Jo-B Sebastian September 20, 2008

Film History Analytical Paper #2

064037

Notorious: Alfred Hitchcock and his Universal Acceptance

The name Alfred Hitchcock is synonymous with suspense, just the mere thought of his name conjures

up images of crazed birds, swirling blood, and glinting knives. Hitchcock is undeniably one of the most influential

Hollywood directors in film history; he is often hailed as the “Master of Suspense” (Finler, 1992) because of his

technical and artistic excellence in the field of film, or more specifically, in the field of the suspense/thriller genre. With

his personal style and unique vision, Hitchcock was essentially able to create his own genre, one that had elements of

suspense, horror and romance, and proved himself to be one of the pioneering members of the suspense genre.

(Chandler, 2005) Hitchcock invented many cinematographic techniques that he utilized to heighten the mood and help

portray situations in a more true to life sense with the added personal style Hitchcock was so well known for. (Truffaut,

1983)

Born on the 13th of August (a Friday) in 1899, Alfred Joseph Hitchcock went through a somewhat troubled

childhood, being put through awkward punishments, wrongfully blamed for many incidents and enduring the harsh

punishment of 1900s Jesuit school discipline, his childhood experiences would later influence many elements of his

future films. (Chandler, 2005) But it wasn’t until the early 1920s that Hitchcock started working in the film industry. A

job as a title card designer for silent films sparked an interest in photography and he was inspired to further a career in

film. His directorial debut came about in the form of Number 13, a film that was never finished due to its studio,

Islington Studios, being sold to Gainsborough pictures. (Truffaut, 1983) At the early age of twenty-three Hitchcock

penned his first official script, after self-teaching himself to script write by writing scripts from novels, Hitchcock was

hired for the film Woman on Woman where he worked not only as a script writer but as art director and set designer. It

was also through this film that Hitchcock was introduced to his future wife, Alma Reville, a young film editor who had

worked in Islington with Hitchcock. Hitchcock had in fact met Reville prior to this film but was always too shy to

approach her; he took a chance and hired her as an assistant for Woman on Woman. (Chandler, 2005) Hitchcock was led

to Germany through his work on the film The Blackguard (1925), which was filmed in Berlin. It was here that

Hitchcock was introduced to German Expressionism, often stating the movement as an influence in his later work,

naming Fritz Lang as one of his influences. (Truffaut, 1983) Hitchcock’s real directorial debut came in the form of the

commercial failure, The Pleasure Garden. Hitchcock made a comeback in what many believe to be the birth of the
Hitchcock film, The Lodger: a Story of the London Fog (1926) it is in this film that Hitchcock established his style and

vision as a thriller/suspense writer. (Truffaut, 1983) The film was a success and established Hitchcock as a competent

film maker. It is worth noting that a look at Hitchcock’s films, especially his earlier films, shows the expressionist

influence working in Germany had had on him.

After a string of successful British films, Hitchcock had become a powerful force in British cinema. In 1939,

David O. Selznick (the well-known Hollywood producer, infamous for his manipulation of his productions) contracted

Hitchcock for a 7-film deal. (Wood, 1965) He accepted due to the promise of more creative opportunities and also due

to the fact that the quality of films in British Cinema at the time was greatly being reduced. (Chandler, 2005) Because

of Hitchcock’s established name in British cinema he was able to negotiate this deal; it was then that the Hitchcocks

moved to Hollywood. It was the beginning of Hitchcock’s reign over the Suspense genre and, on a bigger scale,

Hollywood. Hitchcock was not just the Master of Suspense; (Finler, 1992) he is, in a sense, also the father of suspense.

His Hollywood films introduced him to a wider audience, enabling him wider distribution and recognition. Hitchcock

had become, and remains to be, a household name.

It is the author’s belief that Hitchcock was accepted not only in America but also in other countries, proving

him to be universally accepted, hence the title. Hollywood cinema is often regarded as inhibited, lacking in many

elements that film makers from other countries (France, Italy etc.) consider essential in creating a true and remarkable

film, this is due mainly to the fact that the standards of commercialized Hollywood inhibit the creative vision of their

directors, with producers (Like the infamous David O. Selznick) often interfering with the director’s work in order to

ensure a more acceptable production and in turn a better chance of commercial success. With this in mind, it is

astonishing that Hitchcock was able to maintain his directorial power yet still was able to abide by the standards of

Hollywood, allowing for acceptance in both domestic and foreign markets. This paper aims to prove that Hitchcock was

universally accepted and n order to do so it is important to examine his reception in America, as well as his reception in

foreign countries, and to further the study, what made him so different from his contemporaries and why he was able to

reach audiences outside America, while focusing on films released during the “Golden Era” of Hollywood cinema.

