Rebet
Alfred
Hitchcock has a ton of movies on the List. That is no secret, in fact it may be
the first thing you notice when you flip through the book. I will stay out of
the discussion of whether his many entries are deserved or not and just enjoy
the opportunity to actually follow a director’s development over the years.
Where early Hitchcock films had a tendency to be all over the place, he
gradually developed a sharper focus so that eventually he could produce exactly
the message he wanted. I think that with “Rope” this focus is finally
perfected.
This is a
movie where everything else is cut away, no dallying around. From start to end
Hitchcock focuses his and our attention on a single evening in an apartment
where a murder has been committed.
The background
stories on “Rope” are very much about the technique used. That Hitchcock wanted
to make this look like a stage play in real time and therefore tried to make it
seems like there are no cuts at all, that we are there all the time. It is
interesting and it works as intended, but it is also a bit of a gimmick and not
really the reason this film is as good and interesting as it is. I feel that
this gimmick steals the attention but in a way I should be pleased by that.
Because this may well be the reason there is a film at all. More about that
below.
“Rope” has
a number of interesting elements.
The first
is of course the murder itself. The two men living in the apartment, Brandon (John
Dall) and Phillip (Farley Granger) have killed an acquaintance called David,
hid him in a chest in the living room and invite a group of relatives to the
deceased to a party in the self-same room. It is morbid in the extreme and the
suspense is in whether or not the guests will discover the stiff. This is
mostly interesting because we are not really sure if we are hoping the body
will be discovered or that it will not be discovered and that is largely due to
the characters of the two perpetrators. Brandon is an asshole and clearly the
one who engineered the murder. He needs to go down and we are rooting against
him. Phillip on the other hand bears all the marks of one who are in this
against his will. He bitterly regrets the deed and is searching for a way out.
His nervousness and misery makes make us hope the body will not be discovered.
With his usual deft touch Hitchcock keeps us on that knife’s edge throughout
the movie before we find release. Especially the long scene seen from just
behind the chest where the unsuspecting Mrs. Wilson (Edith Evanson), the maid
of the boys, is clearing the chest and preparing to stuff the books back in the
chest, is nerve wracking.
Behind this
plot is the next layer, which is one of philosophy. This is just after the war
where a number of traumatic experiences on the world stage has thrown a glaring
light at the misbegotten idea that some people are better than others. I
suspect at this point (1948) the world has not yet fully digested these events
and so it is still a matter of debate. Well, to a point this is only the
beginning, the discussion is still going on, sadly as it is. In any case, in
the circles Brandon and Phillip moves in, the ideas on Nietche, that there is
some sort of übermench identifiable by a larger and more sophisticated
intellect, which is surrounded by lesser beings, who because they lack the
clarity of mind must be subservient to the übermench, lives well and good. The
old “house master” on their college, Rupert (James Stewart) has been promoting
these ideas, and Brandon has not only adopted them, but decided to live them
out. Instead of just talking about that some people deserve to die and that
some exalted few are free to exact that punishment on a whim, Brandon has
decided that he is one of those few and practically everybody else (with the
exception of Rupert) are those lesser beings. David, he decided, must die,
simply because he is a lesser being. David’s friend Kenneth (Douglas Dick) and
David’s girlfriend Janet (Joan Chandler) can be manipulated and David’s parents
can be mocked, all so Brandon can feel almighty.
It is this
move from talk to action that shocks Rupert so badly when faced with it. He may
have the role as “detective”, but he is also the teacher who is faced with a
student that actually listened and now reveals what horrors those words
actually meant. Much like Nazism took those words and slogans that were so easy
to banter around and took them to their natural conclusion in what became the
world’s biggest horror show ever. By what right can you claim to be a better
person and by what right can you enforce your judgment on others? Those are the
questions “Rope” asks us.
But that is
not enough. “Rope” has a third layer that may or may not be related to the two
above, but is not less interesting. In fact it makes the movie down right
unique. “Rope” is a very homosexual movie. Brandon and Phillip are living
together, shares one bedroom and behaves in every way as a couple. Homosexuality
is not mentioned by a word and there are no kisses or hugs or outright remarks
in that direction, but there is no need. It is very clear these two are together
and it is just as clear that Brandon is the one on top. This is just about
unheard of in American movies of this period and normally the censors would
have cracked down on much less than this. Homosexuality was after all the kind
of “filth” they were supposed to protect the innocent American population from.
My only explanation is that Hitchcock’s revolutionary technique stole all the
attention so the censors simply missed it. Amazing as it sounds.
Brandon may
be together with Phillip, but that is not where his love is. He wants Rupert.
Rupert is his teacher, but he is also Brandon’s idol and the entire evening can
be constructed as one big hit on Rupert. The stammering, the eagerness of
recognition and respect, damn, he wants to be found out by Rupert so Rupert can
see that Brandon is worthy of him. Phillip is of course upset that Brandon is
giving them away, but mostly I think he sees that Brandon plays up to Rupert
and he feels like the third wheel. This is a very advanced love triangle!
Rupert of
course is played by James Stewart and he is about the straightest man ever.
This means of course that Brandon’s love can never be returned and I think the
movie suffers a bit from it. Of course Stewart is excellent as the professorial
“detective” and he is even better as the academic who realizes what dangerous
crap he carelessly has been teaching, but the gay element is missing. In that
way it makes Brandon even more disturbed and blind, but I cannot help thinking
that that might not have been all the intension.
“Rope” is
simply one of the most interesting Hitchcock movies I have seen, maybe not the
best, but probably the most advanced. It worked completely for me and I have
not even mentioned the excellent script. The dialogue is so spot on and helps
to lubricate a message that is by no means a light one. A lot of people after
the war had to ask themselves what they had been thinking of. The übermench is
a very very disturbed character.
I've always thought it was a shame that Hitchcock who was such a master at cutting hampered himself so much in Rope. I think the story deserved a more cinematic treatment. But I respect him for experimenting and the topic was very well handled.
ReplyDeleteI am not so sure. Yes, this looks a lot like a stage play and in the beginning this annoyed me. It reminded me of the style from the very early years of cinema. Just filmed theater. But the annoyance passed and instead I got the feeling of being present. A naturalistic element we are not too used to in this period. That feeling made the act more gruesome and Brandon even more abhorrent. So, all in all I would say it worked.
DeleteI was pretty shocked by how gay Brandon and Philip are allowed to appear, but I don't think the censors could really do anything about it, as Hitchcock doesn't ever say that they are and there are no kisses or the such. I would think the actual plot would have been more bothersome to the censors, as Hitchcock, some fifty years earlier, had made a much tamer version of Michael Haneke's disturbing Funny Games.
ReplyDeleteThat is a very interesting reference and you are exactly right. The casual attitude towards violence and murder is truly frightening and should have been a tough one for the censors. Maybe that too got through due to the distraction of the technique. Earlier Hitchcock did show himself adept in dodging the censors. The kisses in Notorious for example, timed exactly to pass below the bar.
DeleteRope is a good movie, but a lot of the reason it's a good movie is because Hitchcock filmed it like a stage play. I love the fact that the whole thing feels like a single take. It's almost a pure experiment, and it paid off brilliantly. I love how consistently Hitchcock pushed boundaries, and pushed multiple boundaries at once.
ReplyDeleteHmmm...Yes, I agree, it is a good movie, even a very good movie, but I think the experiment was merely a tool to create the effect he wanted. I am more impressed with the story and the gutsy themes displayed.
Delete