DOCSLIB.ORG

Hitchcock's Appetites

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hitchcock's Appetites McKittrick, Casey. "The pleasures and pangs of Hitchcockian consumption." Hitchcock’s Appetites: The corpulent plots of desire and dread. New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. 65–99. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 28 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781501311642.0007>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 28 September 2021, 16:41 UTC. Copyright © Casey McKittrick 2016. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 3 The pleasures and pangs of Hitchcockian consumption People say, “ Why don ’ t you make more costume pictures? ” Nobody in a costume picture ever goes to the toilet. That means, it ’ s not possible to get any detail into it. People say, “ Why don ’ t you make a western? ” My answer is, I don ’ t know how much a loaf of bread costs in a western. I ’ ve never seen anybody buy chaps or being measured or buying a 10 gallon hat. This is sometimes where the drama comes from for me. 1 y 1942, Hitchcock had acquired his legendary moniker the “ Master of BSuspense. ” The nickname proved more accurate and durable than the title David O. Selznick had tried to confer on him— “ the Master of Melodrama ” — a year earlier, after Rebecca ’ s release. In a fi fty-four-feature career, he deviated only occasionally from his tried and true suspense fi lm, with the exceptions of his early British assignments, the horror fi lms Psycho and The Birds , the splendid, darkly comic The Trouble with Harry , and the romantic comedy Mr. and Mrs. Smith of 1941, which he is said to have made purely out of loyalty to friend Carole Lombard. When asked why he did not branch out into other genres, Hitchcock generally replied with some variation on the reply he gave Fletcher Markle above on his TV show Telescope . The elliptical explanation he was known to offer — “ Nobody in a costume picture ever goes to the toilet, ” and “ I don ’ t know how much a loaf of bread costs in a western ” — should tell us several things. First, it points to a particular ethos of verisimilitude in representation for which critics have applauded HHitchcock.indbitchcock.indb 6655 228-04-20168-04-2016 112:41:142:41:14 66 HITCHCOCK’S APPETITES him throughout his fi lm career — his careful attention to detail within the mise-en-scene of his fi lms. Hitchcock assiduously avoided anachronism, left nothing extraneous, nothing without visual explanatory power, in his frame, and was wholly and consistently devoted to a realism that governed the life of objects and people in his fi lms. It points to Hitchcock ’ s need to know the ins and outs of the material world of his fi lm, including the small transactions, before he could begin to realize a drama within it. It is also quite telling that Hitchcock (repeatedly) offered the examples that he did. His microscopic focus on human habits, behaviors, and obligations such as going to the toilet and buying bread are, for him, benchmarks of that commitment to realism. They reveal his belief in grounding his cinema in the banal, the quotidian, the material realities and exchanges of human existence that often receive representational short shrift in the cinema of other directors. These small moments of transaction, he says, are “ sometimes where the drama comes from. ” Of course, food and drink were incredibly important both in the director’ s own personal life, as well as in his motion pictures. Food was not just sustenance for Hitchcock; it was inspiration, fantasy, a window to sublimity. As he once told a reporter in New York, “ There is as much anticipation in confronting good food as there is in going on a holiday or seeing a good show. There are two kinds of eating — eating to sustain and eating for pleasure. I eat for pleasure. ” When Hitchcock hired new actors and writers for his productions, he most often used conversations about food and drink to break the ice with them, whether it was how to prepare batter pudding with Frenzy ’ s Anna Massey; how to fi nd good wine in Bristol, with (twelve-year-old) Veronica Cartwright of The Birds ; how donuts are made, with Tippi Hedren; or how to make pork cracklings, with writer David Freeman. For Hitchcock, friendship bonding happened over food and drink. A sure sign of his acceptance was an invitation to his always plentiful dinner table. In what follows, I explore the various ends to which Hitchcock deployed food and drink beyond the sustenance of a realist aesthetic. Specifi cally, I locate moments when he grounds food and drink in philosophical inquiries about the relationship between pleasure and disgust (the polarized ambivalence which characterized his own consumption of food and drink); further, I examine his use of processes of consumption and elimination to dramatize sublimation, particularly sexual sublimation; to explore the nature of his characters ’ vulnerabilities; to metaphorize the narrative fl ow of information and the nature of his characters ’ interactions; and to convey particular attitudes toward his characters. We will begin with the status of the body in Hitchcock ’ s fi lms. HHitchcock.indbitchcock.indb 6666 228-04-20168-04-2016 112:41:142:41:14 THE PLEASURES AND PANGS OF HITCHCOCKIAN CONSUMPTION 67 Screening the revolting body The pleasure and disgust that alternately governed Hitchcock ’ s feelings about food and drink similarly describe his attitudes toward the human body and its capacities for consumption and elimination. As much