The whole idea of this film was to do it entirely in one take without cuts. The ONLY edits are timed to when the actual reels of film run out, and he accomplishes this by zooming in on somebody's back, so that the frame goes black, and then the new reel starts as the person's back moves away from the camera. The STAGGERING brilliance of pulling this off was incredible, and the film is riveting. The story is based on the true story of Leopold and Loeb, who were reportedly lovers, and you can feel the sexual tension between the characters of Phillip and Brandon. It's really an extraordinary film.
Actually there were three straight cuts in the film because at the time theater projectionists would have to switch projector seamlessly at the end of a film reel. They know longer do this, but in the old movie houses you'd see a small blip in the uppper right hand corner at the end of the reel -- a signal for the projectionist to switch.
Your building excitement when you realized the camera didn’t cut away for so long was a joy to see. Lifeboat is a Hitchcock movie that’s really interesting and underseen.
Great reaction. This is one of .my favourite Hitchcock films. As you pointed out it was very clever directing. It had minimum cuts, only when necessary due to the length of the film rolls, and mostly done in a discreet way.
I've loved Rope since I was a kid. There actually are more cut-aways than you realise when you're watching it, because it uses a stitch-together technique. It's meant to look like it was in 4 segments, like acts of a play - those cuts aren't disguised, and are based around the point where the projectionist would have to change the reel. The whole thing is done in 10 (if I remember right) long shots, with some stitched together so as to be barely noticeable. But Hitchcock was the master of long shots, going right back to his early days in London. I like early Hitchcock (with the exception of Rear Window), so 39 Steps, Saboteur, Lady Vanishes, Young and Innocent, Murder! It's interesting to see how similar the 39 Steps (made in the UK), and Saboteur (made in the US) are. 39 Steps has the edge, but Saboteur worth watching to compare.
GREAT reaction, Elie! Thanks! So many great Hitchcock films to explore. I highly recommend Shadow of a Doubt (Hitch’s personal favorite of his films); Strangers on a Train, The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956 version): North by Northwest and Frenzy. Can’t go wrong with any of those.
Hitchcock’s The Rope was an adaptation of Patrick Hamilton’s play of the same name. This was, in turn, inspired by the 1924 trial of two young men Leopald and Loeb, who kidnapped and murdered a young boy. The Rope was first performed on stage in 1929 and on television in 1939 before Hitchcock’s 1948 film. The case also inspired Meyer Levin’s novel Compulsion (1956) that was turned into a film of the same name in 1959. Compulsion stuck pretty closely to the Leopold and Loeb case with only name changes and the sort of cinematic licence that should be considered documentary quality in todays twisted “real life” movie world where most “true stories” are about 90% fiction.
Two additional Hitchcock films that you should really prioritize are North By Northwest and Strangers On A Train - both brilliant suspense thrillers, and both with iconic set pieces - the airplane attack and the Mt. Rushmore chase scene in North by Northwest, and the incredible carousel scene in Strangers On A Train. I think you'll really love them both. I would also highly recommend, for something COMPLETELY different, that you check out the Netflix series Heartstopper, which I think is one of the best TV series of any genre I've seen in a very long time.
Nice reaction Elie. I came to your channel via your Buffy and Angel reactions and didnt know you also did Hitchcock movies. I will go back and watch them! This story was originally a stage play and is very loosely based on the real life killers Leopold and Loeb who wanted to commit a murder to prove theie intellectual superiority. The 2002 film murder by numbers starring Sandra Bullock, Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt is also based on the same case. There are a couple of well disguised cuts in this movie, but as its also based on a stage play it makes sense both narratively and creatively to give the illusion of a single take. One film that does film as single take, and its quite brilliant, is the 2015 German crime drama Victoria. Definitely worth your time (and a reaction maybe?)
Yes i do everything film here it just so happens im caught up with buffy and angel atm so its hard to find time to do anything else. But when i cam i will
Sometimes, in a Hitchcock film as good as this one, you completely forget to look out for his cameo appearance .. after all, where could it be in a one set film like this ? .. and then @25:42 there is a flashing red neon sign in the background, shaped like a silhouette of his head.
If you don’t realize that he’s worried about his son then you’re missing out on how demented a situation it is. It’s a good time and all fucked up, dude.
If you're still curious about what happened afterward, you might try watching *Compulsion* (1959). Though still not using the killers' real names, it hews much closer to the facts of the real Leopold and Loeb case, and takes the story all the way up to the conclusion of their trial.
