Just rewatched the movie earlier today. I was reminded from someone else’s post on another video that the original henchman, who held a gun on Roger when he was abducted, was certainly the submachine gun toting killer who died in the crop duster, along with the pilot. Besides never seeing the pilot, I realized that there was another henchman of Vandamm we never got to actually see, but who was definitely present. I’m talking about the driver of the abduction car. He was fully involved in the abduction, but disappeared after fulfilling that task. This could be a possible hint as to how large Vandamm’s organization was, but not vital to the plot.
Support the channel on Patreon and get access to more videos: patreon.com/scriptsleuth CITY OF GOD CRIES AND WHISPERS DO THE RIGHT THING IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Hitchcock use the macguffin as a dramatic device. The audience is held in suspense because they know that it is a bomb ready to go off but the characters are blissfully unaware of the danger tucked under the seat. Tarantino misuses the macguffin by informing everyone except the audience making them only curious. It is a mcguffin in reverse..
I don't know for sure if this is off topic or not, I always hear about 'in act one', or 'in the last act', I'm just wondering, how does one know, for instance, when act one ends and act two begins? By the way, I'm loving this channel! Thanks!
Another bit of irony, which the screenplay points out for comic effect: Roger claims both of his ex-wives divorced him for "leading too dull a life," while in the midst of a situation that's anything BUT dull.
Wait...the highest ranked Hitchcock film on WGAW's list of top 101 screenplays is: North By Northwest, at only #21? WTactualF is up with that?! Sorry, you're evaluation is really good, this is not a criticism of that...but more a criticism of that dopey WGAW list. I mean, really...This film should be ranked way higher than this, along with a few other films he did.
One place where Hitchcock and Lehmann seem to have failed is the totally transparent 'U.S. Intelligence Agency' scene in which the mysterious Kaplan character is explained. Totally unnecessary! The Professor explains that later when he and Thornhill are walking to the plane. The plot would have succeeded beautifully without the inclusion of that scene.
Good point, they could have trimmed that down a bit. But it still works well as dramatic irony because Roger Thornhill doesn't know that information yet.
Well, hold on: by showing the audience the behind the scenes activities of the intelligence group, isnt Hitchcock just doing another version of the bomb-under-the-table juxtaposition with the audience, by revealing what's REALLY going on in this film, while Thornhill continues to be hounded and pursued? Because without that, the audience doesn't learn until practically the 2nd to last act that this is a very big espionage caper, and Thornhill has been entirely absorbed into this (unwillingly of course). I mean...you've got to have that scene in the movie, which is all but 2-3 minutes max, it doesn't realy affect the film at all...and the scene is almost required to make the film have the proper pace for the viewer. BTW, ive seen this film on the big screen in an actual movie theater...and I have to tell you that the PACING of the film (thanks to the superb setpieces) is just about as perfect as a film gets. This is really one of the things that I think viewers don't appreciate unless they see it like that. Plus, how can one not appreciate that bit of dark humor, with the line of "So horribly sad, but how is it I feel like laughing?"
@@luskvideoproductions869 Since this is one of my favorite films of all time, I'm not going to claim the film was ruined by the inclusion of that scene. There are a few dubious plot elements but not enough to worry about. I just feel that the scene was not a 'gotta have.' It was witty, as you note--one of Lehmann's best. I think Hitchcock included it to help the audience out a bit. In my case it tipped me to Eve Kendall's being the good Girl Scout. Concerning the very BIG espionage operation: I always heard Townsend's organization as UNIPOL, whereas the captioning had it as UNIPO. Neither is, of course, an actual UN entity, but it does suggest an INTERPOL-like connection, which could indicate that Townsend was part of the espionage plot and was allowing the bad guys to use his estate as a safe house. In that case the knife thrower was just cleaning up a possible leak by killing one of his own. I dismissed this in the end, but it's one of the intriguing bits that helps the film. I saw the movie in 1959 in a drive-in and instantly noted it as one of the greats.