(1940s-1950s)

The suspense genre was said to be pioneered by Alfred Hitchcock and, in a fact that may prove the theory that

Hitchcock started it all; the suspense genre grew in popularity as Hitchcock began directing. Hitchcock’s European

influence was significantly evident throughout his work and it helped set him apart from his fellow Hollywood
directors, comparing him to his contemporaries it is crystal clear that Hitchcock was in a league of his own. Perhaps

because he was educated in Europe he was able to look beyond the standards of Hollywood and was able to break free

from the American mould that Hollywood had created for their productions, providing a fresh, new style that film

makers then would be inspired by and its effects can still be felt to this very day. Hitchcock was surprisingly resistant to

the meddling of Hollywood producers, something that plagued many Hollywood productions, but this can be explained

by looking at Hitchcock’s work ethic. Each of Hitchcock’s films was thoroughly planned and amazingly detailed, all

the while making sure to keep within the budget; this granted him freedom from the producers and allowed him to do as

he pleased. (Starr, 2007)Throughout the 30s to the 60s, the suspense genre had become a very popular field, and taking

this into account many directors have tried their hand at it, though many not even coming close to what Hitchcock had

been able to achieve. But Hitchcock’s influence can be seen even as early as the 50s.

In 1952, British director Roy Ward Baker’s Don’t Bother to Knock was released, a psychological thriller

starring Marilyn Monroe (in an attempt to prove herself as a serious actress) as a borderline psychotic babysitter and her

struggle with insanity and the effects of her troubled past. Many of the elements of Don’t Bother to Knock were similar

to Hitchcock’s own style. Not surprisingly, Baker had worked for Hitchcock as an assistant director and in turn was

heavily influenced by Hitchcock’s style and direction. Looking at Hitchcock’s films as a whole it is easy to see that he

injected psychological conflicts into many of his films, deepening the level of suspense, adding to the complexity of the

plot. Most of these psychological conflicts dealt with very controversial topics at the time (and, to an extent, remain

controversial to this day) such as incest psychosis, and, one of Hitchcock’s favourites (Chandler, 2005), obsession,

something which is disturbingly explored in one of Hitchcock’s greatest films, Vertigo (1958). Moving back to Don’t

Bother to Knock, Monroe’s character is a fresh-out-of-the-asylum “recovering” delusional woman who is hired by an

upper class couple, staying at a hotel, to baby sit their daughter. The innocent-looking Monroe delivers a convincing

performance as her demure manner turns to sinister as we discover that Nell (the name of Monroe’s character) isn’t

quite well in the head. Suffering from delusions (as seen when calling out to her dead lover) and a strange detachment

from reality, paying little regard to the feelings or safety of the girl she is babysitting, even abusing the child as we see

later on in the film, tying her up and gagging her mouth. As the film goes on we are introduced to a heartbroken pilot,

Jed, whose lover had just broken up with him. Jed notices Nell while looking outside his window as her hotel room

window faces his. Various “Hitchcockian” themes arise throughout the film, one being when Jed “spies” on Nell,

watching her change and quietly observing her. Very reminiscent of Hitchcock’s previous films such as Shadow of a
Doubt (1943), where Uncle Charlie, the antagonist of the story (a serial killer), watches his niece, who has discovered

Uncle Charlie’s crimes, from behind a window, quietly watching her. Perhaps it is even more evident in a later film of

his, Rear Window (1954), which takes place entirely in a man’s bedroom as he observes his neighbour’s activities

through the use of a telescope. A sense of voyeurism is established, but in Jed’s case this voyeurism is broken when