I'm late to this, 10 days late (which is an eternity in Internet time), so you likely won't even notice these comments. Someone has already mentioned this but with less detail. Hitchcock's ambition here was to make a one-take film, only he didn't have the type of technology that would later be used for 1917. Film came in 12 minute (at 24 fps) reels maximum in 1948, thus Hitchcock was forced to only shoot in 12 minute takes. Interestingly you missed the first cut in the apartment, it was probably the best disguised, around the 12 minute mark. There were however two undisguised cuts in the film, deliberate edits I would say. The first is when we hold on Kenneth's face after Brandon has suggested he may have a chance with Janet. The second, the most interesting, is when we cut to Rupert's reaction to Philip's exclamation, 'That's a lie!' This effectively marked the change of POV character. Throughout the film, until this point, we have been following things from the perspective of Brandon and Philip, with (hopefully) most of us empathising with Philip. That cut tells us to shift perspectives to that of Rupert. I believe we could call that plot point 2 in the script. The 12 minute reel problem though allowed for the background lighting to be changed as well as the model clouds moved with relative ease. I often wonder, had film come in 90 minute reels, would Hitchcock have had men racing, beavering away to make background changes while the camera wasn't on the window? We will never know the answer to that question since he died in 1980 😞 His last film was Family Plot (1976) which didn't exactly light up the box office (more people went to see Jaws again, which had been released the year before). The last great film that anyone talks about of his is Frenzy (1972), which was a British made film about a serial killer. I would recommend that, not necessarily Family Plot.
Hitchcock decided to use this film to experiment with shooting a film with few to no obvious cuts. The thing is… editing and the juxtaposition of shots from different angles and point-of-views are an important part of the very language of film. In order to successfully tell the story, the filmmaker needs to use all the tools of their art. Hitchcock used a similar technique in the film Under Capricorn. For his later masterpieces he went back to more traditional editing.
I suspect Rupert simply found it amusing to play the curmudgeon, and to express ideas that seemed provocative and/or shocking for the entertainment of his listeners. This sort of pose would have served him well with college boys.
Excellent discussion. You seem smarter and more mature than the last time I watched one of your reactions six or so months ago. One thing to think about is this. Obviously, the movie wasn't actually filmed in the 80 minute run time. Like any other movie, it must have taken days to make, yet the city skyline out the window gets slowly darker and darker as night falls. Other great Hitchcock films are "North by Northwest," and two never before reviewed on UA-cam, "The Lady Vanishes" and "Suspicion." Also, "Lifeboat" is a great movie that's really a stage play - the action all takes place in a life boat after the characters' ships are sunk during WW2. The volume of the file was pretty low compared to your voice.
Just a friendly observation, but the volume on the movie was too low compared to your voice. Since the picture is so small ?(on a smart phone), it's even more important to hear the movie.
This one is good, but my favorite one is Notorious. The story, the framing, the lighting-pretty much everything. Also worth your time: North by Northwest and Rebecca
I agree that a bigger surprise at the end would have been great. But it's a Hollywood film so that was unlikely unfortunately. I like how Brandon and Rupert play along with each other. The Rupert speech at the end goes on too long for me and we had already got this message from David's father. In the acting Brandon is definitely the star for me, and of course he gets a lot of the best lines. His nervous friend is meant to contrast of course, maybe he is a little over the top too early on. And of course some nice composition and camera work. Not least with the reveal, the books falling off to enhance the drama, and the slow reveal of Rupert's face. A good Hitchcock I'd recommend would be Sabotage
This isn’t one of my handful of favorite Hitchcock movies. However, it is an interesting stylistic experiment, and the same-sex undertones add some weight to an otherwise simple story. Out of the Hitchcock movies you haven’t reacted to I’d suggest North By Northwest and Notorious. I’d also recommend a reaction to some random faves like Mulholland Drive, Almost Famous and the ‘Before’ trilogy.
OK I'm confused and maybe I don't know what a cut away is. But I have seen a platform of them since the movie started. I don't know why you're not seeing them.
The whole idea of this film was to do it entirely in one take without cuts. The ONLY edits are timed to when the actual reels of film run out, and he accomplishes this by zooming in on somebody's back, so that the frame goes black, and then the new reel starts as the person's back moves away from the camera. The STAGGERING brilliance of pulling this off was incredible, and the film is riveting. The story is based on the true story of Leopold and Loeb, who were reportedly lovers, and you can feel the sexual tension between the characters of Phillip and Brandon. It's really an extraordinary film.
Actually there were three straight cuts in the film because at the time theater projectionists would have to switch projector seamlessly at the end of a film reel. They know longer do this, but in the old movie houses you'd see a small blip in the uppper right hand corner at the end of the reel -- a signal for the projectionist to switch.
