4753fa01   
   From: ggggg9271@gmail.com   
      
   On Monday, May 21, 2012 at 12:12:12 PM UTC-7, calvin wrote:   
   > This was buried within another thread; reposted    
   > here with no changes:    
   >    
   > (SPOILER WARNING)    
   >    
   > I watched 'Rope' again today, and I don't understand    
   > why people seem to think that Hitchcock's 'gimmick'    
   > detracts from the movie. I always start by paying    
   > special attention to the the continuous 8 to 10 minute    
   > takes, but then get so caught up in the play that the    
   > gimmick is often forgotten, until it calls attention    
   > to itself again, as when the camera passes behind    
   > someone's back, which fills the frame for an instant,    
   > allowing an end to the take, and the beginning of the    
   > next one.    
   >    
   > In some cases, especially the one that I mentioned in    
   > the first post, a long take is extremely effective.    
   > While we listen to a conversation off screen, we    
   > watch the housekeeper working continuously, clearing    
   > off the chest, going back and forth, then bringing books    
   > from the dining room that she intends to put back into    
   > the chest. The people having the conversation aren't    
   > paying any attention to her, as she relentlessly    
   > approaches the critical moment. In high Hitchcock style,    
   > we are amused and willingly manipulated into hoping that    
   > the body is not discovered, at least not yet.    
   >    
   > The movie is quite effective in showing James Stewart's    
   > gradually growing suspicions that something is seriously    
   > wrong with this party. The two gay (not stated, but    
   > clearly presented) young men are very well played by a    
   > reptilian John Dall and emotional, paranoid Farley Granger.    
   >    
   > What's wrong with this movie is not the gimmick, but the    
   > hypocrisy of the James Stewart character in the end. He    
   > was not involved in the murder, but he had been very much    
   > intellectually complicit in the Nietzschian rationalizations    
   > that led to it. Earlier in the play he had expressed these    
   > views to a horrified Cedric Hardwicke. His words in the    
   > end express proper shame, but his manner is that of an all-    
   > American crime fighter doing justice for all.    
   >    
   > In spite of this flaw, though, 'Rope' is one of the better    
   > Hitchcock movies, and his difficult-to-film 'real time'    
   > takes add up to a fascinating and successful experiment,    
   > in my opinion.   
      
   (2023 Youtube upload):   
      
   "7 Reasons Why Rope (1948) is a Perfect Movie"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)