@dpcon said:

Paul beat me to the Jason and The Argonauts reference. I'm not happy about it and will have satisfaction concerning the issue.

Hahha! No. The thing is, I first saw Jason and the Argonauts when at boarding school in about 1964. It was shown to us actually through a film projector, if you can believe that. We had this film club going in those days and this was one of the first we saw. Most of the kids that used the film club were music students and the school was a bit specialist in that way. God knows what I was doing there. Anyway, we weren't just allowed to watch the films and wonder off in those days. Typical 'British' fashion of the day, you know. The music master would then ask questions about scenes and music scores for an hour afterwards. When all the other kids were playing football (soccer) or thinking about about girls, we were being educated about David Lean or Alfred Hitchcock or Bernard Herrmann or Alfred Newman.
We thought this was quite normal at the time, but I understand now that for the period, it was actually unusual. The music master was into all that and had studied mostly Bach and the Baroque period at The Royal College of Music. What a surprise, I hear you say. [:)]
I'm hoping satisfaction has been given Dave, and in the meantime, a certain computer consultancy is going to be sued very soon if they don't sort out the email problems that now seem to be chronic. [8o|]

Paul

Dave, stop playing with those dueling pistols. You're liable to hurt somebody. And take off that silly wig! It's not going to help and will just drop talcum powder into your keys.

Paul, that was a unique situation you had there in school, quite an inspiration. Also very rare in those days, since most people who studied Bach then wouldn't be caught dead studying film music. Though many today have the same attitude.

@William said:

Also very rare in those days, since most people who studied Bach then wouldn't be caught dead studying film music. Though many today have the same attitude.

Yes Dave, stop it at once or you may get people thinking your'e from England [H]

Very rare Bill as it turned out, but when your'e a kid and have spent most of your time prior to this in film school from the age of six (local cinema) and suddenly find that your first music professor is a Bernard Herrmann fan, whilst at the same time making you play almost exclusively, music of the Baroque form and period, looking back it does seem strange. Like I said, when your'e young, you are much more open to receive things as the norm, especially when being educated in a cloistered environment.
Actually, I defer to Dave here and cheated a bit, because the other day I bought Jason and the Argonauts on DVD for the original soundtrack (as with Psycho, Taxi Driver etc). Personal and subjective opinion. Bernard Herrmann is and was the best filmscore writer ever. Such a fantastic range and quality with no real letting up and no laziness.

Paul,

How extraordinary and fortunate an experience for a young lad to see such great films as education. Seems to have stayed with you. When was Argonauts released? I seem to recall seeing it in a theatre as a boy. A remarkable film to this day. When that statue comes alive (Talos?) it still absolutely thrills. What a great score by the best guy for the job.

William, okay I put the pistols down but don't ask me to part with the wig and powder. Paul will explain since he has the same condition (as all Brits do.)

DC

Released in 1963. And yes Talos. By that time, there wasn't much left in the bank with regard to Alfred Hitchcock and Bernard Herrmann, so Herrmann had to look at other projects, especially after the fiasco on The Birds.

It wasn't The Birds but Torn Curtain that was the fiasco. On Torn Curtain Hitchcock actually fired Herrmann when he saw the orchestra after he'd been instructed to do a more "pop" Mancini style score. It had twelve flutes, nine trombones, eight horns, violas, basses and percussion and nothing else. It was not even faintly "pop" and was pure Herrmann. And then the film was a flop (though had some great scenes like the killing of Gromek).

Yes thats right, but I was thinking more about Hitchcock than Herrmann. The Birds was a fiasco because of what was done to the end of the film. Hitchcock, for whatever reason, never was the same after that film, and Torn Curtain, whilst I agree had its great moment of vintage Hitchcock, was really the end of a great career. Totally miscast Julie Andrews for starters. Did Hitchcock really want that? Lame film that didn't know what it was; a thriller? a comedy thriller? a drama? The film that defines the expression of losing the plot. Herrmann may well have seen this coming, I don't know, but The Birds was really the end of their partnership, although it happened as you say on Torn Curtain. Had Bernard Herrmann's score been used on Torn Curtain, it must have improved the final result, but nevertheless, by then Hitchcock had lost his edge and the ability to 'cut' a film over the 90 minutes or so.
Plus, audiences were changing with the onset of the mid-sixties and Hitchcock tried to follow the times later with Frenzy, which in my view is lurid and actually almost dreadful. Its like a poor Hammer Horror.

