Hitchcock: A Short Review that became a little bit longer…(A rant of biographic movies)

Posted on January 17, 2013

Why didn’t I cop the fuck on that this was Helen Mirren when I was watching this? UGH!

YES !! Another biographical movie! The fun man’s documentary!
All the excitement of a shitly referenced wikipedia page in movie form!
What could possibleye go wrong? Obviously it can’t go wrong. (BOLLSHIT!)

Boring plot part:
This movie deals with the famous director Alfred hitchcock’s( Played by Anthony hopkins) struggle as an aging director to bring his audience something new. This focuses on  Psycho ( Released in 1960) and his struggle to make the film and ughhhhhhhh( Here we go) his failing marraige…. but we’ll get to that later. Hitchcock himself is having visions and going flat out batshit crazy blaghdy blaghdy blagh.

Right!

Now you have to wonder HOW making a movie out of a filmmaker’s life, who has made some of the greatest movies ever made could be worse than say… a movie about a social networking website, which has source material that should make up the ingredients of a shit sandwich on the screen. The Social Network movie managed to make a gay rowing scene look like what Die hard 4 should have been, whereas Hitchcock struggles to make a naked stabbing look like what die hard 4 became.
So why do I keep bringing up the Social Network and Die Hard 4? I HAVE NO FUCKING IDEA. Let’s move on..

Before I watched this, I was wondering why it got nominated for barely anything at the Oscars and in fairness I can kinda see why. There’s something very “tv-movie” about this thing. I can’t quite put into words what’s wrong with this film but I can certainly put it into numbers 010101010011010 (Sorry couldn’t resist 0101010101

Yes I feel this film kinda missed the point a little. It kept misfiring like a blind man in an orgy. While it was a good idea to focus on Psycho, the other half of the film was focused on his failing relationship with his wife (Hellen Mirren). But………nobody… really cares that he’s not being a good husband? If he’s not “hitching” the “cock” why should we care? (Apologies to everyone everywhere anytime for that one)

A lot of films have an annoying habit of doing this actually. I saw a Beatles film once that was about john Lennon’s relationship with his mother.. What the flying fuck like?
It’s like making a film about a young Adolf Hitler’s battle through German Measles. We don’t really care about that aspect of his life, just show us what it was like to make the pretty movies.
The Iron Lady had a similar problem and focused too long on her present day condition rather than her fucking up England in the past (Oh the Irish in me), which is what we all really care about.
I’m also to learn that the latest Lincoln movie has a similar problem that I won’t EXACTLY spoil for you buuuuut let’s play some role play for a minute.

Imagine!!!:
YOU are a director!
YOU have to make a  movie about the life of Abraham Lincoln, which should be a rather heroic tale of battling against all odds with a tragic finale and some other tits..
We all good?..Ready?… Noooowwww.

QUESTION TIME FUCKERS!
Q.WHAT do you think the most iconic scene in a Lincoln movie SHOULD be if you DON’T want your audience to plunge headfirst into their popcorn for 5 minutes without taking a breath..

….

Yes that’s right!!! The part where Lincoln get’s shot and DIES! BUUUT our golden globes’ best picture left that little chestnut out!

Jesus Christ:[ On leaving out obvious shit in movies]” Those Bastards!”

Revengeofthesurfboardingkillerbikinivampiregirls is never going to watch Lincoln because I’m washing the upstairs carpet every day for the rest of my life, even though I live in a bungalow with wooden floors.

You see Hitchcock’s wife is “almost” having an affair……… Ya she doesn’t even do it. There’s your main problem with the film.

Otherwise It’s fairly well acted, is thankfully short .
There are other things wrong with this film, but I just made this to get my biography movie rant out there so I’m done.

5/10 chainsaws on the chainsaw scale.