By Jonathan Monovich.
A lot of people talk about the scary Hitchcock, the manipulative Hitchcock, or the anti-feminist Hitchcock, but in looking at his films I wanted to see what really were the themes and where the humanity was in his work.”
Mark Cousins
Mark Cousins has dedicated his life to deciphering the language of cinema. His oeuvre is a true gift to film lovers, and his passion for the moving image is infectious. Cousins is a superb historian, visionary, and storyteller, and his work has been incredibly impactful in developing the next generation of students of film. The Story of Film: An Odyssey (2011), Cousins’ fifteen hour documentary, chronicling the birth of film through 2011, is among the greatest comprehensive studies of film. It is a brave undertaking and a joyous experience, recounting iconic moments from the Lumière brothers/Georges Méliès’ pioneering early films and the 100+ years that followed. Before Cousins’ revered career as a documentarian, he first told The Story of Film in print. His writing is equally as informative, though Cousins has developed great talent as a filmmaker over the years. Cousins possesses a rare ability to both curate the perfect movie moments to further his ideas and delicately analyze them for grand effect. His knowledge is wide spanning, and Cousins uniquely approaches The Story of Film: An Odyssey with a global lens. He has since delivered the next chapter with The Story of Film: A New Generation (2021), which remains optimistic about film’s continuous ability to fascinate audiences through the medium’s poignant capabilities.
Cousins’ intelligible, international outlook on cinema also helped him to become Alex Cox’s successor as the host of the BBC’s beloved Moviedrome program. His well-respected expertise also found Cousins interviewing many of the greatest contemporary directors, including Martin Scorsese, Paul Schrader, and David Lynch for the BBC’s Scene by Scene series. Scene by Scene offers some charismatic conversations between Cousins and many of the most important figures in recent film history. Other notable works in Cousins’ catalogue include The Story of Looking (2021), a personal exploration of the importance of visual experience in Cousins’ life, Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (2018), an enlightening exploration of the history of women directors, and The Eyes of Orson Welles (2018), a genuine appreciation of Welles’ work and a deep dive in to the way he thought. The most interesting aspect of Cousins’ filmography is that his style is constantly evolving. The same holds for My Name is Alfred Hitchcock (2022). Hitchcock was and remains one of the most influential figures of film history, yet Cousins has found a way to approach the master of suspense in a new way. In theme with Hitchcock’s love for trickery, My Name is Alfred Hitchcock is presented as an interview between Cousins and Hitchcock. Obviously, Hitchcock passed away in 1980, though Actor Alistair McGowan’s impersonation of Hitchcock is uncanny. McGowan’s voice work is quite convincing, and hearing him as Hitchcock explain why he chose to film certain scenes in a specific way makes it seem as if My Name is Alfred Hitchcock is a long lecture from Hitchcock himself. Just as he does with his other films, Cousins is thoughtful in how he approaches the material. Cousins is keen to cover moments from all parts of Hitchcock’s long spanning career and not just the classics. Cousins is also able to cleverly combine these moments into six specific categories: escape, desire, loneliness, time, fulfillment, and height. Though My Name is Alfred Hitchcock is undoubtedly a well put together addition to the world of Hitch studies, perhaps the most interesting aspect of the film is Cousins’ bold choice in offering Hitchcock’s takes on elements of contemporary society. By putting words into Hitchcock’s mouth so to speak with this scripted/fictionalized narrative, viewers will leave with more questions than answers. This is by design, inventively finding a way to bring fresh air to Hitchcock discourse.
My Name is Alfred Hitchcock is now exclusively in theaters via Cohen Media Group.
In The Story of Film: An Odyssey, which I believe to be essential viewing, you preface the documentary by saying that films are driven by ideas, rather than money. I’m curious, how did the idea for My Name Is Alfred Hitchcock come about?
The idea came from my producer who said to me ‘it’s been about 100 years since the first Hitchcock film’. There have been so many films and books about Hitchcock, and I thought ‘no way! I don’t want to add the overload.’ Then, I said ‘there’s a way to do this where Hitchcock comes back from the dead and talks to us in the era of TikTok’.
