Hitchcock's Repeated Compositions

We were discussing the similarity of the technique used in creating these two "trick shots" which reveal simultaneous action from The Man Who Knew Too Much and Vertigo at the WWH Facebook page, and it got me thinking about other images and juxtaposed shots that Hitchcock repeated in his films—kind of like the second Mrs. De Winter's father who liked the paint the same tree over again.

Here are just a few that come to mind:

Of course Hitchcock used stairways so very often, but the framing he used in The Lodger, Blackmail, and Vertigo were strikingly similar.

Designer Saul Bass had a hand in both the Vertigo title sequence and the shower sequence in Psycho, but it was a design that Hitchcock chose in two of his key films.

The Catholic Hitchcock repeated variations of his own Pietà, but the images in The Lodger and Topaz are most similar.

As Hitchcock's films progressed in the 1950s he explored more deeply the frailty of the human psyche. Notice how these two scenes in consecutive films—The Wrong Man and Vertigo—are nearly identical. Here a desperate Manny goes into Dr. Banay's office to ask about Rose's condition. Dr. Banay leans back on his desk, arms crossed, explaining the healing will take time. Later Manny departs, walking away from the camera down the long corridor of the sanitarium. Below, an equally desperate Midge goes into the office of Scottie's doctor and departs down a similar corridor after telling the doctor Mozart isn't going to help.

In each of these scenes from The Wrong Man and Psycho as the discussion turns to someone being institutionalized or being "put someplace", both Rose Balestrero and Marion Crane begin clutching and rubbing an arm.

In both of these scenes from The Man Who Knew Too Much and Topaz, the listener is receiving information he'd probably rather not have heard.

It doesn't matter whether it's the police or a couple of henchmen, on the front steps of your own home or through the lobby of a New York hotel in broad daylight, Hitchcock knew that being taken into a car against your will could be equally frightening and filmed these scenes from The Wrong Man and North by Northwest in much same way.

Then, of course, there's the way Hitchcock filmed kissing scenes, but we covered that already!

Revisiting Alfred Hitchcock's The Wrong Man

In mid-1955 while in production on the re-make of The Man Who Knew Too Much for Paramount Pictures, Alfred Hitchcock began planning a film that would be a dramatic departure from the up-beat Technicolor productions he made since leaving Warner Brothers two years earlier. Although Hitchcock had fulfilled his obligation under the terms of his original four-picture contract with Warner Bros., in February 1952 he agreed to produce and direct an additional film for the studio at no additional salary. (It is often stated that Hitchcock was to receive no salary for the additional film, but it should be noted that he was to share in the film’s profits.) 

Hitchcock left Warners after completing Dial M for Murder, yet it wasn’t long before the studio reminded Hitchcock of his informal promise of an additional, or fifth picture. The studio managed to do this just a few months before the original contract would expire. Knowing that Hitchcock was about to embark on a large scale production for Paramount, Warner Bros. requested an extension of the original agreement so that they could still get their “free” Hitchcock picture, and so on April 13, 1955, Hitchcock entered into an agreement to produce and direct The Wrong Man for Warner Bros.

Briefly, the story was based on the actual events surrounding the wrongful arrest of Christopher Emmanuel (Manny) Balestrero, a musician in New York’s Stork Club. Subsequent to his arrest for armed robbery and during the course of preparing his defense for trial, Manny’s wife, Rose, suffers a mental breakdown and is placed in a sanitarium. Later, Manny is cleared when his “double” is apprehended, but the damage to Rose’s psyche has already been done. 

This was a departure from the recent upbeat enertainments that Hitchcock had turned out in his collaboration with screenwriter John Michael Hayes. Hayes told Hitchcock as much, which added to the growing friction between writer and director. Another reason Hayes expressed reluctance to write the project was that the story had recently been done on television as "The Idendified Man" for Robert Montgomery Presents. 

Robert Ellenstein, who would later play Licht in North by Northwest, played the role of Manny in the TV production "The Identified Man" aka "A Case of Identity" in 1954.

The real Manny Balestrero reenacts the walk to his front door for Life.

Hitchcock's depiction of Manny's walk to his front door with Henry Fonda as Balestrero.

