Showing posts with label Alfred Hitchcock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alfred Hitchcock. Show all posts

Friday, August 22, 2014

TGI Joe Friday

I have a friend at work who likes to spend time in my office.  I don’t blame him, not only am I cool cat to hang with, I have one of the best views on the floor – made even better for him because he doesn’t have windows at all.  Our conversation tramples free-range over pretty much everything but generally falls into one of the cardinal directions of work, military service, fine dining, or film – a discussion of Casablanca is very efficient.

Recently he told me that Dragnet, Adam 12, and Emergency had all become streamable on Netflix.  I loved Emergency growing up – to this day, when someone says, “We’re on our way” I silent add “Rampart” every single time.  Every time.  Then I hear the siren sound in my head.  I’m really surprised I didn’t become a fireman.  Anyway, I remember that I watched Adam 12 but couldn’t tell you anything about it and the closest I ever came to Dragnet was handing over the video cassette of Dan Aykroid’s movie to rental customers.

It was time to check out some classic TV.  My friend’s description of Dragnet was just too juicy to miss out on.  Slang.  Public Service Announcements disguised as “on the nose” dialogue, and more voice over narration that you can shake a stick at.  Henry Morgan is just a bonus.

Dragnet lived up to its reputation.  I like it way better than Cops.  Even my children watch it.  Sort of.  There’s a lot of Candy Crushing going on too.  But a funny thing happened on the way to queueing up Dragnet – I spotted Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

We love it.  I remember the opening and the opening only from decades ago.  We’ve watched a couple of them and their great, if you are interested in a good story and observing how film has changed in the last 60 years.  Not all of my children like it, but their reactions have been very educational for me as a story teller.

1.       “That guy is annoying.  He says the other guy’s name every single time he talks.”  Parents observe.  “See?  He did it again.  ARRGGGGHHH!”  I think that the main character’s name was the single most often used word, squeezing out ‘and’, ‘the’, and ‘red bellied sap sucker.’  Today’s audience doesn’t like that – it’s condescending.

2.       “Dad.  What did he do?”  Hmm, sort of the point of the show, right?  “No really, Dad.  What’s going on?  I mean, its obvious right?”  Not the way Alfred rolls.  More to it.  “So tell me what’s going on, what did he do?  No, really, I NEED to know.”  The shows run about 25 minutes.  At minute 11 my daughter couldn’t stand it.  The suspense was too much.  Awesome.  I haven’t seen her react like that to anything.  And she loved the twist, the story “after” the story.

So the takeaway?  You don’t have to be nostalgic to enjoy an old program and a great story will reach across generations, bending convention and medium, to draw the audience in.  Black and white?  Who cares.  Cheese Whiz for dialogue?  So what.  Create an alluring mystery and then deliver on the promise – it will be a populist winner every time.

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

"There's a speed limit in this state, Mr. Neff."

So on the coldest day yet this century, indeed, this millennium, my train was switched to the track opposite the station.  To add frostbite to exposure, it was 10 minutes late.  I put my hands on my ears when I got into the train just to warm them up and had to stop because it was making my hands too cold.

Yes, I should have had a hat.  I actually had one with me.  But my hair is too long to wear a hat and not have to fix it again and...

I started reading the script for "Double Indemnity" on the ride home last night.  It was really good, hooked me straight away.  I had my wife put it on our queue.  It was streamable so last night after a few thousand Russian swings at the gym, we watched it.

It's a 1944 thriller starting Fred MacMurray and that dame, Barbra Stanwick.  Two things really stood out from the picture show, the first was that it was a swell movie, even 70 years into it.  The second was that watching it immediately after reading the script was the cat’s meow.  I kept telling my wife what was about to happen -- just enough in advance to show off (think George Costanza and Jeopardy) but not ruin the story.  I had to stop though.  It was annoying.  Just like my attempt at 1940s slang in this post.

I noted several places where scenes were slightly changed or cut -- but also where it played exactly like it was written.  I felt like somebody raised the blinds in the room I've been writing screenplays in.  The direct comparison was enlightening.  Enriching.

The script had several sections of voice over which were written side-by-side with the action sequences they went with.  It was very good at showing the pacing, but harder to read than the modern style of breaking up the narration text.  But it works.  I think that if I were to write a period piece, I’d write the script using that format.

The dialogue is fantastic, short and choppy, filled with innuendo (the rules of decency required that certain words and topics never be discussed) that conveyed tremendous meaning to an adult paying attention but would have slipped over the heads of any young tykes watching from the back of the Plymouth at the drive-in.

The characters were well drawn.  I especially liked Keyes.  If you haven't seen it, I highly recommend the film.  It's in black and white, has been reformatted to fit your television screen, and doesn't contain a single profanity.  I dare say it is superior to "The Maltese Falcon."

If you want a copy of the script, send me an email and I'll share my PDF with you.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

"Neatness is always the result of deliberate planning."

I actually remembered to enter the 5 minute fiction contest last night.  It went a little better than last time but I don't think I've quite figured it out yet.  The story itself made more sense - I took a minute (just a minute) to think about where I wanted to go before I started writing and wasn’t committed to a bad idea.  I'm reminded of a poster on the wall at work three employers ago - "Why is it that there's never enough time to do it right but always enough time to do it again?"

Today's "Tales From the Script" comes from Alfred Hitchcock's "North by Northwest".  Long considered a classic by the people who get to pick that sort of thing, NXNW has been argued as the finest work by "the master of suspense".  I enjoy a good Hitchcock most of the time, most of the way through, but I've come to the opinion that the industry has moved too far for most people to enjoy the films.  They want Cameron or Tarantino.  You have to be in the mood for an antique to appreciate something like NXNW.  (I offer you to compare "Dr. No" with "Skyfall" before arguing that old movies are equally enjoyable to a modern audience.)

What I'm getting at is that I saw NXNW in my teens and it was okay but not something I cared to see again - it was an old movie and seemed a bit hokey, not suspenseful.  Reading the script, I was struck by how much has changed in the way we are supposed to tell stories for the screen.  But I also saw how valuable reading the story of a successful film from another time can be.  The script was fantastic.

Really, it was.  There were all sorts of bits in the dialogue that were very well done.  There were real expressions of emotion rather than mindless cursing.  Everything was innuendo - it was very clear exactly what the characters were talking about, but they never said it and while we knew what they were about to do (or had just done) there was no scene showing us any of it.  If nothing else, it's proof that a good writer will find a way, no matter what the rules may be.

On the down side, it was a very long read - as scripts go.  Enjoyable, but not the easy-to-finish-in-one-sitting that now populates the world.  There were huge long blocks of descriptive text.  They moved along fairly well but it was much more novel like.  There was also quite a bit of exposition through dialogue which is not only out of vogue, but extremely boring.

The comedy played through well and so did the desperation.  I felt quite certain, by the end, that I knew Mr. Thornhill.  For some strange reason though, as I read, I kept hearing Jimmy Stewart instead of Cary Grant.

I'm wondering if there are any Hitchcock fans out there?  What was your take on NXNW?