MovieChat Forums > Torn Curtain (1966) Discussion > pros and cons, an incomplete list - plea...

pros and cons, an incomplete list - please add your own

posted 16 years ago by nosnojsirhc
8 replies | jump to latest

pros:

excellent cinematographic sequences including the farm murder, the ballerina payoff, the bus ride...

newman is unlikable in his role - not heroic - advancing AH's problematic exploration of espionage's darker side.

many behind the curtain ARE likable, advancing the notion that peoples' supposed characters are often falsely forced upon them by the political walls that have been constructed around them (iron curtains).

some funny lines - the book seller, for example.

cutting out of unnecessary dialogue by showing characters from afar - saving audience from enduring pointless plot explication and showing us instead - the lover's quarrel on the hill, for example, or the many of the untranslated german dialogues.

great secondary character acting. little touches like our polish countess' colorful scarf symbolizing the lives being squelched out by suffocating ideology.

the faux sets and the garish primary colors of the print juxtaposed against the 'coldness' of the 'soviet world' of concrete and overcast skies creates yet another instance of that eerie hitchcock world where light and color feel psychotic and architecture feels imprisoning or, conversely, alienating - truly bizarre.

cons:

bad spying. writing 'look on page #___' in a book, for example. leaving symbols around for detection.

method actor in auteur film. newman wants to bust out of Hitch's constraints - while this works to create a certain uncomfortable tension, it doesn't serve his character as a somewhat cold brainiac. i love newman, but not here.

apparent great scene involving meal in factory with brother of murdered german intelligence agent was cut.

fight with herrmann; score changed.

hitch relies too much on his dated understandings of the cow-audience, which by this point was more onto the cinematic game. for example, after the clever distance of the camera from the quarrel on the hill, he suddenly pans in with swelling strings to a make-up kiss and an 'oh, michael' that would have worked in the 50s, but is too sappy for this film.

[–] franzkabuki 15 years ago

Pros: some of it is more or less decent.

Cons: a lot of it is not quite decent and the sum of all the bland, unremarkable parts is spelled "bad". Nothing works. That´s that.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] rexshard93 15 years ago

There are lots of great scenes in Torn Curtain. Museum Scenes, Gromek, Murder Scenes are great. What was the problem? Casting of Paul Newman and Julie Andrews.

Hitchcock didn't want both Newman and Andrews. I think Hitchcock's first choice Eva Marie Saint would have been far better. The casting of Julie Andrews was the biggest problem. Hitchcock wanted to do extensive rewritings on the script. But the limited availability of Julie Andrews prevented Hitchcock and writers from rewriting the script.

[–] collin-reid 15 years ago

Pro: Had a good story and lots of potential.

Con: Alfred was not satisfied with the script which soured him on the whole project. Going into filming Alfred wanted everything set and his script critism of poor dialogue in the Act I is spot on. The audience is drawn into the characters as much as they should be which does diminishes the suspense in Act 2 and 3.

[–] luisffoliveira 15 years ago

OK, so you want to go to Germany as a spy, and you have months to prepare.

What about learning some german?? That might come in handy.

[–] onepotato2 15 years ago

Ugh. That cheap, phony looking hill they walk up to chat. This is the worst set that ever made it into a finished film ...ever. Volition: "We need a hill and the script doesn't allow any time to move Paul and Julie convincingly into nature, from the city. Well heck , just act like the hill has an address; ...building, building, hill!" It looks like a hill looks in a childrens strybook.

It also commits the additional crime of being an exterior filmed indoors.

horrible.

[–] nosnojsirhc 15 years ago

hehe like a trainset!

[–] g-moff 15 years ago

ok to your pros. One more: the scene when Lindt explains his stuff to Armstrong is really funny, especially that dumb, half-understanding look on Newman's face...
Hm well another one: I also liked the end when the arrogant ballerina gets ignored for a second time - nice.
some more cons: Armstrong obviously never tried to learn some German although he would 'defect' to East Germany later - not convincing, especially not to the East German Stasi. - I don't think it would've been so easy to fly to an Eastern Block country without a proper visa, so at least his fiancée would have had problems getting there. - Some of the actors playing Germans were obviously Americans and their 'German' sounds really odd. - Some of the studio scenes look really awful, especially that hill scene when Armstrong explains it all to his girl. Then, she seems to smile nearly the rest of the movie - Stasi officials would've wondered what made her so happy out of a sudden. - Also, her and his rooms certainly would've been bugged all the time, maybe even the doctor's room. - Some scenes were clearly shot in West Berlin (f.e. the scene when they are driven to their hotel, the car is clearly crossing Fehrbelliner Platz in the West, you can even recognize some Western cars. - I like the bus chase scenes with the idea of the regular bus appproaching closer and closer, but: the idea of 'army deserters' performing a roadblock is already ridiculous enough, they should've used their weapons to get to the West asap. But even more ridiculous IMHO is the fact that they ask for money only, not jewels etc.. That doesn't make sense at all in a state where the official currency was regarded as relatively worthless. - The scene in which Newman shouts 'fire': first, people wouldn't have panicked that much anyway due to the fact that there was no trace of smoke, second they wouldn't have understood him anyway. Weak.

[–] nosnojsirhc 15 years ago

wow, good list - observant...

i thought the same thing about the hill scene, especially because so many other scenes go so far to create the sense of you-are-there reality (starting at the credits)... however, it seems like hitch sometimes pulls back deliberately for stylized moments that are consciously filmic to remind us that we are watching 'A MOVIE'. sometimes this works to great effect, as when the woman's dress spills out around her as she collapses... sometimes, it's less successful, like the hill scene. but it feels like his heart was in the right place? for comparison, i'd show scenes from 'brigadoon', which are studio sets with painted backgrounds and sheep strolling around like the grand ole opry. in that case, there is no conscious artistic effort in employ - we are just watching hollywood spinning another tale, for better or worse.