In retrospect, that screenplay is filled with holes. Scenes such as the one with the airplane make absolutely no sense. They couldn't pull up in a car and shoot him? There's no reason to be on Mt Rushmore other than it's a good prop. The direction is stiff and unrealistic. He depends on the charisma of the stars. I know -- that's sacrilege. You want a good Hitchcock film watch, "LIFEBOAT."
Very true. It shows the power of dramatic irony and constantly making the audience want to know what's going to happen next. They're focused on the future of the narrative instead of how silly it is to try to kill someone with a crop duster 😅
I don’t really understand the hype about this film. Yes, I understand that at the time of its release it must have been groundbreaking, but if it is known for its set pieces those will probably not age very well. I find the romance story to be soppy and most of the set pieces not believable at all. The train scenes are the best in my opinion, and the shots of the train at dusk still hold up very beautifully in 2021
![Tour the North by Northwest Home [CG Tour]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/284iZJ0zzts/mqdefault.jpg)
My all time favorite movie and I with there was more analysis about it. This was fantastic!
Awesome! Glad you liked it.
Alright Mike Tyson
I think both Casablanca and North by Northwest were being rewritten during production, which to me makes the results even more impressive.
100% agreed.
Same with GWTW.
Hey guys, please do me a huge favor and hit the LIKE button. That's all I ask - it helps out the channel a lot!
5:25 Nice touch showing Hitchcock's cameo without mentioning (as we all know) that he loved doing them. Now THAT is irony!
Great video. I just rewatched the movie after several years and I am reminded of how good it is.
Thanks for the comment! I seem to watch this movie once a year 😅
Just rewatched the movie earlier today. I was reminded from someone else’s post on another video that the original henchman, who held a gun on Roger when he was abducted, was certainly the submachine gun toting killer who died in the crop duster, along with the pilot. Besides never seeing the pilot, I realized that there was another henchman of Vandamm we never got to actually see, but who was definitely present. I’m talking about the driver of the abduction car. He was fully involved in the abduction, but disappeared after fulfilling that task. This could be a possible hint as to how large Vandamm’s organization was, but not vital to the plot.
Interesting! Great comment.
Great presentation! The only thing I’d add is Herman’s wonderful score.
Brilliant film! And very nicely examined screenwriting aspects!
We are planning to cover the production design of this one down the road.
Very cool. I'm sure that's going to be tons of fun to cover!
NORTH BY NORTHWEST is one of those rare films that you can watch over and over again, any number of times.
this is fantastic, thank you!
Thank you for watching!
Fiirst real Bond movie,
the Hunt For George R.
Kaplan, is .
Support the channel on Patreon and get access to more videos: patreon.com/scriptsleuth
CITY OF GOD
CRIES AND WHISPERS
DO THE RIGHT THING
IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Excellent analysis - next time I watch the movie I’ll enjoy it even more!
Thanks for watching!
This movie and Notorious are my favs. Vertigo is ranked the best movie office all time but i like the humorous AH films more!!
I agree, I like this one a lot more.
Hitchcock use the macguffin as a dramatic device. The audience is held in suspense because they know that it is a bomb ready to go off but the characters are blissfully unaware of the danger tucked under the seat.
Tarantino misuses the macguffin by informing everyone except the audience making them only curious. It is a mcguffin in reverse..
Thank you for this terrific video.
You're welcome, Carson! Thanks for watching.
His suit is immaculate through out
Well, it IS Cary Grant!
Good fellas
Great choice!
I don't know for sure if this is off topic or not, I always hear about 'in act one', or 'in the last act', I'm just wondering, how does one know, for instance, when act one ends and act two begins?
By the way, I'm loving this channel!
Thanks!
Great question! I'm actually working on a story structure video next, so stay tuned for a detailed answer!
@@ScriptSleuth THANKS! I have wondered about this for years.
That's funny. This is My favorite Hitch movie too!
What other films would you like to see me cover? Let me know in a comment below!
Rear Window - best film ever made.
Leon aka The Professional
@@oot007 Wow, two excellent films!
Forrest Gump
Leaving Las Vegas
th-cam.com/video/ySLKeEDf69o/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/EkDplDuh1O8/w-d-xo.html
Another bit of irony, which the screenplay points out for comic effect: Roger claims both of his ex-wives divorced him for "leading too dull a life," while in the midst of a situation that's anything BUT dull.