Your building excitement when you realized the camera didn’t cut away for so long was a joy to see.
Lifeboat is a Hitchcock movie that’s really interesting and underseen.
Lifeboat is an incredible Hitchcock film and very underrated.
Conversate? Converse is a word.
Great reaction. This is one of .my favourite Hitchcock films. As you pointed out it was very clever directing. It had minimum cuts, only when necessary due to the length of the film rolls, and mostly done in a discreet way.
I've loved Rope since I was a kid. There actually are more cut-aways than you realise when you're watching it, because it uses a stitch-together technique. It's meant to look like it was in 4 segments, like acts of a play - those cuts aren't disguised, and are based around the point where the projectionist would have to change the reel. The whole thing is done in 10 (if I remember right) long shots, with some stitched together so as to be barely noticeable.
But Hitchcock was the master of long shots, going right back to his early days in London.
I like early Hitchcock (with the exception of Rear Window), so 39 Steps, Saboteur, Lady Vanishes, Young and Innocent, Murder! It's interesting to see how similar the 39 Steps (made in the UK), and Saboteur (made in the US) are. 39 Steps has the edge, but Saboteur worth watching to compare.
Would Rear Window really be early Hitchcock? Why don’t you like it?
I stumbled across this, and I feel like I landed in an ocean of hubris.
GREAT reaction, Elie! Thanks! So many great Hitchcock films to explore. I highly recommend Shadow of a Doubt (Hitch’s personal favorite of his films); Strangers on a Train, The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956 version): North by Northwest and Frenzy. Can’t go wrong with any of those.
Great comments and review of this classic Hitchcock film. What creativity!
much love thank you!
Hitchcock’s The Rope was an adaptation of Patrick Hamilton’s play of the same name. This was, in turn, inspired by the 1924 trial of two young men Leopald and Loeb, who kidnapped and murdered a young boy. The Rope was first performed on stage in 1929 and on television in 1939 before Hitchcock’s 1948 film. The case also inspired Meyer Levin’s novel Compulsion (1956) that was turned into a film of the same name in 1959. Compulsion stuck pretty closely to the Leopold and Loeb case with only name changes and the sort of cinematic licence that should be considered documentary quality in todays twisted “real life” movie world where most “true stories” are about 90% fiction.
Two additional Hitchcock films that you should really prioritize are North By Northwest and Strangers On A Train - both brilliant suspense thrillers, and both with iconic set pieces - the airplane attack and the Mt. Rushmore chase scene in North by Northwest, and the incredible carousel scene in Strangers On A Train. I think you'll really love them both. I would also highly recommend, for something COMPLETELY different, that you check out the Netflix series Heartstopper, which I think is one of the best TV series of any genre I've seen in a very long time.
Nice reaction Elie. I came to your channel via your Buffy and Angel reactions and didnt know you also did Hitchcock movies. I will go back and watch them! This story was originally a stage play and is very loosely based on the real life killers Leopold and Loeb who wanted to commit a murder to prove theie intellectual superiority. The 2002 film murder by numbers starring Sandra Bullock, Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt is also based on the same case. There are a couple of well disguised cuts in this movie, but as its also based on a stage play it makes sense both narratively and creatively to give the illusion of a single take. One film that does film as single take, and its quite brilliant, is the 2015 German crime drama Victoria. Definitely worth your time (and a reaction maybe?)
Yes i do everything film here it just so happens im caught up with buffy and angel atm so its hard to find time to do anything else. But when i cam i will
Sometimes, in a Hitchcock film as good as this one, you completely forget to look out for his cameo appearance .. after all, where could it be in a one set film like this ? .. and then @25:42 there is a flashing red neon sign in the background, shaped like a silhouette of his head.
It is one continuous shot. No cutaways except for one, I believe.
Another great Hitchcock film is Lifeboat.
I wonder how complicated all those tracking shots were for the actors and crew.
If you don’t realize that he’s worried about his son then you’re missing out on how demented a situation it is. It’s a good time and all fucked up, dude.
yes a masterpeice
If you're still curious about what happened afterward, you might try watching *Compulsion* (1959). Though still not using the killers' real names, it hews much closer to the facts of the real Leopold and Loeb case, and takes the story all the way up to the conclusion of their trial.
I'm late to this, 10 days late (which is an eternity in Internet time), so you likely won't even notice these comments. Someone has already mentioned this but with less detail. Hitchcock's ambition here was to make a one-take film, only he didn't have the type of technology that would later be used for 1917. Film came in 12 minute (at 24 fps) reels maximum in 1948, thus Hitchcock was forced to only shoot in 12 minute takes. Interestingly you missed the first cut in the apartment, it was probably the best disguised, around the 12 minute mark.