Of course, Hitchcock did not merely want to redo what had already been done on television, and despite his promoting the film as a factual case, his intention was not to make a docu-drama. Hitchcock's focus would be on the mental breakdown of Rose Balestrero. With the exception of North by Northwest (which was actually initiated with Hayes), Hitchcock's post-Hayes films—The Wrong Man, Vertigo, Psycho, The Birds, and Marnie—would each focus on the psychological trauma a character endures. In the case of The Wrong Man, although Manny is ultimately cleared of the crimes for whch he is accused, the real nightmare of Rose's remained.

Manny (Robert Ellenstein) tells Rose (Florence Anglin) that he has been cleared of the robberies.

In Hitchcock's depiction of the same sequence, the focus is on Rose (Vera Miles).

Not wanting to end the film on the bleak note of Manny leaving Rose in the institution, the final shot of The Wrong Man shows the Balestreros and their two boys strolling beneath the palm trees of sunny Florida, with the an epilogue stating, “Two years later, Rose walked out of the sanitarium — completely cured. Today she lives happily in Florida with Manny and the two boys ..and what happened seems like a nightmare to them — but it did happen...”

It has long been contended that Warner Bros. insisted on tacking on the final shot of the Balestrero family along with a "happy" epilogue over Hitchcock's "loud objections." Fortunately, the interesting circumstances under which the script of The Wrong Man was written resulted in a trail of correspondence between the director and his writers, playwright Maxwell Anderson and Hitchcock’s longtime friend and occasional collaborator Angus MacPhail, which reveals that the director had both the final shot, and the reassuring epilogue in mind even before the screenplay was completed. 

MacPhail and Hitchcock worked in New York, researching factual details, interviewing persons like Judge Groat, (Rose's doctor) Dr. Banay, (Manny's attorney) O'Connor and (Prosecuting Attorney) Mr. Crisoda, and laying out the story and the visuals more or less in treatment form. As they completed each section of the story, they sent pages to Maxwell Anderson, at his home in Connecticut. Anderson then set about adding the dialogue, which MacPhail would edit and incorporate into the final script as approved by the director.

Correspondence between Hitchcock, MacPhail and Anderson reveals that Hitchcock fully intended both the final shot of the Balestrero family in Florida, as well as the epilogue. As early as March 20, 1956, while the script was in preparation, Hitchcock indicated in a letter to Anderson, "if you would have a 'go' at the words that are to be printed on the screen at the end, I would be very grateful. Not only does this give us a note of relief, but more than that, they [the audience] have been seeing a factual case and I think this is very important." 

Although Hitchcock had asked Anderson, it was MacPhail who had the first "go" at the epilogue, which he turned in on April 4, 1956. MacPhail’s epilogue went as follows: "Two years after these events Rose Balestrero walked out of the sanitarium completely cured. Today she lives happily in Florida with the two boys. Now they can hardly believe that this nightmare experience was reality. But it did happen to Manny Balestrero, and but for the grace of God, it might happen to you." 

MacPhail sent his "temporary" epilogue to Anderson, who replied in a letter dated April 5, "I think it's essentially good, but I don't personally think the deity intrudes in these matters, so I just left him out." Anderson simply cut MacPhail's "and but for the grace of God". In a letter to Anderson dated April 10, MacPhail indicated, "[Hitchcock] would like the Epilogue to end up on a note of warm reassurance and not on a chilling reminder," adding, "I accept your reproof about the deity." 

Anderson replied on April 11, "As for the Epilogue, it seems to me Hitch's objection should simply be remedied by excising the two final sentences. We don't need them ... The warm reassurance is there in the Florida sky and in the family group." And regarding the reference to God, Anderson wrote, "I didn't mean to reprove anybody about the deity, but my father was a Baptist minister and I'm allergic." 

As far as Hitchcock was concerned though, the reference to the Almighty might well have been left in, for as he expressed to a reporter from the Los Angeles Examiner, "The [film's] suspense is due to the thought that will strike everyone, 'There, but for the grace of God, go I.'"

Hitchcock Halloween Contest

Writing with Hitchcock is proud to announce our first Hitchcock Halloween Contest!

Now is your chance to get into the spooky spirit of the season by dressing up as your favorite character from an Alfred Hitchcock movie—Norman Bates, Melanie Daniels, Richard Hannay, Mrs. Danvers? Or perhaps you'll dare to disguise yourself as the Master of Suspense himself? In any event the contest is very simple…

Between now and 12:00 AM Eastern, Tuesday, November 2, 2010, submit your photo to the Hitchcock Halloween Contest by posting it on the Writing with Hitchcock Facebook Wall.

