Alfred.
Hitchcock.
The Undisputed Master of Horror.
A filmmaker who effortlessly guided the hand of horror cinema in it’s halcyon days--and
whose unique blend of suspense and genuinely horrifying human motifs of fear led the way
for an entire generation of horror fans and filmmakers alike.
My favourite line about Hitchcock, is his description of cinematic suspense.
Picture two men sitting beside a table.
They’re talking at length for minutes on end--and then suddenly a bomb explodes from
beneath them.
Game over.
Pretty surprising, but oh well.
But now--picture that scene again, but this time--the audience knows exactly what’s
underneath the table--but the two men don’t--and the bomb keeps on ticking.
It’s a simple equation--but boy, has it done the trick.
Hello horror fans, what’s going on--and once again, welcome back to the scariest channel
on YouTube--Top 5 Scary Videos.
As per usual, I’ll be your horror host Jack Finch--as today, we curiously take a look
at the Top 5 Most Horrifying Hitchcock Horror Movies.
Roll the clip.
For the curious amongst you, that was from 1959’s North by Northwest--a fantastic demonstration
of Hitchcock’s work--that captures some of the most iconic scenes in the whole of
cinema--cropduster and a genuine idiot included.
Now--it’s important to note that--it goes without saying, but obviously Hitchcock has
created some of the most iconic works in the whole of cinema--and this--well, this is a
five point list.
You can see the problem here, right?
But--we’re sticking strictly horror---so, hopefully, it might make things a little easier.
Let’s begin.
Kicking off at Number 5 -- Rear Window, 1954
And for The Simpsons fans amongst you--you may remember a certain Bart Simpson being
in a very similar position--and whilst it’s certainly true that being referenced by that
show is an accolade in it’s own right--I’d say that yeah, Hitchock really *was* that
influential.
You see, it’s easy to argue sometimes that the classics were only successful because
no one had done it yet--and yeah, whilst that’s correct for some of his contemporaries--Hitchcock
really was in a league of his own.
He was one of the few filmmakers to master single location movies--and in doing that,
it earned him the incredibly complex and detailed set that Rear Window is filmed on--an exquisitely
crafted replica of one particularly iconic Greenwich Village Courtyard.
Again--when we talk about Hitchcock’s horror here, we have to remember that suspense was
the man’s modus operandi--and this film is the literal definition *of* suspense.
Based upon the 1942 short story, It Had to Be Murder by Cornell Woolrich--with a screeplay
from John Michael Hayes, Rear Window tells the tale of a man named Jeff--a fantastic
and adventerous photographer who has suffered a broken leg on his latest journey--and so
is wheelchair bound whilst he recovers in his Greenwhich Village apartment.
During this time, as the rear window of his apartment backs out into a busy and elaborate
courtyard--Jeff slowly starts to learn about the intricate lives of his many neighbours.
During a powerful heat wave--his neighbours tend to keep their windows open to stay cool--but
on one certain stormy evening, Jeff overhears a woman scream a blood curdling scream--pleading
for her life--and suddenly, he discovers that there’s a killer somewhere in the courtyard.
Honestly, this film is *actually* brilliant--and for people trying to get into Hitchcock’s
work, I’d recommend this is a starting point.
It’s entirely accessible in its simplicity--but it’s execution is second to none.
It’s almost strange to be watching a genuinely gripping film to then get snapped back to
reality to realise this film was made in 1954.
Also, it stars James Stewart as Jeff--who is historically fantastic in this movie, and
there’s an absolutely knockout performance from the legendary Grace Kelly.
It’s Hitchcock 101.
Swinging in at Number 4--Rebecca, 1940
A film which, for all intents and purposes--wasn’t exactly Hitchcock 101--but instead, a frighteningly
different foray into a burgeoning facet of his potency as a filmmaker.
You see, it goes without saying, but Hitchcock first cut his teeth in his native Britain
as a silent filmmaker--carving out a new path for the horror and thriller genre.
Eventually, with success, soon came international acclaim--and that caused Hollywood to take
note--as they do.
Rebecca--for the sum of its parts--was Hitchcock’s first American film--and it *does* stand out
because of that.
