Marnie

Marnie is not perfect, the horse riding scenes are artificially edited and some of the sets seemed somewhat plastic-theatre-backdrop standard. However, while Marnie is not one of Hitchcock's very finest films, it is one of his most underrated. And I don't think it is close to his worst, his weakest overall for me is Jamaica Inn and Topaz the worst of his late-period films. Hitchcock directs splendidly with a lot of memorable touches in the final thirty minutes that are his style all over, while the photography is suave, atmospheric and above all striking. Bernard Hermann's score, while not quite as good as his ones for Vertigo and Psycho, fits perfectly and has a very haunting edge. The dialogue has wit and intensity, which makes the many talky scenes in Marnie interesting. The story is slow in pace but didn't bore me, here there are themes that are not easy to talk about that are explored compellingly and tastefully. The final thirty minutes is edge-of-your-seat stuff, to me the best final act of any Hitchcock film pro-Psycho. The characters are not easy to engage with and very complex, especially Hedren's, but all the actors give their all to making them interesting to the viewer. Grace Kelly may be more people's idea of icy aloofness needed for the woman who steals to forget, but Tippi Hedren particularly in the final act does a very good job(though I preferred her in The Birds). Sean Connery has a very atypical role, his character is somewhat boorish and calculating but he brings those qualities across as well as his trademark suavity and charm. Diane Baker is terrific, and Louise Latham is genuinely frightening as the mother figure. Bruce Dern and Martin Gabel don't have as much to do, but they are good too. To conclude, a fascinating film. 8/10 Bethany Cox

The rumors surrounding Marnie - the last in an amazing run of truly great Hitchcock movies that lasted from 1950-1964 - are plentiful. All of them consist of director Alfred Hitchcock's growing obsession for Tippi Hedrin (who starred in The Birds one year earlier). By the end of the movie, Hitchcock would not talk to Hedrin or even refer to her by name (this following a supposed failed pass at Hedrin), and his friends say Marnie was the last movie Hitchcock truly cared about.

Regardless of the rumors, Marnie was a box-office failure and went unnoticed until recently when DVD brought back Hitchcock's unremarkable films, along with his classics. And behold, from the ashes ariseth... Marnie.

Starring Hedrin as Marnie and Sean Connery as the man who falls in love with her, this movie tells of a compulsive thief and pathalogical liar who is caught by Connery and blackmailed into marrying him. Connery finds that Hedrin has incredible fears of red and thunderstorms, refuses to let men touch her and has disturbing dreams brought on by knocks at her door. Connery must play the dual role of keeping Marnie away from the police while trying to find out why she does what she does.

This is indeed an excellent Hitchcock film. He reminds the audience that he did start out directing silent movies, and uses this silence very well in the robbery/cleaning lady scene. The moments leading up to Marnie's revealing flashback are incredible, and the movie reeks of typical Hitchcock: slow, methodic pacing to a brilliant and stunning climax.

Marnie is not a patented "Hitchcock classic": The fades-to-red have not aged well (if they ever did look good), the horse-riding scenes just don't work, and the backgrounds are obviously fake (although it has been speculated that Hitchcock did this on purpose -- whatever the case he later regretted it). But the basic premise, the acting, the directing are all top notch and have turned Marnie into another of the "Underrated Hitchcock"s.

8/10

To find out that Bernardo Bertolucci, the director of Last Tango In Paris, loves Marnie makes a lot of sense, to me anyway. If you think about it, Last Tango In Paris could have been a Hitchcock movie. An American in Paris meets a young girl, they have sex without knowing anything about each other and ends up in murder. Marnie is truly perverse and Sean Connery's obsession for Tippi Hedren is infinitely more perverse than whatever poor Tippi Hedren suffers from. He is turned on by her rejection. The kiss during the gelid honeymoon stays inches away from necrophilia. right?. The script is just delicious. Sean Connery goes for the troublesome center of his character, yes he does, whether consciously or unconsciously. Tippi Hedren is terrific here and with all the things we know now about the making of the movie her performance has acquired some extra something. Diane Baker as the scorned sister in law is a delight. So here we are, talking about a movie made 53 years ago. Time does extraordinary things.

"Marnie" is one of the least essential-to-watch Hitchcock films: he plays one ingenious trick on the audience (the robbery and the cleaning lady), but apart from that one sequence, there are hardly any memorable set-pieces or flourishes (the screen going red a few times does not count). Like "Suddenly, Last Summer", the entire film hinges on what-happened-that-fateful-day. But unlike SLS, where the ultimate revelation is genuinely shocking, the ending of "Marnie" leaves us with an "is that all?" feeling. Very good performances by both Tippi Hedren and Sean Connery, full-blown score by Berrnard Hermann. **1/2 out of 4.

This is not the stuff that director Hitchcock is usually attracted to. Hitchcock was scared of jails. In this film, the lead female character prefers to be bridled by marriage rather than jail. It is an intriguing choice for a character who had earlier stated to her husband "You don't love me. I am something you have caught. Some kind of wild animal you have trapped." Aware of this, the young lady who has so far fooled a lot of rich men and escaped the law, prefers marriage to jail. She is smart, a woman who embezzles her employers to buy rich gifts for her mother, aware of modesty in dress (keeps pulling her skirt over her knees) and a convincing liar. Like "Notorious," the marriage is one of convenience, or so it appears—the end of the film is open-ended.

For those who are not aware of it, Hitchcock fired the initial scriptwriter (a male), who honestly felt the rape of the wife by the husband was out character with male lead played by Sean Connery. The replaced scriptwriter (a lady) wrote the sequence which was used, in a suggestive way rather than a graphic way. Hitchcock loved to slip in sex even if it was out of character. Lesbianism is suggested by the husband's sister-in-law's remark "What a dish!" a remark one would associate from the opposite sex. (Hitchcock similarly played with homosexuality in "Rope"). A critical scene that could be mistaken for child molestation was probably an innocent gesture mistaken by the mother.

Hitchcock usually was attentive to visuals and sound. This is an unusual film where the director swings from one extreme of high sophistication to absolute stupidity. The opening shots of the woman walking away with the yellow handbag are stunning. The silent "cleaning" of the office safe, while a deaf woman cleans the office is simply outstanding. Yet the crass painting of a dock near Marnie's mother's house would make a school kid laugh out loud. Why would a woman who is scared of red wear red lipstick or not react when her husband's sister-in-law wears red at a party? Similarly, the shot of Marnie's hand not being able to pick up the money in the safe is an unconvincing shot, if ever there was one.

The film can be appreciated and be equally dismissed. The acting by all the main characters was good but Louise Latham performance (and make up!) needs to be singled out for praise. Kubrick seems to have copied Hitchcock's Marie's voice differentiation in the young child's voice in "The Shining." I am not surprised if people swing from liking the film to dismissing it and back again. It has great elements and bad elements as well—yet the bottom line is, it entertains!