This is all theory on my part, of course.

William,

had Hitchcock stood up to the studios and coveted Herrmann's ultimate choice to do an orchestral score, and the studio caved in, do you think the film would have been successful? With Herrmann's score?

Do you think Hitchcock directed and cut in a more "pop" style? If not, then Herrmann's score would be the only thing making it worthy of inclusion withe the others:

Psycho
NXNW
Vertigo
Man Who Knew Too Much
The Wrong Man
Trouble With Harry
etc.

By the way, in my opinion, The Wrong Man is a very unclassical score and the movie is very contemporary for it's time.

Hitchcock deserved failure for abandoning Herrmann. Later he became obsessed with trying to prove he could outdo the magic they created together, ALL BY HIMSELF. His ego tore him apart as his films worsened.

Evan Evans

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.

@William said:

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?

Hahaaa! No need to be shocked Bill. Remember, this is just a personal view, whereas most film critics agree that The Birds is great throughout. The end of the film just doesn't conform to my compartmental mind, thats all it is really. The rest of the film to that point, when they walk from the house (I haven't seen this film for years btw) is great and from what I recall there is no music as such. The score is basically electronic if I remember right, with Bernard Herrmann being consulted for sound design. Anyway, I had a crush on Suzanne Pleshette when I was a kid (thanks Walt Disney). [:O]ops: and she doesn't last long enough.
How would I prefer the ending to be? No idea, but I will get the DVD soon and come back on this out of interest. Although I wouldn't feel threatened by any ideas I have, if were Hitch!

Frenzy! Thats interesting and I wonder why. Seen from a British perspective (saw it in the cinema when it came out) it seemed to lose the magic of the Anglo/American relationship usually associated with Hitchcock and even down to the quality of the actual film. It almost looks like video to me. I accept that an American audience wouldn't worry that there are no traces of America in this film, but to me it's like a 1970 version of Jack the Ripper (is that what it's meant to be? btw). Alright Guv, ow's it goin! Allo my luv, fancy a drink! etc etc. I found it lurid, rather than menacing with cockney stereotypes all over the place. BUT, most people agree, it's a good film. Just my taste on this one. If I told you my favourite Hitchcock film Bill (not necessarily the technical best) I reckon you'd be surprised. Your'e right about the old age thing obviously. Thats the way it goes even to the best of them in the end, unfortunately. It's difficult to make allowances like that for the likes of Hitchcock, as one never regards them as having normal human conditions apply.
With regard to his diabolical brain, I actually watched the original trailer to Psycho the other night. Thats just brilliant, it really is. Diabolical brain alright! [:)]

Paul

@William said:

Almost as bad - but not quite - as Mel Gibson's recent acting (and directing).

Couldn't agree more on that! I know it's off-topic, but this surely has to be one of the most overrated screen actors around.

All the Mad Max films -- Nonsense

Brave Heart -- Rubbish

Another film about the American Civil War and I can't be bothered to look up it's name-- Rubbish

A remake of a Lee Marvin/Angie Dickinson film by John Boreman (I think?) which was brilliant -- Rubbish

Some film about a kid getting kidnapped -- Tripe

All the good cop/bad cop films-- Rubbish

Phony American accent-- Rubbish

This new phantasmorgorical horror film. Haven't seen it yet, but-- Rubbish

Christ Almighty, these films make some money! The intellectual equivalents of a Chinese takeaway!

Glad you bought this up Bill! That feels good!

Anyone with any thoughts?

[6]

Paul,

Yes, this overrated Aussie is not terribly interesting, quite. By the by, guv, did you know his wife's going to Hell? Yes, the bird's taking the plunge or so the old boy claims. Not very decent of whomever's responsible, what?

Interesting how the "Englishness" of Frenzy is what turns you against it - I can understand that completely, and yet it was one of the more attractive aspects of the film to me. I suppose this is something similar to Westerns: maybe they have a certain exoticism (???!!) to people in England or Europe but here, where I can look out my window and see sagebrush-covered hills, they are just too ordinary most of the time.

Also - that Marvin/Dickinson film: one of the most original film noir ever made - "Point Blank." Lee Marvin is apparently a vengeful ghost in the fascinating metaphysical plot. Both Clint Eastwood and Mel the Auteur stole the concept from it.

