"Hostel"

[Guest Trevor Swaim]

The "Psycho" remake was one of the worst films I've ever seen. It was a brillant example of how even the slightest changes in composition, camera placement and production design can change EVERYTHING.

 

It's all about perspective. Maybe someday you'll have some.

 

i can't agree more, I i normaly like the stuff Gus Van Sant does.

[Landon D. Parks]

I said the remake was better than the original, I never said I liked the remake.

[Greg Gross]

Hey Landon,

 

Can you imagine all these posts? All I said was if I didn't know better I would have thought

Mr. Hitchcock(God bless him)was on the set of "Hostel". Did you know that Brian De Palma

loved Hitchcock? I ran into a guy on a set tonight and he told me Mr. De Palma used to have

a large poster of Mr. Hitchcock,on the wall of his audition room in NYC. Have a good weekend!

Here's one of Mr. Hitchcock's quotes- "If I filmed "Cinderella", people would be expecting a

corpse to fall out of the coach". (Mr. Hitchcock,ca. 1961). This quote was taken from the book-

"Hitchcock" by Robert E. Kapsis.

 

Greg Gross

[Landon D. Parks]

Really? I would expected a fake looking skelton to fall out... A corpes would have given people on the 50's a hear attack...

[Wendell_Greene]

In Washington, D.C. there are two statues that stand outside the National Archives [where the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights are on display] on Pennsylvania Avenue.

 

One statue is called "Study the Past" and the other explains why: "What is Past is Prologue."

 

Sage wisdom that I feel would be applicable to anyone who wants to become a competent and skilled filmmaker, would you not agree?

[Michael LaVoie]

I've been reading a book on Hitchcock. It's called Vertigo - The making of a Hitchcock classic by Dan Auiller. Martin Scorsese wrote the foreword. I have to say, I always hated watching Hitchcock but I never really knew why exactly. Untill I read this book. It turns out, I'm not alone. Hitchcock's work wasn't universally loved and adored by all, the way the critics and film historians make it seem. His films are dense, complicated and sometimes just border on plain incoherent unless you really pay close attention. That's the main complaint I have. I can't get into the stories because I can't ignore the artifice of his mise en scenes and the heavy handed musical scores. I'd almost rather watch a Douglas Sirk film. At least I wouldn't be expected to take it so seriously.

 

Having said that, I still think he was a genius for his time.. Even if I find his work cold and inaccessible. It's a matter of taste. I happen to love Atom Egoyans films and a lot of people I know feel about him, the way I feel about Hitchcock.

[Landon D. Parks]

Thats Exactly how I feel... I'm not saying I don't like HIM as a person or His ability as a director, only that I don't care for his films.. Fancy Camera movements are only so much of what makes a good movie, and thats about the only area I feel he covers in his films.

Edited January 16, 2006 by Landon D. Parks

[Micah Fernandez]

It's true that you don't HAVE to study the past, as if it's a rule or something, but you will circumvent so many pitfalls by doing so. Ignoring what paths have been forged by the great directors only assures that you'll be hacking your way through a jungle, and in the end you'll find that you're gonna end up in the same place anyway.

 

But if you're set on being 'original', good luck reinventing the wheel.

Edited January 16, 2006 by Micah

[David Mullen ASC]

There are certain directors who are practically a film school onto themselves and Hitchcock is one of them. Anyone who doesn't take the time to study his techniques and his philosophy towards editing and camera placement is sorely missing out on an education; there isn't a day on a film set where some lesson from Hitchcock doesn't come into play, especially when dealing with subjective storytelling where point-of-view is critical.

 

And not all of Hitchcock's films have to be taken seriously; even his more serious ones like "Rear Window" are quite entertaining, and he made much lighter entertainment than that one. "The 39 Steps" and "The Lady Vanishes" are quite charming, and "To Catch a Thief" is quite frivolous entertainment.

 

Whenever I'm stuck as to how to break down a scene, I think "How would Hitchcock do it?" and usually it leads to some good ideas because I'm forced to think about whose scene it is emotionally and where I should be looking, and how information should be presented both to the main character and to the audience. So many films opt for the objective master angle, which is fine sometimes, but it's great to think psychologically about the scene and figuring out how to represent the emotional state of the character and how they view reality.