Nell discovers him, and in turn flirting back, provoking Jed to call Nell in her hotel room, starting a strange “love story”

and unfolding the secrets of Nell’s past. A major theme of many Hitchcock films is the conflict of mistaken identity and

false accusation. In Strangers on a Train (1951), for example, a budding young tennis stars is wrongfully accused of the

murder of his estranged wife, or take To Catch a Thief (1955) where Cary Grant’s character is, again, wrongfully

accused for the robbery of a rich woman, Grant’s love interest also happens to be her daughter, further complicating

things. In Baker’s Don’t Bother to Knock Jed is wrongfully accused of forcing his way into Nell’s employee’s hotel

room, mistaken for an intruder as Nell tells her nosey neighbours he had forced his way in. But Hitchcock’s influences

don’t stop just at the themes but extend even to the cinematography. Baker used close ups and zoom-ins in order to

convey important information, very much in the vein of Hitchcock’s style. In a particular scene, as Nell is putting on

perfume the camera zooms in to focus on her wrists, which we see bear the mark of a razor slashing, further adding to

the establishment of Nell’s character, this technique can be compared to Hitchcock’s use of zoom ins and close ups,

treating the camera as if it were the audiences own eyes, (Bays, 2007) following the same human qualities eyes possess,

such as wandering across the set and focusing on interesting objects, and in effect causing the audience to feel as if they

were part of the story itself and all the more adding to the suspense of the story by helping to reveal information to the

audience, sometimes even garnering a shocked reaction. Hitchcock humanized the camera, inserting many shots that

mimic what the character would be seeing, like in Notorious (1946) as Alicia drives through Miami, we are shown a

shot of what her eyes would have seen, obscured by her hair or as Alicia wakes up and we are shown what she sees as

she looks up, showing the audience an upside down and “topsy turvy” view of Cary Grant. This point-of-view

technique Hitchcock employs adds a sense of humanization, a factor that sets him apart from the standard Hollywood

cinematography and something that would be emulated by film makers later on.

Examining and comparing Don’t Bother to Knock to Hitchcock’s own films it’s clear to see that he has heavily

influenced the suspense/thriller genre, something that isn’t surprising considering he was one of its founders. But while

he was able to influence many films none are able to completely capture or perhaps best the film making excellence

Hitchcock had achieved. Perhaps a main thing that many of his contemporaries lacked was Hitchcock’s interest in
mixing the genres, he loved to mix carefully measured amounts of different genres into his films. For example, To

Catch a Thief contained elements of suspense, of action, romance and most especially comedy. “For me, suspense

doesn't have any value if it's not balanced by humour." – Alfred Hitchcock. (Bays, 2007) True to his word, Hitchcock

loved to juxtapose humour with suspense; his dry, deadpan humour and wit are very prevalent throughout many films.

The contrast between the humour and the suspense allows the suspense in the film to become more pronounced, the

irony he implants adds to the emotion of the film. It is perhaps this unique quality that greatly sets him apart from his

contemporaries, films like Don’t Bother to Knock and Niagara (1953) are clearly lacking in this area and as Hitchcock

said, their suspense seems to lack any value. Contrary to what might be obvious, humour does not detract from

suspense; “In fact, he argued that humour heightens the drama and makes it even more potent. “ (Bays, 2007) It is

perhaps this facet of “Hitchcockian” film making that sets him apart from many of his contemporary and even modern

film makers, many unable to grasp and utilize the dark, subtle and often deadpan humour Hitchcock was famous for,

enabling Hitchcock to detach himself from the typical Hollywood director and set himself on a new platform of film

making.

Despite Hitchcock’s uniqueness among his Hollywood peers his reception in Hollywood definitely proves his

mainstream success. Hitchcock’s films were, more often than not, met with great praise and his releases proved to be

very profitable in America among other countries. (Truffaut, 1983) Seeing as how Hitchcock defied many of the

Hollywood standards of the time it is strange that his films had such great reception in America, who, by then, was

already used to the Hollywood standard. Hitchcock’s success may be attributed to the fact that Hitchcock had the

uncanny ability to manipulate his audience, Hitchcock called it “Directing the Audience” (Truffaut, 1983). Hitchcock

directed his films in a way that included the audience, he made sure to make his characters and stories relatable to the

audience, enabling them to immerse themselves in the story and sympathize with the characters. Hitchcock focused on

emotions in order to connect with his audience, looking at many of the situations his characters go through it is

seemingly hard to relate with them, but the emotions the characters feel, that is where the relation comes in. Hitchcock

was surprisingly spot-on when it came to romance and love scenes, for someone who had never been with a woman

until the age of 24 (Chandler, 2005)he recreated love scenes with remarkable emotion, take for example the “infamous”

kissing scene of Notorious (1946) between Cary Grant and Ingrid Bergman, often called the “Longest kissing scene

ever on film” (Truffaut, 1983) the scene (all done in one continuous take, also slyly defying the 3 second kissing limit

