IMDb RATING
6.3/10
7.4K
YOUR RATING
The turbulent relationship between filmmaker Sir Alfred Hitchcock (Toby Jones) and actress Tippi Hedren (Sienna Miller).The turbulent relationship between filmmaker Sir Alfred Hitchcock (Toby Jones) and actress Tippi Hedren (Sienna Miller).The turbulent relationship between filmmaker Sir Alfred Hitchcock (Toby Jones) and actress Tippi Hedren (Sienna Miller).
- Nominated for 6 Primetime Emmys
- 3 wins & 36 nominations total
Adrian Galley
- Martin Balsam
- (uncredited)
Louis Joubert
- Reporter
- (uncredited)
Leon Kowalski
- Photographer
- (uncredited)
Sean Cameron Michael
- Robert Burks
- (uncredited)
Carel Nel
- Clapper Loader
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
The Girl is an interesting movie about Hitchcock's obsession with Tippi Hedren as they made two movies together. It's stylishly made, with good performances. It is focused very much on Hitchcock's cruelty to Hedren.
My main objection to this movie is that its focus makes it rather unbalanced. Hedren herself says this. She says working with Hitchcock was great at first, and while the movie portrays her as dealing with one indignity after another, she says this was only really a problem toward the end of Marnie. It might have been interesting to see more of Hitchock's process - I liked the scene where he helps her work on her lines - but it's a short movie and they had a story to tell.
What is more interesting than the movie is its detractors here. While some people just don't find The Girl interesting, the vast majority seem to dislike it because they don't believe it. Some reviews will even say they're not invested in Hitchcock's reputation, but then follow it up by saying they don't believe this happened.
First off, the movie is based on information from a book by a respected biography writer, based on what he was told by both Hedren and those who worked with her. And Hitchcock was certainly a dark, obsessive, and sometimes cruel (witness his vicious "practical jokes") person. His movies are about obsessions and cruelty, so it would hardly be surprising if he acted poorly with his actress.
Yet, many of the movie's critics express outrage that Hitchcock's name is being besmirched. They say Hedren lied; that she is just trying to scapegoat Hitchcock for her lack of major successes after the Hitchcock films. They say she couldn't act. They say she should have been grateful that Hitchcock gave her a career.
There is a phrase I don't like, because it sounds extremist and harsh and overly politically correct, but that I increasingly realize accurately describes something, and that is "rape culture," the idea that sexual harassment and attacks on women are so ingrained in our society that they aren't even seen as abnormal. The reactions to this movie seem to me examples of this. What is the difference between saying Hedren lied about Hitchcock and the claims that a woman lies about being raped? What does her acting ability have to do with anything? (And what are people basing their assessment on? I suspect most of us have only seen her in two movies, made by a director who got exactly the performances he wanted from his actors).
Many people are saying,essentially, "he didn't do it, and if he did do it, she deserved it."
Look, I understand that people feel a need to defend great artists, but many great artists are not especially great people. That's inevitable; art often comes from a strange place. Don't attack the victim because you think the aggressor was a cool dude.
My main objection to this movie is that its focus makes it rather unbalanced. Hedren herself says this. She says working with Hitchcock was great at first, and while the movie portrays her as dealing with one indignity after another, she says this was only really a problem toward the end of Marnie. It might have been interesting to see more of Hitchock's process - I liked the scene where he helps her work on her lines - but it's a short movie and they had a story to tell.
What is more interesting than the movie is its detractors here. While some people just don't find The Girl interesting, the vast majority seem to dislike it because they don't believe it. Some reviews will even say they're not invested in Hitchcock's reputation, but then follow it up by saying they don't believe this happened.
First off, the movie is based on information from a book by a respected biography writer, based on what he was told by both Hedren and those who worked with her. And Hitchcock was certainly a dark, obsessive, and sometimes cruel (witness his vicious "practical jokes") person. His movies are about obsessions and cruelty, so it would hardly be surprising if he acted poorly with his actress.
Yet, many of the movie's critics express outrage that Hitchcock's name is being besmirched. They say Hedren lied; that she is just trying to scapegoat Hitchcock for her lack of major successes after the Hitchcock films. They say she couldn't act. They say she should have been grateful that Hitchcock gave her a career.
There is a phrase I don't like, because it sounds extremist and harsh and overly politically correct, but that I increasingly realize accurately describes something, and that is "rape culture," the idea that sexual harassment and attacks on women are so ingrained in our society that they aren't even seen as abnormal. The reactions to this movie seem to me examples of this. What is the difference between saying Hedren lied about Hitchcock and the claims that a woman lies about being raped? What does her acting ability have to do with anything? (And what are people basing their assessment on? I suspect most of us have only seen her in two movies, made by a director who got exactly the performances he wanted from his actors).
