The Trouble With Harry

The Trouble with HarryWhen Alfred Hitchcock set out to direct a comedy, I'm not sure how much success he was expecting, but The Trouble With Harry has some undeniably hilarious moments. The script has some very clever moments, although quite a few of the jokes would fall flat for current, jaded audiences. For instance, a punchline about a double-bed just doesn't have the punch it once did.

The movie overall revolves around a corpse, making for a somewhat morbid experience, although all of the characters involved with said corpse seem unusually jaded, leaving only the villain, the deputy Calvin Wiggs, to express sincere shock at the presence of death.

This juxtaposition of truth from the villain appears in several movies I've seen lately, and I'm beginning to wonder if there's a name for it, or if it serves some kind of purpose. During the movie, one doesn't identify with the villain. One fears him for the sake of the heroes. But to look back and realize that one identified more with the perspective of the "bad guy" seems to say something.

I don't imagine the director was attempting to alienate the audience, as we, I, clearly identified with the couple falling in love in the foreground. I feel anxious for their success, and anxious that they neither appear to be the murderer, nor actually are. What I do imagine, is that the director intended the audience to temporarily identify with an unusual perspective. We are meant to root for the lovers, possibly never realizing that we're basically rooting for an entire group of sociopaths for the sake of humor.

I shall ponder.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lost in Austen

Image
My co-worker warned me about Lost in Austen . She said it was cheesy, and from the few clips forced on me by a very fanatically-inclined little sister, I would have completely agreed. In context, though, I think it all sort of fit, although it's not exactly Emmy material. I really liked what they did to this story, but my reasoning is a bit complex. I have read Pride and Prejudice perhaps seven times. The only books I have read more often are Heart of Darkness (8) and The Book of Mormon (?). That doesn't mean that I like the work, just that my professors did. I admit, I liked the book very well the first three times. The romance was classic and endearing, and the language was fluid and fun. Then came Austenmania, and I jumped ship. Jane Austen wrote some enjoyable stories, but I wouldn't rank her any higher than Georgette Heyer (this coming from the same person who ranks Shakespeare with Steven Spielberg). And at this point, having seen every version of P&P ever fil
Read more

The Fountain

Image
This film should only be watched once. As a second-time viewer, I knew approximately how it ended, and how the three epic stories tied together, but it wasn't pleasant to watch. It wasn't pleasant the first time, but at least the images were striking, and felt like some kind of voyage of discovery. Watching this again was a bit like watching The Sixth Sense for the fourth time. The impact had disappeared. For most of the film, the camera moved toward those truly frustrating close-up, poser shots that so irritated me about Master and Commander . I understand that these are pretty people, and they earn the money, and so they get close-ups, but when it doesn't enhance the plot or the artistic composition as a whole - when it doesn't create unity, then it has no place. Actors should understand that, and have a serious heart-to-heart with their directors about it. I usually enjoy watching Rachel Weisz, but in this film she seemed flat, passive, and enervated. To be fa
Read more

UHF

Besides the totally outdated technology prevalent throughout the entire film, this movie grated on my nerves precisely every time Al pulled out his despairing or angry screech. It was exactly like watching a two-year-old throw a tantrum (and I would know, having spent this last weekend with SEVEN of the most adorable human rodents in the universe), but to be fair, the effect was probably intentional. Don't think I didn't love the rest. The movie was really funny. The parodies of then-popular movie franchises were just high-budget enough to be unmistakable, and just dramatic enough to be almost flattering. I particularly enjoyed Conan the Librarian's accent, the Rambo parody (lovely muscle-suit), and the opening Indiana Jones sequence - complete with a lovely imitation of Harrison Ford's deadpan acting. The plot was thoroughly predictable which made the characters themselves a parody of the romantic comedy as well. It's either brilliant or sad, depending on how broad
Read more