I have to say that I think this movie has a damn good plot. Without spoiling too much, the criminological aspect I found very interesting. There was an expirement done in those days that did show a very possible connection between an extra chromosome and criminal behaviour. What do you think? Good plot or not?
shareI couldn't agree more, this is one of Argento's best stories. As much as I admire Argento's work, many of his films do have rather thin plots. Cat O' Nine Tails, on the other hand, has a complex plot that needs your undivided attention. It's just loaded with many twists and turns. And yes, that XYY chromosome theory was intriguing. The first hour of this movie has some of the best suspense I've ever seen in a murder mystery. It's just great the way a character stumbles upon a revealing clue to the killer's identity, only to end up being stalked by the killer himself. And it's cool how Argento shows a tight close-up of the killer's blinking eye to let the viewer know he is on the prowl.
The downside of Cat O' Nine Tails is the second half, which gets bogged down in a tedious subplot involving incest. I didn't really see what purpose that served. It's as if Argento was having trouble deciding which direction to take the film. However, things really start to pick up again once we get to the grave-robbing, a very intense sequence.
So all in all, this is a very good mystery/thriller. Anybody who is new to Dario Argento's work should try and track this one down. It deserves to be seen more.
I don't think so. Did anyone fully understand the subplot about Anna Terzi's relationship to her adopted father? Apparently, Carlo Giordani did. What?! How?! Those passages he read from Terzi's journal were completely shrouded in mystery and incredibly cryptically written. But somehow it makes perfect sense to Giordani. Then, if she knew about the poisoned milk... Does that make her in league with the killer? Was her adopted father involved with the killer? Was Bianca Merusi involved with the killer? Who the hell did she call after the blind man came to see her? Terzi or the killer? Was she in league with Braun? Was he blackmailing Terzi because he knew about him and Anna? Or did Braun also know who the killer was, was he in league with the killer? Why in the hell did the killer kill Braun? Was it the plot trying to make us think that just because Braun met with Terzi right before he disappeared that Terzi either was in league with the killer or was the killer himself? What the hell did this film have to do with a cat (a cat's not even mentioned, beyond that midevil weapon)?
Nothing in this film made the slightest bit of sense. So I'd argue that this is one of Argento's worst plots. Not to mention that none of the characters were likable or agreeable to the slightest degree, the film itself was a little sleazier than most Argento films, and we never see the little girl untied at the end yet we hear her scream "Cookie!" We knew she was still alive, was the film actually trying to trick us into thinking the killer actually COULD HAVE killed her when we weren't looking? There wasn't any time for that. I think Anna should have been the killer.
"Carol, one word of advice: send Cindy to a special school"
Wow, almost a year now and finally somebody else has posted on this thread. It's about time! Anyway, allow me to answer some of these questions as best I can.
**ATTENTION, SOME OF THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS CONTAIN SPOILERS**
1. "Did anyone fully understand the subplot about Anna Terzi's relationship to her adopted father? Apparently, Carlo Giordani did. What?! How?! Those passages he read from Terzi's journal were completely shrouded in mystery and incredibly cryptically written. But somehow it makes perfect sense to Giordani."
It was insinuated in Terzi's diary that he was having a sexual relationship with his adopted daughter. There was one entry that read something along the lines of "Anna is a splendid woman. I adore her! I often ask myself if these are normally the types of feelings a father would have for his daughter. Professor P say it is a question of induced fantasies." This is why Giordani had that look of shock after reading the diary.
2. "Then, if she knew about the poisoned milk... Does that make her in league with the killer?"
Anna didn't know the milk was poisoned. Giordani thought she knew because he was wrongly beginning to think she was the killer. But in fact, she almost became a murder victim herself.
3. "Was Bianca Merusi involved with the killer? Who the hell did she call after the blind man came to see her? Terzi or the killer?"
