Skip to main content

You don’t know anything about this man, and he knows everything about you.

The Man Who Knew Too Much
(1956)

(SPOILERS) Hitchcock’s two-decades-later remake of his British original. It’s undoubtedly the better-known version, but as I noted in my review of the 1934 film, it is very far from the “far superior” production Truffaut tried to sell the director on during their interviews. Hitchcock would only be drawn – in typically quotable style – that “the first version is the work of a talented amateur and the second was made by a professional”. For which, read a young, creatively fired director versus one clinically going through the motions, occasionally inspired by a shot or sequence but mostly lacking the will or drive that made the first The Man Who Knew Too Much such a pleasure from beginning to end.

Title: A single crash of cymbals and how it rocked the lives of an American family.

Like many, I saw this version first, as a kid, and my recollection is of finding it perfectly enjoyable, while regarding Doris Day singing Whatever Will Be unnecessarily intrusive and slowing things down (which it is, and it does). With hindsight, the picture is revealed as one of the – if not the – most middling of his 1940s-50s zenith as a director in demand. It’s understandable that Hitch saw the potential in revisiting the material (first considering it in the 1940s) as it has an easily malleable template of the type that also explains the various iterations of The 39 Steps, or his later cut-and-paste, built from the set pieces up approach to North by Northwest.

However, the 1934 picture was tightly written and expertly paced. Hitch takes advantage of the melodramatic opportunities in husband James Stewart’s everyman Dr Ben Mckenna and wife Day’s professional singer Jo Conway and sketches out a lightly believable and playful relationship between them, but one entirely lacking the wit and get-up-and-go of Leslie Banks and Edna Best. Worse, it’s a malaise that extends to the supporting cast, who are at best serviceable. Essentially Hitch is trying to lay a “real” couple over an outlandish template, and the fit isn’t entirely seamless.

Jo: Ben, are we about to have our monthly fight?

Indeed, aside from the easy chemistry between Steward and Day, there’s little beyond the stars’ consummate professionalism to sell us on the pair. Day is actually very impressive outside of the usual romantic comedy pigeonhole, and Stewart is at his most laconic, even when he’s driven. They’re trying to get their son Hank back (a precious lad prone to inviting Daniel Gelin’s Louis Bernard over to tuck in on the family’s rampant snail population: “We tried everything to get rid of them. We never thought of a Frenchman”). This necessitates the curtailing of their Moroccan holiday in order to track him down in England. Indeed, the film’s most notable scene finds Doctor Jimmy drugging his wife before telling her the bad news about Hank. It’s a mesmerisingly shocking scene, as Jo rightly denounces him for denying her the opportunity to respond with her full faculties

Ben: I’ve got nothing to hide.
Jo: I’ve a feeling Mr Bernard does.

The Morocco set scenes have a certain flavour, and Louis’ death is suitably dramatic. Even if, as with all his colour films to a greater or lesser extent, the joins between studio and location are never less than jarring. It’s thirty minutes before Louis is stabbed, though (early scenes evidence their lack of cultural sophistication at a restaurant). And it’s an hour before Stewart locates Ambrose Chappell.

Louis: A man… a statesman… is going to be killed… assassinated, in London. Soon… very soon. Tell them in London… Ambrose Chappell. Chappell.

Well, the first Ambrose Chappell. Remember the marvellous sequence infiltrating the sun-worshippers coven in the first? Here, Stewart gets it wrong first time out, accusing a taxidermist of stealing his son (a nice slice of misdirection on Hitch and John Michael Hayes’ part; Hayes wasn’t allowed sight or script of the original, drawing solely on the director recounting the plot as a guide). When he arrives at an actual church, the results are disappointingly austere and flavourless, with only the leads “singing” their discussion of what to do next to enliven matters.

Ben: You not only ask the questions, you answer them too. Don’t you?

They have tracked down child snatchers Lucy (Brenda de Banzie) and Edward (Bernard Miles) Drayton, however. Both performers are expectedly solid, and de Banzie conveys Lucy’s reluctance for harm to come to young Hank (Christopher Olsen) convincingly, but they nevertheless come across as a couple who shouldn’t have tried to compete in the big leagues, meaning there’s a severe lack of dramatic heft regarding the overall threat.

Ambassador: In a few moments I have to welcome our prime minister as my guest of honour, when I had hoped and expected that he would be totally unable to attend.

Truffaut seemed to fixate on the Albert Hall climax – well, first climax, since the action then moves to the embassy – as proof of the remake’s superiority over the original. Seemingly on the thin basis that Stewart gets in on the action here too. Yes, he does, but all this really entails is frightening the shooter into toppling over a balcony. The set piece is undoubtedly more polished, with the extended staging of the cantata – conducted by Hermann no less, and advertised as such outside – but I actually prefer Best’s lone gun improvisation (before saving the day with her lone gunmanship). It certainly beats Doris sobbing to herself until Stewart rocks up.

Hayes came up trumps for Hitch with Rear Window, but I’m less convinced of the subsequent To Catch a Thief and The Trouble with Harry. With The Man Who Knew Too Much, there’s some nice, low-key observation in the couple’s relationship, but the plot mechanics are insufficiently oiled and there’s only the sparse memorable line (“Don’t you realise that Americans dislike having their children stolen?” chides Mogens Wieth’s ambassador).

Ben: Will it chew any better than it tears?

