MovieChat Forums > North by Northwest (1959) Discussion > Probably brilliant at the time, but does...

Probably brilliant at the time, but doesn't stand up to modern movies


Every Wednesday I head over to my dad's for dinner with him and my brothers. I bring over a movie for us to watch after dinner, and lately I've been going down the imdb top 250 list to try and find movies that none (or almost none) of us have seen. This is the 2nd "old movie" that I brought over, the first being The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly. Both disappointed all of us. Especially given the very high rating here on imdb.

My dad says that this was cutting edge back in the day, but laughingly admits to how dated it is compared to newer movies. Same with the Eastwood picture. Watching these is like watching old sports games from the 50's where the average football lineman was around 6'0" 250, or the average 40yd dash time was 5 sec, etc... the greatest of an era might not even make it to the pros of today. That's how I feel about these movies, NxNW in particular.

This felt like an early James Bond movie, or maybe a Bourne movie. Yet, everything about it is slower, less exciting, less entertaining. No exciting fights, minimal stunts, obvious set-pieces (we watched it on bluray, which after reading the forums here seems to magnify the obviousness of old sfx).

There's also just something about the way people talk and behave in old movies versus new. The dialogue is stilted and fake. Everyone is prim and proper, no swearing, etc...it's the type of acting you would expect in a play rather than a window into real life.

Getting into specific scenes, the plane scene was laughable. It was like someone thought, "What would be the most difficult way to kill someone? Oh, I know, try to run him down with a prop plane, which would cause the plane to crash and kill everyone inside. Or wait, let's try to gun him down while flying at 200mph instead of doing a drive-by or waiting in the field with a rifle." And then it crashes into the tanker truck which isn't even moving at the time they crash into it? Wow.

I think this movie's rating is held up by nostalgic memories of people seeing it as kids and how impressive it was back then. If you put this movie in a room of 20-40yr olds who've never seen it or heard of it, it would fall off the top 250 like a rock. But hey, maybe that's true of all old movies, and the rating system is supposed to be relevant to the time the movie was made. If that's the case, and someone going down the list is simply looking for the best movies ever made, then most old movies should be skipped because people have just gotten better at making movies and have more tools available to them now. Much like a 1950's Cadillac, what was great then, wouldn't even sell today.

6/10 rating from me. Watch it to say you have, but wouldn't watch a 2nd time.


p.s. I really liked 12 angry men, which is probably one of the only old movies I thought was good. Maybe because it's all just in one room and psychology is the same today as it was then.

reply

I love MANY old movies- i.e.: Maltese Falcon, Citizen Kane, Lawrence of Arabia, etc.
Yet I agree with most of your statement.
I also want to state that this film has a major flaw that can't be blamed on generational differences: horrible acting. I was amazed that this "legendary" film has so many spotty performances.

reply

I like this movie pretty well, but I can't say none of your points have any merit. I would suggest trying a couple early 1940s films though: "Double Indemnity" and "Citizen Kane". Those are the only two American films made before 1960 that are in my top twenty of all time.

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

Well, I'm pretty inclined to disagree. I first saw this film when I was 14 years old, a freshman in high school, back in 2006. Of all of the Hitchcock films I'd seen at the time, besides Psycho, this was my favorite.

I can understand where you're coming from, but I do find this film very enjoyable, and one of Hitchcock's best.

Sure, it wouldn't hold a candle today's films like The Dark Knight, but I would be willing to give this film a 9/10 stars; in terms of entertainment and story structure.

The one thing about this film that irked me slightly was how forced the relationship between Thornhill and Kendall was. Today's audience would laugh at how quickly they decided to get it on, even if she was merely trying to deceive him. It felt too out of place. Especially since she had revealed to him that she knew he was a man accused of murder. If a girl warmed up to me that easily, and knew I was wanted for murder, I'd have to be some brand of idiot to not consider that she may double cross me.

reply

Please remember, at that point in the story he has only her to talk to, or to go to for any reason . . . he's on his own, and must try to bond her to him, as much as possible . . .

reply

"Sure, it wouldn't hold a candle today's films like The Dark Knight."

I would disagree - I think North by Northwest is a far superior film to The Dark Knight.