In your Scene by Scene interview with Brian De Palma you’re clever to mention that De Palma was once quoted saying “Hitchcock is grammar.” In My Name is Alfred Hitchcock, you are very methodical with your approach, breaking down very specific examples and meticulously categorizing Hitchcock’s work into six categories, presenting the material very clearly as if it were grammar. In The Story of Film: An Odyssey you also mention that passion and innovation drive films. Both are very apparent in My Name is Alfred Hitchcock. Given Hitchcock’s incredible legacy, he’s someone who has been the subject of many books and documentaries. How difficult was it to keep this level of focus and approach Hitchcock studies in a new direction?
Can I just say you’ve obviously done your research. Thank you, my friend! What an interesting question. You’re right. Hitchcock is grammar. He’s in the DNA of cinema, so why say anything new about him? I think my answer to your question is that society changes. Each time we have a social change, we look back at the great artists of previous times with new eyes and a fresh lens. That’s what’s happened here. After Hitchcock died, things like #MeToo happened, and filmmakers were looked at with a feminist lens and other types of lenses. I made this film in the COVID era, and I asked what are some of the less usual themes of Hitchcock’s work like solitude and fulfillment. A lot of people talk about the scary Hitchcock, the manipulative Hitchcock, or the anti-feminist Hitchcock, but in looking at his films I wanted to see what really were the themes and where the humanity was in his work.
At the end of the film, it’s said that Hitchcock’s voice is still alive in a figurative way via the excellent voicework by Alistair McGowan, but in a way, his voice does quite literally live on with artificial intelligence. I personally appreciate the approach you took. Can you discuss why you went the way you did, and I’m curious what your opinion is on documentaries that have gone the other route like The Andy Warhol Diaries (2022) for example?
I think any new technology has its creative possibilities and its ghetto possibilities, where you get stuck in a really conventional way of doing something. What was really interesting for me for this film was the script. It’s a fully fictional script. None of these words are Hitchcock’s words. I thought the script was slightly funny; then, when I gave to Alistair, it was funnier. You can see how a really talented actor in the real world can do things that you couldn’t imagine. I’ve worked with Tilda Swinton, Jane Fonda, and loads of people, but to work with Alistair McGowan and see what he did with my script, which is interesting but not brilliant, and turn it into something a bit brilliant made me say ‘wow!’ I am in awe of that process. I’m not sure that AI can fully deliver that process.
In your film, Hitchcock says that “might I lie to you in this film? Oh yes I will.” He’s early on revealed to be a rule breaker, saying “when your character wants time to speed up, slow it down.” He also notes that he “realized movies are tricks.” Someone else who I think thought similarly was Orson Welles, particularly with his film F for Fake (1973). In your film The Eyes of Orson Welles , you discuss Welles’ fascination with the Thorne Miniature Rooms at the Art Institute of Chicago, which I too have been fascinated by my whole life having grown up in the Chicago area. I couldn’t find anything to suggest that Hitchcock was too, but given that you have him say he “approached films as if they’re a house to explore,” in My Name is Alfred Hitchcock, I’m curious if you think that Hitchcock would have also been influenced by the Thorne Rooms.
Yes, definitely! Hitchcock was so interested in architecture and rooms. Psycho (1960) was a lot about rooms and North by Northwest (1959) is also a lot about rooms. So many Hitchcock films are about rooms, how you escape them, and the rooms next-door. It’s a very unusual question. I think it’s one of the most interesting ones I’ve been asked [laughs]. Thank you for it! Hitchcock would have loved the Thorne Miniature Rooms. Think of that crane shot in Notorious (1946). It starts like an architect’s vision of a room and then slowly goes down to Ingrid Bergman holding a key in her hand. Hitchcock was so interested not only in architecture but also in miniatures. You make a really good point, and I think he would have loved those rooms.
The terrible things don’t cancel out the good things. There are so many terrible things happening in the world at the moment, and in the past as well, but we don’t need to feel guilty about having moments of rapture or pleasure because we can’t fix everything.”
One of the aspects of My Name is Alfred Hitchcock that I found to be most interesting is how you offer opinions on how you think Hitchcock would have responded to elements of modern society like cellphones and the internet. Apart from his incredible influence as a filmmaker, I would argue that Hitchcock was equally as influential as a marketer. Take for example the no late admission policy for Psycho or the trailers for his films in which Hitchcock inserts himself into different scenes. The trailer for Frenzy (1972) is among my favorites. The only other director I can think of who used similar practices was Peter Bogdanovich with the trailer for What’s Up, Doc? (1972) as an example. How do you think Hitchcock would have adapted in today’s media landscape? Also, do you think if directors were to be more involved in films’ marketing that it would help bring a return to auteur driven cinema, or do you that will never happen again?
