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

Don't "go down the IMDB top 250 to find movies you've never seen" all the ratings are skewed and bumped higher. Tons of movies that never made an "8" star rating based on some overexcited hillbilly clicking 10 stars on a movie never made that list. I bet even you can think of multiple movies that you really enjoyed, and thought were "well made" that did not make that list. I have heard that IMDB ratings are weighted and try to be accurate, but you never know. Once I seen some of the average movies that made the supposed "top 250" I gave up on the IMDB rating system altogether. Find some other organizations top 100 and go by that instead, anything that is not rated by us drooling masses, including myself. Try to stick to action movies with women and explosions to keep you excited, sounds right up your alley.

reply

I'm 14 and I've seen a LOT of new and old movies but this was the first movie in a long time that kept me guessing. I love Hitchcock and I love old movies. If they're not your taste, that's fine by me but I do agree that it's harder to appreciate old films. You have to put yourself in the era to feel what it's trying to make you feel.
P.S. Have you seen Casablanca yet? It's a timeless classic! Give it a try. If you don't like it, maybe it would be better to stick to post-80's films. No offense meant, I'm just giving my 2-cents.

u got rick roll'd

reply

I'm 19 and I just watched this with 2 of my friends who are both 20. It was the first viewing for each of us, and we really enjoyed it. We understood going in that it was made sevaral decades ago, so I wasn't exactly expecting stunning effects or modern conviences. I think it was completely entertaining as is. Hitchcock has yet to disappoint me in the few things I have seen of his. I'm not an expert, but I'm a fan.

There is more to film than action scenes and CGI.





"Like sands through the hour glass,
So are the Gilmores of our life."

reply

The fact that this is one of the greatest and most purely entertaining movies of all time has nothing to do with its age; and for that matter I don't buy the argument that older movies are more realistic / believable / better and conversely.

Quite simply all the very greatest movies come down to the basic elements: setting, story, writing, acting and directing. In this case, Hitchcock amps up the suspense and thrills to breaking point. The script (one of the greatest of all time) by the brilliant Ernest Lehman is funny, witty, suspenseful and coherent; and Cary Grant & Eva Marie Saint are exquisite. I can go on about the score and iconic production design. All amazing.

This film is just so irresistible if you let yourself go along for the ride and so much more original than any other film nowadays (which are all derivative anyway).

I watched this today (probably my 3rd or 4th viewing) at a public screening at my local art cinema of about 200 people audience. It would be one of the most blissfully enjoyable film experiences I've ever had. People laughed out loud, gasped, clapped, cried out; the lady next to me couldn't bear to watch during the cropduster scene! This is a film that is 50 years old, and provokes such immense joy in audiences I seldom see nowadays (read Avatar). It really is timeless.

reply

Wow... I totally agree with you! I've tried watching Hitchcock's and other old movies, but I keep getting disappointed. I hate most of them. Boring and cheesy. The exceptions are westerns (I really liked The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly) and 12 Angry Men. And normally, I love cult and foreign movies, but "classics", unfortunatelly, no.

reply

i have nothing against old movies. plenty of my favorites are classics. this movie however was kind of boring and similar movies like the bourne triology and enemy of the state are more entertaining. i was really hoping i would like this but it is just okay.

reply

I don't know how old you are, but clearly you didn't pay attention to much of this movie. The plane wasn't trying to "run him down" - it was shooting at him, and it was a mistake the pilot made that made it crash in to the truck.
This film is a classic, and nothing "modern" stands up to it. I didn't read most of your post because it was long-winded (incorrect) and boring.

reply

[deleted]