Actually Evan I don't think anything could have saved Torn Curtain since the script was messed up and Paul Newman in his early career pretty-boy persona was terrible. (He finally evolved out of that insufferable "Am I not beautiful?" role, but it took about thirty years.) The way he took his "method" acting so seriously is pathetic and disgusting, since he was constantly ignoring Hitchcock's and film's needs to show how brilliant he was. Almost as bad - but not quite - as Mel Gibson's recent acting (and directing). Something that happens to pretty boy actors when they decide they are ARTISTS. Especially pathetic when compared to the light, effortless perfection of the quintessential Hitchcock leading man - Cary Grant. The most unpretentious and perhaps best actor ever in Hollywood. But the film would probably have been more powerful in individual scenes if the Herrmann score had been used, since the John Addison one was very insipid.
I am shocked to discover that I actually disagree with Paul!!! There is no fiasco at the end of the Birds! What do you mean? The end is one of the most weirdly ambiguous and surreal conclusions ever done in a mainstream film, and it perfectly mirrors the existential anxiety which the story was ultmately about. Also, I disagree in general with the concept that Hitchcock went down the toilet at the end. He was coping with a massive change in the entire structure of film and the audience's concept of film. "Frenzy" was a great film - shocking and extreme, yes, but essential Hitchcock and evidence that he was just as powerful a director as ever. The film he was going to do next "The Short Night" was going to be just as ambitious and strong as any he'd ever done, but he just was not up to it physically. If old age had not stopped him that diabolical brain of his would probably still be putting everyone else who makes thrillers to shame even today.
I am shocked to discover that I actually disagree with Paul!!! There is no fiasco at the end of the Birds! What do you mean? The end is one of the most weirdly ambiguous and surreal conclusions ever done in a mainstream film, and it perfectly mirrors the existential anxiety which the story was ultmately about. Also, I disagree in general with the concept that Hitchcock went down the toilet at the end. He was coping with a massive change in the entire structure of film and the audience's concept of film. "Frenzy" was a great film - shocking and extreme, yes, but essential Hitchcock and evidence that he was just as powerful a director as ever. The film he was going to do next "The Short Night" was going to be just as ambitious and strong as any he'd ever done, but he just was not up to it physically. If old age had not stopped him that diabolical brain of his would probably still be putting everyone else who makes thrillers to shame even today.