MovieChat Forums > Torn Curtain (1966) Discussion > Underrated...or Not?

Underrated...or Not?

posted 16 years ago by snidgeskin
2 replies | jump to latest

Well I recently saw topaz, a film of Hitch's I feel is grossly underrated, so much so I gave it a second viewing within a week and enjoyed it even more, especially the ending.

Torn Curtain, sadly in my opinion, remains the bottom of the barrel of the 25 of Hitch's films I've seen so far. Unlike Topaz where much of suspense is arrived at through talk, this film tries to rely on clumsy attempts to mount tension which at times are plainly laughable. Andrews is engaging but her role doens't demand much of her; mind you if Bergman had played it she would no doubt have fleshed it out more. Newman portrays the role with what seems obvious discomfort at times. The scene on top of that appalingly bad film set hill and the laughable bus chase at the end don't help matters.

All the elements were there for a classic film, improbable as it was at times, though the bountiful classic Hitchcock set pieces just didn't work well. The build up to/and extended murder scene seems to be the films best part maybe followed by the chalk board scene, a scene which teetered on the point of being ridiculous, just managing to save it self as the announcing tannoy was heard.

Maybe another viewing might help, however this will never be considered one his best, the tension just wasn't there.

[–] rexshard93 16 years ago

I consider Under Capricorn as Hitchcock's most underrated film. Its a drama. Not a thriller.

As for Torn Curtain, there are some interesting ideas in the film. But it isn't really as strong as Hitchcock's other films.

Its not Hitchcock's fault. Hitchcock was completely dissatisfied with the script written by Brian Moore. Hitchcock wanted to do lots of changes with the script. But he had to start shooting, due to the limited availability of Julie Andrews. Hitchcock didn't want Paul Newman and Julie Andrews for the leading roles. Hitchcock wanted Eva Marie Saint for the leading female role. Hitchcock wanted someone who could play like Cary Grant.

But the studio forced him to cast Paul Newman and Julie Andrews.

[–] meakins8 16 years ago

This is still an adequate Hitchcock film, not one of his best, but after making over 50 films they can't all be brilliant. Personally i liked it, didn't get boring the whole way through.

Still a cool film which even though is not as good as some of the other Hitchcock's like Vertigo, Rear Window, Rebecca etc its still better than most other films.