There were however two undisguised cuts in the film, deliberate edits I would say. The first is when we hold on Kenneth's face after Brandon has suggested he may have a chance with Janet. The second, the most interesting, is when we cut to Rupert's reaction to Philip's exclamation, 'That's a lie!' This effectively marked the change of POV character. Throughout the film, until this point, we have been following things from the perspective of Brandon and Philip, with (hopefully) most of us empathising with Philip. That cut tells us to shift perspectives to that of Rupert. I believe we could call that plot point 2 in the script.
The 12 minute reel problem though allowed for the background lighting to be changed as well as the model clouds moved with relative ease. I often wonder, had film come in 90 minute reels, would Hitchcock have had men racing, beavering away to make background changes while the camera wasn't on the window? We will never know the answer to that question since he died in 1980 😞
His last film was Family Plot (1976) which didn't exactly light up the box office (more people went to see Jaws again, which had been released the year before). The last great film that anyone talks about of his is Frenzy (1972), which was a British made film about a serial killer. I would recommend that, not necessarily Family Plot.
Hitchcock decided to use this film to experiment with shooting a film with few to no obvious cuts. The thing is… editing and the juxtaposition of shots from different angles and point-of-views are an important part of the very language of film. In order to successfully tell the story, the filmmaker needs to use all the tools of their art. Hitchcock used a similar technique in the film Under Capricorn. For his later masterpieces he went back to more traditional editing.
Enjoyed your reaction. The only thing that made me a little crazy, was each time you said "the waitress" ... instead of "the maid".
Glad you loved it. My personal favorite Hitchcock. Very subversive.
I think you'd love Strangers On A Train
8:35 - You missed a cut here, on the back of Brandon's black jacket.
And another cut at 14:21 - also on the back of a jacket. You were laughing at that moment and it looked as if you did not notice the cut.
There was a cut away but you missed it.
There were actually several.
I’ve never really understood Rupert. What he thinks his words meant.
I suspect Rupert simply found it amusing to play the curmudgeon, and to express ideas that seemed provocative and/or shocking for the entertainment of his listeners. This sort of pose would have served him well with college boys.
@@oliverbrownlow5615 Basically, yes. Apparently, he never thought anyone would take him seriously. He could be a shock radio guy.
Excellent discussion. You seem smarter and more mature than the last time I watched one of your reactions six or so months ago.
One thing to think about is this. Obviously, the movie wasn't actually filmed in the 80 minute run time. Like any other movie, it must have taken days to make, yet the city skyline out the window gets slowly darker and darker as night falls.
Other great Hitchcock films are "North by Northwest," and two never before reviewed on UA-cam, "The Lady Vanishes" and "Suspicion." Also, "Lifeboat" is a great movie that's really a stage play - the action all takes place in a life boat after the characters' ships are sunk during WW2.
The volume of the file was pretty low compared to your voice.
Just a friendly observation, but the volume on the movie was too low compared to your voice. Since the picture is so small ?(on a smart phone), it's even more important to hear the movie.
This one is good, but my favorite one is Notorious. The story, the framing, the lighting-pretty much everything.
Also worth your time: North by Northwest and Rebecca
I agree that a bigger surprise at the end would have been great. But it's a Hollywood film so that was unlikely unfortunately. I like how Brandon and Rupert play along with each other. The Rupert speech at the end goes on too long for me and we had already got this message from David's father.
In the acting Brandon is definitely the star for me, and of course he gets a lot of the best lines. His nervous friend is meant to contrast of course, maybe he is a little over the top too early on.
And of course some nice composition and camera work. Not least with the reveal, the books falling off to enhance the drama, and the slow reveal of Rupert's face.
A good Hitchcock I'd recommend would be Sabotage
This isn’t one of my handful of favorite Hitchcock movies. However, it is an interesting stylistic experiment, and the same-sex undertones add some weight to an otherwise simple story. Out of the Hitchcock movies you haven’t reacted to I’d suggest North By Northwest and Notorious. I’d also recommend a reaction to some random faves like Mulholland Drive, Almost Famous and the ‘Before’ trilogy.
It was like you were watching an episode of friends.
Not sure you really got the undertone of the ubermench.
Try “The Trouble with Harry.” One of his only comedies, and it was Shirley MacLaine’s film debut.
Rupert fired the gun so the police would come. No, he is not going down with them. Spouting questionable philosophy is not a crime.
OK I'm confused and maybe I don't know what a cut away is. But I have seen a platform of them since the movie started. I don't know why you're not seeing them.