Skip to main content

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright
(1950)
(SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.
 
Of course, others have used the unreliable narrator, both before and since, sometimes overtly so (Rashomon, released the same year). On occasions, it’s a key reveal (Fight Club, Shutter Island). Rarely, the narrative is entirely unspooled, the viewer left without any idea if what they have just seen is accurate or complete invention (The Usual Suspects, The Life of Pi). In theory, those should be the greater sins (their trickery is to make them an emblem of pride rather than shame). In comparison, Hitchcock’s cheat is small potatoes.
 
Jonathan Cooper (Richard Todd) tells besotted actress pal Eve Gill (Jane Wyman) that his lover, stage dame Charlotte Inwood (Marlene Dietrich) has killed her husband and he’s copping the blame for it. Eve, being a good-hearted sap (and besotted) agrees to help him, which entails enlisting father Commodore Gill (Alastair Sim) and investigating the case herself. Wyman gets to don various guises and ends up falling for Michael Wilding’s Detective Inspector Smith. Which is just as well, as Cooper was lying; he killed hubby, albeit at Charlotte’s instigation.
 
This revelation comes late in the proceedings, Cooper admitting his deed while he and Eve are hiding out from the police in the theatre, a confession having been extracted from Charlotte. Cooper proceeds to moot murdering Eve, believing it could help his case for an insanity plea; Todd’s compellingly ruthless here, the strongest showing he makes in a picture where he’s off screen for swathes. That’s generally a weakness, though; the plot revolves around Eve’s investigation, and Wyman is fine in a spirited-but-mousey fashion, but it means the characters providing the plot motor, Cooper and Inwood, are little more than silhouettes (and in Dietrich’s case, meticulously lit silhouettes). 
 
Of course, Dietrich doesn’t need much to make an impression, and she proceeds to do so in abundance, but it only ever feels as if she’s doing a star cameo. That sort-of works in a meta sense, as a theatre star in the piece, but like the plot generally, it isn’t the most elegant of constructions (the screenplay, credited to Whitfield Cook from Alma’s adaptation, with additional work from James Bridie and Randall MacDougall, comes from Selwyn Jepson’s 1948 novel Man Running). What that means is that the local colour, the idiosyncrasies of Hitch back doing a quirky English contemporary production (as opposed to the po-faced The Paradine Case), one that has more in common tonally with something like The Lady Vanishes, is able to shine through. 
 
Indeed, while I can readily appreciate Dietrich’s star wattage, she’s the least of the attractions in Stage Fright. Rather it’s the amount of fun to be had with the eccentricities on display. It’s perhaps a shame someone as “straight” as Wyman (whom Hitch found a bit of a pain due to her feeling of being over shadowed by glamorous Marlene) is in the lead, but it does mean everyone else gets uninterrupted limelight. Aside from the indiscretion of the lie, Truffaut convinced Hitch to give Stage Fright unfairly short shrift, scraping together his admittance that he “had lots of fun with the theatre-benefit garden party”. Sycophantic Truffaut agrees it was “funny” but then, being a rather choleric gallic, professes “I didn’t care for Alastair Sim… I objected to the actor as well as the character”. Hitch, going with the flow, admits he’s a problem (the trouble of shooting a film in England; “They all tell you, ‘He’s one of our best actors; you’ve got to have him in your picture’. It’s that old local and national feeling. That insular mentality again”). 
 
This is merd, to put it mildly. Perhaps what Truffaut is getting at in part is that Sim doesn’t blend into a Hitch film. He is ever Alastair Sim. Which means he is an absolute delight throughout the picture, informing its humour and zest. He gives Stage Fright buoyancy it would otherwise lack, and one very much feels Hitch has been led by his interviewer in this case. 
 
If anything, there isn’t enough of Sim, and he’d have been best used actively investigating the case (since, as has been noted, there’s little sense of danger in the proceedings, owing to Eve’s performances being more deceits than imperilling her life, it would have done no harm to have Sim becoming embroiled to more comedic effect). In the immediate moment, he also seems to be putting on his Inspector Hornleigh hat (“I don’t know how this bloodstain got into this dress, but I do know someone smeared it on deliberately”), but he ultimately has no idea that Cooper is the culprit. 
 