enforced by the American Censorship Board) is so charged with sexual energy that it is impossible to not feel
Bergman’s longing and Grant’s detachment (as he is seen doing other activities during their kiss, answering a phone,

perhaps in hopes of being called to work.). His brilliance in portraying scenes of love comes as a shock seeing as how

he was raised in a 19th Century family, and taking into consideration that he himself was shy and inhibited when it came

to women. (Chandler, 2005) Hitch thought it an important part of film making that the film’s plot and characters be

relatable, it was for this reason that Hitchcock refused to create films in the Sci-Fi genre, because it was too fantastical

and not easy to relate to. (Truffaut, 1983) Hitchcock was able to make his audience feel for his characters, to

sympathize with a character, even after exploiting his/her imperfections and playing with the dark side of the human

being. Like in the ending of Notorious, the film’s villain Alex Sebastian was left to die by Grant and Bergman. One

cannot help but feel sorry for him, despite his cruelty and deception. The audience is led to feel sympathy for this man

they once felt hatred for, even feared. Hitchcock loved to play with the dark side of the human mind, often exposing his

characters to extreme situations which cause them to doubt their own morality and, in a sense, the audience is often led

to doubt their own morality as well, a good example of this is Strangers In a Train (1951) where protagonist is caught

in a dilemma, should he kill the antagonist’s father? Should he hold up his end of the “bargain”? We find out that his

morality gets the better of him, but for even just a moment, the protagonist was re-evaluating his beliefs and his morals.

As the audience watches they are also left to re-evaluate their beliefs and morals as they themselves make a choice, do

they urge him to do it? Or do they protest his very entertainment of the idea that he should commit murder? Hitchcock’s

involvement of the audience allows the audience to become more than just observers; it allows them to become a part of

the story.

From the start, Hitchcock was sure to set the line between surprise and suspense. In Truffaut’s interview with

Hitchcock he described this difference, stating that in suspense, a particular element is revealed to the audience while

the character is left in the dark, as opposed to surprise where that element is left concealed until the character finds out

about it. Hitchcock gave a very good example which more or less explains this definition: Two people are talking over a

table when suddenly the table explodes, it is then revealed that a bomb had been implanted on the bottom of the table,

this, Hitchcock says, is surprise, the audience is surprised by the sudden explosion without any inkling to its occurrence.

Taking the same storyline but approaching it in a suspense situation, the audience is shown that there is a bomb beneath

the table, perhaps they are shown the antagonist planting the bomb beneath the table. Since the audience knows about

the bomb they are left anticipating the explosion, perhaps they are shown intercut shots between the timer on the bomb

and the conversing people, the audience is then brought to the edge of their seats as they worry for the characters, as
each second goes by they are gripped by the anxiety of having to wait for the explosion. (Truffaut, 1983) This suspense

further involves the audience, including them in the story, in an anecdote Hitchcock shares with Truffaut, an audience

member seated next to Hitchcock in his premiere of Rear Window squirmed during the scene where Grace Kelly

searches the neighbour’s room as the neighbour himself enters the hallway, on his way back to his room. Obviously

upset, the audience member turns to her husband and begs him to “Do something!” (Truffaut, 1983) Suspense causes

the audience to want to interfere with the events happening in the film, as Hitch’s anecdote clearly proves.

All of these factors help to overcome the breaking of the Hollywood standard among Hitchcock’s audience,

and not only impressed and arrested his American audience but also attracted new viewers and transformed his

“novelty” genre into a serious and well appreciated one. It didn’t matter to audiences that his approaches were different

and, often times, jarring. The public was able to accept his films as masterpieces, as we now know them to be today.

Hitchcock’s creative and unique approaches to film making, including his European influences, have granted him

recognition not only in Hollywood but also in Europe, his continent of birth. The greatest example of this recognition is

perhaps Francois Truffaut’s admiration of Hitchcock. Truffaut, a prominent director of the French New Wave

Movement (whose style is considered to be very anti-Hollywood), greatly praised Hitchcock in his days as a film critic

and when he became a film maker himself, he cited Hitchcock as one of his main influences and even as one of his

inspirations. (Truffaut, 1983)