Pauline Kael didn’t pen a full review for the remake, but referred to it as a “stodgier version” of the original. She wasn’t wrong. The Man Who Knew Too Much manages to be both rather bland and also overwrought. Whatever Will Be was a no-brainer as a hit tie-in single – shrewd fellow, that Hitchcock – but it underlines the kind of manufactured studio product this was, thirty years before such an approach had become the norm. 




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

No matter how innocent you are, or how hard you try, they’ll find you guilty.

The Wrong Man (1956) (SPOILERS) I hate to say it, but old Truffaut called it right on this one. More often than not showing obeisance to the might of Hitchcock during his career-spanning interview, the French critic turned director was surprisingly blunt when it came to The Wrong Man . He told Hitch “ your style, which has found its perfection in the fiction area, happens to be in total conflict with the aesthetics of the documentary and that contradiction is apparent throughout the picture ”. There’s also another, connected issue with this, one Hitch acknowledged: too much fidelity to the true story upon which the film is based.

He’s so persistent! He always gets his man.

Speed (1994) (SPOILERS) It must have been a couple of decades since I last viewed Speed all the way through, so it’s pleasing to confirm that it holds up. Sure, Jan de Bont’s debut as a director can’t compete with the work of John McTiernan, for whom he acted as cinematographer and who recommended de Bont when he passed on the picture, but he nevertheless does a more than competent work. Which makes his later turkeys all the more tragic. And Keanu and Sandra Bullock display the kind of effortless chemistry you can’t put a price tag on. And then there’s Dennis Hopper, having a great old sober-but-still-looning time.

He is a brigand and a lout. Pay him no serious mention.

The Wind and the Lion (1975) (SPOILERS) John Milius called his second feature a boy’s-own adventure, on the basis of the not-so-terrified responses of one of those kidnapped by Sean Connery’s Arab Raisuli. Really, he could have been referring to himself, in all his cigar-chomping, gun-toting reactionary glory, dreaming of the days of real heroes. The Wind and the Lion rather had its thunder stolen by Jaws on release, and it’s easy to see why. As polished as the picture is, and simultaneously broad-stroke and self-aware in its politics, it’s very definitely a throwback to the pictures of yesteryear. Only without the finger-on-the-pulse contemporaneity of execution that would make Spielberg and Lucas’ genre dives so memorable in a few short years’ time.

Another case of the screaming oopizootics.

Doctor Who Season 14 – Worst to Best The best Doctor Who season? In terms of general recognition and unadulterated celebration, there’s certainly a strong case to be made for Fourteen. The zenith of Robert Holmes and Philip Hinchcliffe’s plans for the series finds it relinquishing the cosy rapport of the Doctor and Sarah in favour of the less-trodden terrain of a solo adventure and underlying conflict with new companion Leela. More especially, it finds the production team finally stretching themselves conceptually after thoroughly exploring their “gothic horror” template over the course of the previous two seasons (well, mostly the previous one).

But everything is wonderful. We are in Paris.

Cold War (2018) (SPOILERS) Pawel Pawlikowski’s elliptical tale – you can’t discuss Cold War without saying “elliptical” at least once – of frustrated love charts a course that almost seems to be a caricature of a certain brand of self-congratulatorily tragic European cinema. It was, it seems “ loosely inspired ” by his parents (I suspect I see where the looseness comes in), but there’s a sense of calculation to the progression of this love story against an inescapable political backdrop that rather diminishes it.

The game is rigged, and it does not reward people who play by the rules.

Hustlers (2019) (SPOILERS) Sold as a female Goodfellas – to the extent that the producers had Scorsese in mind – this strippers-and-crime tale is actually a big, glossy puff piece, closer to Todd Phillips as fashioned by Lorene Scarfia. There are some attractive performances in Hustlers, notably from Constance Wu, but for all its “progressive” women work male objectification to their advantage posturing, it’s incredibly traditional and conservative deep down.

What do they do, sing madrigals?

The Singing Detective (2003) Icon’s remake of the 1986 BBC serial, from a screenplay by Dennis Potter himself. The Singing Detective fares less well than Icon’s later adaptation of Edge of Darkness , even though it’s probably more faithful to Potter’s original. Perhaps the fault lies in the compression of six episodes into a feature running a quarter of that time, but the noir fantasy and childhood flashbacks fail to engage, and if the hospital reality scans better, it too suffers eventually.

They literally call themselves “Decepticons”. That doesn’t set off any red flags?

Bumblebee  (2018) (SPOILERS) Bumblebee is by some distance the best Transformers movie, simply by dint of having a smattering of heart (one might argue the first Shia LaBeouf one also does, and it’s certainly significantly better than the others, but it’s still a soulless Michael Bay “machine”). Laika VP and director Travis Knight brings personality to a series that has traditionally consisted of shamelessly selling product, by way of a nostalgia piece that nods to the likes of Herbie (the original), The Iron Giant and even Robocop .

That’s what people call necromancer’s weather.

The Changes (1975) This adaptation of Peter Dickinson’s novel trilogy carries a degree of cult nostalgia cachet due to it being one of those more “adult” 1970s children’s serials (see also The Children of the Stones , The Owl Service ). I was too young to see it on its initial screening – or at any rate, too young to remember it – but it’s easy to see why it lingered in the minds of those who did. Well, the first episode, anyway. Not for nothing is The Changes seen as a precursor to The Survivors in the rural apocalypse sub-genre – see also the decidedly nastier No Blade of Grass – as following a fairly gripping opener, it drifts off into the realm of plodding travelogue.