In many ways, Rebecca is an island in Hitchcock’s work--standing on its own significance--and
that perhaps is the reason why it was so impactful.
For all intents and purposes, Rebecca is a gothic horror--it is a brooding film, deeply
psychological--haunting in many ways that modern cinema struggles to capture.
It’s grandiose at all the right notes and it paints itself as a ghost story--without
a ghost--but hey, that’s Hitchcock right?
Based upon the Daphne du Maurier novel of the same name written in 1938--Rebecca typifies
the role of the malevolent housekeeper--a classic staple of Gothic Horror--and the vessel
in which this film goes from being just a drama, to a deeply unsettling psychological
thriller.
From a narrative perspective, this film was way ahead of its time--and although it encapsulates
the plot of du Maurier’s novel, Hitchcock’s handle of the cinematic lens took it to the
next level.
It tells the tale of a young woman, played by Joan Fontaine--who although is never named
in both the book and the film, falls in love with an aristocratic widower, a man named
Maxim de Winter--played by the one and only Laurence Olivier.
The pair marry, and he soon takes her back to Manderley, his extravagant mansion by the
sea.
There, we meet his housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers--and there, we have Rebecca.
Listen, although the stars of this film, Olivier and Fontaine are remarkable in it--Rebecca
is terrifying because of the performance of Judith Anderson, who plays Mrs. Danvers.
She is *impeccable* in this movie.
She’s terrifying.
She really is.
Why’s it called Rebecca?
Well, watch the movie and find out.
Next up at Number 3--The Birds, 1963
Which--let’s face it, you’ve all been waiting for, as it is in fact--perhaps Hitchcock’s
most explicit horror--but it’s also one of the strangest, and most mysterious horror
movies ever made.
Which might sound like a bit of an overstatement--but hear me out.
If you’re asking me, The Bird’s is more cosmic horror than anything else--it’s the
definition of the unknown.
It’s a small town, that seemingly gets savagely attacked by a swarm of crows, seagulls and
sparrows.
Why?
We don’t know.
In fact, Hitchcock made a point of it to never tell us or explain the matter.
He was deliberately ambiguous--in fact, he invited the audience to theorise as to why
these birds are savagely attacking the poor townspeople--and then gave no answer.
In some cases, he outright refused to answer.
A virus?
Nope.
Mad bird disease.
Nope.
Now, for those of you that haven’t seen this film--you might be thinking--birds?
Really?
Scary?
But--please, this is Hitchcock we’re talking about--the man can make a bouquet of flowers
scary.
Again, based upon the resounding 1952 novella of the same name by Daphne du Maurier, The
Birds tells the tale of Melanie Daniels, a young socialite who falls smitten with a lawyer
named Mitch in a chance encounter at a pet store--and shortly takes a trip with him to
his quaint, coastal Californian town of Bodega Bay.
After a romantic excursion, Melanie strangely gets attacked and badly injured by… a seagull.
It strikes her as odd--and soon as the day’s go by--more and more birds seem to be converging
over the town.
Standing in lines on unassuming fences--covering children’s playgrounds--flocking on people’s
roofs.
And then--we have The Birds.
It’s simple.
It’s effective.
And it’s genuinely terrifying.
A little side note--my nan actually showed me this film when I was about 6 years old--and
although it was the middle of the day, I was completely and utterly horrified.
Hey--maybe that’s what instilled in me a passion for horror fiction.
Thanks Nan--and thank you Hitchcock.
Coming it at Number 2--Vertigo, 1958
Pound for pound--I’d say this is Hitchcock’s best movie.
Obviously, it’s a tough one to call--but the convergence of every theme he ever laid
out on screen--seems to find its place in the frames of 1958’s Vertigo.
First and foremost--this film is beautiful--and not only is it beautiful, but from a technical
perspective it was way--way ahead of its time.
Now, I know it’s easy to sometimes get wrapped up in the ostentatious nature of the grass
being greener way back when--but forget about the sycophants of cinema--this film is truly
a masterpiece--and much like the more contemporary classics of horror cinema--it’s in repeat
viewings where Vertigo truly shines.
