Search
Search results
Rico Rodriguez recommended Psycho (1998) in Movies (curated)
Rico Rodriguez recommended Psycho (1960) in Movies (curated)
I love this series. It features former child star Jupiter Jones and his friends, Bob and Pete.
Jupiter decides to form a detective agency and puts Kristin Amanda Thomas to business shame by tricking his way into a meeting with Alfred Hitchcock, who is looking for a haunted house to shoot a movie in.
There are some nice creepy moments here and the friendship between the boys is a lot of fun.
Jupiter decides to form a detective agency and puts Kristin Amanda Thomas to business shame by tricking his way into a meeting with Alfred Hitchcock, who is looking for a haunted house to shoot a movie in.
There are some nice creepy moments here and the friendship between the boys is a lot of fun.
Tobin Bell recommended Psycho (1960) in Movies (curated)
Andrew Koltuniuk (747 KP) rated I Confess (1952) in Movies
Mar 28, 2020
An interesting movie. I really love Alfred Hitchcock and so it was really cool to see another of his movies on the screen. It has been a long while since I saw this film and it felt like I was viewing it for the first time. This is a really interesting Drama, well crafted, but I felt like it lacked a lot of what Hitchcock's other films had. Definitely a solid film, but I like a lot of Hitchcock's other films better.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Rear Window (1954) in Movies
Aug 22, 2019
Watching You Through The Window
Rear Window- is one of my favoirte alfred hitchcock films.
Its myesterious, thrilling, chilling, suspenseful, dramatic and will have you keeep guesting until the end.
A newspaper photographer with a broken leg passes time recuperating by observing his neighbors through his window. He sees what he believes to be a murder, and decides to solve the crime himself. With the help of his nurse and girlfriend, he tries to catch the murderer without being killed himself.
I would highly reccordmend this film.
Its myesterious, thrilling, chilling, suspenseful, dramatic and will have you keeep guesting until the end.
A newspaper photographer with a broken leg passes time recuperating by observing his neighbors through his window. He sees what he believes to be a murder, and decides to solve the crime himself. With the help of his nurse and girlfriend, he tries to catch the murderer without being killed himself.
I would highly reccordmend this film.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated The Birds (1963) in Movies
Aug 23, 2019
When Birds Attack
The Birds- is one of my favorite alfred hitchcock films.
The birds- is mysterious, dramatic, horrorfying and overall a great movie.
Melanie Daniels (Tippi Hedren) meets Mitch Brenner (Rod Taylor) in a San Francisco pet store and decides to follow him home. She brings with her the gift of two love birds and they strike up a romance. One day birds start attacking children at Mitch's sisters party. A huge assault starts on the town by attacking birds.
The birds is a must see film.
The birds- is mysterious, dramatic, horrorfying and overall a great movie.
Melanie Daniels (Tippi Hedren) meets Mitch Brenner (Rod Taylor) in a San Francisco pet store and decides to follow him home. She brings with her the gift of two love birds and they strike up a romance. One day birds start attacking children at Mitch's sisters party. A huge assault starts on the town by attacking birds.
The birds is a must see film.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Marnie (1964) in Movies
Nov 6, 2020
Mediocre Hitchcock - but still pretty good
Heading into 1964, Alfred Hitchcock was on quite a roll. He had just rolled out - in order, VERTIGO (1958), NORTH BY NORTHWEST (1959), PSYCHO (1960) and THE BIRDS (1963) and his anthology series ALFRED HITCHCOCK PRESENTS had made him into a household name throughout the world. So it was with great anticipation/expectation that the world awaited his next major motion picture.
And while this film, MARNIE was not the critical or commercial success of his previous outings, it still has enough good in it that makes it a worthwhile film to watch.
Starring Tippi Hedren (THE BIRDS) and Sean Connery (fresh off his James Bond success in DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), MARNIE is, basically, a "two-hander" (a film that is primarily focused on conversation between 2 people) about an habitual thief, Marnie, with deep psychological troubles who is loved (and handled) by a man who is seeking to get to the root of what makes her tick.
And..in someone else's hands..this film could have been overly melodramatic, but in Hitchcock's adroit hands, it is a deep and disturbing psychological thriller that succeeds more often than it doesn't.
Starting with what works, Hitchcock's Direction (obviously) is at the fore. He knows how to play out a moment - especially a scene where Marnie steals from a safe. Hitchcock locks the camera in place and plays the scene with no music and just letting the events play out. It is a typical suspenseful Hitchcock scene and very well done.
The other thing that works is the performance of Connery. His charm and screen charisma shines brightly. making a problematic character like the one Connery portrays seemingly benign. Also...Tippi Hedren's performance at the end of this movie almost rescues her character...almost.
What doesn't work? Well...let's start with the title character, Marnie, as played by Hedren. She just doesn't have the charisma and charm of Connery and never really brings her character to life. She overacts at times when she has one of her "episodes" (I would think that both Hitchcock and Hedren share the blame for this) it is almost laughable in it's over-acting and she just seems in over her head with this role. It is said that Hitchcock had the film and role of Marnie written specifically as a comeback vehicle for Grace Kelly. It is too bad that this didn't come to pass, as I would have LOVED to see what an actress of her caliber would have done with this role.
The other thing that doesn't really work for me is the 2 characters at the forefront of this film. Both Hedren's Marnie and Connery's Mark Rutland are not likeable (though, as I said earlier, Connery's charm and charisma rescue's the Rutland character), but neither of these characters are ones that us, the audience, particularly care for - and that is a problem with a film that is pretty much focused on these characters.