Generally, though, his cavalier manner is a breath of fresh air. When Smith reprimands him for letting his daughter endanger herself with a “What sort of father do you think you are?” he responds “Unique”. Which is a uniquely Sim response (apparently, James Bridie suggested Sim to Hitch, so it’s a fair bet his dialogue was written especially). Having allowed Cooper to stay the night, Gill suggests, as the former retires, “If you want anything to read in bed, you’ll find some quite good murder mysteries”. His rapport with his wife (they do not live together and she disapproves of him, to his mild amusement) played by the almost two-decades-older Sybil Thorndike is very funny (“Forgiveness, Mr Smith. The seat of a happy married life. That and good long stretches of the absence that makes the heart grow fonder”). 
 
It isn’t often that a movie finds a place for a crazy dad, less still that he manages to steal the show. Later, Sim brings pay-off money to Nellie Goode (Kay Walsh providing a suitably conniving turn) and cannot disguise his distaste (“You’re a blackmailer, aren’t you?”) His finest moment comes with an inspired scene shared with the wonderfully loony Joyce Grenfell at the fair Hitch so enjoyed designing. Gill has the idea of laying a trap but needs to win a doll to do so (so as to smear blood on her dress and then confront Charlotte with it). This requires hitting bullseyes at Grenfell’s stall (“Oh, would you like to shoot a duck?” – it’s all in her delivery). And some subterfuge in order to lay claim to the prize. 
 
Wilding, reuniting with Hitch following Under Capricorn, is a bit more Alan Cumming than David Tennant this time. His easy charm is a good fit for a detective role that needs a sense of humour to avoid becoming part of the wallpaper (his frustration at Eve getting shot of him, then having to make nice with her friends, one of them being Patricia Hitchcock’s Chubby Bannister, is good evidence of his comic timing). Also to be seen are Andre Morell, Miles Malleson (the “helpful” man in the pub who keeps bothering Eve), Alfie Bass, and Irene Handl, most of whose business ended up on the cutting room floor. 
 
I’m definitely on the side of Stage Fright being underrated. It is a fairly inconspicuous affair at this point in the director’s career, untypical of the star-led fare that would embody his most prolific decade and without showy set pieces or dramatic fireworks. But it’s hugely likeable, even if that’s mostly at the behest of a supporting player Hitch found easy to dismiss. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.

You can’t climb a ladder, no. But you can skip like a goat into a bar.

Juno and the Paycock (1930) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s second sound feature. Such was the lustre of this technological advance that a wordy play was picked. By Sean O’Casey, upon whom Hitchcock based the prophet of doom at the end of The Birds . Juno and the Paycock , set in 1922 during the Irish Civil War, begins as a broad comedy of domestic manners, but by the end has descended into full-blown Greek (or Catholic) tragedy. As such, it’s an uneven but still watchable affair, even if Hitch does nothing to disguise its stage origins.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

I mean, I am just a dumb bunny, but, we are good at multiplying.

Zootropolis (2016) (SPOILERS) The key to Zootropolis’ creative success isn’t so much the conceit of its much-vaunted allegory regarding prejudice and equality, or – conversely – the fun to be had riffing on animal stereotypes (simultaneously clever and obvious), or even the appealing central duo voiced by Ginnifier Goodwin (as first rabbit cop Judy Hopps) and Jason Bateman (fox hustler Nick Wilde). Rather, it’s coming armed with that rarity for an animation; a well-sustained plot that doesn’t devolve into overblown set pieces or rest on the easy laurels of musical numbers and montages.

Sir, I’m the Leonardo of Montana.

The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet (2013) (SPOILERS) The title of Jean-Pierre Jeunet’s second English language film and second adaptation announces a fundamentally quirky beast. It is, therefore, right up its director’s oeuvre. His films – even Alien Resurrection , though not so much A Very Long Engagement – are infused with quirk. He has a style and sensibility that is either far too much – all tics and affectations and asides – or delightfully offbeat and distinctive, depending on one’s inclinations. I tend to the latter, but I wasn’t entirely convinced by the trailers for The Young and Prodigious T.S. Spivet ; if there’s one thing I would bank on bringing out the worst in Jeunet, it’s a story focussing on an ultra-precocious child. Yet for the most part the film won me over. Spivet is definitely a minor distraction, but one that marries an eccentric bearing with a sense of heart that veers to the affecting rather than the chokingly sentimental. Appreciation for