Many people are saying,essentially, "he didn't do it, and if he did do it, she deserved it."
Look, I understand that people feel a need to defend great artists, but many great artists are not especially great people. That's inevitable; art often comes from a strange place. Don't attack the victim because you think the aggressor was a cool dude.
The Girl (2012)
** (out of 4)
HBO movie about the working relationship between Alfred Hitchcock (Toby Jones) and Tippi Hedren (Sienna Miller) while making THE BIRDS and MARNIE. The film focuses in on Hitchcock's mental and sexual abuse of the actress who blames the director for her career never taking off. THE GIRL has hit with all sorts of controversy with people attacking it for trying to ruin Hitchcock's legacy and others attacking Hedren for coming up with this stories after years of talking about how great the director was. I guess we'll never really know what happened between the two but it's pretty clear by watching this movie that it didn't make for any entertainment. THE GIRL could have made for an interesting psychological thriller but what we get is pretty much a gossip film that has nothing going for it. It seems like the only thing this film tried to do was show Hitchcock as an ugly man both physically and in the way that he treated women. Watching this film you learn absolutely nothing about Hitchcock or this so-called obsession with Hendren. Did Hitch do this to other actresses? Why was Hitch so obsessed with Hedren? These are two important things that are never mentioned here and the only thing we are told is that this happened. THE GIRL is so short on any sort of information that the entire thing just comes across as an attempt to show a legend as a pervert. Again, if this really happened then I have no problem with a movie being made about it. The problem is that director Julian Jarrold has delivered a lifeless, boring mess that just doesn't add up to anything. Both Jones and Miller do what they can with decent performances but neither can overcome the screenplay. The best thing going in the film is the make-up job done to Jones. THE GIRL might lure people in wanting to see what all the controversy is about but I can't see too many sticking around to the end.
** (out of 4)
HBO movie about the working relationship between Alfred Hitchcock (Toby Jones) and Tippi Hedren (Sienna Miller) while making THE BIRDS and MARNIE. The film focuses in on Hitchcock's mental and sexual abuse of the actress who blames the director for her career never taking off. THE GIRL has hit with all sorts of controversy with people attacking it for trying to ruin Hitchcock's legacy and others attacking Hedren for coming up with this stories after years of talking about how great the director was. I guess we'll never really know what happened between the two but it's pretty clear by watching this movie that it didn't make for any entertainment. THE GIRL could have made for an interesting psychological thriller but what we get is pretty much a gossip film that has nothing going for it. It seems like the only thing this film tried to do was show Hitchcock as an ugly man both physically and in the way that he treated women. Watching this film you learn absolutely nothing about Hitchcock or this so-called obsession with Hendren. Did Hitch do this to other actresses? Why was Hitch so obsessed with Hedren? These are two important things that are never mentioned here and the only thing we are told is that this happened. THE GIRL is so short on any sort of information that the entire thing just comes across as an attempt to show a legend as a pervert. Again, if this really happened then I have no problem with a movie being made about it. The problem is that director Julian Jarrold has delivered a lifeless, boring mess that just doesn't add up to anything. Both Jones and Miller do what they can with decent performances but neither can overcome the screenplay. The best thing going in the film is the make-up job done to Jones. THE GIRL might lure people in wanting to see what all the controversy is about but I can't see too many sticking around to the end.
As Total Film magazine said of this one-off drama, "it amounts to nothing less than a wholesale character assassination". They were right – it makes Albert Goldman's biography of John Lennon appear hagiographic.
While it looks great and Sienna Miller is fine as Hedren and Jones captures Hitch's voice well, The Girl is a narrow and nasty portrayal of the world's greatest film director. In its attempt to construct a drama it forgets some important points: people often have to suffer for their art; Alfred Hitchcock was a film director who knew his audience better than anyone, his understanding of the human condition was deep, and he realised that the thing that mattered most was the experience that the audience would derive from his work. If it meant discomfort and long hours on the set, that was a price worth paying – there's no room for fluffy dressing gowns and tea and biscuit breaks when you're trying to create a masterpiece, something that might last for centuries.
To suggest that Hitch unexpectedly sent a model bird crashing through a telephone box window just to terrify and "punish" Hedren, as opposed to being a desire to frighten the wits out of the audience, is absurd. The shoot of The Birds had been meticulously planned for – literally – years, and in any case, why would Hitch risk harming his leading lady's features? The greatest of people are endowed with light and shade, and possess the ability to view human existence from deep and differing positions. Hitchcock was one of these people. This greatness is something to be lauded – not bemoaned and belittled, as was the case with The Girl.
