A QUEER Hitchcock Classic! | "Rope" | Gay Mexican First Time Reaction!

Albert's deep dive into queer media lands us with our first (though, NOT last) reaction to a Alfred Hitchcock classic. This time around we are going back to the late forties (1940s, that is). This one has quite the queer background and there are tons of behind the scenes stuff that Baz gives a glimpse into for Albert to take in.
EDITOR NOTE: I forgot to insert the commentary by Arthur Laurents from Celluloid Closet that I mention around the 1:50 minute mark. Instead, I will put up a card/link to that reaction and if you go to the following timestamp (0:11:35:00), you can view the comment by Arthur regarding his screenplay for this film. APOLOGIES FOR THE OVERSIGHT.
OR - if you become a patron over at our Patreon channel, you can view the entire unedited reaction by Albert and myself. - Baz
#wrotepodcast #wrotereacts #ropereaction
From IMDb -
Two (gay) men attempt to prove they committed the perfect crime by hosting a dinner party after strangling their former classmate to death.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @wrotepodcast
Visit our SWAG shop: wrote-podcast.myshopify.com/c...
Purchase Vance's Book: amzn.to/3FnrCaV
Purchase Baz's Books at Ninestar Press: bit.ly/3Jd0cHa
WROTE Podcast is a new media company operating under a SAG-AFTRA Microbudget contract producing film/TV/book interviews, reviews and commentary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
00:00:00 Introduction
00:00:11 Opening Discussion
00:09:19 Rope Trailer
00:12:09 Rope Movie Reaction
01:12:43 Closing Comments
01:24:16 Wrap up and End Credits

[@HuntingViolets]

A lot of actors loved the freedom Hitchcock gave them. Ingrid Bergman spoke of asking Hitchcock for her motivation once, and he told her, "Fake it, Ingrid." She said she often used that advice going forward.

[@HuntingViolets]

This is one of my favorite Hitchcock movies.

[@albertnothlit]

So, I watched Hitchcock's "The Birds" when I was maybe too young to do so and since then I don't think I ever watched another of his movies, but I was missing out. This one was like watching a play, not so much a movie, and watching the unraveling of two men's minds.

[@HuntingViolets]

I don't think I've ever seen this trailer.

[@HuntingViolets]

Of course, this is very loosely inspired by the Leopold and Loeb case, which also inspired the movies, _Compulsion, Swoon,_ and _By the Numbers._

[@HuntingViolets]

Very interesting commentary!

[@wrotepodcast]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@HuntingViolets]

Yeah, I prefer opening credits unless there's something you're trying to hide.

[@HuntingViolets]

Since you talked about a bomb, albeit a different bomb, I thought I should add Hitchcock's famous statement about suspense (I believe this is from Truffaut's book on Hitchcock). I think it fits very well with the newer reactor's (I'm sorry! I've forgotten your names) viewing of this dinner party.
_There is a distinct difference between "suspense" and "surprise," and yet many pictures continually confuse the two. I'll explain what I mean._
_We are now having a very innocent little chat. Let's suppose that there is a bomb underneath this table between us. Nothing happens, and then all of a sudden, "Boom!" There is an explosion. The public is surprised, but prior to this surprise, it has seen an absolutely ordinary scene, of no special consequence. Now, let us take a suspense situation. The bomb is underneath the table and the public knows it, probably because they have seen the anarchist place it there. The public is aware the bomb is going to explode at one o'clock and there is a clock in the decor. The public can see that it is a quarter to one. In these conditions, the same innocuous conversation becomes fascinating because the public is participating in the scene. The audience is longing to warn the characters on the screen: "You shouldn't be talking about such trivial matters. There is a bomb beneath you and it is about to explode!"_
_In the first case we have given the public fifteen seconds of surprise at the moment of the explosion. In the second we have provided them with fifteen minutes of suspense. The conclusion is that whenever possible the public must be informed. Except when the surprise is a twist, that is, when the unexpected ending is, in itself, the highlight of the story._

[@wrotepodcast]

Yes, that's the interview from Truffaut. He's explaining the theory but he derived it *because* of the blow-back from the public on the film he made where he blew up a trolly car/bus and the child died. That's when he fully formed the concept and knew where the "line in the sand" was that should not be crossed. Brilliant! Thanks for sharing! LOVE IT!

[@joebloggs396]

Telling him what happens in advance isnt a great idea, it's best for someone to work things out for themselves.

[@wrotepodcast]

So noted! Sometimes my mouth gets ahead of my head in these cases. But you're right. It adds to Albert's first viewing. I'll do better!