The cantata has many different lyrics from the 1956 version, but no matter. The music is a thrilling addition to a scene of great suspense (as opposed to dread, which is what passes for suspense now), though Edna Best's tinny little squeek should have been overdubbed with a genuine scream. In that respect, Doris Day delivered.
Snark, snark. Who said it was a great piece of music? I'm checking what I wrote and I certainly didn't. Nor did I compare it to, nor mention Bach or Beethoven, you pretentious pedant.
The film was made in 1934 so I imagine that Edna Best started her career in silent movies. Anyway, I am full of admiration for the way at the end of the film she grabs the gun and shoots dead the terrorist who is threatening her young daughter. A truly strong woman.
I prefer the 1934 version to the 1956 version as I simply don't see why he felt the need to remake the film. We all know about the tension, suspicion of Hitlers military buildup and fundamental distrust of what was going on in Europe at the time, leading up to the second world war. English filmmakers responded to the German threat by making films that alerted British citizens to the impending danger. A lot of the 1930's films like 'Secret Agent' and especially 'Sabotage' from 1936 with Sylvia Sidney and Oscar Homolka focused on this upcoming danger. What place this had in 1956, especially when Hitchcock had moved to America 🇺🇸 and had been making films there since 1940 really challenges my understanding of the need to remake a film rather than just make one more relevant to the world and audiences of the time. So to summarise the 1934 version really makes sense to me both as a film and why it was made. The 1956 film feels like a waste of time and a missed opportunity to produce a film we all could have related to and enjoyed during in a from that time. Can you imagine a world where we never got to see 'Dial M for Murder' in 1954 because he had used that time to remake 'Sabotage' again.
@@clarequilty4962 No one is questioning if he was allowed/permitted to remake the movie/film. Only if it was worth the time and effort to do so, when the time, energy and available resources could have been used to make a film more preferable to audiences of the time.
@@Robert_Manners "I simply don't see why he felt the need to remake the film… What place this had in 1956, especially when Hitchcock had moved to America 🇺🇸 and had been making films there since 1940 really challenges my understanding of the need to remake a film" Yes, it seems Mr. Hitchcock was not as smart and talented as you.
The cantata has many different lyrics from the 1956 version, but no matter. The music is a thrilling addition to a scene of great suspense (as opposed to dread, which is what passes for suspense now), though Edna Best's tinny little squeek should have been overdubbed with a genuine scream. In that respect, Doris Day delivered.
Snark, snark. Who said it was a great piece of music? I'm checking what I wrote and I certainly didn't. Nor did I compare it to, nor mention Bach or Beethoven, you pretentious pedant.
Clare Quilty 1930s shriek for you
Clare Quilty I like it.
The film was made in 1934 so I imagine that Edna Best started her career in silent movies.
Anyway, I am full of admiration for the way at the end of the film she grabs the gun and shoots
dead the terrorist who is threatening her young daughter. A truly strong woman.
@@andrewnorth6472 But her squeaky little "scream" is embarrassing.
Looks great! Too bad Universal cannot say the same for their Blu-ray of Hitchcock's 1956 remake.
Mission Impossible did a great scene not unlike this one
I prefer the 1934 version to the 1956 version as I simply don't see why he felt the need to remake the film. We all know about the tension, suspicion of Hitlers military buildup and fundamental distrust of what was going on in Europe at the time, leading up to the second world war.
English filmmakers responded to the German threat by making films that alerted British citizens to the impending danger.
A lot of the 1930's films like 'Secret Agent' and especially 'Sabotage' from 1936 with Sylvia Sidney and Oscar Homolka focused on this upcoming danger.
What place this had in 1956, especially when Hitchcock had moved to America 🇺🇸 and had been making films there since 1940 really challenges my understanding of the need to remake a film rather than just make one more relevant to the world and audiences of the time.
So to summarise the 1934 version really makes sense to me both as a film and why it was made. The 1956 film feels like a waste of time and a missed opportunity to produce a film we all could have related to and enjoyed during in a from that time.
Can you imagine a world where we never got to see 'Dial M for Murder' in 1954 because he had used that time to remake 'Sabotage' again.
It's called show business. If someone wants to remake a movie, he's allowed.
@@clarequilty4962 No one is questioning if he was allowed/permitted to remake the movie/film. Only if it was worth the time and effort to do so, when the time, energy and available resources could have been used to make a film more preferable to audiences of the time.
@@Robert_Manners "I simply don't see why he felt the need to remake the film… What place this had in 1956, especially when Hitchcock had moved to America 🇺🇸 and had been making films there since 1940 really challenges my understanding of the need to remake a film"
Yes, it seems Mr. Hitchcock was not as smart and talented as you.
The 50s version is superior in every way.
This reminds me of the assassination attempt in The Manchurian Candidate
S.P.E.C.T.R.E.
0:00 *322 - The Skull & Bones (Brotherhood of Death).*