While it looks great and Sienna Miller is fine as Hedren and Jones captures Hitch's voice well, The Girl is a narrow and nasty portrayal of the world's greatest film director. In its attempt to construct a drama it forgets some important points: people often have to suffer for their art; Alfred Hitchcock was a film director who knew his audience better than anyone, his understanding of the human condition was deep, and he realised that the thing that mattered most was the experience that the audience would derive from his work. If it meant discomfort and long hours on the set, that was a price worth paying – there's no room for fluffy dressing gowns and tea and biscuit breaks when you're trying to create a masterpiece, something that might last for centuries.
To suggest that Hitch unexpectedly sent a model bird crashing through a telephone box window just to terrify and "punish" Hedren, as opposed to being a desire to frighten the wits out of the audience, is absurd. The shoot of The Birds had been meticulously planned for – literally – years, and in any case, why would Hitch risk harming his leading lady's features? The greatest of people are endowed with light and shade, and possess the ability to view human existence from deep and differing positions. Hitchcock was one of these people. This greatness is something to be lauded – not bemoaned and belittled, as was the case with The Girl.
This TV movie looks at Alfred Hitchcock's obsession with Tippi Hedren during the making of the Birds.
This is quite fascinating compared to the film "Hitchcock" starring Anthony Hopkins. It shows Hitchcock's obsession with his leading ladies in a more predatory abusive nature than the Hopkins movie. Wonder which is closer to the truth? Sienna Miller doesn't look much like Tippi - she has a harder look but she does a good job. Toby looks more like Hitch than Anthony Hopkins.
Watch "The Birds" first and then watch this. The peek a the behind the scenes creative process is fascinating for Hitchcock fans.
This is quite fascinating compared to the film "Hitchcock" starring Anthony Hopkins. It shows Hitchcock's obsession with his leading ladies in a more predatory abusive nature than the Hopkins movie. Wonder which is closer to the truth? Sienna Miller doesn't look much like Tippi - she has a harder look but she does a good job. Toby looks more like Hitch than Anthony Hopkins.
Watch "The Birds" first and then watch this. The peek a the behind the scenes creative process is fascinating for Hitchcock fans.
Despite wonderful performances by Toby Jones and Sienna Miller, "The Girl," purporting to be the story of Hitchcock's obsession with Tippi Hedren, was tough going.
I'm getting a little tired of reading on the message board that Tippi Hedren "needed the money." I guess I'm unclear as to how she's cashed in on this story. Did she write the book? The screenplay? She gets a "thanks" in the credits. I have a thanks on a film's credit and I didn't get a cent. If she acted as a consultant, I doubt for a TV movie it would help her wildlife preserve much.
Hitchcock fans know several things: filming "The Birds" was a miserable experience for Hedren; Alfred Hitchcock was a brilliant, complicated man who probably had some sexual hangups; and Alfred Hitchcock had fallen for other leading ladies. However, those leading ladies remained friends with him (Bergman and Kelly) so one wonders if the way he is depicted in this film is correct. If someone tried to ram his tongue down my throat or recited dirty limericks to me or asked me to touch him, I'd have gone running.
The screenplay was criticized by one of the people who worked on the film and was interviewed, so you already know it's sensationalized.
In this version, Hitchcock falls for Tippi Hedren and makes her life a living hell after she rejects him. I have no idea if this happened or not. Toby Jones has again proved his gifts as a mimic - his Hitchcock is perfection, just as his Capote was. Sienna Miller is beautiful and strangely resembles Janet Leigh in this film! She did a good job playing a vapid actress.
The problem with the film is that it's skewed toward Hedren instead of telling a story in a balanced manner. The second problem is that even at 90 minutes it's too long with scene after scene of Tippi sighing over her bad treatment or someone commiserating with her over her bad treatment and scene after scene of Hitchcock staring at her and then plotting another way to torture her.
I had the pleasure of transcribing interviews that Donald Spoto did on his important book on Alfred Hitchcock, The Dark Side of Genius. I can testify that he worked for years on this book and left no stone unturned. I remember one part of the book, where Hitchcock is through with Hedren as an actress, saying, "She did the unimaginable -- she mentioned my WEIGHT." They didn't get along, that's evident. Hitchcock here is presented as a sicko whack job. Were that the case, he wouldn't have had so many people -- so many women -- working with him over and over again, which they did.
I suggest to people that if they want to know the whole story that they read Spoto's two books, Spellbound, about Hitchcock and his leading ladies, and The Dark Side of Genius. He is given to psychobabble but believe me, it's more interesting material than this. And if any of this is in his writing, you can believe it.
