Review: North By Northwest

Ad exec Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant) gets mistaken for someone named George Kaplan and is promptly kidnapped by thugs. And so it begins. Eva Marie Saint plays a mysterious woman on a train, James Mason is a dastardly villain, with Martin Landau his henchman. Jessie Royce Landis plays Thornhill’s mother who is absolutely no help to him at all, whilst Philip Ober turns up as Mr. Townsend, and Leo G. Carroll plays an important, shadowy figure observing Thornhill’s plight in rather detached fashion.

This 1959 film is a lot of people’s favourite Alfred Hitchcock (“The 39 Steps”, “Strangers on a Train”, “Vertigo”) film, or at least it seems to be Top 5 for many. I currently don’t even have it in my Top 10 of the 39 Hitchcock films I’ve seen, but make no mistake, it’s a rock-solid piece of ‘Wrong Man’ thriller entertainment. Hitch is in such full command here as a director, that he manages to time his requisite cameo with his on-screen credit appearing. Personally, I think “The 39 Steps” is by far a better ‘Wrong Man’ film, as is the non-Hitchcock “Mirage”, but Hitch is unquestionably a ‘Master’ orchestrator/conductor here.

This is a really classy-looking film from a director who knows what he’s doing, and has been aided by crew members who are also talented and in full command of their skills. Chief among these is the great Bernard Herrmann (“The Day the Earth Stood Still”, “Citizen Kane”, “Cape Fear”, “Vertigo”, “Psycho”) with one of his best-ever scores for Hitch. Saul Bass is also on hand to give us one of cinema’s most memorable title designs. It’s not as noticeable as in some of his other films for Hitchcock, but the Robert Burks (“Strangers on a Train”, “To Catch a Thief”) cinematography is very nice, as is the entire production design. James Mason’s house near Mt. Rushmore is one of the more memorable and unusual-looking movie homes, I must say. There’s lots of cool overhead shots and high angles, and every shot looks perfectly designed, aside from the shoddy projection shots. This is a really lovely-looking film that you can tell was heavily storyboarded and planned out. Lines/rows are a constant theme or motif throughout the film, visually. The success of all of these sorts of films depends largely on solid plotting that keeps you in the dark (like the protagonist is) without losing your attention. This film, as scripted by Ernest Lehman (“Sweet Smell of Success”, “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?”), indeed does have a solid plot. It’s also got quite a bit of wit, most of it in the scenes between Grant and his on-screen mother Jessie Royce Landis, who is hilarious.

For me, the flaws are minor, including being far too long at over two hours. There’s a few moments at the back-end of the film that could’ve easily been excised to tighten it up a bit. I also wasn’t entirely fussed with Hitch’s casting of two somewhat unlikeable lead actors to play our romantic leads. I can easily understand why Hitch cast Cary Grant for the lead in this. I just personally would’ve preferred someone a little less smugly charming, Jimmy Stewart (who served Hitch well in several films, chiefly the classic “Vertigo”), Gregory Peck (from the aforementioned and seriously underrated “Mirage”), possibly even Kirk Douglas (Yes, he could be smug too, but also fiery, passionate, and interesting). Having said that, Hitch does take the opportunity to use the supposedly suave and sophisticated Grant and have him play a mummy’s boy who gets himself caught up in a crazy conspiracy his mum doesn’t even believe. As poor as the drunk-driving scene in question looks due to typically shoddy projection work (one of the few sour notes in a lot of Hitchcock films, sadly), it’s a genuinely funny scene. Grant is made to look like a drunken fool, albeit entirely beyond his control. Grant is certainly better than co-star Eva Marie Saint, as the requisite cool Hitchcock blonde. Saint’s chilly demeanour does tend to give the impression immediately that she’s not just the love interest here, which is far too early to be clueing the audience in, I think. She’s also a little dull, to be honest. She’s not the worst Hitchcock leading lady nor the best, but even Grant makes a more favourable impression than her. That’s a shame because whilst Saint’s face is a bit frozen, her character is interestingly layered.

Thankfully, the supporting cast are top-notch including the aforementioned Landis (Who, it has to be said is quite clearly too young to play Grant’s mum, but it’s forgivable). James Mason could effortlessly play good guys, pathetic losers like Humbert Humbert in “Lolita”, and urbane villains like the one he plays here. It’s a terrific, classy performance from a true pro. Leo G. Carroll also plays one of his better parts for Hitchcock, despite one helluva unconvincing hair piece. Almost running off with the film is the intense-looking Martin Landau, as Mason’s trigger-happy right-hand man. I think this, not his Oscar-winning turn in “Ed Wood” (it wasn’t even the best performance in the film) represents his best screen work.

Overlong, but well-scripted, crisply shot, and entertaining thriller from The Master. I perhaps would’ve liked more accessible leads, but most of the technical aspects and a great supporting cast help a great deal. Good fun, if not great fun.

Rating: B-