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

Bourne and James Bond movies put me to sleep. They are very boring.

This movie is one of my favorite from Hitchcock. In my opinion it is not boring in the least. The dialogue, characters ect was very good.

There is nothing wrong with it being prim and proper. Eva and Carey sexual attraction in this movie is very sexy. Not everybody cusses. I really like the wit, grace class and beauty in North By Northwest.

Eve elegant beautiful cloths in this movie is timeless.

Not everybody acts the way they are portrayed in modern movies. No movie is complete reality. Some realism in film is good, but not all the time. It’s nice to escape from reality. North By Northwest is perfect for that kind of situation.

I adore classic movies. North By Northwest is one of the few action movie I enjoy immensely. I certainly don't agree there are no good modern movies. Assassination By Jessie James By The Coward Robert Ford, Winters Bone, The Prestige, Eternal Sunshine Of A Spotless Mind ect are very good movies.

reply

It's strange . . . but NxNW is timeless . . . even the clothes--that suit Thornhill is wearing I wouldn't mind at all . . . and, even today, a woman wearing the clothes Eve has on would be still most fashionable . . . and on it goes, a timeless tale . . .

reply

Well, congratulations on a thread that has garnered 200+ responses over five years; that's something.

Now...North by Northwest is not yours nor everyone's cup of tea, so that's fine.

And your dad has a point that for its era it was "cutting" edge in terms of tension, comedy+adventure mishmash, sexy faux-"sophistication" for the pop culture to be entertained by. Not to mention, technologically. And of course, it might not remain so if it were to be created as is but today.

That said...you could work on a higher-level perspective on what constitutes excitement or entertainment--not so that you prefer North By Northwest over Bourne or whatever...but so you can see why others always will really find North By Northwest more exciting and entertaining than Bourne or whatever. Basically other people are unlike you--and you can either process that fact erroneously (they are wrong) or accurately (they differ). And if you want insight--even garner comprehension of why they differ and why they're no more "wrong" about excitement or entertainment than you.

For example...the "stagey" dialogue of most if not all Hitchcock films and 50's films...stilted and tellingly "scripted" in ways...is not accident. Rather its a style. It's not that they didn't know better--its that they were going for an effect. Just as overlapping, improvosational style dialogue a la Robert Altman is a different effect.

And maybe you prefer one over the other...but it misses the point to assume one is an improvement upon the other. Both are simply choices, like whether you want background music or not or whether you want the music to be trumpets or violins for the scene.

Its ALL fabrication for your mood and entertainment, after all.

Or the premises that you don't find the plot as enjoyable because they choose convoluted, unrealistic ways to try to kill.

That's the point and part of the fantasy. This isn't a treatise on real-world killings, and if you watched one you would NOT likely be entertained. This is an adventure that you try to join or refuse to join. Just like when you go to Bourne, you buy into its fantasies about its stylizations of killing and chasing and whatever, or when you go to Fast and the Furious or The Godfather or whatever you then must buy into its different fantasy stylizations of killing and chasing and whatever--all for the sake of a particular fabricated adventure for entertainment.

So its just kind of missing the point to simplify it to "the cropduster isn't exciting" because of its storytelling style. Sure, it doesn't work for you. What that means is...too bad for you; you've missed out on experiencing what the entire industry of filmmakers generally considers to be a very exciting scene. It's not that you have higher taste or insight rather just different--and the result is that it sucks more to be you. Because your life would be more entertained if you found the cropduster scene to be a masterpiece. Oh well.

I'm sure nostalgia plays a part in some peoples' assignment of merit to this or any old story, just as novelty plays a part in some peoples' assignment of merit to any new story. Just, you inaccurately use nostalgia as a depreciation of the merit, as if it is a less-than-valid driver of entertainment than the alternative. It's not. People like the style of old movies (if they do) and others like the style of new movies. Nostalgia counts. It's like saying "the clothes are out of style so its not as entertaining as movies with modern clothes" which misses the point of those who are entertained literally by seeing the old-fashioned clothes!

At any rate its not really supposed to "sell today." That would be wrong. It represents an era. What sells today would not sell back then and vice versa (for the most part). Though, technologically of course you could probably wow 50's eyes with 2015 cgi and whatnot--that would generate time-machine excitement, period. But storytelling style? Nah. Whatever you think sounds like good dialog in a spy adventure (Bourne?) would likely be found unentertaining if not even a bit repulsive to Hitchcock and his 50's audience if you could somehow time machine it back to them. Though, on the other hand, some (including Hitch) would likely enjoy freedom from the Hays code that folks have now that he so enjoyed teasing back in his day.

Finally if you like 12 Angry Men...perhaps its more about the "timeless" qualities inherent in a tight character drama about a fairly timeless issue (justice) which some stories have, inherently. But if you try to tell a pop culture adventure...you're going to imbue your story with "trendiness" etc which of course timestamps you.

Like...if you were to tell a scifi adventure of that day, even a really good one...you'd be hamstrung in Forbidden Planet territory like it or not. You literally couldn't have made a "timeless" scifi pop culture adventure back then...unlike a tight little stagey talky character interaction like 12 Angry Men which you can make and remake and could remake again years from now with few changes. All you really need is a room and some good actors to execute a very non-trendy script. Unlike NBNW, Bourne, Bond, Fast and the Furious, etc etc etc.




Now, this is a signature gun, and that is an optical palm reader.

reply

You might be missing the point that people watch films like this to SEE the way things were 'way back then' ... There's a quaintness and almost comforting innocence about them.

Many of us like modern films too and whe we want that kind of experience, we'll watch one. But sometimes we want THIS kind of experience.

Maybe try watching an older film not looking for a modern movie experience.

reply

Modern movie experiences are a cowner . . . so many flee to the classics . . . that golden age . . . and forget this nonsense we're subjected to today . . .

reply

It is the most quoted film of our time, if peer review means anyhing to you.

'Ne cherchez plus mon coeur, les bêtes l'ont mangé.' Baudelaire

reply

The thing that puzzled you was "acting". I know thats something you arent familiar with. And then there is this other thing you dont know called "plot". Nothing of that exists anymore. Most of todays "actors" cant "act" anymore. They just stand around with their own personality. The ugly inheritance of method acting. And then you had to deal with a working plot. OMG, poor content consumer. Next time have fun again with content freed up of all this disturbing things and some woke fascism as toping!

reply

How sad to be unable to step outside of your obviously very narrow comfort zone & enjoy quality film from an era of many quality films. North by Northwest is brilliant for any time.

reply