NYC's Film Forum is doing a retrospective of the legend's career and as a big fan of "the master", I wanted to revisit this film which confounded me the first time I saw it. It has grown in stature over the years, with some calling it his last masterpiece.
Unfortunately the crowd I saw it with was full of snarky, sniveling hipsters who spent most of the movie guffawing at some of the more dated aspects of the film and missing the depth and intelligence beneath the surface.
For a movie that came out fifty years ago, Marnie is remarkably fresh and entertaining.
Yes, there are elements that verge on camp (the process shots for instance) and there are cringe-worthy moments in the film -- but I would argue they are intentional and they hold up far better now than they did when the movie was first released.
What Hitchcock was attempting here was something very different than he ever did before. It's a purely psychological character study with very little traditional thriller elements. 'Tippi' Hedren's mannered, occasionally shrill performance as Marnie turned off audiences then but now seems smart and feisty and Sean Connery, whether he realized it or not, brilliantly subverts his persona to play one of the most disturbing and fascinating male leads in Hitchcock's canon.
 |
| Sean Connery |
The opening at first seems conventionally Hitchcockian. Hedren plays a woman who travels around the country, switching identities and ripping off wealthy businessmen who hired her for her looks. Hedren is usually unfairly compared unfavorably to the director's past heroines like Grace Kelly and Ingrid Bergman but I think it was just the fact that her more purely feminist and assertive persona was unusual for their time. Her character's only quirks are her aversion to both men and the color red.
Connery plays an egomaniac named Mark Rutland -- who is a lot like James Bond but with less humanity. A playboy who seeks the approval of his father, he's the kind of man who has no qualms comparing women to animals.
It's a testament to Connery's considerable charm and sex appeal that for a while his macho desire to "tame" Hedren is almost appealing, until it turns sadistic.
Without spoiling to much of the plot I will say that Rutland gets wise to Marnie's routine and in one of the most bizarre plot contrivances in movie history forces her to marry him or face jail time.
What follows is exploration of gender inequality that rivals many future examinations of domestic horror.
Marnie begs Rutland to "let her go" repeatedly and points out his mental instability, which he normally reacts to with a smug cocked eyebrow.
I can't say enough about how interesting the Connery performance is.
This film came out the same year as Goldfinger, arguably the most celebrated Bond film of all time. He had solidified himself as the most popular action hero in film and yet here he is playing a neurotic, possessive and ultimately quite vindictive man.
One can't help but think of Connery's well-documented real-life issues with women when watching the film and as a fan of his acting it made me miss him as a presence in the movies (he prematurely retired 11 years ago).
I also think Hitchcock's so-called late period gets a bad rap. I have, admittedly, not seen a lot of his earlier films but my favorites are mostly from the mid-to-late 50s and beyond. In movies like Marnie and later Frenzy, he was finally breaking free of the pesky Hollywood censors and bringing some real edge and darkness to his movies.
Gone were the compromised happy endings, like in the otherwise excellent film Suspicion. He was laying down a blueprint that his heirs like Brian de Palma and Martin Scorsese would pursue in the decades following his death. And if you look below the surface their films owe a bigger debt to Marnie than some might think.
I agree with you, Adam, that this is a fascinating if imperfect film. The creaky Freudianism is something of an embarrassment. But where I think the film fails most is that there's not a single sympathetic character: as a result it strikes me as being as emotionally detached as Marnie herself, which may have been Hitchcock's intention but ultimately results in a lack of concern or emotional involvement in her narrative for this viewer, at least. There's some lovely cinematography, and I agree that Connery went out on a limb in taking on the role: the rape/"fucking cure" scene is brutal to watch despite the Ozzie-and-Harriet pajamas he wears.
ReplyDelete