At 12:00 PM Eastern, Tuesday, November 2, 2010, all submissions will be placed in an Album and judging will begin in the form of a poll on the page. The poll will be open until 12:00 PM, Sunday, November 7, 2010 when the winners will be announced.

• FIRST PRIZE: Two Orchestra Seats to The 39 Steps at New World Stages in New York City
• SECOND PRIZE: Psycho (50th Anniversary Edition) Blu-ray
• THIRD PRIZE: North by Northwest (50th Anniversary Edition) DVD

For more info on The 39 Steps visit www.39Stepsny.com. For tickets visit Telecharge.com. 

CONTEST RULES: You must be a member of the Writing with Hitchcock page to submit a photo. It must be you in the photo. You may only vote in the poll one time. You must be a member of the Writing with Hitchcock page to vote. Yes, you can encourage all your friends to join the page and vote for you! 

CONTEST RESTRICTIONS: First Prize is valid for two orchestra seats to The 39 Steps at New World Stages in New York City on a select performance through December 30, 2010. Winner will have the option to choose from a variety of dates. Blackout dates apply. Second and Third Prizes are Region 1, US Release only.

The Trouble with Harry—Perhaps a secret to Hitchcock's Art

What is the trouble with The Trouble with Harry? Why does it remain among the least analyzed of Hitchcock’s 1950s films (probably beating out only Dial M for Murder and Stage Fright)? To date, few have seen fit to rank The Trouble with Harry as a key work in the director’s canon. (By far, I most admire Ed Sikov's chapter on the film in his 1996 book Laughing Hysterically. And more recently, Joel Gunz of AlfredHitchcockGeek.com, has devoted several excellent blog posts to the film.)

For obvious reasons critics have preferred delving into the tragedy of Vertigo, the refined technique of Rear Window, the sweeping movement of North by Northwest, for these films enjoy a certain following because they touched audiences in a way that Hitchcock and his collaborators had planned. They were carefully constructed and designed in a manner consistent with a majority of the director's work. But The Trouble with Harry is so very faithful to the novel by Jack Trevor Story that the film is problematic, creating an instance where Hitchcock’s signature is not easily discerned.

To begin by searching for what Hitchcock brought to the material is the wrong approach. Instead, one must look at The Trouble with Harry for what it brought to Hitchcock. His legendary technique for being “ruthless” when adapting literary material was severely reined in on this one. Hitchcock found a novel that truly spoke to him.

Something I had the pleasure of discussing at length with John Michael Hayes, was the different approach taken by him in each of the four screenplays he wrote for Hitchcock. In one he had concentrated on telling the story cinematically, consistently falling back on the director's preference for supporting the narrative through technique. In another they had fun planting visual and verbal clues, and so on. But Hayes recalled that Hitchcock didn’t want Harry tampered with very much. Had the story been reworked to build up a role for Cary Grant, a notion Hitchcock had considered early on, the film might have had more commercial appeal, but as Hayes pointed out, "Hitch didn't want to lose what was already there."

What was already there was a story where someone's death has an impact on a group of characters, bringing them together, and in this case, resulting in a romance. One need only look at Rebecca, Spellbound, The Paradine Case, Rope, Stage Fright, I Confess, Rear Window, Vertigo, and Psycho to find variations of this dynamic. Additionally, the theme of redemption looms large in The Trouble with Harry. In Writing with Hitchcock I demonstrate the significance of the confession in Hitchcock’s films, and its particular importance in The Trouble with Harry, a film in which each of the major characters has a confession of sorts.

As for a bit of trivia … John Michael Hayes began working on the script while in Cannes for the location filming of To Catch a Thief—in fact, Hitchcock had him working on both scripts at the same time, since many of To Catch a Thief's scenes were being rewritten during filming. Some of the second unit footage of the New England landscapes which were also filmed in VistaVision made its way into Peyton Place, which was also scripted by John Michael Hayes. Both films share a number of shots that follow their title sequences. Not long ago, I visited some of the Vermont locations used in the film—Morrisville, East Craftsbury, and Craftsbury Common. In fact, the little square in Craftsbury Common, which in the film is opposite the Wiggs's Emporium (where Sam looks off and sees a few cows and asks "Do you think we'd do any better on Fifth Avenue?"), looks very much the same as it did in 1954, minus a few trees.