"You're my kind of woman" — 36 weeks ago
It’s another Hitchcock review – this time of Frenzy, Hitchcock’s 1972 thriller filmed on location in London and in Pinewood Studios. I had seen this one before, but on examining the back of my DVD case realised that I couldn’t remember a thing about it. When I started watching the film, however, it all came flooding back.
Frenzy was apparently Hitchcock’s penultimate film (his last being Family Plot). It is based upon the novel ‘Goodbye Piccadilly, Farewell Leicester Square’ by Arthur La Bern, and was adapted by Anthony Shaffer for the big screen. After filming many movies in the United States, Hitchcock had come back to London, and the city is beautifully portrayed in the film from the opening shot, where the camera sweeps down the Thames to Tower Bridge, to the scenes at Covent Garden market, and every main street and back alley in the movie. I found the portrayal of London to be fascinating in itself – I love the city and it was incredibly interesting to see how different it was in the early seventies. London is as essential to the film as San Francisco was to Vertigo, or Santa Rosa was to Shadow of a Doubt.
As the camera pans down the Thames in the opening sequence, it closes in on a group of people who are listening to a politician, speaking (somewhat ironically) about the imminent clean-up of the river and the removal of the waste polluting it. He is interrupted by a member of the crowd who spies a body in the water – it is a naked young woman with a tie around her neck, and the crowd realise it is another victim of the ‘Necktie Murderer’.
Meanwhile, barman Dick Blaney is having a run of bad luck. He has been sacked from his job on suspicion of stealing, and doesn’t have enough money to bet on a horse his friend Bob recommends – though it ends up winning. Down and depressed, he wonders what on earth will go wrong next. In typical Hitchcock style, circumstances conspire to make him the chief suspect in the ‘Necktie Murder’ case. Will Blaney be able to prove his innocence, and will the real murderer be caught?
This film is rated 18, and for good reason. Only one rape and murder is shown, but it is exceptionally graphic. It was also, I thought, incredibly realistic. I have never experienced rape or murder (and I doubt I’d be writing this if I had, somehow…), but the way it was scripted, acted and filmed made me feel as though this could really happen (as opposed to older films which feel like they’re from another world, and modern-day crime dramas which seem too glossy to be true). It was very uncomfortable to watch, and the contrast between the scene of the rape and murder and the quiet, daytime London streets outside made it stand out even more.
Another, later murder is not shown but we as the audience are made to realise it is happening through clever dialogue. There is some wonderful camera work as the camera moves backwards down the stairs at the murderer’s apartment, as if we are saying goodbye to the victim.
The film is not all dark and depressing – there is plenty of black humour to lighten the mood. One sequence in particular, in which the murder attempts to remove incriminating evidence from one of his victims, is simply bizarre. Other lighter moments are provided by the Chief Inspector working on the case, whose theoretical and interested discussions with his partner about the character of the unknown murderer are reminiscent of two characters’ debates in Shadow of a Doubt about ways in which they might kill one another. The Chief Inspector’s exchanges with his wife are also rather funny, mostly revolving about the disgusting gourmet food she constantly cooks for him, despite knowing he would much rather have a good old English breakfast!
I thought the acting in the film was generally good, but the actor playing the murderer was particularly outstanding. His charming, full-of-banter character didn’t seem like a typical murderer at all (if there is such a thing), yet he was able to switch convincingly from his everyday personality to a chilling, murderous one. I wasn’t so keen on the performance of Jon Finch as the protagonist Dick Blaney. He seemed rather ineffectual, and I was surprised that he seemed to display no sorrow at the deaths of women close to him. Of course, as chief suspect in a murder enquiry he had a lot on his plate, yet I would have expected him to be more upset. In fairness though a lot of this may have been down to the script and not his acting ability. The full cast list is below:
Jon Finch as Richard Ian ‘Dick’ Blaney
Alec McCowen as Chief Inspector Oxford
Barry Foster as Robert ‘Bob’ Rusk
Billie Whitelaw as Hetty Porter
Anna Massey as Barbara Jane ‘Babs’ Milligan
Barbara Leigh-Hunt as Brenda Margaret Blaney
Bernard Cribbins as Felix Forsythe
Vivien Merchant as Mrs. Oxford
Clive Swift as Johnny Porter
Michael Bates as Sergeant Spearman
Jean Marsh as Monica Barling
I initially thought the film seemed quite slow, but it did pick up pace towards the end and became increasingly gripping. The slow pace did allow the film to introduce the characters of some of the women later murdered, meaning that their deaths were more unexpected and you really did care when they died. This is one of the strengths of the film. However, I got quite annoyed at the main character, who unlike many wrongly-accused Hitchcock heroes seemed remarkably ineffectual in taking matters into his own hands, spending most of his time just running away. It is the Chief Inspector’s wife who does the most to solve the mystery, planting the seeds of doubt in her husband’s mind by claiming she intuitively ‘knows’ Dick cannot be guilty.
I can’t say I enjoyed this film as much as the others I have reviewed so far. Admittedly this is partly due to my own preference for the forties and fifties in general, but it is also partly because of the vivid rape and murder scene which I found very difficult to watch. Nevertheless it’s a very well put-together, acted and filmed movie, and I do recommend you watch it, providing you feel you can cope with the more explicit scenes.
