Alfred Hitchcock's Under Capricorn
|
List Price: Our Price: $13.84 You Save: $6.14 (31%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $11.95 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Alfred Hitchcock's Under Capricorn
Movie Review: Hitchcock stretches with mixed success
Summary: 3 Stars
A period piece directed by Hitchcock? Yes, it is a surprise. It wasn't the first though It must have surprised Hitch as well. While produced by his own company (Transatlantic Pictures), Under Capricorn would seem a natural choice for David O Selznick as producer but all wrong for Hitchcock as director. While Under Capricorn is flawed, it's got a number of strengths chiefly the performance by Ingrid Bergman and the unusual experiment begun in Rope with long takes. Under Capricorn doesn't rely on as many gimmicks as Rope did and, while Joseph Cotton may seem odd for his role (Burt Lancaster was Hitchcock's original choice), he does a solid job in the role. Although the Irish accent perpetually eludes the three principal actors, it's no worse than watching a film set in, say, Germany with actors attempting German accents while speaking English.Yes, the material might seem appropriate for Hitch given the themes explored but this romantic melodrama was really quite a stretch for him as a director. The experience here certainly made his later works richer (such as Vertigo) but, on the whole, Under Capricorn was clearly a learning experience for Hitch.
The performances are grand and as florid as one might expect given the material. The screenplay by James Bridie (with considerable rewriting by Hume Cronyn)leaves Hitch in a lifeboat without oars; Hitch pretty much goes nowhere over the course of the film's 116 minutes. Unfortunately, this expensive miscalculation would do in Hitch's Transatlantic films (Rope was the first Transatlantic production and, despite some obvious flaws, is a much better film).
Still, despite its considerable flaws, Under Capricorn is a worthy experiment and worth a look from Hitchcock fans. The transfer is solid although not as rich as I expected and the extras are pretty slim (especially compared to Rope and Shadow of a Doubt).
Movie Review: Bergman and Hitch's Last Film
Summary: 3 Stars
While Hitchcock was under contract to David O Selznick, he was loaned out more than used by Selznick. This was another loan out situation.
Prior to the American Revolution, the colonies were used to transport criminals from Great Britain. Afterwards, they were transported to Australia. This film takes place during the Australian transportation period. England has sent a new governor to Australia. With the governor is his shady cousin, Charles Adare (Michael Wilding). Adare is looking to make his fortune in Australia but has no money to get started. He falls into the company of Sam Flusky (Joseph Cotton). Flusky is a freed transportee (he murdered his wife's brother). Henrietta (Ingrid Bergman) and Sam's marriage is not the strongest but he cannot divorce her. A servant has her eye on Sam, so ala Gaslight, she tries to push Henrietta over the edge - with the help of the other servants. But Charles falls for Henrietta and gives her the support she needs.
This is the third and final pairing of Hitchcock and Bergman. Unfortunately it is not their best. Henrietta is similar to the role she played in Notorious but in Notorious had a more compelling story.
The good that came from this film was his continued association with Hume Cronyn. Cronyn did the adaptation of the book and would help Hitch on other films and continue to write on his own (Foxfire is one of the great plays of all time.) But he and his wife Jessica Tandy were both favorite character actors in a number of Hitch's future films.
This is not one of Hitchcock's great films but is still better than most other psychological dramas.
DVD EXTRAS: None
Movie Review: Solid, But Flawed
Summary: 3 Stars
A Hitchcock film that I'd never seen. Many of them I've viewed a dozen or more times so I'm no stranger or newcomer to his films. DVD transfer is quite good and the color very saturated. It certainly held my attention and has some wonderful performances. Standouts are Bergman and Leighton as the strange housekeeper, ala Mrs. Danvers. I thought Joseph Cotton and Michael Wilding were very good, too.
Next is the camerawork that is astonishing at times. Considering this was made decades before the Stedicam, this film is remarkable for the dolly and tracking shots. Amusing and at times beautiful are the process shots of early Sydney in the opening sequence. Either glass paintings or mattes were used but the shot when Adare first arrives at the Flusky mansion was clearly a painting that must've been laughable when seen projected on the big screen. The matching of color and mood of the painting during the transition to the set was done very well. A later shot of that same painting of the mansion with some fluttering leaves on the trees in the foreground make it much more believable. Previous reviewers here remark on the budget and cheapness of Hitchcock on this film since it was an independent production and it shows clearly at times. Bergman is stunning in many of the scenes. Hitch was clearly smitten with her during the production.
It's quite set-bound with very few real exterior shots that I could find which gives it a very theatrical look. An artificiality that can be found in many of his films right up until the last ones. Overall, well worth seeing.
Movie Review: Period films not Hitchcock at his best
Summary: 3 Stars
This is, as far as I know, the only period film Hitchcock ever made. Being very familiar with most of his movies for many years I was excited to finally see another one from a high point in his career that I had never seen. I think it's interesting that he tried something new and different, for him, but it doesn't completely work. It's always a pleasure, though, to watch Ingrid Bergman in anything, and Joseph Cotten for that matter. And this isn't horrible, just definitely a failed attempt. I think "Saboteur" is another failed attempt by Hitchcock and this isn't even as good as "Saboteur". Still, all things considered, die hard Hitchcock fans should see it - to me it's interesting to watch anything he attempted.Movie Review: yak yak yak
Summary: 3 Stars
Hitchcock did this film as a favor to Bergman. A boring costume picture, the only saving grace is Joseph Cotton. Anything with Cotton in it is worth watching just for his unequaled screen presence. The 'loser' sort of wins in the end, giving Cotton a rare, cheery ending. To be fair, the acting in this film is really good, as is the cinematography. But the story, pacing, and overall energy of the film falls flat. "Under Capricorn" would be the next to last picture I'd ever recommend to anyone unfamiliar with Hitchcock ("Jamaica Inn" still the lamest of the bunch).