Jamaica Inn (1939) (75th Anniversary Edition)

[MikeyHitchFan]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

Frenzy is counted as a British film and it is quintessentially British.

If that's the case then Stage Fright would count as it was filmed there. Personally, I feel that once he came to America all his films are American as they were produced and financed here though U.S. studios.

[BluPat]

Amazing news! Never have seen this but will definitely pick it up!

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by MikeyHitchFan

If that's the case then Stage Fright would count as it was filmed there. Personally, I feel that once he came to America all his films are American as they were produced and financed here though U.S. studios.

Stage Fright is counted among his British films. I don't care how you "personally feel" about it, but there is a consensus on what are considered his British and his US films. Stage Fright and Frenzy have always been counted as the two British films he made after Hitchcock left for Hollywood.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

Frenzy is counted as a British film and it is quintessentially British.

They're welcome to it

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by octagon

They're welcome to it

I like it there (and I rather like Frenzy).

[Arkadin]

great news!!

[Scarface32]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

Frenzy is counted as a British film and it is quintessentially British.

It may have been set in the UK, it might have even been filmed there, but it was by a US company. So I don't count it as being British.

That would be like saying Roman Holiday is an Italian film, just because it was shot in Rome, Italy.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Double post

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

It may have been set in the UK, it might have even been filmed there, but it was by a US company. So I don't count it as being British.

That would be like saying Roman Holiday is an Italian film, just because it was shot in Rome, Italy.

I don't care about what you think, I care about what every book and Internet reference on Hitchcock and Frenzy thinks. Some of you guys behave like these things are being discussed for the first time and it's entirely up to you.

[Scarface32]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

I don't care about what you think, I care about what every book and Internet reference on Hitchcock and Frenzy thinks. Some of you guys behave like these things are being discussed for the first time and it's entirely up to you.

To say you "don't care" is a bit harsh, don't you think? People that write books are offering up an opinion, even if they state it as fact. No one throughout history has been 100% correct about anything, everything should be taken with a grain of salt.

How many times have history books been proven wrong decades later? Nothing is concrete. My opinion is just as valid as a book. But to say you "don't care"

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

To say you "don't care" is a bit harsh, don't you think? People that write books are offering up an opinion, even if they state it as fact. No one throughout history has been 100% correct about anything, everything should be taken with a grain of salt.

How many times have history books been proven wrong decades later? Nothing is concrete. My opinion is just as valid as a book. But to say you "don't care"

I don't subscribe to his forum fallacy that everything is down to individual opnion and therefore every fact can be bent to satisfy each individual's ego. I have read about twenty books on Hitchcock and his films, both for fun and because I wrote a dissertation on Vertigo at college. All these reference works published over many decades are of the same opinion on the nationality of Hitchcock's films and which ones are counted among his UK and US films. Now excuse me, but I rather orientate myself by that than by some random guy on the Internet. Btw. the nationality of a film is down to several factors and not just who put up the bulk of the money or who distributed it.

[Cinemach]

Originally Posted by NoirFan

I'm guessing you haven't sat through Number 17 then.

I agree. Hitch didn't make too many bad films, but this is the worst I've seen of his, and I've seen pretty much all of them. Number 17 is laughably bad, and I was certainly not surprised to read from himself that his direction of it was half-hearted.

Originally Posted by MikeyHitchFan

If that's the case then Stage Fright would count as it was filmed there. Personally, I feel that once he came to America all his films are American as they were produced and financed here though U.S. studios.

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

Stage Fright is counted among his British films. I don't care how you "personally feel" about it, but there is a consensus on what are considered his British and his US films. Stage Fright and Frenzy have always been counted as the two British films he made after Hitchcock left for Hollywood.

Stage Fright and Frenzy are both considered British films. The alchemy for filmic nationality is not fulproof across the board, and especially when it comes to Anglo-American productions this can become very muddled*. Without going into history and legislative lessons, nationality of a film is not determined solely on who financed it**, but weighted more towards where it was filmed, and the nationality of the principal participants (director, writer, cast, crew). For this reason Stage Fright and Frenzy, which were shot in Britain, by a British director, with largely British casts is enough to mark them in the annals of British filmmaking - but Dial M For Murder, even with its British setting (though not location), director, and star (Ray Milland), is not a British film.

*Indeed, there are several examples of British filmmaking dependent on American co-financing, or American stars
**particularly in this current age of multiple co-financiers that can come from many countries

[MikeyHitchFan]

Well then, you might consider Under Capricorn as a British film as it was also shot there with a British crew.

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by Cinemach

I Stage Fright and Frenzy are both considered British films. The alchemy for filmic nationality is not fulproof across the board, and especially when it comes to Anglo-American productions this can become very muddled*. Without going into history and legislative lessons, nationality of a film is not determined solely on who financed it**, but weighted more towards where it was filmed, and the nationality of the principal participants (director, writer, cast, crew). For this reason Stage Fright and Frenzy, which were shot in Britain, by a British director, with largely British casts is enough to mark them in the annals of British filmmaking[/SIZE]

More importantly, both were flagged as British productions.

Stage Fright was because of a curious period in British film history when, in 1948, the government tried to boost the market for local films by implementing a quota on the amount studios could take out of the country (just 25% of their profits), which simultaneously led to some studios boycotting the UK while others made their own films in the UK with the blocked funds after the UK government raised the annual quota of British films local theaters had to play to 45% (MGM's wave of 50s Robert Taylor swashbucklers shot in the UK was one direct result).

Frenzy was a result of another government incentive, the Eady Levy, where a percentage of every ticket sold went into a fund for the production of British films which foreign studios could access on wholly British films (the fund didn't 100% the films but it did reduce the risk considerably). There were also tax incentives for US studios to make British films - one reason for the explosion of US-backed British films in the 60s such as the Bond films.

[jjhlh]

Originally Posted by EVERYONE LIES

Under Capricorn is by far his worst film.

Perhaps, but I still enjoy that one and would love to see it on blu ray. It would look beautiful in all it's Technicolor glory.

I didn't realize that Hitch made Under Capricorn using extended takes, similar to what he did with Rope.

As far as Jamaica Inn is concerned, the trailer looks very impressive from a quality perspective. The sound also appears significantly improved from my current dvd version. Looking forward to this one!

[GrouchoFan]

Originally Posted by Scarface32

... No one throughout history has been 100% correct about anything...

Clearly, you've never met my wife!

[Aclea]

Originally Posted by GrouchoFan

Clearly, you've never met my wife!

Ron Perlman's advice on how to stay married for over 30 years:

Learn how to say the following:

"You are so right, darling."

[Akijama]

Artwork:

[Professor Echo]

Another crap Cohen cover. This one just screams out to the masses: "Hey, buy me, uncontrollable pleasures lie within!"

[RiFiFi1955]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

Another crap Cohen cover. This one just screams out to the masses: "Hey, buy me, uncontrollable pleasures lie within!"

I am just not a fan of the big grey C taking up half the cover. I don't like the C anyway because Criterion already has the C claimed haha but seriously just too big.