Rope (1948)

[PolkaDotMeggie]

I have never seen Marnie or Frenzy... anyone have a synopsis for me???

 

[Starius]

I have never seen Marnie or Frenzy... anyone have a synopsis for me???

Marnie on Wikipedia (Stars Sean Connery!)

Frenzy on Wikipedia (Some critics say it was Hitchcock's last great film.)

I'm thinking I'm gonna have to watch these, Marnie at the very least.

 

[nyx]

Marnie was panned at the time, but I really enjoy it. Although, it's hard to watch Sean Connery be a rapist. There is some heavy handed symbolism, like Marnie's reaction to the color red, which could probably be more subtle, but I think it's a great performance by Hedren. And Bruce Dern is sooo young.

 

[Dr Doran]

Rope is my favorite of his films. Aside from the wonderful long takes, the fine suits, the nice limitation on sets, and the spot-on acting, the preppie twits' version of Nietzsche was vivid and compelling. I have met many many people of criminal nature who have either cited Nietzsche or without quoting him used the argument the young men use in that film as justification for their crimes. The moment when their teacher realizes that his teachings can be used to justify this sort of thing was priceless.

I'm always interested in the what characters (and people in real life) use as a program/justification/philosophy for their actions.

 

[funneman]

The Rope

Great camera work! Really builds the tension. And the whole thing works on one set! :eusa_clap

 

[Jack Scorpion]

Rope is my favorite of his films. Aside from the wonderful long takes, the fine suits, the nice limitation on sets, and the spot-on acting, the preppie twits' version of Nietzsche was vivid and compelling. I have met many many people of criminal nature who have either cited Nietzsche or without quoting him used the argument the young men use in that film as justification for their crimes. The moment when their teacher realizes that his teachings can be used to justify this sort of thing was priceless.

I'm always interested in the what characters (and people in real life) use as a program/justification/philosophy for their actions.

It is difficult for me to watch/read anything of the sort after studying Crime and Punishment so many times. Contrary to that, the Nietzsche criminal arch-type never gets old.

I think my main gripe with Rope is that Jimmy ain't on the screen half the time. Jimmy should never be found off camera.

 

[Edward]

This is one of my favorite Hitchcock movies, maybe because it's so rarely on TV. Everyone is so sophisticated ! I understand that it was based loosely on the Leopold and Loeb case of the '20s(30's?) and I remember hearing somewhere that there was something special about the way it was filmed, all on one reel or one camera or something, I don't remember...It is a great film! Even my teenage son likes it, and thats a rousing endorsement

1924. Yes, Leopold and Loeb was a much-publicised and speculated over case in its day. In essence, it was two kids - 18 and 19 at the time of the murder - who thought they were Nietschean supermen who could carry out the perfect crime, and so they murdered a 14 year old boy. Much at the time was made of their supposed homosexuality (they apparently admitted a sexual relationship) as the reason behind the murder - basically, it was claimed in some quarters that if they were homosexual, they were obviously insane and therefore not responisible for their crime (I think this was raised by the defence, but it's so long since I read the transcripts...). Others, equally blaming homosexuality, were considerably less charitable, shall we say.

The Hitchcock film, I saw some years ago. If memory serves, the sexual side of the relationship is left out, but otherwise it was quite true to the basic story, albeit updated and set in a contemporary New York. does memory serve me in the recollection that it opens midway through the murder? I recall it that way, and that this really drew me in. Good film, and all the more shocking for its basis in reality.

 

[Dr Doran]

The Hitchcock film, I saw some years ago. If memory serves, the sexual side of the relationship is left out, but otherwise it was quite true to the basic story, albeit updated and set in a contemporary New York. does memory serve me in the recollection that it opens midway through the murder? I recall it that way, and that this really drew me in. Good film, and all the more shocking for its basis in reality.

I believe the gayness was supposed to be hinted at in the dominance and submissiveness of the leads. Then again, many people act dominant and submissive and they are not gay at all. So it could be read either way. (And many people are gay and are not dominant and submissive at all, so, again, the characters' topness and bottomness don't necessarily point to that.)
****Another film, MUCH more recent, which was loosely based on the Leopold and Loeb murders stars Sandra Bullock (!), Ryan Gosling, and the young, very handsome Pitt boy (not Brad. Michael?) who was also in The Dreamers. I cannot recall his first name, nor the name of the film. Perhaps it is called Murder By Numbers. It is not a great film, but it plays up the Nietzsche angle too.****
As far as Jimmy Stewart not being onscreen enough -- I don't know. I thought that movie was perfect and unimprovable. I like the sparingness. It's too easy to let Jimmy eat up the camera. Wasn't the dominant lead also in the film noir Gun Crazy?

 

[Starius]

I believe the gayness was supposed to be hinted at in the dominance and submissiveness of the leads. Then again, many people act dominant and submissive and they are not gay at all. So it could be read either way. (And many people are gay and are not dominant and submissive at all, so, again, the characters' topness and bottomness don't necessarily point to that.)
****Another film, MUCH more recent, which was loosely based on the Leopold and Loeb murders stars Sandra Bullock (!), Ryan Gosling, and the young, very handsome Pitt boy (not Brad. Michael?) who was also in The Dreamers. I cannot recall his first name, nor the name of the film. Perhaps it is called Murder By Numbers. It is not a great film, but it plays up the Nietzsche angle too.****
As far as Jimmy Stewart not being onscreen enough -- I don't know. I thought that movie was perfect and unimprovable. I like the sparingness. It's too easy to let Jimmy eat up the camera. Wasn't the dominant lead also in the film noir Gun Crazy?