as he framed the body as a source of scopic pleasure in his fi lms, he also frequently directed our cinematic gaze to the body as a site of abjection, and exploited it as such, albeit less frequently and less explicitly in his fi lmmaking than in his life off screen. Throughout his career, Hitchcock retained a self-confessed puerile sense of humor rooted in the functions of the body, which for him were endlessly funny and bizarre. He would often use a whoopie cushion on new guests to his house, and would feign horror and dismay as the unsuspecting guest sat on the fl atulent toy. 2 He seemed to enjoy the incommensurability of the dignifi ed English gentleman ’ s persona he performed in public, with the private jokester who could not help but titter at the mention of unmentionables. In the late 1920s, he laid a bet with one of his cameramen that the latter could not spend a night in the supposedly haunted fi lm studio, chained to his camera. The unwitting man accepted the bet, as well as a carafe of brandy, courtesy of Hitchcock, that had been spiked with laxatives, to get him through the night. The next day, the crew arrived to fi nd the mortifi ed winner of the bet, who had ruined his pants in the process — a sight that delighted the director. A running joke in several of his fi lms involved his use of the initials B. M. (an abbreviation for “ bowel movement ” ): characters Bob Marvin in The Secret Agent (1936), Barbara Morton in Strangers on a Train (1951), Ben McKenna in The Man Who Knew Too Much , and Babs Milligan and Brenda Margaret Blaney in Frenzy (1972). Additionally, John Hodiak displays a chest tattoo of the initials in Lifeboat (1944), and the “ engagement ” ring of Shadow of a Doubt bears the inscription “ TS, from BM. ” It was common for him to introduce himself jokingly (to men, rarely to women), as “ Hitch, without the cock .” This is, of course, a crude joke, but it also points to a biographical fact that Hitchcock did not mind sharing in some intimate company: his lack of sexual experience and his impotence throughout most of his adult life. During the shooting of The Birds , he described himself as “ long chaste, ” and either joked or confessed that he had had proper sex only once, to father his daughter Patricia. Several times, to the chagrin of Alma and in the presence of friends, he would share, regarding his size at the time of Pat ’ s conception, “ I was so fat I had to conceive my daughter with a fountain pen! ” 3 Clearly, elements of Hitchcock ’ s lifestyle during most of his time as an adult — such as his weight, poor circulation from sedentary work days, and HHitchcock.indbitchcock.indb 6677 228-04-20168-04-2016 112:41:142:41:14 68 HITCHCOCK’S APPETITES heavy drinking — conspired to challenge his sexual performance. Hitchcock ’ s lack of bedroom experience, however, evidently did not curb his interest in bodies, sex, and sexuality — quite the opposite. His sexual dysfunction, though, may shed some light on the importance for him of rendering the body, its processes and its irregularities, comically. In another context, he candidly confessed to Francois Truffaut, “ I ’ m a celibate, you know. I ’ m not against it, but I don ’ t think about it very much. ” 4 This cinematic focus on the absurd and unpredictable aspects of embodiment offered a way for him to avoid the pitfalls of idealizing the life of physicality that was unavailable to him. To his immense credit and to our benefi t, Hitchcock chose to see his sexual outsider status as conducive to the creative process, rather than detrimental. To friend Charlotte Chandler, he said: I think that too much sex while you are working goes against the work and that repressed sex is more constructive for the creative person. It must get out, and so it goes into the work. I think it helped create a sense of sex in my work.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • LYNNE MACEDO Auteur and Author: a Comparison of the Works of Alfred Hitchcock and VS Naipaul
    EnterText 1.3 LYNNE MACEDO Auteur and Author: A Comparison of the Works of Alfred Hitchcock and V. S. Naipaul At first glance, the subjects under scrutiny may appear to have little in common with each other. A great deal has been written separately about the works of both Alfred Hitchcock and V. S. Naipaul, but the objective of this article is to show how numerous parallels can be drawn between many of the recurrent ideas and issues that occur within their respective works. Whilst Naipaul refers to the cinema in many of his novels and short stories, his most sustained usage of the filmic medium is to be found in the 1971 work In a Free State. In this particular book, the films to which Naipaul makes repeated, explicit reference are primarily those of the film director Alfred Hitchcock. Furthermore, a detailed textual analysis shows that similarities exist between the thematic preoccupations that have informed the output of both men throughout much of their lengthy careers. As this article will demonstrate, the decision to contrast the works of these two men has, therefore, been far from arbitrary. Naipaul’s attraction to the world of cinema can be traced back to his childhood in Trinidad, an island where Hollywood films remained the predominant viewing fare throughout most of his formative years.1 The writer’s own comments in the “Trinidad” section of The Middle Passage bear this out: “Nearly all the films shown, apart from those in the first-run cinemas, are American and old. Favourites were shown again and Lynne Macedo: Alfred Hitchcock and V.
