't know why Hitch didn't reshoot the scene. (P.S. I understand that he used to joke something like this: "Just call me Hitch. Forget the cock." He was so naughty!)

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Hitchcock and Grant, what could go wrong.

 

[whitehall]

The plot never made much sense to me. It seemed to be a hodge-podge mess of foreign spies chasing this poor schlep for no reason. Cary Grant's acting saves it.

 

[DudleySmith]

There is a local channel that runs a lot of old B&W noir movies on Wednesdays; you get to see stuff like what a hottie Shelly Winters was back in 'the old days', and Lee Marvin and Raymond Burr always playing bad guys, more Joseph Cotton roles, Glenn Ford, Jane Russell, etc., etc. Even the 'cheap crappy movies' back then were Oscar standard classy compared to to today's crap. I mean seriously, a 'hip hop' trash remake of The Great Gatsby and carpet muncher 'Spiderwoman' garbage are what passes for 'art' these days? Babbling profanities and flashing ass and tits to get giggly teenage boys to buy your crap went out in the 1970's' it's just tard land rubbish these days.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The plot never made much sense to me. It seemed to be a hodge-podge mess of foreign spies chasing this poor schlep for no reason. Cary Grant's acting saves it.

??
They were chasing him out of mistaken identity.
Foreign spies were tracking a Spy that stayed at several hotels in several cities... coincidently, Grant's character, who is an advertising executive, stayed at the same hotel 3 cities in a row at the same time period. They were convinced he was the spy.

 

[whitehall]

??
They were chasing him out of mistaken identity.
Foreign spies were tracking a Spy that stayed at several hotels in several cities... coincidently, Grant's character, who is an advertising executive, stayed at the same hotel 3 cities in a row at the same time period. They were convinced he was the spy.

And that makes sense?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

And that makes sense?

It was 1959

 

[Flopper]

We watched this last night. Bonzi seen it many years ago, I had only seen bits of it.
Great movie. Like always when watching movies made 70+ years ago, you have to suspend modern sensibilities and just enjoy the story.
You would think Hollywood would have remade this at least once.

There's two reasons why this is a great movie to watch. First, being Hitchcock, one our greatest directors and second, Cary Grant one of our greatest screen personalities.

The Cary Grant we know was created by Paramount and Grant in the 1930's. The Cary Grant in the 1932 movie "This Was the Night" lacked the elegance, class, charisma, and charm of the Cary Grant we know. By 1935, Paramount recognized his star potential so began the creation that would transform Alexander Leach, Archie to his friends to the Cary Grant we know in the 1939 movie "Only Angels Have Wings." From that point on, every role was selected carefully and every line was written for Cary Grant. Often upon reading a script, he called the writer or director saying, I can't say that. Asked once if he liked being Cary Grant, and he said, "I miss Archie, but the audience likes him so that is who I am." Alexander Leach's greatest roll was playing Cary Grant.

 

[Flopper]

It also includes a big blooper that was left in the film.

In one scene, a bunch of people are eating in a big room.

One of the bad guys shoots off a gun in the room.

The film, however, shows a boy cover his ears BEFORE the shot goes off!

Don't know why Hitch didn't reshoot the scene. (P.S. I understand that he used to joke something like this: "Just call me Hitch. Forget the cock." He was so naughty!)

The vast number of bloopers such as actors being out of position, bad lighting, forgotten lines, synchronization of action, etc are caught while filming. I can see why the blooper you saw would not be caught. The director, camera man and sound man are focused on the central characters of the scene, not a minor character in the background. I believe that set was only used once and it was lightly torn down after the scene was complete. So days later, possibly after filming is complete, the blooper may have been caught but the cost of redoing the scene was probably judged not worth the cost.

I can remember as a kid seeing old westerns with a plane flying in the distance or telephone wires. The most memorable was the controls on rocket man's suit in the Rocket Man serial. It was a Norge refrigerator control.

In early days of movies, filming crews were pretty small, typically a director, camera and sound man and a couple of prop people. So if something happens like losing a light, or equipment problem ,you just worked around it even if it effected the filming. Audiences in those days were far less critical. In the early thirties the most important thing was sound. I remember seeing a poster somewhere for Greta Garbo's first sound movie. In large type above the name of movie was the phrase, "Garbo Speaks"

 

[Flopper]

It was 1959

And that makes sense?

Yes in those days it did. 60 years ago people went to the movies to escape from reality just as we do today but the difference is today we expect the details in the movie to be realist regardless of how unrealistic the story might. In 1959, 1/4 of the country had never been out of the state they were born. The public knew practically noting about how intelligence services worked.

Movies and novels set in yesteryear reflect the mores of that time period. This is one of the interesting things about old movies. Upon seeing an old Hitchock movie, my grandson said he thought it was silly. I ask him why and he said, people don't do things like that or act like that today. And I said, but it's not today. Their ideas, beliefs, dress, mannerisms are different. This is one of things that makes old movies interesting. It's like stepping back in time.