Truffaut says that his respect for Hitchcock comes from the fact that Hitchcock was not just a genius in certain

aspects of film making but was a genius in the entire process; in short he was the complete package. He was able to

perfectly conceptualize and assemble each shot, each scene, he examined and thought through every aspect of his films,

his excellence was not limited to any one element of his films. (Finler, 1992) As a film critic working for the Cahiers

du Cinema Truffaut initially praised most of Hitchcock’s work, but it was only when he became a film maker that he

was able to truly see the importance of Hitchcock’s films and his directorial achievements. (Truffaut, 1983)

Hitchcock’s recognition in foreign cinema circles such as from those directors of the French New Wave can be

attributed to Hitchcock’s unique approach to film making, as said earlier in this paper. His refreshing techniques and

twisted plot lines captivated not only American audiences but foreign audiences as well; his defiance of the Hollywood

standards earned him the attention and praise of European film critics and film goers alike. Perhaps it is also important

to note that the Auteur theory, which is the theory that a production should always bear the mark of the author/director,

cites Hitchcock as a major example. (Starr, 2007) Truffaut, whose contributions to this theory is more than significant,
points out that each and every one of Hitchcock’s films bears Hitchcock’s undeniable mark, such that upon watching

any of his films it is immediately clear that he directed this film, as they contain a style unique only to Hitchcock.

(Truffaut, 1983) As advocators of this theory, the French New Wave directors received Hitchcock’s films with great

praise, looking beyond his Hollywood film base and acknowledging Hitchcock’s film making ability, naming him one

of the greatest film makers in Film History. (Finler, 1992) Truffaut states that he holds Hitchcock in such high regard

because his films are “complete”:

“If I Apply the term “complete” to Hitchcock’s work, it is because I find in it

both research and innovation, a sense of the concrete and a sense of the abstract,
intense drama as well as a subtle brand of humour. His films are at once
commercial and experimental, as universal as William Wyler’s Ben Hur and as
confidential as Kenneth Anger’s Fireworks.” (Truffaut, 1983)

Truffaut’s description of Hitchcock’s films further proves its universality, and also brings back what was said

earlier, about Hitch’s tendency to mix genres, and do so perfectly. Hitchcock’s European influences clearly shines

through his work, and it is perhaps this which enabled him great reception in Europe and perhaps other foreign cinemas.

Because of the fact that he was able to “bend” the rules of Hollywood, European film makers did not find his films to be

confined to the standards Hollywood had created, also his technique was relatable and maybe even inspiring to

European film makers especially, seeing as how Hitchcock infused many of the techniques and ideas that he picked up

from his film career in Europe into his Hollywood films.

It has become clear that Hitchcock’s work has been universally accepted. Looking at his success in America

and in other foreign markets, particularly France, Hitchcock clearly was able to penetrate both domestic and foreign

markets. Because Hitchcock had managed to create a hybrid of European and Hollywood techniques and ideals he was

able to cater to both major cinemas, and through his unique film making style, impeccable attention to detail, and

interesting outlooks on audience mentality he was able to not only produce significant films but also films that were

commercially successful, thus stabilizing him as both a Box Office draw but at the same time earning him recognition

as a respected director both in America and in foreign cinema culture, evidently inspiring both American and foreign

film makers alike. He has been able to create a style that is distinctly his, a style that many have continuously tried to

emulate, and has proven himself as film making genius, whose influences will likely be felt for many decades to come.

His pioneering techniques and ideas have helped shape not just the suspense/thriller genre but the film industry itself

and has helped shaped cinema into what it is today.

Bibliography

Bays, J. (2007, December). Film Techniques of Alfred Hitchcock. Retrieved September 14,
2008, from Borgus: http://www.borgus.com/think/hitch.htm

Chandler, C. (2005). It's Only A Movie: Alfred Hitchcock, A Personal Biography. London:
Simon & Schuster UK Ltd.

Cook, D. A. (1996). A History of Narrative Film. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Duguid, M. (2003). Hitchcock's Style. Retrieved September 15, 2008, from BFI Screenonline:
http://www.screenonline.org.uk/tours/hitch

Finler, J. W. (1992). Hitchcock in Hollywood. New York: Continuum Publishing Company.

Starr, E. R. (2007). Alfred Hitchcock as an Auteur Filmmaker. Retrieved September 10, 2008,
from The Genesis and Application of the Auteur Theory:
http://www89.homepage.villanova.edu/elana.starr/pages/genesis_and_formulation_of_the_a.
htm

Truffaut, F. (1983). Hitchcock. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Wood, R. (1965). Hitchcock's Films. London: A. Zwemmer Limited.