Mysteries, Anyone?

17 responses to “Mysteries, Anyone?”

1. The 39 Steps isn’t really a whodunnit. You find out who the bad guy is pretty early in the movie. It’s more a prototype for the classic suspenseful Hitchcock chase film like NXNW. That said, it is an excellent film, and I did my senior seminar project on it and NXNW at Berkeley so I would have lots to say about it! 🙂

   I would kind of argue that none of the Hitchcocks, although I adore him, are really whodunnits. There’s a great quote from him about surprise vs. suspense and I feel like his attitude about suspense kind of precludes him creating whodunnit movies. His movies are never really mysteries in the typical sense because usually the audience knows who the bad guy it’s just matter or why or how they’ll be caught. That said, dissecting a masterwork like Hitchcock’s canon can never be a bad thing.

   Whatever else you have to cut PLEASE keep The Big Easy. Me and my sis love that movie, and I would love to hear you guys discuss it.

   You could put some Murder She Wrotes on there. That show eventually did practically every murder plot you could ever think of. At least twice. (says the JB Fletcher fangirl…)

2. Here’s the Hitchcock quote I was talking about. It’s kind of long, but interesting, it’s from the set of interviews he did with Truffaut:

   “There is a distinct difference between ‘suspense’ and ‘surprise’, and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I’ll explain what I mean.

   We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let us suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, ‘Boom!’ There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table, and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware that the bomb is going to explode at one o’clock and there is a clock in the décor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions this same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene.

   The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: ‘You shouldn’t be talking about such trivial matters. There’s a bomb underneath you and it’s about to explode!’

   In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second case we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist, that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story.”

3. Have to agree that I don’t consider most of the Hitchcock movies mysteries. I think you could safely say that Dial M for Murder and To Catch a Thief would probably qualify, but I’ve always thought of the others as thrillers. Love The Lady Vanishes, and I guess you could call it a mystery, although I’ve always labelled it “spy movie.” Second The Big Easy, it’s one of my favorites, and I’d really like to hear your take on that one (definitely think of it as a romantic mystery). I remember Suspect, with Dennis Quaid and Cher (also from the ’80s) being a decent mystery, but I saw that on commercial TV some time ago, so I could be wrong.

   I’m inclined to argue for the original Big Sleep rather than the remake, although to be fair to Robert Mitchum, I haven’t seen the 1978 version. In the noir category, there’s always Murder My Sweet (would two Philip Marlowe stories be overkill?). For comic mysteries, maybe Fletch. I’m not a fan of Chevy Chase but I think they stuck fairly close to the novel, and that was a great book. Saw the tail end of Fracture the other day and was very impressed, so there’s that too. And now I’m just rambling so I’ll stop and think it about it some more later.

4. Spellbound would probably be a Hitchcock mystery, but it’s not his best movie per se, and the screenwriter was enamored with Freud and psychoanalysis. The Dali dream sequence is a point of interest. Though not much help for dissecting what makes mystery plots work…

5. Moth, that Hitchcock suspense theory is the one I always use to back up the argument that it’s dumb to keep secrets from the reader, but only if the POV character knows the secret. In fiction, if nobody knows the bomb is there, the only way you can tell the reader is if you’re writing omniscient POV.

6. @Moth – I’ve been working my way through the “Murder, She Wrote” series on Netflix. Sometimes I’m very clever:)

   First, I think the sub-genre list is the way to go. I think we’ll get pissed off if we do it chronologically. Mysteries are too different and can be too badly done sometimes.

   Secondly, wow. I. LOVE. MYSTERIES. In fact, they were my first love when I was allowed to pick my own books in the library. The ‘big kid books’ were biographies and mysteries. I read the 10 biographies the school library had and then devoured the mysteries and didn’t stop reading them until 2001 when I started reading romances. World events caught up with me and I found I was more interested in happy endings.

   I did my women’s studies capstone project on women in detective fiction. Both fascinating and depressing but I read a LOT that year. I’ll admit I’ve not seen all of these but I read the list as a lot of ‘guy mysteries’. It’s just a first blush look as I scroll through and maybe the ones that less overtly masculine are the ones I don’t know. On the other hand this is what Hollywood makes so, this is what we’ll be watching.

   Also, I just tried to watch Charade last month and I almost plucked my eyeballs out due to boredom. Sorry. But The Thin Man is just so good. Besides, there’s a dog:)

7. @ Moth. Ditto. I want to argue in favor of Rear Window just because I want to watch it again, but I really think the suspense movies should be judged on their own. I think as far as Hitchcock goes, the closest of the group would be “To Catch a Thief.”

   And, I love (and own) the Bob Mitchum version of “The Big Sleep.” I haven’t seen the new one.

8. Forgot to suggest:
   Witness for the Prosecution – Wanna kiss me duckie?

9. Oh wait. I’m confusing The Big Sleep with Out of the Past. Huh. I’m juggling too many Life Issues this morning.

10. I like the comparison of mystery types, but I wonder if there’s enough to compare with all the Hitchcock movies. I wonder if it would be interesting to compare a Hitchcock to a similar but non Hitchcock movie. Assuming Hitchcock is the master.

11. I did my master’s thesis on women in mysteries. “A Spirit More Capable of Looking Up To Him: Women’s Roles in Mystery Fiction from 1840 to 1920.” I had intended to keep going into the 80s (which is when I was writing it) but I decided I wanted to graduate.

12. Perry, I ditched the Hitchcock category once we went to subgenres. He’s good, but he’s not a subgenre.

13. Oooh, Witness For the Prosecution. Love that one. Dietrich is amazing.

14. Sub genres please.

15. I would think most of the Agatha Christie (sp?) novels/movies would be good. There was a series on PBS years ago for her as well. Any of the Sherlock Holmes movies, including the newest one would probably be good as well. Just my two cents.

16. I believe the only 2 movies I’ve seen on this list are Foul Play – loved it – and the Thin Man – also good.

17. Agree with Stephanie about Charade. I found it painful– so much so that maybe I didn’t give a fair viewing, but definite negative reaction.