Birth of a Notion: Dial M For Murder

Showing posts with label Dial M For Murder. Show all posts

Thursday, May 29, 2014

The Wrong Number?

Tony (Ray Milland): How do you go about writing a detective story?

Mark (Robert Cummings): Well, you forget detection and concentrate on crime. Crime's the thing. And then you imagine you're going to steal something or murder somebody.

Tony: Oh, is that how you do it? It's interesting.

Mark: Yes, I usually put myself in the criminal's shoes and then I keep asking myself, what do I do next?

Margot (Grace Kelly): Do you really believe in the perfect murder?

Mark: Mmm, yes, absolutely. On paper, that is. And I think I could plan one better than most people; but I doubt if I could carry it out.

Tony: Oh? Why not?

Mark: Well, because in stories things usually turn out the way the author wants them to; and in real life they don't always. I'm afraid my murders would be something like my bridge. I'd make some stupid mistake and never realize it until I found everybody was looking at me.

"Dial M for Murder" premiered 60 years ago today.

That was before my time — which is true of nearly every Hitchcock movie — but I still enjoy watching it whenever it's on.

It seems dated now, I admit, but I didn't mind that when I saw it the first time. Nor did I mind that nearly all the action takes place in a single location, which makes it seem more like a stage play than a movie. Actually, the movie was based on a very successful stage play.

The author of that play, Frederick Knott, did the screenplay as well, which may account for its virtually seamless presentation. In my opinion, movie adaptations of books or plays usually turn out better if the original author is involved. That isn't always possible, of course, but if the author is involved, it seems to improve the chances that his/her vision will be faithfully represented on the big screen.

Well, it helps to have a good cast, too — and the cast of "Dial M for Murder" was top notch. I have written before of my admiration for Grace Kelly, and she was excellent as Margot, Ray Milland's wealthy and (for the most part) faithful wife. Her character was also a bit naive, I thought. But I'll get back to that in a minute.

At one point, Kelly was roused from her slumber by a ringing phone (which was intended to lure her into the living room, where her intended killer waited for her). It seemed to me, when I first saw "Dial M for Murder," that only a handful of humans have ever been able to roll out of bed and look like they were ready to go out on the town. Apparently, Grace Kelly was one of them.

Her character was also alert enough to fight back against her attacker and stab him with some scissors. She was convicted of murder (in one of the few segments in the movie that took place outside the cozy little flat that Kelly and Milland shared), but, apparently, she never figured out that Milland had planned the attack.

Well, not until the very end.

She had had an affair with an American writer (Robert Cummings) but then broke it off. He wrote several letters to her, all of which she destroyed except one, which disappeared. But she never put two and two together until it was spelled out for her at the end — the man she had killed had been sent to her apartment by her husband to kill her.

She had acted in self–defense.

I guess Margot was an exceptionally trusting sort. The first time I saw "Dial M for Murder," I thought Milland's complicity was obvious. Apparently, it never occurred to Kelly's character. Well, they say love is blind ...

In his droll yet understated way, John Williams, as the chief inspector, helped persuade her that her husband was behind it all.

But, while I always enjoy watching Kelly in any of her movies (and she made three of them for Hitchcock), I have to say I don't think her British accent was very convincing. For me, that was and continues to be a distraction, mainly because "Dial M for Murder" is such a talkative movie.

There is more to it, I suppose. My parents spent a lot of time overseas in the first years of their marriage, and they met many people from other countries, some of whom came to visit us in the United States later. A few of those people were British so I had more exposure to that accent (and some of its variations) than most.

But perhaps I am nitpicking. Most people probably didn't notice.

"Dial M for Murder" may seem to have a transparent plot — but you have to remember that the plot hasn't been a secret for 60 years. It probably packed quite a punch when it was new. Personally, I have always thought the early scene in which Milland blackmailed his old friend into murdering his wife was impressive.

AllMovie.com's Michael Costello appeared to agree. "Kelly, and Robert Cummings as her lover, are forced to contend with underwritten stock characters," Costello wrote. "Neither comes off particularly well."

