This is what happens when your car breaks down on a Sunday morning and you have nothing else to do…
Two young men strangle their "inferior" classmate, hide his body in their apartment, and invite his friends and family to a dinner party as a means to challenge the "perfection" of their crime.
One of the most innovative films of its time, Alfred Hitchcock's Rope introduces a number of filmmaking experiments which, even today, remain widely unexplored in the world of cinema. It is an immensely captivating tale of two men who strangle one of their acquaintances, hide his body in their apartment, and then throw a party to determine the perfection of their crime.
Filmed in a manner that gives the illusion of being shot in a single take, the biggest strength of this film is how effortlessly it manages to engage the viewers in its expertly crafted plot & sustain the tension throughout its runtime even when the audience is aware of how the movie will end. The direction by Hitchcock is…
“I've always wished for more artistic talent. Well, murder can be an art, too. The power to kill can be just as satisfying as the power to create.”
With the aftermaths of the effects of World War II, Patrick Hamilton’s play seemed like the perfect choice for Alfred Hitchcock’s next film. A plot which centers on two highly intellectual men that decide to commit the perfect murder. The victim being one of their classmates who they consider to be inferior to them. This concept of superiority is handled pretty heavily as there are several discussions about it through the film, and it is easy to compare it to Hitler’s ideal of the superior Nazi race. Rope isn’t subtle at all,…
Not Quite Hoop-Tober: Day 8
Double feature: classic genre-bending thrillers – part 1
Rope is a classic Hitchcock murder mystery best known for its inventive use of long takes and creative cutting to try to appear as a single, uninterrupted shot, and while some audiences may find this distracting, it effectively puts the viewer at the scene of the crime and creates a feeling of claustrophobia or entrapment, as if events are escalating out of control and there's nowhere for you to escape to—likewise, confining the action to a single apartment with a view of the New York skyline increases the anxiety of the situation by creating the sense that we're not allowed to leave (and it's this tense and…
Phillip: Brandon, you don't think the party is a mistake, do you?
Brandon: Being weak is a mistake.
Phillip: Because it's human?
Brandon: Because it's ordinary!
Without exaggeration, I think this may have been probably my tenth viewing of 'Rope'. It's a film that I can just never tire of, every time I watch the film I get caught up in Alfred Hitchcock's innovative mastery, and on this subsequent viewing not an inch of my admiration for the film or Hitch has at all faded.
Two friends orchestrate the murder of an old acquaintance who they believe to be ''inferior''. They throw a party the same afternoon to show the perfection of their crime, but things go awry when their…
This certainly isn't a classic who-done-it. It's more of a modern will-they-get-caught. So much has been said of this film already, I would not dare revisit the plot points. In the interest of adding some fresh perspective, however, here are ten curious things viewers might not know about the Alfred Hitchcock murder thriller Rope.
1. The script was loosely adapted from a stage play called Rope's End by British playwright Patrick Hamilton.
2. The primary characters, Brandon & Phillip, are homosexual roommates, but in 1948 their relationship could not be made obvious.
3. This was Hitchcock's first film in color, and he had to reshoot many scenes because the hues were too bright.
4. The action was filmed continuously on ten…
In Rope Unleashed, the 2001 documentary featurette produced by Alfred Hitchcock historian Laurent Bouzereau, Rope’s screenwriter Arthur Laurents questions Hitchcock’s decision to show the crime in the opening moments of the film instead of revealing it at the end. It is an interesting observation. It may indeed be true that by doing so Hitchcock has drained much of the suspense from the film, at least in the conventional sense. I imagine Rope would be a very different experience if the audience had to guess whether a crime was committed or not. I am not sure, however, that it would be a better one. It would have certainly taken away from the film’s homosexual undercurrent (reportedly much stronger…
This was amazing, way ahead of its time.
“These hands will bring you great fame.”
As a technical exercise, Rope succeeds. As an entertaining and playful chamber piece, rife with murderous double entendres, it’s almost perfect.
The only thing, or person, that unbalances it is Jimmy Stewart who rather obviously signposts his suspicions and comes across more as a detective than a morally ambivalent mentor.
Apart from Stewart, who I feel is miscast; the ensemble is excellent, with particular accolades due to John Dall and Farley Granger as the thrill-seeking sociopaths.
Rope represents the very best of what filmmaking can be; a director creating new filmmaking techniques for the purpose of visual storytelling, not just for the sake of pretentious gimmicks. As technically astounding as Rope is, it's also got an incredibly tight narrative with tension dripping from the screen, along with terrific performances. In short, Rope is an absolute classic.
It really is quite maddening that even with all the handicaps in place Hitchcock is able to make this film so successful and great hardly breaking a sweat. Given how the technology is clearly not up to snuff, how censorship limits the gruesomeness of the game, and the need to play as straight entertainment retards the dialog significantly that the film still hits what all of those things should prevent is a little absurd. I understand the complaint of the editing which is the one element that doesn't entirely work, but the awkward close ups are worth it for the effect the smash cut to Stewart during the chicken monologue creates. Naturally the big speaking point especially as the film…
After Rope, Strangers on a Train, and Psycho, I think it's safe to add "charismatic homicidal homosexual sociopath" to the official list of Hitchcock tropes, right in between "icy blonde" and "birds."
This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
Cinematography is very reminiscent of the original stage play. Also, BRO WANTED TO GET CAUGHT. WHY.
This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
How to not get away with murder:
-Throw a party at the scene of the crime
-Have your partner in crime be someone who gets really anxious under stress
-Move all the food to where the body is hidden to make the maid suspicious
-Leave the murder weapon in plain sight
-Tell everyone the victim is coming to the party so everyone gets suspicious when he doesn't arrive
-Make murder a main talking point in a discussion at the party
-Invite the parents and girlfriend of the victim
-Invite the person who gave you the ideas of murdering "inferior beings"
-Make allusions to death when your talking, like saying "killing two birds with one stone"
-Put the body in an easily accessible place in the room
The plot is as sinister as it can get. There is a murder in the first scene itself and the suspense lies not in knowing who the murderers are (the murders are the protagonists!) but whether the murderers will get caught or not - classic Hitchcock! The film happens all inside the house of the killers and doesn't come across theatrical at all as the camera follows the characters everywhere. I only wonder why he had to adopt the gimmick of making the film look like one big shot; it is quite obvious when the shots are cut. That hampers the film a bit.
This is the movie that made me love Hitchcock
Movies that are slightly off.
All the films from all the editions, including those subsequently removed, presently totalling 1177. An easy way of seeing how…