CW: Alfred Hitchcock
Like Griffith, Alfred Hitchcock is one of cinema's biggest problems. He is among our most influential formalists, but also one of the most notoriously abusive misogynists. His elevated place in history will loom large over filmgoing -- let alone filmmaking -- for years to come. Where do we go from here? I myself can't much help, but I have noticed that I respond differently depending on the film. Some (THE 39 STEPS, THE FARMER'S WIFE, THE RING) repel me with their pervasive ugliness. Others are less offensive (SECRET AGENT, YOUNG AND INNOCENT) but marred all the same. Then there are those that, whatever their toxicity, communicate something profound. MARNIE is incredibly unpleasant, but it has a purpose to it that carries private and extraordinary meaning to me.
I've written before about canonical films that deserve greater scrutiny regarding their sexism (RASHOMON, SOME LIKE IT HOT), and Hitchcock is not a hill I'd choose to die on (i.e. I'm much more of a Hawksian). There are however films of his that I quite like; and, even if there weren't, he continues to pose a particularly vexing problem for cinephilia. I'm going to see what I can do to parse out the misogynistic workings of his sophisticated formal control. They're impossible for me to ignore, just as he himself is impossible for me to ignore. Best then to meet the challenge head-on. Accelerate the contradictions.
1 - 4: Existentially Terrifying (and Misogynistic)
5 - 11: Unquantifiable Mix of Good/Great and Sexist
12 - 19: Lesser; and Seemingly Less Toxic?
20 - 24: Sexism Overwhelms Skillful Construction
No comments:
Post a Comment