No, Bianca was not involved with the killer. Both she and Braun were working together as industrial spies stealing classified information from the Terzi Institute. This was revealed during that conversation Giordani had with Inspector Spimi. Spimi said that they found a large sum of money in Bianca's closet, as well as some detailed files on one of Terzi's research projects. He also stated that she and Braun used to meet often. So I would say that the person she called after Arno left was likely Braun.
4. "Why in the hell did the killer kill Braun?"
Unfortunately, that was never really elaborated. I can only speculate that the killer somehow knew that Bianca and Braun were working together as spies, and maybe Braun was going to sell the secrets of the XYY project, which would have really pissed off the killer since he was one of the doctors working on that project. Also, what was that conversation between and Braun and Terzi supposed to be about? That was never explained either.
5. "What the hell did this film have to do with a cat (a cat's not even mentioned, beyond that midevil weapon)?"
It didn't have anything to do with a cat. The title simply means a mystery that has nine leads to follow, as explained by Giordani.
6. "we never see the little girl untied at the end yet we hear her scream "Cookie!" We knew she was still alive, was the film actually trying to trick us into thinking the killer actually COULD HAVE killed her when we weren't looking?"
Um, no, it was pretty clear that Giordani came to Lori's rescue and gave the killer a good beating. The killer slowly got up, but then quickly left the room because the police was calling out for Giordani. I think the real question here is did Giordani survive after getting stabbed?
I'm sorry that you didn't like this film, but I know that it's not everybody's cup of tea (famous critics such as Leonard Maltin and Steven Scheuer absolutely hated it). And admittedly, it does have some minor plot holes, but then again what Argento movie doesn't? Personally, I think it is very suspenseful, stylish and original.
I'm with the original poster. This is one of Argento's tighter plotlines. I dismays me that LEONARD MALTIN gave this a BOMB. In fact, my hope were low watching this for the first time because of his rating. To my pleasure, it was pretty good, certainly better than FOUR FLIES ON GREY VELVET and TRAUMA and SLEEPLESS.
I liked the characters. I liked the aspect of the blind hero (Karl Malden) overhearing part of stolen conversation, which turns out to be just the beginning of a sinister plot. This movie is a precursor to such similar thrillers as BLOW-UP/BLOW-OUT and THE INTERPRETER. Argento did the whole "overhearing a murder plot" thing first.
I also liked the mystery of the Anna character. She's probably the only real Argento Noirish Femme Fatale in his movies. The exchanges between her and James Franciscus (a gorgeous man and talented actor, by the way) are crisp and sexy and engaging. I would say that they are my favorite Argento couple.
Also, I liked how the killer basically was one step ahead of our heroes, dispatching anyone that might be able to, help them. Finally, the whole XYY criminal gene thing was definitely a great MacGuffin.
Again, this film doesn't deserve a BOMB nor Argento's scorn. It's way better and more intelligent than people give him credit for. Also, it might interest fans to know that Argento must not hate this as much as he says, because he is thinking about remaking it with a different storyline -- a model who is blinded adopts a Chinese boy and together they investigate a series of prostitute murders.
.
Whether deliberate or not on Argento's part, the blind man overhearing part of a conversation is "lifted" from "23 Paces to Baker Street" (1956) in which blind Van Johnson hears part of a criminal plot. The older movie has an excellent central gimmick which I won't reveal as it'd really be a gigantic SPOILER. The IMDb description of the 1956 film states this gimmick had been used in 1945's "The House on 92nd Street" which seems to indicate Argento really knew his film history ... of course his family was in the industry.
share[deleted]
I have to reply to your post...as ive posted on another section on here..."the killer" didnt kill Braun. Manuel killed him after assuming Braun was having an affair with Giordani. It was a fit of jealous rage.