I'm not sure I would take it quite that far. I have already praised Knott's "seamless" story and the quality of the cast — and I stand by that. I still think "Dial M for Murder" was a good movie, but maybe Costello was on to something. Kelly and Cummings did not come off well even though their characters prospered. Maybe it was hard for some viewers to care what happened to them.

Sometimes, I suppose, all the elements in a movie are good — until they're mixed together.

Technically, "Dial M for Murder" was noteworthy for its early attempt at 3–D. If you look closely, you can see remnants of the rudimentary technology that Hitchcock used to create the 3–D effect.

Personally, I have never really cared for the 3–D effect, but I was never sure why until I read an online journal entry by Roger Ebert.

"There is a mistaken belief that 3–D is 'realistic.' Not at all," Ebert wrote. "In real life we perceive in three dimensions, yes, but we do not perceive parts of our vision dislodging themselves from the rest and leaping at us. Nor do such things, such as arrows, cannonballs or fists, move so slowly that we can perceive them actually in motion. If a cannonball approached that slowly, it would be rolling on the ground."

I guess that explains it.

Saturday, January 11, 2014

Survival in the North Atlantic

It would be quite a challenge for a modern movie director to make a film like "Lifeboat," the Alfred Hitchcock drama that made its debut 70 years ago today.

It isn't that disaster movies are so rare. They aren't. But disaster movies like "Lifeboat" — which require a good story and great acting in the absence of splashy special effects — are quite rare, if not nonexistent, today.

Hitchcock had been playing it safe, I suppose, in the years before "Lifeboat." He had made some of his best movies in the preceding years, but they were mostly melodramas, not quite as thrilling as the thrillers he produced later in his career. In fact, many of his projects could be described as routine.

Apparently, he decided to stretch his creative wings with "Lifeboat."

"Lifeboat" was a real challenge for Hitchcock. It was really his first movie to be set entirely in a confined space. He revisited that style in a couple of movies a decade later — "Rear Window" and "Dial M For Murder."

In "Lifeboat," a diverse group of people found themselves together in a lifeboat in the North Atlantic after their ship and a U–boat sank each other, and they were forced to work with each other to achieve a mutual objective — survival.

The group included mostly British and Americans, but there was one German survivor who was pulled into the boat. That led to some remarkable discussions ...

For example, at one point, it was suggested that the German should be thrown overboard and allowed to die. But, after a spirited argument, the German (who was later revealed to have been the captain of the U–boat), was allowed to stay on the boat.

One could hardly imagine a more diverse cross–section of passengers in a cramped lifeboat — but Hitchcock's exploration of the characters made for a gripping story.

Hitchcock was known for his cameo appearances in his films. Usually he appeared briefly and casually as a very minor character, but a movie like "Lifeboat" presented him with some unusual problems.

Given the fact that "Lifeboat" was set at sea, Hitchcock couldn't exactly walk by as he did in other films. But he could be seen as the before and after photos in a newspaper ad for a weight–reduction project.

Hitchcock's greatest influence in the film could be seen in the performances he drew from his cast. Tallulah Bankhead gave what may have been her best performance as a cynical columnist, but she didn't outshine her co–stars, like William Bendix and Hume Cronyn.

If you've never seen "Lifeboat," you should — and you will have your opportunity a week from today. Turner Classic Movies will be showing it next Saturday at 7 p.m. (Central).

Sunday, November 21, 2010

After Turkey ... Four Treats

Some folks are reluctant to go anywhere near the stores on the day after Thanksgiving.

It's not because they're stuffed from Thanksgiving dinner the day before, and they don't want to go anywhere ... although that might be part of it.

They're understandably wary of the crowds who have been lured to the stores, many of them in the dead of night, by the special prices being offered for the traditional kickoff to the Christmas shopping season.

Well, if you're planning to spend Friday at home, I've got something you can do if you have little interest in the football games being played that afternoon.

As I have often said, I owe my appreciation for Alfred Hitchcock's movies to my parents.

I enjoy them all, even the ones that are often dismissed as being among Hitchcock's lesser efforts. There are many directors who would give anything if their best films could rise to the level of mediocrity attained by Hitchcock's "lesser efforts."

