Rope
|
List Price: Our Price: $12.69 You Save: $7.29 (36%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $10.42 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Rope
Movie Review: a valuable experiment, but not up to the Hitch's usual mark
Summary: 3 Stars
For any film buff and/or Hitchcock fan, this is a must see. It is his first technicolor film and it is supposed to appear as one long shot, essentially a one-act parlor play on film. This offers a window into Hitch's genius: he was constantly trying to push the envelope and found many ways to do so. (Due to the ten-minute limit of a reel, he has to fade into dark objects to change each reel.
The plot of the film is fairly taut: with the opening scene a murder by strangulation, the psychological tension builds, first as to whether they can get away with it, and then to how it will end. This is better than average, as anything the Hitch does achieves at least that, but it isn't very fun to watch and certainly not worthy of multiple re-viewings. So it left me pretty tepid. That being said, the acting is also above average, with the young Jimmy Stewart in a solid dramatic performance and the others, esp. Farley, also excellent.
The version that I saw has wonderful followup interviews with Farley and the screenwriter Arthur Laurents, who is surprisingly critical. In particular, Laurents argues that Hitch should not have revealed that they were actual murderers until the end; I would agree with that idea. Also, Laurents emphasizes the gay themes in the film and play, which were downplayed due to the mores of that time, also very interesting.
Recommended, but I would rent it rather than buy it. You probably won't want to want it again.
Movie Review: 2.5 stars out of 4
Summary: 3 Stars
The Bottom Line:
John Dall is great but the movie's continuous-take experiment doesn't really work and the ending is flat; it's often entertaining but must be seen as a failure coming from the Master.
Movie Review: A failed experiment by the Master
Summary: 2 Stars
It's evident from the reviews that this is love it or hate it film. Unfortunately, while I don't think it's quite as bad as some of the other reviewers do, I would say it is a failure. As you probably know, this was Hitchcock's first color film, and he tried the experiment of filming it in as close to one continuous take as he could. Apparently in those days the technicolor film had to be changed about every 12 minutes (the Amazon reviewer says 10 minutes), so he needed to use tricks, such as focusing on a character's dark suit jacket to disguise the breaks. Generally, this is handled well, although a couple of times, coming out of the break the characters are not quite in their previous positions.
The film has a number of major problems. Farley Granger is decent, but not nearly as good as in "Strangers on a Train" where, in a somewhat similar role, he was paired with Robert Walker. Here he plays opposite John Dall, who lacks the creepy intensity that made Walker so good. Even the ever-reliable Jimmy Stewart is at best mediocre. He appears to walk very stiffly, which makes me wonder whether he had suffered a back or neck injury prior to the start of shooting. The film is set entirely in Granger and Dall's apartment, with most of the action taking place in their living room. Unfortunately, the living room has windows that are supposed to be overlooking the New York skyline. The skyline is quite obviously a painting, which given how much of the background it takes up is quite distracting. Frankly, I've seen high school productions with better sets. As the day fades to night, lights begin blinking in the "skyscrapers," but the effect is so unrealistic as to be comical.
Finally, the plot [WARNING: SPOILER ALERT] has some glaring problems. (Actually, this is not much of a spoiler because the murder takes place right at the opening of the film.) The film is based on the infamous Leopold and Loeb murder, where a young boy was killed so L and L could pull off the "perfect crime." Here, Granger and Dall also try to pull off a perfect crime, but their scheme is laughable. They have a friend come to their apartment just before a party and then strangle him, put him in a box in their living room, and proceed with the party. How on earth could they have expected to get away with it? If the victim had mentioned to anyone that he was on his way to visit them, or if anyone had seen him enter the building, or heard the scream he gives out when being strangled, they would have been caught. It's also never explained how they intend to get the victim out of their apartment, although Stewart mentions that they waited until night time so they wouldn't be seen. But the hallways and lobby of their apartment building would have been lighted and carrying a dead body through them without being detected would have taken some doing. The film is based on a play by Patrick Hamilton. I don't know whether the play also had this huge plot hole, but if so, you would think Hitchcock would have insisted on its being fixed before making the film. Finally, Dall decides to get fancy by using the murder rope to tie up some books that he gives to the victim's father. I know this is 1948, but even then it must have been possible to find some of the victim's flesh on the rope. In attempting the perfect crime, destroying that rope would have been a high priority.
This being a Hitchcock film, there are some good touches, including the scene where the maid slowly clears plates and dishes from the box containing the body, while the other characters are deep in conversation, and nearly opens it before being stopped. Overall, though, I cannot recommend you watch this one, unless you are on a mission to watch all of the Master's films.
Movie Review: Too gimmicky
Summary: 2 Stars
A very gimmicky film on a couple of levels. First it's shot all in one long shot, actually several shots spliced together more or less unobtrusively to look like one shot. Second, it all takes place in real time in one location. This, along with the plot, make it seem like an Agatha Christie play. Two young men (supposedly homosexual, but I didn't notice) murder a friend because they are "superior" creatures. Then they invite the murdered man's fiance and relatives over and serve dinner on a large chest where the murdered man is stashed. Gee, I wonder where David is tonight? He was supposed to be here. Stewart plays their old schoolmaster who taught them the Nietzschean doctrine, but who discovers the murder and is horrified. Hitchcock's first color film.Movie Review: How can anyone like this film"
Summary: 1 Stars
I think the worst thing about this film was the acting of the great Jimmy Stewart. He, after all, was the instigator of the dastardly deed done by two unpleasant fools. Were they gay guys? I couldn't tell? Is being gay supposed to make them stupid? Jimmy had blabbed on and on when he was their teacher or something in an expensive un-named prep school in New England on how the superior people of the world have every right to kill the inferior people. He even ran on about it in front of us while sitting on the sofa. But hey...that was just irony or something. Ole Jimmy didn't ACTUALLY MEAN IT. HE JUST SAID IT TO BE CUTE. A great performance is given by Cedric Hardwick as the Dad of the unfortunate victim. The other actors also played their roles well. Then..Ole Jimmy wonders where the victim is and as he is VERY INTELLIGENT he hangs around and follows clues and discovers the corpse. The boys tell him why they did it and Jimmy gets on his High Horse...You is bad boys! and its very funny how Jimmy shoots bullets out the window of a NYC skyscraper to get the police to come. Very confusing message: Jimmy is his usually honey lovey self...the gay boys are burdened with all the blame. And all those aimless bullets sprayed over Manhattan just like Jimmy's nonsense verbiage. Maybe the vagrant bullets killed someone just like his words did but Jimmy gets off scot free.