[Max Jacoby]

Whenever I'm stuck as to how to break down a scene, I think "How would Hitchcock do it?" and usually it leads to some good ideas

Well said David. Somehow I doubt the same would occur if one were to ask: How would Chris Columbus do it?

[Landon D. Parks]

Ok, first off. Will people please drop the "Chris Columbus" thing? Sure I think he's a good director, but does he have to come into every post I make? Second of all, I'm not saying Hitchcock is not a film school in hiself, or that he is not smart, I'm just saying I'm not into his films. I'm sure I'm not the only person on this forum who is not into his films?

 

I mean really Max, what your saying is that Hitchcock is briliant, but Columbus is dumber than a box of rock's. Lets put the Hitchcock thing this way: He may have pioneered moving the camera, but Henry Ford also Pioneered the Car, that Don't mean that when I'm re-building my car that I'm going to go back and "Watch how Henry did It"...

 

There is so much we can learn from the past... But really, all of Hitchcocks camera movements have been done in more recent films. So why go back and watch the same movement in a 40's film that I can in a 90's film? At least I'll be able to enjoy the movie I'm watching while I'm at it.

Edited January 17, 2006 by Landon D. Parks

[Scott Fritzshall]

I mean really Max, what your saying is that Hitchcock is briliant, but Columbus is dumber than a box of rock's. Lets put the Hitchcock thing this way: He may have pioneered moving the camera, but Henry Ford also Pioneered the Car, that Don't mean that when I'm re-building my car that I'm going to go back and "Watch how Henry did It"...

Actually that wouldn't be a bad idea.

[Landon D. Parks]

Yeah, if you like the design of the model T.... :lol: and umm, handcrancks.. ect

Edited January 17, 2006 by Landon D. Parks

[Wendell_Greene]

. Lets put the Hitchcock thing this way: He may have pioneered moving the camera, but Henry Ford also Pioneered the Car, that Don't mean that when I'm re-building my car that I'm going to go back and "Watch how Henry did It"...

 

 

D.W. Griffith pioneered moving the camera. Henry Ford didn't create first successful gasoline powered car in America. But rather he pioneered industrial mass production for mass consumption by creating the assembly line for workers to create his cars. So I agree, you wouldn't download a schematic for a Model T engine to give your Toyota a tune-up. But if you want a model for being a successful business man, then Ford and his methods would be worth studying.

 

And no, you don't need to learn how to use a Pathe camera or copy the blueprints for the dolly Griffith used did in "Intolerance" to understand how to move the camera. But understanding the contribution of these men and learning the principles of what they did, their cinematic "raison d'etre", if you will, can only add to your knowledge base as a filmmaker. Same goes for Hitchcock and other directors of the past.

 

You don't have to LIKE the films they made, you don't have to enjoy the content of their films. I certainly didn't like the subject matter of "Birth of a Nation", or the early one reel films of Thomas Edison denigrating black people, but I watched them so I could understand their role in the history of cinema.

 

Of course, if you choose not to, that's your choice as well.

[Keith Mottram]

Landon, it is perfectly acceptable for you to dislike Hitchcock, although you'd be pushed to find another filmmaker who does. but, i do need to ask which of his films you've seen- he shot over fifty and the last film was actually only thirty years ago. I would also say Psycho is not one of the best Hitchcock films in my opinion- one of his less subtle event movies. and dont worry if you cant find them in your local shittyplex plenty are available on DVD. in case you haven't seen North By Northwest I would really recomend that as a starter for someone with your tastes (and I'm not being patronising) it kind of set the blueprint for modern blockbusters.

 

If your interested here are my top five (what do other posters rate as theirs?)

 

in no particular order:

 

Notorious

North By Northwest

Rear Window

Strangers on a Train

Vertigo

 

 

Keith

Edited January 17, 2006 by keith mottram

[Mike Lary]

"D.W. Griffith pioneered moving the camera."

 

Murnau did some amazing stuff in The Last Laugh as well, strapping cameras on bicycles and sending them along ropes, and that was well before the majority of Hitchock's films.