Not one of Hitchcock's best...but still good...and the ending almost makes up for the weaknesses of the earlier parts of the movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - even mediocre Hitchcock is till pretty good.
And...you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
And while this film, MARNIE was not the critical or commercial success of his previous outings, it still has enough good in it that makes it a worthwhile film to watch.
Starring Tippi Hedren (THE BIRDS) and Sean Connery (fresh off his James Bond success in DR. NO and FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE), MARNIE is, basically, a "two-hander" (a film that is primarily focused on conversation between 2 people) about an habitual thief, Marnie, with deep psychological troubles who is loved (and handled) by a man who is seeking to get to the root of what makes her tick.
And..in someone else's hands..this film could have been overly melodramatic, but in Hitchcock's adroit hands, it is a deep and disturbing psychological thriller that succeeds more often than it doesn't.
Starting with what works, Hitchcock's Direction (obviously) is at the fore. He knows how to play out a moment - especially a scene where Marnie steals from a safe. Hitchcock locks the camera in place and plays the scene with no music and just letting the events play out. It is a typical suspenseful Hitchcock scene and very well done.
The other thing that works is the performance of Connery. His charm and screen charisma shines brightly. making a problematic character like the one Connery portrays seemingly benign. Also...Tippi Hedren's performance at the end of this movie almost rescues her character...almost.
What doesn't work? Well...let's start with the title character, Marnie, as played by Hedren. She just doesn't have the charisma and charm of Connery and never really brings her character to life. She overacts at times when she has one of her "episodes" (I would think that both Hitchcock and Hedren share the blame for this) it is almost laughable in it's over-acting and she just seems in over her head with this role. It is said that Hitchcock had the film and role of Marnie written specifically as a comeback vehicle for Grace Kelly. It is too bad that this didn't come to pass, as I would have LOVED to see what an actress of her caliber would have done with this role.
The other thing that doesn't really work for me is the 2 characters at the forefront of this film. Both Hedren's Marnie and Connery's Mark Rutland are not likeable (though, as I said earlier, Connery's charm and charisma rescue's the Rutland character), but neither of these characters are ones that us, the audience, particularly care for - and that is a problem with a film that is pretty much focused on these characters.
Not one of Hitchcock's best...but still good...and the ending almost makes up for the weaknesses of the earlier parts of the movie.
Letter Grade: B
7 stars (out of 10) - even mediocre Hitchcock is till pretty good.
And...you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Birds (1963) in Movies
Feb 25, 2019
Hitchcock at his best
1960 saw the release of Psycho, Hitchcock's signature work, but Psycho is not the only film that people think of when talking about his work. The Birds, made three years later, has a warm place in film fans hearts and a much larger fan base than people seem to think.
I know more people who dislike Psycho compared to those who like The Birds and I feel that this is most defiantly Alfred Hitchcock at his best. Rear Window and Vertigo are also up there but this film offers the right blend of shocks and a disturbing sense of dread, that makes it accessible by many, whilst still being fun to watch.
The birds have turned. Nature is taking her wrath upon man for a brief moment, but the sheer scale of the idea that nature could turn on us is a primally frightening concept. I do feel that this was the vain in which M. Night Shyamalan's dismal The Happening was attempting to tap into decades later, but Hitchcock got this right first time, for all time.
The effects are dated but their impact is still strong, as the ideas are so pronounced that there's little need to show anything. The acting is decent and the direction, though not as perfect as many would argue for Hitch, still doing the job well. This is a timeless and more accessible Hitchcock classic than Psycho, yet often dismissed and I wonder why?
Both films are clear genre pieces and are still being drawn from today. This is a textbook thriller with a natural twist and a dire tone. But the image of the crow massing on telegraph poles is a simple as it it frighting, just because it happens every day
I know more people who dislike Psycho compared to those who like The Birds and I feel that this is most defiantly Alfred Hitchcock at his best. Rear Window and Vertigo are also up there but this film offers the right blend of shocks and a disturbing sense of dread, that makes it accessible by many, whilst still being fun to watch.
The birds have turned. Nature is taking her wrath upon man for a brief moment, but the sheer scale of the idea that nature could turn on us is a primally frightening concept. I do feel that this was the vain in which M. Night Shyamalan's dismal The Happening was attempting to tap into decades later, but Hitchcock got this right first time, for all time.
The effects are dated but their impact is still strong, as the ideas are so pronounced that there's little need to show anything. The acting is decent and the direction, though not as perfect as many would argue for Hitch, still doing the job well. This is a timeless and more accessible Hitchcock classic than Psycho, yet often dismissed and I wonder why?
Both films are clear genre pieces and are still being drawn from today. This is a textbook thriller with a natural twist and a dire tone. But the image of the crow massing on telegraph poles is a simple as it it frighting, just because it happens every day
Veronica Pena (690 KP) rated Rear Window (1954) in Movies
Apr 22, 2020
big let down.
I had such high hopes for this film. I saw the trailer, I've seen clips, I really thought, "This is the Alfred Hitchcock film that is going to restore my belief in his abilities." And alas. I was let down immensely. This film moves at a snail pace with a shit ending. I don't know how else to put it. I just hated every minute of it. I literally had to stop watching on multiple occasions because it was bad and I couldn't bear to hold on and wait for something to happen. Again, Hitchcock's blatant savior complex and overall hatred for women is obvious through this film and it's just gross. It doesn't sit well, it doesn't age well, and I just don't like him.
Yikes.
Yikes.