That was Murder By Numbers, yeah. Actually, I thought that was a pretty decent movie to watch. Well, a good sunday afternoon kind of movie.

 

[Edward]

That was Murder By Numbers, yeah. Actually, I thought that was a pretty decent movie to watch. Well, a good sunday afternoon kind of movie.

Inasmuch as Nietschean murder always is good family entertainment for a Sunday afternoon. lol

Doran, you could be right re the portrayal of the gay angle in that subtle way... givne when the film was made, I imagine that having openly gay characters could be a difficult thing to get away with - certainly a sexual relationshpi between two men of any age was a criminal offence in the UK right up until 1967 - I'm not sure what the equivalent was in the US (am I right that there is still one state where it's still illegal?). Nowadays it could still be controversial, though more likely that would arise if it was perceived that the film seemed to take the "they did it because they were gay" line rather than becuase it simply had gay characters in it. A very different reason for it to be controversial (and hopefully one reflecting progress in society).

 

[Doctor Strange]

With all this talk of Rope and Leopold/Loeb, I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the excellent 1959 film Compulsion, which is a fictionalized version of their murder trial. I haven't seen it in a long time, but I seem to recall that it has a powerhouse performance by Orson Welles as the defense lawyer, a thinly disguised Clarence Darrow. (BTW, it makes for an interesting comparison with Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind, also playing a thinly disuised Darrow.)

 

[herringbonekid]

there is also an arty black and white version of the Leopold-Loeb case called 'Swoon' by Tom Kalin, 1992.

 

[Lincsong]

How did I miss this thread? A very odd film and disturbing film, but does showcase how some people think committing murder is nothing more than a common house event.

 

[Dr Doran]

How did I miss this thread? A very odd film and disturbing film, but does showcase how some people think committing murder is nothing more than a common house event.

Not at all, my good fellow. In Rope, the two preppie twits resorted to quite UNcommon Nietzschean rationales and justifications. I suppose that were we to interview murderers in prison, their justifications might be similar; however, I doubt they would invoke Nietzsche.

The real-life duo (statistically odd; American just-for-kicks-killers have been very rarely Jewish) were highly educated, excellent students. The submissive one (Loeb? I cannot recall) was a prodigy in entomology or biology or something. (Sorry, too lazy to wikipedia it.) I don't think they viewed the murder as a common house event at all. It was an act to prove their intellectual superiority (in their own deluded minds, that is) to the "herd." In real life, their victim was much younger than in the film Rope, as well -- although I am not certain how to interpret that aspect of it.

 

[Lincsong]

I wikipedia'd Leopold and Loeb. Seems Clarence Darrow used the case so he could advocate against the death penalty since the case was so widely covered and it would provide him with a place to argue against it. Leopold and Loeb were 19 and 20. Both had graduated from University of Chicago and were going to enter law school when they hatched up the plot.

In Rope the movie begins with them strangling the victim and putting his body in the trunk. They discuss how the victim had to die since he was obviously inferior to them. While in Leopold and Loeb they wanted to see if they could get away with crimes. The murder of the 14 year old was just the last of a crime spree that they had committed. I find it interesting how some people who are very educated/sophisticated seem to beleive that their brilliance allows them to do whatever they wish. There is an oversupply of that mentality here in Frisco Bay.

 

[Dr Doran]

I wikipedia'd Leopold and Loeb. Seems Clarence Darrow used the case so he could advocate against the death penalty since the case was so widely covered and it would provide him with a place to argue against it. Leopold and Loeb were 19 and 20. Both had graduated from University of Chicago and were going to enter law school when they hatched up the plot.

In Rope the movie begins with them strangling the victim and putting his body in the trunk. They discuss how the victim had to die since he was obviously inferior to them. While in Leopold and Loeb then wanted to see if they could get away with crimes. The murder of the 14 year old was just the last of a crime spree that they had committed. I find it interesting how some people who are very educated/sophisticated seem to beleive that their brilliance allows them to do whatever they wish. There is an oversupply of that mentality here in Frisco Bay.

I am in full agreement: it's a repellent attribute of the "Bay Areans" ("Bay Aryans"?). they need to be sat down, slapped around a bit, and told "You can't just do whatever you want." (Please see the 1970s thread for more on my disgust with this attitude, its possible origins, and more.)

 

[Lincsong]

Well, I've been kicking their @$$'s since the 1970's and it still doesn't work.

 

[FATS88]

After listening to you's guys;
I have to watch this again and pay more attention!

 

[WH1]

Rope is a fascinating movie for all the reasons previously mentioned. Another Hitchcock film I find interesting is Lifeboat. He was able to create a very interesting story working on an even more limited stage than the one in Rope. Interesting study of humanity under stress. Screenplay was from a story by John Steinbeck. Plus it has some good performances by Tallulah Bankhead, William Bendix and Hume Cronyn.

 

[Dr Doran]

Rope is a fascinating movie for all the reasons previously mentioned. Another Hitchcock film I find interesting is Lifeboat. He was able to create a very interesting story working on an even more limited stage than the one in Rope. Interesting study of humanity under stress. Screenplay was from a story by John Steinbeck. Plus it has some good performances by Tallulah Bankhead, William Bendix and Hume Cronyn.

Haven't seen Lifeboat. Sounds interesting. Maybe I'll watch it. Thanks for the tip.