We are to believe in this movie that Hitchcock was hurtful and insulting to everyone, that he tortured, threw himself at, and belittled Tippi Hedren to such an extent that she made a second film with him. Yeah, that's what I would have done.
I'm guessing there might be a little more to this story that would possibly not present Ms. Hedren in the best light. I admire her very much for her work on her wildlife preserve, and in interviews, she always comes across as a lovely woman. That doesn't mean she is as shown in this film.
Hitchcock had his demons. Somehow Cary Grant, Grace Kelly, Ingrid Bergman, Teresa Wright, Janet Leigh, Vera Miles, and Barbara Harris got through it. Granted, they didn't have birds attacking them. They did, however, admire the genius behind the films.
I'm getting a little tired of reading on the message board that Tippi Hedren "needed the money." I guess I'm unclear as to how she's cashed in on this story. Did she write the book? The screenplay? She gets a "thanks" in the credits. I have a thanks on a film's credit and I didn't get a cent. If she acted as a consultant, I doubt for a TV movie it would help her wildlife preserve much.
Hitchcock fans know several things: filming "The Birds" was a miserable experience for Hedren; Alfred Hitchcock was a brilliant, complicated man who probably had some sexual hangups; and Alfred Hitchcock had fallen for other leading ladies. However, those leading ladies remained friends with him (Bergman and Kelly) so one wonders if the way he is depicted in this film is correct. If someone tried to ram his tongue down my throat or recited dirty limericks to me or asked me to touch him, I'd have gone running.
The screenplay was criticized by one of the people who worked on the film and was interviewed, so you already know it's sensationalized.
In this version, Hitchcock falls for Tippi Hedren and makes her life a living hell after she rejects him. I have no idea if this happened or not. Toby Jones has again proved his gifts as a mimic - his Hitchcock is perfection, just as his Capote was. Sienna Miller is beautiful and strangely resembles Janet Leigh in this film! She did a good job playing a vapid actress.
The problem with the film is that it's skewed toward Hedren instead of telling a story in a balanced manner. The second problem is that even at 90 minutes it's too long with scene after scene of Tippi sighing over her bad treatment or someone commiserating with her over her bad treatment and scene after scene of Hitchcock staring at her and then plotting another way to torture her.
I had the pleasure of transcribing interviews that Donald Spoto did on his important book on Alfred Hitchcock, The Dark Side of Genius. I can testify that he worked for years on this book and left no stone unturned. I remember one part of the book, where Hitchcock is through with Hedren as an actress, saying, "She did the unimaginable -- she mentioned my WEIGHT." They didn't get along, that's evident. Hitchcock here is presented as a sicko whack job. Were that the case, he wouldn't have had so many people -- so many women -- working with him over and over again, which they did.
I suggest to people that if they want to know the whole story that they read Spoto's two books, Spellbound, about Hitchcock and his leading ladies, and The Dark Side of Genius. He is given to psychobabble but believe me, it's more interesting material than this. And if any of this is in his writing, you can believe it.
We are to believe in this movie that Hitchcock was hurtful and insulting to everyone, that he tortured, threw himself at, and belittled Tippi Hedren to such an extent that she made a second film with him. Yeah, that's what I would have done.
I'm guessing there might be a little more to this story that would possibly not present Ms. Hedren in the best light. I admire her very much for her work on her wildlife preserve, and in interviews, she always comes across as a lovely woman. That doesn't mean she is as shown in this film.
Hitchcock had his demons. Somehow Cary Grant, Grace Kelly, Ingrid Bergman, Teresa Wright, Janet Leigh, Vera Miles, and Barbara Harris got through it. Granted, they didn't have birds attacking them. They did, however, admire the genius behind the films.
Did you know
- TriviaRay Berwick, the bird trainer on The Birds (1963), is depicted as having contempt for Sir Alfred Hitchcock, even referring to him at one point as "the old fool". In reality, Berwick always spoke of Hitchcock with the utmost respect and affection, working with him again on Topaz (1969).
- GoofsIn one scene, Hitchcock and the screenwriter of 'Marnie' conduct a conversation in the back of a car en route to the studio. In external shots, the car is seen driving on the right (on temporarily closed roads) but in internal shots the car is driving on the left. The film was made in South Africa, where cars drive on the left.
- Quotes
Alfred Hitchcock: There was a young man from Nantucket / Who had such a large cock he could suck it. / He looked in the glass / And saw his own arse / And broke his neck trying to fuck it.
- ConnectionsFeatured in 70th Golden Globe Awards (2013)
- SoundtracksTristan And Isolde: Act I Prelude
Written by Richard Wagner
Performed by Daniel Barenboim (as Daniel Baranboim)
Details
- Runtime1 hour 31 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content