HITCHCOCK

Hitchcock (12A)

Director: Sacha Gervasi
Screenplay: John J McLauglin
Starring: Anthony Hopkins, Helen Mirren, Scarlett Johansson

I was looking forward to this movie for at least two reasons (Who shouted “Yeah! Scarlett Johansson has both of them!”? Leave this site immediately, you ruffian!). For one thing, my stock answer to the perennial “What’s your favourite movie of all-time?” is “Psycho”. For another, I was exceptionally ticked off by the crass BBC drama “The Girl”, and the unsubstantiated hack-job it did on the character of Hitchcock, and was hoping this would be a more balanced affair. For yet another, the non-fictional book that the screenplay is based on, has pride of place on my book-shelf. Yeah! Book-Shelf! Take your kindles and shove ‘em!! Ahem … Anyway, onto the film itself …

The movie starts with Alfred Hitchcock’s release of the classic “North by Northwest”. As he absorbs the plaudits, one comment from a journalist present raises his ire, when his age (60) is brought up and asks him why he “...doesn’t quit while ahead”. This stings Hitchcock and he sets about looking for a new project, which needs to be something different. He avoids the more “classy” fare like “Casino Royale” (seriously, Hitch could have been the first Bond director!), and sets his sights on bringing the Robert Bloch novel “Psycho” to the silver screen. Regarded by Paramount Film studios, the censors (MPPC at the time), and to most of those in the film industry as a “tawdry little horror” and unworthy of Hitchcock’s talent. To bring the film to life, he risks his home and his marriage, and he comes dangerously close to losing both… The fact that he eventually succeeds in creating a classic and that he is directly instrumental for a whole new style of horror, is a direct testament to not only Hitchcock’s skills, but his unsung wife’s talents as well.

First off, we have to acknowledge the skills and performance of Anthony Hopkins and Helen Mirren. Accomplished as always, they bring gravitas and emotion to the roles of Alfred Hitchcock and his wife Alma Reville. Hopkins has the physical quirks (finger twiddling & impassive stares) to a tea, and the verbal inflexions are effective. However, despite some realistic prosthetics, I was personally never really convinced by his performance. It always seemed to be Tony Hopkins voice, and he never really seemed to comfortably take on the full persona of the director.



Maybe it’s me, but as much as it pains me to say so, Toby Jones portrayal in “The Girl” seemed far closer to the mannerisms and physicality of Hitchcock. Helen Mirren fares better as Alma, but that’s probably because she was in the public limelight less often. As it’s Mirren though, she does sell some great scenes, especially when she is accused of having an affair by her husband, and she royally lets rip, reminding him of how much he owes her!

The supporting cast are top notch also, and it’s a real shame that some of them are side-lined for a good portion of the film. In particular, Scarlett Johansson is absolutely perfect as Janet Leigh and nails the part completely. Her wide-eyed, good-natured performance, complete with spot-on slightly husky voice, is a doppelganger of the actress. If there is ever life-story of Janet Leigh, they certainly know where to look! James D’arcy too is a dead-ringer for Anthony Perkins, and his twitchy performance is a winner. (Pity he only has about two scenes). Toni Collette is also great as Hitchcock’s personal secretary Peggy Robertson. Starchy but reliable, she holds her own in all her scenes with Hopkins. Jessica Biel has less luck with the Vera Miles role, but that’s really because the part is under-written and doesn’t give her a lot to work with. Genre vet Michael Wincott (“The Crow”, “Alien: Resurrection”) also appears intermittently as Ed Gein…

And this is where we get to some of the elements of the film that don’t really work. Ed Gein, of course, was the real life murderer and grave-robber that inspired “Psycho” (along with other films and stories). In the film, he occasionally appears to Hitchcock to advise him and comment on proceedings. The surreal nature of these scenes, seem out of odds with the tone of the film and aren’t really needed. Despite a good start, the film itself reaches a bit of an impasse at the half-way mark. Ironically, once “Psycho” itself is being filmed on a closed set, the movie concentrates on the discord between Hitchcock and Alma. He’s compulsively ogling his leading ladies and obsessing over “romantic fantasies” (never to the depths that “The Girl” suggested though),



whereas she is stewing over a lack of recognition for her screen-writing skills and is being drawn into a possible relationship with the slimy Whitfield Crook (Danny Huston), a writer friend of the couple. Basically it comes down to an old married couple arguing over petty mis-understandings, as oppose to the making of a classic movie. We barely see 3-4 scenes being shot (even the shooting of the shower scene is rushed through, almost as an after-thought). Maybe I’m being selfish, due to my love of the movie, but there are so many myths and great stories around the actual shooting of “Psycho”, that it seems a wasted opportunity not to spend more time on those moments, particularly with such a great supporting cast.

As if to back this view up, the best scenes in “Hitchcock” deal directly with “Psycho” itself. A lovely scene has the director standing in a cinema auditorium, conducting an imaginary orchestra during the shower scene, as an audience screams at its very first showing. This scene culminates with a wry smile on his lips. Wonderful stuff. The constant battles with the censors and the panic-driven editing scenes are also well worthy of mention.

The director (Sacha Gervasi – known for the rock-band documentary “Anvil!”) does an admirable job with juggling the actors, but I just wished that the scope had been less insular, and more focussed on Hitchcock’s film-making and associated tribulations.
Certainly not a failure, and well worth seeing, but it could have been that much better ….

Classy and mostly enjoyable, but … less Gein, less domestic squabbling, and more set-shooting … and it coulda been a real contender.