Cozmogrl1-1, you actually had me thinking about the possibility of Manuel killing Braun. But then I remembered Arno's quote after the killer threatened to kill Lori: "When somebody has committed four murders, he won't hesitate to commit the fifth!" Up to this point the four victims are Dr. Calabresi, Righetto the photographer, Bianca Merusi, and Braun. So this implies that the actual killer did murder Braun, it wasn't Manuel. Therefore, I maintain that Braun was killed for being an industrial spy. And it's quite possible the real killer may have tried to frame Manuel for Braun's murder.
"It's not that tough being a film cricket."
Easily the best plot of the mystery movies Argento made.
There is a certain irony though: Killing people to prevent others from finding out you have a genetic predisposition towards crime.
Manuel killed Braun. Go watch that scene again. Manuel is hiding in the house with the lights off, and knew exactly where he was. He thought Giordani was after a little hanky panky that night. Remember the st. Peters club scene? Manuel is extremely jealous. Dont look so hard into things. Sadly or not sadly ive seen this movie around 50 times and its pretty straight forward.
Remakes = garbage
[deleted]
I have to agree with you, I thought this thing was a mess. I couldn't really get interested at all, despite trying.
shareIn just a few words, I think it's a brilliant thriller, one of the best of its kind, incredibly atmospheric. I watched it a second time after several years and I enjoyed it even more than the first time. Now I own the DVD (bought new for 3 euros !) and I'm glad I do.
shareI've probably watched this movie at least half a dozen times and it gets better each time. The ending is so incredible it gets me everytime. Not only one of Argento's best plots but for me personally it's arguably one of the best plots in Italian cinema history.
shareI think "The Cat O'Nine Tails" is exceptionally well-plotted: it's complex, gripping and above all surprisingly plausible.
Q: What's the biggest room in the world? A: The room for improvement.
This is by far my favourite of Argento's films. Definitely has the best plot and characterization. Fine acting by Malden and Francisco. I find it very telling about Argento that he hates it more than any of his other films when he's done far, far worse (and made a few fine films as well).
"That is why I'm with you... because you say, 'I' for me".
I wouldn't say this was Argento's best plot, but I think it was a nice change from his psychopaths whose motives are shady bogged down in psycho-analytical babble at the end.
The killer was a sane (in due measure) man who killed people because he was afraid of losing his job; then he started killing to cover his tracks and things just snowballed. It's a perfect motivation. Killing wasn't even his first resort; he tried blackmailing first. I understand that, it shows desperation.
In all other Argento movies, his killers never seem to have a decent reason to kill anyone; they just kill.
This world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel.
Greetings, all,
I saw this for the first time just last night. How Giordano had any inkling about the adoption or Terzi's journal is a mystery to me. Still.
However, what I got out t of the entire segment was that Terzi possibly had the XYY chromosome. Those with this are prone to uncontrolled sexuality, often, though not exclusively homosexual as well as violence.
Still puzzled how the reporter knew this. Also, what exactly was the relationship between Bianca and the daughter?
thx,
s
I didn't care for this movie the first time I saw it many years ago, but then I had just started my Argento journey on DVD and had watched his more fantastical films before this one (Deep Red, Suspiria, Phenomena, etc.). By the time I got to the Animal Trilogy, I was so used to seeing crazy camera angles and hearing weird music set to a fuzzy plot that favored style over substance that I was bored by their more straight-forward approach. It felt like a chore to get through them. But then something happened in the past few years and now I actually enjoy the Animal Trilogy films more than some of his later work because of the emphasis on narrative and his restraint in the direction department, whereas in his later work he tended to overindulge. That being said, they are still stylish films, and this one is no exception. No, there aren't any lavish shots of a camera tracking over the exterior of a house or crazy colors messing with us, but they are still gorgeously shot and dripping with "70s cool".
sharethere aren't any lavish shots of a camera tracking over the exterior of a house or crazy colors messing with us, but they are still gorgeously shot and dripping with "70s cool"Absolutely! The clothes, the decor, the use of lighting. Argento makes Italy in the early 70's look like design heaven.
my vessel is magnificent and large and huge-ishshare