    [Show full text]
  • Leituras Freudianas E Lacanianas Do Espaço Simbólico Hitchcock's Films O
    Universidade de Aveiro Departamento de Línguas e Culturas Ano 2017 Mark William Poole Os Filmes de Hitchcock no Sofá: Leituras Freudianas e Lacanianas do Espaço Simbólico Hitchcock’s Films on the Couch: Freudian and Lacanian Readings of Symbolic Space Universidade de Aveiro Departamento de Línguas e Culturas Ano 2017 Mark William Poole Os Filmes de Hitchcock no Sofá: Leituras Freudianas e Lacanianas do Espaço Simbólico Hitchcock’s Films on the Couch: Freudian and Lacanian Readings of Symbolic Space Tese apresentada à Universidade de Aveiro para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Doutor em Estudos Culturais, realizada sob a orientação científica do Doutor Anthony David Barker, Professor Associado do Departamento de Línguas e Culturas da Universidade de Aveiro o júri Doutor Carlos Manuel da Rocha Borges de Azevedo, Professor Catedrático, Faculdade de Letras, Universidade do Porto. Doutor Mário Carlos Fernandes Avelar, Professor Catedrático, Universidade Aberta, Lisboa. Doutor Anthony David Barker, Professor Associado, Universidade de Aveiro (orientador). Doutor Kenneth David Callahan, Professor Associado, Universidade de Aveiro. Doutor Nelson Troca Zagalo, Professor Auxiliar, Universidade do Minho. presidente Doutor Nuno Miguel Gonçalves Borges de Carvalho, Reitor da Universidade de Aveiro. agradecimentos Primarily, I would like to thank Isabel Pereira, without whose generosity this entire process would not have been possible. She believes in supporting all types of education and I cannot express my gratitude enough. I express equal gratitude to Marta Correia, who has been the Alma Reville of this thesis. She has had the patience to listen to my ideas and offer her invaluable insights, while proofreading and criticising the chapters as this thesis evolved.
    [Show full text]
  • Silent Films of Alfred Hitchcock
    The Hitchcock 9 Silent Films of Alfred Hitchcock Justin Mckinney Presented at the National Gallery of Art The Lodger (British Film Institute) and the American Film Institute Silver Theatre Alfred Hitchcock’s work in the British film industry during the silent film era has generally been overshadowed by his numerous Hollywood triumphs including Psycho (1960), Vertigo (1958), and Rebecca (1940). Part of the reason for the critical and public neglect of Hitchcock’s earliest works has been the generally poor quality of the surviving materials for these early films, ranging from Hitchcock’s directorial debut, The Pleasure Garden (1925), to his final silent film, Blackmail (1929). Due in part to the passage of over eighty years, and to the deterioration and frequent copying and duplication of prints, much of the surviving footage for these films has become damaged and offers only a dismal representation of what 1920s filmgoers would have experienced. In 2010, the British Film Institute (BFI) and the National Film Archive launched a unique restoration campaign called “Rescue the Hitchcock 9” that aimed to preserve and restore Hitchcock’s nine surviving silent films — The Pleasure Garden (1925), The Lodger (1926), Downhill (1927), Easy Virtue (1927), The Ring (1927), Champagne (1928), The Farmer’s Wife (1928), The Manxman (1929), and Blackmail (1929) — to their former glory (sadly The Mountain Eagle of 1926 remains lost). The BFI called on the general public to donate money to fund the restoration project, which, at a projected cost of £2 million, would be the largest restoration project ever conducted by the organization. Thanks to public support and a $275,000 dona- tion from Martin Scorsese’s The Film Foundation in conjunction with The Hollywood Foreign Press Association, the project was completed in 2012 to coincide with the London Olympics and Cultural Olympiad.