@William said:

Paul,
Yes, this overrated Aussie is not terribly interesting, quite. By the by, guv, did you know his wife's going to Hell?

Well, I'm very sorry to hear that.

I was just starting college life in London actually, when Frenzy was being made. A very different London to now. More like the London you may have seen in Blow Up, made about 4 years before.

Yes indeed, it could be the same as Westerns. Quid pro quo. Although, westerns are usually popular the world over.

Point Blank. Thats the one. Lee Marvin's footsteps. Click, click, click, click, like a metronome is what I always think of with that film.

Paul, you must have been extremely cool [H] if you lived in that London.

@William said:

Paul, you must have been extremely cool [H] if you lived in that London.

Nah! It was nice on a sunny day to walk from our appartment in Kangaroo Valley up to Kensington and up and over the steps of the Albert Hall to college though Bill. Bernard Herrmann wouldn't recognize London nowadays. You could buy a row houses in Fulham for £100k then and they'd throw one in for free probably. Los Angeles is probably much cooler, and New York. And as for Reno, well, I would imagine it's so cool, it's like living in a Smeg fridge. [:D]

Reno used to be really cool but people discovered it and now they're all moving here and it is being overrun. I think I'll move to Virginia City (just a few miles up the road) and become a colorful drunk. They have lots of those there.

But back on the original subject - one thing that struck me in this discussion of later Hitchcock was the quality or lack thereof of later scores without Herrmann - "Torn Curtain" is fluff without Herrmann. "Topaz" ? I have no concept of the music in it. Forgettable at best.

HOWEVER -
"Frenzy" - a very good score that had a grand opening title to match the ultimate "Largest to Smallest" visual motif of Hitchcock - the entire Thames down to a necktie on a corpse floating in it. Then a powerful, hard-driving theme to accompany the desperate search for the killer, etc. Some very good music in that.

Also, "Family Plot" which I like and don't care if other people think it's fluff -it's very good fluff - entertaining, clever and humorous with excellent performances - and if Hitchcock had been immortal would probably have been a light interlude between Frenzy and the next powerful film, "The Short Night." This had a score by John Williams, pre-Star Wars. It is interesting to contrast this to Herrmann. In general the music by Williams is insipid and has no strong emotion whatsoever, but it is very skillful and provides what was needed at each point of the film's structure. It does not provide however what Herrmann did - the art of film music. It is just technique. Very effective technique though.

@William said:

I think I'll move to Virginia City (just a few miles up the road) and become a colorful drunk. They have lots of those there.

I thought we already were. You should come and live where I am. Plenty of colourful drunks here. There's a nice place just come on the market 100 yards from the pub. £650 grand and a snip at the price. Thatched roof, plenty of parking, nice views, composers dream. I may become a real estate agent for musicians only actually. More money in it.

Seriously. Henry Mancini I believe was originally going to do the score to Frenzy(released 1972), but he and Hitchcock couldn't agree and that was that. So Ron Goodwin was finally given the score and the part you mentioned is known as the‘London Theme’ which starts the film off. Not the first time Goodwin did this on a film (remember William Walton and The Battle of Britain).He used the City of Prague Philharmonic for this (for whatever reason). Goodwin was always good at that type of thing; for example, the themes and score to Where Eagles Dare. Very good writer. His style was nothing like Herrmann of course, whereas....

I was watching What Lies Beneath the other evening and that to me is a Hitchcock pastiche right down to the camera angles, cutting and score. Entertaining film with Michele Pfeiffer doing most of the work. The score by Alan Silvestri is straight out of the Bernard Herrmann manual, especially at the end where for a moment there I thought we'd gone into Psycho. Presumably this is what the director wanted and how many times have filmscore writers 'borrowed' Herrmann's style over the last 40 years. They can never quite pull it off though, can they?

I've never seen Family Plot.

I have respect for someone who is obsessed with Herrmann and is therefore heavily influenced by him. There are at least two people here like that.

However I have no respect and no tolerance for a damnable hack who is instructed by a fool of a director to imitate Herrmann because the film is a Hitchcock "homage" (translation: ripoff).

@William said:

"homage" (translation: ripoff).

shit. good timing actually. You know there is this idea spinning in my mind about making an "homage" to Santiago Santaolalla (the amores perros composer) and after seeing your post I had to confess that the ideas I had were much to derivative. damnit!
But good timing. I have to come up with something better...