“Rope” or “Frenzy”?

I'll take Frenzy because -- and I was there in 1972 -- it single-handedly lifted Hitchcock up in the public eye from "a has been director in decline" to "The Comeback King" with great reviews that landed Frenzy on many Ten Best Lists for 1972. Hitchcock was hot again -- though he would make only one more movie after Frenzy -- and he got to be happy in his old age.

Frenzy and Rope are tied together in that each film has a brutal, lingering strangulation as its centerpiece. The strangulation(of a woman) is longer -- and accompanied by a rape -- in the R-rated Frenzy . The strangulation(of a man) is shorter -- but opens the movie as the very first scene -- in Rope. In both films, the killings are very horrible -- because the victims are chosen almost at random, they don't deserve what happens to them in any way -- and the killers are merciless.

The R-rated Frenzy was controversial for its lady-killing in '72, but Rope was flat-out banned across much of America in 1948 -- ostensibly for the sexualized violence of ITS strangling -- but also for the fact that the killers were pretty clearly developed as two gay male lovers.

So Rope and Frenzy are tied together not just by being underated, but by being sexually controversial, disturbing films.

Rope gets extra points for its historic "one movie in one single take" experiment - -emulated quite recently in the film 1917-- but I'm still picking Frenzy...for saving Hitchcock's reputation and career, and keeping him relevant all the way to the 70's.

I prefer 'Frenzy'. I live in London and I found the portrayal of the West End characters entertaining. The humour was dark too (e.g. the dinner scene) and Barry Foster delivered a great performance as the villain; a mix of charm and malevolence. It was also Hitchcock revisiting the 'Wrong Man' theme that served him so well, with a slightly different edge. It would make my top 10 Hitchcock films while 'Rope' just misses out.