TDK is bogged down by all sorts of unrealistic psychology. The plot careens all over the place in a nutty fashion. Villains are all super-evil, with the Joker the Most Evil. This is fine, with it all coming from the comic book genre. But really, North By Northwest tries a little bit to be a touch more realistic.

reply

I suppose that while the plot of North By Northwest was more realistic, The Dark Knight's ability to make me think about the way society works is brilliant.

The scene in the hospital where the Joker corrupts Harvey Dent with the logic that when a society's infrastructure is even slightly disrupted, everything goes to hell is genius. It made me think about what happened after 9/11, when everyone immediately wanted to take the fight to the terrorists, without even really thinking of the implications that might follow. Why does the death of an elected official matter more than the deaths of soldiers and/or a criminal? When the people who are "expected" to die, do, no one bats an eye.

That scene kind of makes the Joker seem less "evil" in the conventional sense, and make you think that perhaps he really is "just ahead of the curve". It's still immoral and sick, but it can make a person understand where he's coming from. Harvey Dent sure did.

reply

I think the only line I struggled with was when Cary Grant asks the spymaster if he's FBI or CIA, and the guy replies, "FBI, CIA, [something], we're all part of the same alphabet soup". In a modern film, they wouldn't have a sense of humor and they'd state explicitly (probably the law) what organization they were from.

Aside from that jaunty little moment, the rest of the film is just fine. I find most modern films almost boring in how by-the-book they can get. But then look at the beginning of Hannibal, when Julianne Moore's FBI cover is blown for absolutely no reason except a badly needed plot device to get her in trouble. That scene alone can't be accounted for, so why compare a 1959 movie to something modern that is just as "laughable"?

Movies are meant to be escapism. Read the news if you want "real" (albeit still laughable at times).


http://imgur.com/zmJ4ZR4

reply

[deleted]

OP complains that there is no swearing in this movie. There's no disputing tastes, I guess. I think 99% of the swearing in today's movies is entirely gratuitous.

reply

It is . . . obviously most of the characters were properly brought up . . .

reply

I can relate in a way to the OP's opinion, I think the critics tend to be more indulgent with older productions, I feel that a lot of older movies are highly regarded mainly because they were pioneers in their time and paved the way for newer (and often better in my opinion) movies.

reply

I'm 25 years old

I don’t like Bourne or James Bond movies. I tried watching Bourne movie in theater, I was very bored thinking when is it going to end.

I adore this movie. In my opinion it is not boring in the least. I get really into the dialogue, characters ect. If it’s good movie, it does not matter to me how old it is, or if the special effects are not as good as it is today. Special effects we think are great will seem outdated in years anyway.

I like that it is prim and proper. There is nothing wrong with that. I like how they hinted at Eva and Carey sexual attraction in this movie in tasteful way. I really like the grace, wit, class and beauty in the film and others.

I really like Eve elegant beautiful cloths in this movie.

Some realism in film is good, but not all the time. It’s nice to escape from reality. Not everybody acts the way they portray in modern movies anyway. No movie is complete reality.

That’s why I like it.

reply

it is a god movie for me it is 8/10

reply

Well, there are many Bond films that aren't very good IMHO, and the only Bourne film that I even really like is The Bourne Identity because it actually tells an intriguing story and gives the viewer time to soak in everything that is happening. The sequels go into shaky-cam/action overload and make it hard to enjoy the experience.

But I feel as if this film is the prototype FOR the Bond films, and even summer action movies in general. And you're not going to get profanity in a film back in 1959.

One thing that still holds up very well in this film, to me, is it's dry, witty humor.

reply

I don't have any problem at all with the OP and his family and whoever saying that they don't really care for this film. That's ok. It would be really unusual if we all liked the same things.

What I have a problem with is the suggestion that those of us who really love the film, don't really love it - it's all because of nostalgia, you see. There's no possible way we can actually really think so highly of this movie, and enjoy it as much as we do.

Just absurd.

Don't like it if you don't want to.

But there's no way you can tell me that my love for this movie is just seeing it through some weird rose colored lenses. That if I only just thought about it a little bit, I couldn't really possibly enjoy it and appreciate it as the wonderfully entertaining film that I think it is.

Because that would be pretty arrogant.

reply

I like both Bond movies and North by Northwest. NBNW and Casino Royale are both brilliant films.

reply