    [Show full text]
  • "Sounds Like a Spy Story": the Espionage Thrillers of Alfred
    University of Mary Washington Eagle Scholar Student Research Submissions 4-29-2016 "Sounds Like a Spy Story": The Espionage Thrillers of Alfred Hitchcock in Twentieth-Century English and American Society, from The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934) to Topaz (1969) Kimberly M. Humphries Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.umw.edu/student_research Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Humphries, Kimberly M., ""Sounds Like a Spy Story": The Espionage Thrillers of Alfred Hitchcock in Twentieth-Century English and American Society, from The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934) to Topaz (1969)" (2016). Student Research Submissions. 47. https://scholar.umw.edu/student_research/47 This Honors Project is brought to you for free and open access by Eagle Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student Research Submissions by an authorized administrator of Eagle Scholar. For more information, please contact [email protected]. "SOUNDS LIKE A SPY STORY": THE ESPIONAGE THRILLERS OF ALFRED HITCHCOCK IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY ENGLISH AND AMERICAN SOCIETY, FROM THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH (1934) TO TOPAZ (1969) An honors paper submitted to the Department of History and American Studies of the University of Mary Washington in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Departmental Honors Kimberly M Humphries April 2016 By signing your name below, you affirm that this work is the complete and final version of your paper submitted in partial fulfillment of a degree from the University of Mary Washington. You affirm the University of Mary Washington honor pledge: "I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work." Kimberly M.
    [Show full text]
  • Innovators: Filmmakers
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES INNOVATORS: FILMMAKERS David W. Galenson Working Paper 15930 http://www.nber.org/papers/w15930 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 April 2010 The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2010 by David W. Galenson. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Innovators: Filmmakers David W. Galenson NBER Working Paper No. 15930 April 2010 JEL No. Z11 ABSTRACT John Ford and Alfred Hitchcock were experimental filmmakers: both believed images were more important to movies than words, and considered movies a form of entertainment. Their styles developed gradually over long careers, and both made the films that are generally considered their greatest during their late 50s and 60s. In contrast, Orson Welles and Jean-Luc Godard were conceptual filmmakers: both believed words were more important to their films than images, and both wanted to use film to educate their audiences. Their greatest innovations came in their first films, as Welles made the revolutionary Citizen Kane when he was 26, and Godard made the equally revolutionary Breathless when he was 30. Film thus provides yet another example of an art in which the most important practitioners have had radically different goals and methods, and have followed sharply contrasting life cycles of creativity.