[Michael Most]

Yeah, if you like the design of the model T.... :lol: and umm, handcrancks.. ect

 

Although we were all 17 once, and thought we understood it all, and the adult world at large was generally stupid, stuck in its old dinosaur ways, and unwilling and unable to either grasp the future or understand it, most of us eventually survived long enough to know just how short sighted and immature that world view was, not to mention we also learned how to spell properly. That said......

 

Is there a way to turn the clock forward, say about 10 years or so, so that Landon is grown up enough to not be making so many "I'm the future of filmmaking without actually knowing anything about the craft, its history, its techniques, or life in general" remarks here?

[Stuart Brereton]

Yeah, if you like the design of the model T.... :lol: and umm, handcrancks.. ect

 

Actually handcranks are making a comeback - just ask Tony Scott....

[David Mullen ASC]

I worry about a young filmmaker expending so much effort into deciding what he SHOULDN'T learn, closing off areas of exploration. I don't think that's the time to spend dividing things into good and bad, being judgmental, etc. What value can that serve, to write-off lessons from Hitchcock at 17? If anything, I'm always looking for new things to be inspired by, from the past and the present. You've got 100 years of cinema -- an artform with a relatively short life so far compared to painting -- so take some time to absorb it, learn from it, rather than dismissing whole chunks of it when there's no value in doing so.

 

I'm sure Landon's favorite directors of current cinema are probably not so dismissive of the past masters. If you want to learn from them, also learn what they learned from, and what they learned from learned from.

[Brad Grimmett]

I worry about a young filmmaker expending so much effort into deciding what he SHOULDN'T learn, closing off areas of exploration.

That's a good point. You can often be informed as much from what you DON'T like as you can from what you DO like. Understanding what you don't like, and why, is very important as a filmmaker. Ignoring things you don't like will only cause you to repeat someone else's mistakes.

Of course, only talking about filmmaking and never actually doing it doesn't help much either.

[Saul Pincus]

I'm sure Landon's favorite directors of current cinema are probably not so dismissive of the past masters. If you want to learn from them, also learn what they learned from, and what they learned from learned from.

It's funny, but of late I've felt that Spielberg's approach - at least in terms of shot breakdown - isn't too dissimilar to what Hitch would have done.

 

Saul

[Guest Peter Waal]

If your interested here are my top five (what do other posters rate as theirs?)

 

in no particular order:

 

Notorious

North By Northwest

Rear Window

Strangers on a Train

Vertigo

 

I've started thinking all of Hitchcock's movies are actually demented comedies in disguise, but maybe that says more about me than the movies. He's a genius any way you slice him up.

 

My top five:

 

Vertigo

Marnie

Rope

Rear Window

Psycho

[David Mullen ASC]

There's nothing wrong with disliking obvious crap or mediocrity, but when you're talking about critically respected works, it's a good idea to hold off final judgement until one has had a change to revisit the work, contemplate it longer. There's no need to make up one's mind about Hitchcock too early.

 

I fell asleep trying to watch Tarkovsky's "Andre Rubolov" on DVD but considering how many people I respect who like it, I'm holding off judgement until I can see it in a theater, and when I'm not tired. I remember that for years I didn't see "8 1/2" because some friends in college said "it was dumb" -- and then when I finally saw it, it became one of my favorite movies of all time. But I can see why some college-age kids might not get it -- it requires a somewhat cynical view of human relationships and of film production that is more prevalent as one gets older.

[Guest Peter Waal]

I've started thinking all of Hitchcock's movies are actually demented comedies in disguise, but maybe that says more about me than the movies. He's a genius any way you slice him up.

 

I think Hitchcock himself said Psycho was his idea of a comedy. Can't remember where I heard that.

[Landon D. Parks]

Everyone is entitled to there own opinion, I guess... Mine just so happends to be that Hitchcock Is not that great.. Maybe I'm wrong, I just might be... Maybe theres something I should be getting from his work that I just don't get yet? Maybe a will one day.. At this point in time though, every movie of his I have ever watched has put me alseep...

 

My top 3 movies of all time:

1. October Sky

2. Silence of the Lambs

3. Labyrinth

 

These films have something you can learn from also, most use amazing camera moves, have some of the best Cinematography I'v ever seen, and have a story that won't put me too sleep.

Edited January 18, 2006 by Landon D. Parks