Wait...the highest ranked Hitchcock film on WGAW's list of top 101 screenplays is: North By Northwest, at only #21? WTactualF is up with that?!
Sorry, you're evaluation is really good, this is not a criticism of that...but more a criticism of that dopey WGAW list. I mean, really...This film should be ranked way higher than this, along with a few other films he did.
That brings up a good idea. How would I re-order the list myself?
when you play the video at 1.5 speed ... the commentary voice will sound like George Costanza Yankee's boss
Where's my calzone? I can smell the calzones!
One place where Hitchcock and Lehmann seem to have failed is the totally transparent 'U.S. Intelligence Agency' scene in which the mysterious Kaplan character is explained. Totally unnecessary! The Professor explains that later when he and Thornhill are walking to the plane. The plot would have succeeded beautifully without the inclusion of that scene.
Good point, they could have trimmed that down a bit. But it still works well as dramatic irony because Roger Thornhill doesn't know that information yet.
Well, hold on: by showing the audience the behind the scenes activities of the intelligence group, isnt Hitchcock just doing another version of the bomb-under-the-table juxtaposition with the audience, by revealing what's REALLY going on in this film, while Thornhill continues to be hounded and pursued? Because without that, the audience doesn't learn until practically the 2nd to last act that this is a very big espionage caper, and Thornhill has been entirely absorbed into this (unwillingly of course). I mean...you've got to have that scene in the movie, which is all but 2-3 minutes max, it doesn't realy affect the film at all...and the scene is almost required to make the film have the proper pace for the viewer.
BTW, ive seen this film on the big screen in an actual movie theater...and I have to tell you that the PACING of the film (thanks to the superb setpieces) is just about as perfect as a film gets. This is really one of the things that I think viewers don't appreciate unless they see it like that.
Plus, how can one not appreciate that bit of dark humor, with the line of "So horribly sad, but how is it I feel like laughing?"
@@luskvideoproductions869 Since this is one of my favorite films of all time, I'm not going to claim the film was ruined by the inclusion of that scene. There are a few dubious plot elements but not enough to worry about. I just feel that the scene was not a 'gotta have.' It was witty, as you note--one of Lehmann's best. I think Hitchcock included it to help the audience out a bit. In my case it tipped me to Eve Kendall's being the good Girl Scout.
Concerning the very BIG espionage operation: I always heard Townsend's organization as UNIPOL, whereas the captioning had it as UNIPO. Neither is, of course, an actual UN entity, but it does suggest an INTERPOL-like connection, which could indicate that Townsend was part of the espionage plot and was allowing the bad guys to use his estate as a safe house. In that case the knife thrower was just cleaning up a possible leak by killing one of his own. I dismissed this in the end, but it's one of the intriguing bits that helps the film.
I saw the movie in 1959 in a drive-in and instantly noted it as one of the greats.
Excellent insight. I'm also envious you got to see this film on the big screen. It's exactly the kind of movie that's made for it!
They actually need the scene wear the clothes do not fit him because they are too small for him! Was this a clue or a macguffin?
In retrospect, that screenplay is filled with holes. Scenes such as the one with the airplane make absolutely no sense. They couldn't pull up in a car and shoot him? There's no reason to be on Mt Rushmore other than it's a good prop. The direction is stiff and unrealistic. He depends on the charisma of the stars. I know -- that's sacrilege. You want a good Hitchcock film watch, "LIFEBOAT."
Very true. It shows the power of dramatic irony and constantly making the audience want to know what's going to happen next. They're focused on the future of the narrative instead of how silly it is to try to kill someone with a crop duster 😅
I don’t really understand the hype about this film. Yes, I understand that at the time of its release it must have been groundbreaking, but if it is known for its set pieces those will probably not age very well. I find the romance story to be soppy and most of the set pieces not believable at all. The train scenes are the best in my opinion, and the shots of the train at dusk still hold up very beautifully in 2021
That's the unique beauty of film: it speaks differently to everyone. Thanks for the comment!
Ah, you ruin it.