    [Show full text]
  • DINNERS ENROLL TOM SAWYER.’ at 2:40
    1 11 T 1 Another Film for Film Fans to Suggest Gordon tried out in the drama, "Ch.!« There Is dren of Darkness.” It was thought No ‘Cimarron’ Team. Janet’s Next Role. in Theaters This Week the play would be a failure, so they Photoplays Washington IRENE DUNNE and ^ Wesley Ruggles, of the Nation will * fyJOVIE-GOERS prepared to abandon It. A new man- who as star and director made be asked to suggest the sort of agement took over the property, as- WEEK OP JUNE 12 SUNDAY MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY cinematic history in 1931 In “Cimar- Stopping picture In which little Janet Kay signed Basil Sydney and Mary Ellis "Bit Town Olrl." "Manneouln." "Manneouln." are to be "Naughty Marietta" "Haughty Marietta" "Thank You. Ur. ron," reunited as star and Chapman. 4-year-old star dis- to the leads and Academy "alfm*83ifl£L'‘ Jon Hall in Will Rogers in Will Rosen in and ‘•The Shadow of and "The Shadow of Moto.” and "Ride. recently they scored a Broad- " director of a Paramount to Sth »nd O Sts. B.E, "The Hu-rlcane." "The Hurricane." _"David Harum "David Harum."_Silk Lennox."_ Silk Lennox." Ranter. Ride." picture covered by a Warner scout, should be way hit. This Lad in } into in the Rudy Vailee Rudy Valle? in Rudy Vallee in Myrna Loy. Clark Oa- Myrna Loy. Clark Oa- Loretta Yoon* in go production early fall. next seen on the screen. Miss So It Is at this time of Ambassador •■Sm* "Gold Diggers in "Gold Diggers in "Oold in ble and ble Chap- only yea# DuE*niBin Diggers Spencer Tracy and Spencer Tracy "Four Men and a The announcement was made after man the 18th «nd OolumblA Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • European Journal of American Studies, 5-4 | 2010 “Don’T Be Frightened Dear … This Is Hollywood”: British Filmmakers in Early A
    European journal of American studies 5-4 | 2010 Special Issue: Film “Don’t Be Frightened Dear … This Is Hollywood”: British Filmmakers in Early American Cinema Ian Scott Electronic version URL: https://journals.openedition.org/ejas/8751 DOI: 10.4000/ejas.8751 ISSN: 1991-9336 Publisher European Association for American Studies Electronic reference Ian Scott, ““Don’t Be Frightened Dear … This Is Hollywood”: British Filmmakers in Early American Cinema”, European journal of American studies [Online], 5-4 | 2010, document 5, Online since 15 November 2010, connection on 08 July 2021. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejas/8751 ; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ejas.8751 This text was automatically generated on 8 July 2021. Creative Commons License “Don’t Be Frightened Dear … This Is Hollywood”: British Filmmakers in Early A... 1 “Don’t Be Frightened Dear … This Is Hollywood”: British Filmmakers in Early American Cinema Ian Scott 1 “Don't be frightened, dear – this – this – is Hollywood.” 2 Noël Coward recited these words of encouragement told to him by the actress Laura Hope-Crews on a Christmas visit to Hollywood in 1929. In typically acerbic fashion, he retrospectively judged his experiences in Los Angeles to be “unreal and inconclusive, almost as though they hadn't happened at all.” Coward described his festive jaunt through Hollywood’s social merry-go-round as like careering “through the side-shows of some gigantic pleasure park at breakneck speed” accompanied by “blue-ridged cardboard mountains, painted skies [and] elaborate grottoes peopled with several familiar figures.”1 3 Coward’s first visit persuaded him that California was not the place to settle and he for one only ever made fleeting visits to the movie colony, but the description he offered, and the delicious dismissal of Hollywood’s “fabricated” community, became common currency if one examines other British accounts of life on the west coast at this time.
    [Show full text]
  • Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead Axel KRUSI;
    SYDNEY STUDIES Tragicomedy and Tragic Burlesque: Waiting for Godot and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead AxEL KRUSI; When Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead appeared at the .Old Vic theatre' in 1967, there was some suspicion that lack of literary value was one reason for the play's success. These doubts are repeated in the revised 1969 edition of John Russell Taylor's standard survey of recent British drama. The view in The Angry Theatre is that Stoppard lacks individuality, and that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is a pale imitation of the theatre of the absurd, wrillen in "brisk, informal prose", and with a vision of character and life which seems "a very small mouse to emerge from such an imposing mountain".l In contrast, Jumpers was received with considerable critical approval. Jumpers and Osborne's A Sense of Detachment and Storey's Life Class might seem to be evidence that in the past few years the new British drama has reached maturity as a tradition of dramatic forms aitd dramatic conventions which exist as a pattern of meaningful relationships between plays and audiences in particular theatres.2 Jumpers includes a group of philosophical acrobats, and in style and meaning seems to be an improved version of Stoppard's trans· lation of Beckett's theatre of the absurd into the terms of the conversation about the death of tragedy between the Player and Rosencrantz: Player Why, we grow rusty and you catch us at the very point of decadence-by this time tomorrow we might have forgotten every­ thing we ever knew.