Anyway, Friday is my birthday — so it's kinda nice that Turner Classic Movies will be showing four Hitchcock movies in a row that day.

I can't say that these films were among Hitchcock's "lesser efforts." Two of them — "Strangers on a Train" and "Dial M for Murder" — were included in the American Film Institute's list of the Top 100 thrillers of all time. And one — "Foreign Correspondent" — was among the 400 nominees for that list.

To be honest, I can't really understand why the fourth Hitchcock film being shown by TCM — "To Catch a Thief" — wasn't even nominated for that list. But it was on AFI's list of the Top 100 passion films of all time — presumably because of the sizzling on–screen relationship between Grace Kelly and Cary Grant — although I always thought that movie was more suspenseful than romantic.

Be that as it may ...

"Foreign Correspondent" can be seen at 10 a.m. (Central).

It's the one movie of the four that I haven't seen, and I'm looking forward to it. It is the story of an American reporter who is trying to expose spies based in England. My understanding is that, as events unfold, the story leads into a fictional World War II (the movie was released more than a year before Pearl Harbor drew America into the war in Europe).

It was the second movie that Hitchcock made after coming to the United States from Great Britain, and it wound up in competition for the Best Picture Oscar with the first movie he made, "Rebecca."

"Rebecca" won, but, in hindsight, that may have been one of those decisions the Academy regretted, considering that the movie appeared almost prophetic when the United States, in spite of its efforts, found itself involved in World War II.

It often seems to be overlooked these days — and perhaps that is understandable, given that Hitchcock's body of work includes films like "Psycho," "The Birds," "North by Northwest," "Vertigo" and "Rear Window."

Perhaps that is also why I haven't seen it before. I will be glad to add it to the list of Hitchcock movies that I have seen — and to be able to do so on my birthday is a special treat.

At noon, you can see "Strangers on a Train." I haven't seen it in years, but I'm eager to see it again.

Modern movie viewers might not think much of it. It's in black and white, it doesn't have splashy special effects (just some pretty innovative camerawork), but it's a classic. It explores one of Hitchcock's favorite themes — how good and evil can exist within the same person.

A tennis star, played by Farley Granger, is trapped in a loveless marriage with Laura Elliot (later known as Kasey Rogers, the actress who played Louise Tate in Bewitched). He is approached by a stranger, played by Robert Walker, who offers to kill Granger's wife in exchange for the murder of his father.

In case you didn't know, it served as the inspiration for Billy Crystal's "Throw Momma from the Train," a delightful homage to Hitchcock — and one of the best movie comedies of the last 25 years.

But to appreciate that, you really must see "Strangers on a Train."

At 1:45 p.m., you can see "Dial M for Murder," one of the films Grace Kelly made with the great director.

For a Philly girl, she managed an acceptable British accent — at least, to American ears.

That's an important element of this movie's success because, other than "Rope," "Dial M for Murder" may have had more dialogue and less action than any other film Hitchcock ever made.

If Kelly had not been believable as the affluent Englishwoman whose former tennis star husband wants to have murdered so he can have her money, the movie would have failed.

I definitely do not think it was one of Hitchcock's best. I don't remember what I thought of it the first time I saw it, but in the viewings I have had since that time, my overriding impression has been that the story is perhaps more predictable than the others Hitchcock told.

But I've always liked it, anyway, in spite of its shortcomings. And it was innovative in its way. It was filmed using a rather primitive 3–D technique. Watch closely and you can see it in the depth between people and objects.

Some folks will tell you that "To Catch a Thief" has no shortcomings.

It had a great cast — Kelly, Grant, John Williams, Jessie Royce Landis. It had perhaps the most picturesque of backdrops, the Riviera. It won an Oscar for its cinematography. It told a very cerebral tale of a jewel thief who is at large and a retired cat burglar played by Grant who is the chief suspect.

I can only conclude that it wasn't bloody enough for hard–core Hitchcock fans. No one important was killed. In fact, I recall no blood being shed — at least on camera.

But I liked it. It had style. Judge for yourself. It's on at 3:45 p.m.