Question about Alfred Hitchcock's Notorious

[Castle]

Trying to watch this film for the second time and I keep loosing concentration.

Usually I love an old school Hitckcocok movie and I try to see as many of his films as I can. I already saw Strangers on a train last week, twice and I enjoyed it. great-great film and kind of funny too.

However I cannot get past Notorious for the second time.

I sort of saw Notorious once but cant remember much about it, so I wanted to give it another go and I still cant get into it to know the film in great detail.

Anyone who has seen Notorious, please give nice take or review of why this is always considered a top 5 Hitchcock movie and a must watch for film fans.

[Kieran_Frost]

I'm in the same boat, really had to work to get through it both times I watched it, and... I just felt nothing (but boredom). It's kinda silly, really; and I don't get why it's so lauded for a Hitchcock film. I'm sure I'll try it again... at some point. Might have even reviewed it ages ago, I'll go check.

[Kirby101]

I wouldn't consider it top 5, maybe not even top 10.

[JBatmanFan05]

When I first watched Notorious about a decade or so ago, I did love it, the suspense worked. I didn't see some of the twists coming. And I love ever urbane Claude Raines, Bergman was great, etc. And the subtle nuclear angle was a bold shock for a 1946 film.

But, I admit watching it after the first viewing (with the suspense of the twists gone) can have diminishing returns. But...I still remember how much I enjoyed it that first time.

The film is kinda beloved for its subtly subversive perverse take on romance, relationships (again, this is 1946 mind you). And certain camera work, etc.

[Jim Kelly]

I'm doing a chronological rewatch of all Hitchcock, but I'm just getting to the end of the silents. I only average about one film per month. So at this rate it will be a couple of years before I get to NOTORIOUS.

It did leave me kind of flat the first time I watched it. But it's a good movie to watch for all of Hitchcock's idiosyncrasies--starring two of his favourite actors.

[JBatmanFan05]

I'm doing a chronological rewatch of all Hitchcock

I need to do this. But I won't do all, just all that I own, which is many. Probably I will start with The Lodger (my criterion dvd).

I will skip the many lower tier films like The Skin Game (1931), Juno And The Paycock (1930), Champagne (1928), Easy Virtue (1928), Rich And Strange (1931), The Paradine Case (1947), Under Capricorn (1949), Family Plot (1976) and some others.

[Scott Taylor]

For me, the movie is more interesting aesthetically than it is as a story. I adore the cinematography and Hitchock obviously had his camera practically make love to Bergman. As a story, its got some neat twists and but its not all that much better than a lot of contemporary movies.

This is the same way I feel about a lot of Val Lewton's work.

[Jim Kelly]

Also, the first time I ever watched NOTORIOUS, my appreciation of Claude Rains hadn't fully developed. Next time, I'll be watching him more carefully. With Grant, Bergman and Rains in a scene--that's a lot of acting talent to study. Sometimes a movie doesn't have to be about anything--it's just nice to see people walking around in front of a camera.

[JBatmanFan05]

For me, the movie is more interesting aesthetically than it is as a story. I adore the cinematography and Hitchock obviously had his camera practically make love to Bergman. As a story, its got some neat twists and but its not all that much better than a lot of contemporary movies.

Very fair take. Some kinda view Vertigo that way as well I think or suspect...cinematography, unbelievably awesome score, and loaded with Hitch's idiosyncrasies, but maybe those aspects trump the storytelling/drama/suspense some. (note: I absolutely love Vertigo)

This is the same way I feel about a lot of Val Lewton's work.

I can see that. Cat People I love, then I watched some others and thought...none quite as interesting as Cat People. The Seventh Victim (1943) has an interesting premise, I'm a sucker for satanic cult films, but it gets boring and falls flat.

[Castle]

I'm in the same boat, really had to work to get through it both times I watched it, and... I just felt nothing (but boredom). It's kinda silly, really; and I don't get why it's so lauded for a Hitchcock film. I'm sure I'll try it again... at some point. Might have even reviewed it ages ago, I'll go check.

Well it is nice to know I am not the only one.

I have decided to stop watching it for now. I think I will watch Suspicion and Rebecca, and if that puts me highly in the Hitchcock movie marathon mode , I will go back and try and finish watching Notorious.

[Castle]

I need to do this. But I won't do all, just all that I own, which is many. Probably I will start with The Lodger (my criterion dvd).

I will skip the many lower tier films like The Skin Game (1931), Juno And The Paycock (1930), Champagne (1928), Easy Virtue (1928), Rich And Strange (1931), The Paradine Case (1947), Under Capricorn (1949), Family Plot (1976) and some others.

These seems more like low tier Hitchcock movies you listed. I have not even watched most of them.

However I have seen the Paradine Case because I am a hugh Gregory Peck fan, it was not really a great film, which seems weird looking at things from the Gregory Peck angle because he plays a lawyer in the film as he did in Cape Fear and To Kill Mockingbird, but I just felt he did not embodied ''that'' lawyer mode in his Paradine case character.

Also I heard Peck and Hitchcock did not get along during the production of the movie and Hitchcock never worked with him again, which feels like a darm shame since Peck could have been a signature Hitchcock leading man like Cary Grant and James Stewart became.

[Scott Taylor]

Very fair take. Some kinda view Vertigo that way as well I think or suspect...cinematography, unbelievably awesome score, and loaded with Hitch's idiosyncrasies, but maybe those aspects trump the storytelling/drama/suspense some. (note: I absolutely love Vertigo)

Yah I got to see Vertigo on the big screen for the first time in my life a few years ago, amazing.

[JBatmanFan05]

I am a huge Gregory Peck fan

Also I heard Peck and Hitchcock did not get along during the production of the movie and Hitchcock never worked with him again, which feels like a darm shame since Peck could have been a signature Hitchcock leading man like Cary Grant and James Stewart became.

I can definitely agree I would have liked more Peck/Hitch, love Peck as well, but we did get 2 Hitchcock films with Peck so that's not so bad. I love Spellbound.

[Jim Kelly]

Some months ago, I bragged on this message board that I'd seen every Hitchcock movie. But then I started to doubt myself and decided to do another rewatch. The previous time was some decades ago--when finding every Hitchcock was not easy--and there were a few silents I missed. So this time I'm searching for all of them as I go. THE MOUNTAIN EAGLE (1926) is one that has been lost, so I couldn't get that. Doing this post, I now see there's one lost film that was found--THE WHITE SHADOW (1924)--so I'll have to see if I can find it, if it's been released.

[JBatmanFan05]

Some months ago, I bragged on this message board that I'd seen every Hitchcock movie. But then I started to doubt myself and decided to do another rewatch. The previous time was some decades ago--when finding every Hitchcock was not easy--and there were a few silents I missed. So this time I'm searching for all of them as I go. THE MOUNTAIN EAGLE (1926) is one that has been lost, so I couldn't get that. Doing this post, I now see there's one lost film that was found--THE WHITE SHADOW (1924)--so I'll have to see if I can find it, if it's been released.

Only three of six reels (totaling 43 minutes) have managed to survive. It seems they are on Youtube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iySJgwN0awk