    [Show full text]
  • Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 I
    INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced info the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on untii complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • 2256 Inventory 4.Pdf
    The Robert Bloch Collection, Acc. ~2256-89-0]-27 Page 11 Box ~ (continueo) Periooicals (continueol: F~ntastic Adyentutes: Vol. 5 (No.8), Allg. 194]: "You Can't Kio Lefty Feep", pp.148-166; "Fairy Tale" under the name Tarleton Fiske, pp.184-202; biographical note on Tarleton Fiske, p.203. Vol. 5 (No.9), Oct. 194]: "A Horse On Lefty Feep", pp. 86-101; "Mystery Of The Creeping Underwear" under the name Tarleton FIske, pp.132-146. Vol. 6 (No.1), Feb. 1944; "Lefty Feep's ~l:abian Nightmare", pp.178-192. Vol. 6 (No. 2), ~pr. 1944: "Lefty Feep Does Time", pp. 156-1'15. Vol. 7 (No.2), Apr. IH5: "Lefty Feep Gets Henpeckeo", 1'1'.116-131. Vol. 6 (No.3), July 1946: "Tree's A Cro"d", pp.74-90. Vol. 9 (No. 51, sept. 1947: "The Mad Scientist", pp. 108-124. Vol. 12 (No.3), Mar. 1950: "Girl From Mars", pp.28-33. Vol. 12 (No.7), July 1950: "End Of YOUl: Rope", 1'p.l10- 124. Vol. 12 (No. S), Aug. 1950: "The Devil With Youl", pp. 8-68. Vol. 13 (No.7), July 1951: "The Dead Don't Die", pp. 8-54; biogl;aphical note, pp.2, 129-130. Fantastic Monsters Of The F11ms, Vol. 1 (No.1), 1962: "Black Lotus", p.10-21, 62. Fantastic Uniyel;se: Vol. 1 (No.6), May 1954: "The Goddess Of Wisdom", pp. 117-128. Vol. 4 (No, 6), Jan. 1956: "You Got To Have Brains", pp .112-120. Vol. 5 (No.6), July 1956: "Founoing Fathel:s", pp.34- Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • The Client Who Did Too Much
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Law Review Akron Law Journals June 2015 The lieC nt Who Did Too Much Nancy B. Rapoport Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview Part of the Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility Commons Recommended Citation Rapoport, Nancy B. (2014) "The lC ient Who Did Too Much," Akron Law Review: Vol. 47 : Iss. 1 , Article 6. Available at: http://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akronlawreview/vol47/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Law Review by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Rapoport: The Client Who Did Too Much ARTICLE 6 RAPOPORT MACRO (DO NOT DELETE) 2/5/2014 2:06 PM THE CLIENT WHO DID TOO MUCH∗ Nancy B. Rapoport∗∗ The whole point of the MacGuffin is that it is irrelevant. In Hitchcock’s own words, the MacGuffin is: the device, the gimmick, if you will, or the papers the spies are after. .[.] The only thing that really matters is that in the picture the plans, documents or secrets must seem to be of vital importance to the characters. To me, the narrator, they’re of no importance whatsoever.
    [Show full text]
  • Everything Began with the Movie Moulin Rouge (2001)
    Introduction Everything began with the movie Moulin Rouge (2001). Since I was so obsessed with this hit film, I couldn’t but want to know more about this particular genre - musical films. Then I started to trace the history of this genre back to Hollywood’s classical musical films. It’s interesting that musical films have undergone several revivals and are usually regarded as the products of escapism. Watching those protagonists singing and dancing happily, the audience can daydream freely and forget about the cruel reality. What are the aesthetic artifices of this genre so enchanting that it always catches the eye of audience generation after generation? What kinds of ideal life do these musical films try to depict? Do they (musical films) merely escape from reality or, as a matter of fact, implicitly criticize the society? In regard to the musical films produced by Hollywood, what do they reflect the contemporary social, political or economic situations? To investigate these aspects, I start my research project on the Hollywood musical film genre from the 1950s (its Classical Period) to 2002. However, some people might wonder that among all those Hollywood movies, what is so special about the musical films that makes them distinguish from the other types of movies? On the one hand, the musical film genre indeed has several important contributions to the Hollywood industry, and its influence never wanes even until today. In need of specialty for musical film production, many talented professional dancers and singers thus get the chances to join in Hollywood and prove themselves as great actors (actresses), too.
    [Show full text]