It’s a film that encompasses so much--that it’s impossible to take it all in one sitting.
It’s a vertigo of the mind--almost.
It’s a false sense of rotational movement--something not quite right about a frame, or a certain
sequence jarring you.
Horror cinema *can* do that--and Hitchcock did that.
A film can have a physical effect.
That’s maybe not a weird thought now--but, in 1958?
Phew.
The man was a sorcerer.
Based upon the 1954 French crime novel, From Among the Dead by Boileau-Narcejac--Vertigo
stars the remarkable James Stewart as a former police detective, Scottie Ferguson--who is
forced into an early retirement following a traumatic incident in the line of duty,
which inflicted Scottie with a severe fear of heights--as well as vertigo, a dizzying
sensation of whirling and a loss of balance.
I mean, the clinical definition of vertigo kind of already sums up this film--but yeah,
you get the point.
As the film slowly unravels itself, Scottie is hired by an old college acquaintance, a
private investigator who suspects his wife of infidelity after she’s been acting strangely--and
from there, we have it.
Now, there are so many twists and turns when it comes to this movie--many of them visually
as well as narrative--and it's a disorientating experience to sit through.
Really, it is.
It’s dizzying.
The heights of this film are lofty--and the implications of ever frame run so damn deep
that we could probably do an entire video on it.
Vertigo guys.
It’s the best.
And finally, coming in at our Number 1 spot--Psycho, 1960
Because--the truth of the matter is--I’d usually reserve this position for something
that was perhaps a little off the wall.
You know--something that isn’t quite expected--something that doesn’t find its way to the top of
everyone else's list--because that’s boring, right?
You guys want something fresh--you want a movie that you’d never heard of--you want
something new.
But--guys--this is a list about Alfred Hitchcock’s scariest films--and there is no doubting that
1960’s Psycho is unequivocal.
There is nothing that even comes close to it.
Psycho is the scariest film that he ever made.
Period.
No question.
Not only is it the scariest film that *he* ever made--it’s also one of the scariest
films *ever* made.
Really, it is.
Psycho is horrifying.
I mean--just watch.
The slow pacing of the door’s shadow--the shift of focus as Arbogast takes each step
up the staircase--the inverted aerial shot, of an indoor space--wait, what’s that--why
is it?
And then--Jarring, jagged violins.
And then--mother.
Bernard Herrmann’s music in that scene--as well as the entire movie, is second to none.
I mean, for me--that is one of the scariest scenes in the entire film--and that’s saying
something.
Although, the shower scene gets all of the love--and it deserves it-- because--what the
hell, this film is pretty much near perfection and we don’t have to pick and choose between
some of the greatest scenes in horror cinema because we can just watch the movie and see
them all unfold before our very eyes.
We can just sit down, and witness the master at work.
Psycho.
That’s all there is to it.
Well, there we have it horror fans--our list for the Top 5 Most Horrifying Hitchcock Horror
Movies--what did you guys think?
Do you agree?
Disagree?
Think there’s any more we can add to this list?
Let us know your thoughts down in the comment section below--as well as any choices picks
of your own.
Before we depart from today’s video, let’s first take a quick look at some of your more
creative comments from over the past few days.
Dan Abnormal says--
You guys really do a nice job getting in depth with *why* something is good or not.
--Hey, thanks Dan Abnormal--it’s pretty difficult to convey an elaborate thought in
such a short medium--but I’m glad it’s appreciated!
Cheers buddy.
Norwall says--
You’re the best!
--Awww, thanks dude!
Hey--this is becoming a really nice moment.
And finally, Dominic Van der Merwe says--
The village sucked!!!!!!
So did the twist omg.
First thing I have hated u say jack ever.
--Hey, thanks for bringing me back down to reality Dominic.
A balance in all things.
I guess you gotta take the rough with the smooth.
Thank you.
Well unfortunately on that note, that’s all we’ve got time for in today’s video--cheers
for sticking around all the way until the end.
If you were a fan of this video--or just Top 5 Scary Videos in particular, then please
be a dear and hit that thumbs up button--as well as that subscribe bell, and I’ll be
seeing you in the next one.