I think that Hitchcock was not a snob. He didn’t think that he was working in an elite environment and that the marketing people had to do all of the other work. He really believed that he could use his persona and his sense of humor to his advantage. Of course he would have taken to TikTok with alacrity. He would have loved the new technologies and the new ways of getting to audiences, particularly through humor. There’s this lovely word in the English language, ‘ludic,’ which means playful and modern. Hitchock was very ‘ludic.’ I think he would have loved all of the new technologies and not been suspicious of them at all.
In the film it’s said from the perspective of Hitchcock that “I wanted to walk into your world and perhaps melt into your thoughts.” I think its irrefutable that he successfully did that with many viewers. There have also been plenty Hitchcockian films over the years, with some of the most famous being Brian De Palma’s Dressed to Kill (1980), Roman Polanski’s Frantic (1988), and Jonathan Demme’s Last Embrace (1979) for example. Who in your mind is keeping the Hitchockian genre of cinema alive today, and what are some examples of recent films that you would deem to be Hitchockian? Also, given your deep dive into thinking from the mind of Hitchock in My Name is Alfred Hitchcock, how do you think Hitchcock would feel about these films?
It’s funny that you mention those three filmmakers as I know all of those people. I have had those conversations about Hitchcock with them. I think it’s clear if you’re doing something really fundamental, you’re not going to be as swept away by the new fashion in cinema. In the case of Hitchcock, I think Bong Joon-ho’s Parasite (2019) is super Hitchcockian. I would also argue in some ways that Barry Jenkins is very influenced by Hitchcock, particularly with Moonlight (2016). Anyone who really understands where to put the camera at the right moment and anyone who really articulates that a camera is a point of view are in some way influenced by Hitchcock.
Something I’ve always found fascinating on Hitchcock is that the French critics helped legitimize him in a way, particularly with the Hitchcock/Truffaut book. I believe there is a universal appeal with Hitchock’s films given the themes that you explore in My Name is Alfred Hitchcock. Given that you are an expert in approaching film from a global lens, I’m curious have you come across anything interesting about other countries’ perceptions of Hitchcock through your research?
I’ve worked all over the place, including India, Iran, and Russia, but wherever you go, people know about Hitchcock. The reason is because he’s doing something really fundamental. He’s not tinkering with the surface of cinema. He goes right down into the basic questions, narrative questions, psychology questions, and formal questions about where to put the camera, what is point of view, when do you want your audience to feel that they’re in the mind of the character, and when do you want to take your audience out of the mind of the character and observe them from a distance. Hitchcock really understood all of that. It’s no surprise that he’s still the lingua franca and that a lot of people still talk about him around the world.
In the film, Hitchcock says “I studied desire like Charles Darwin studied earth worms” and also that “beyond suspense and glamor films are about loneliness.” It’s then said that “Escape and desire are rather alike. They are responses to life’s realities.” I think given impact the pandemic had and the increasing atrocities in the world, loneliness is a reality that many feel but films help give us comfort. Your film 40 Days to Learn Film (2020) during the lockdowns is a prime example. How do you think Hitchcock’s films help combat loneliness despite their subjects experiencing loneliness?
The terrible things don’t cancel out the good things. There are so many terrible things happening in the world at the moment, and in the past as well, but we don’t need to feel guilty about having moments of rapture or pleasure because we can’t fix everything. If tonight you go and watch your favorite Hitchcock film on your own or with someone you love, you can definitely give yourself permission to get into that world. Then, we can reencounter everything else that’s going on in the world afterwards. I think My Name is Alfred Hitchcock is sort of saying this is entertaining and there are a lot of bad things happening, but we can take time to enjoy the rapture of this man’s art.
One of my favorite quotes comes from Peter Bogdanovich, saying “I don’t like to call films old films. No one ever says have you read that old play by Shakespeare or have you read that old book by Steinbeck, or have you heard that old symphony by Mozart. Nobody ever says that. It’s only old movies. Well, I don’t believe in that. I think they’re older movies made in an earlier period, but they’re not old. If you haven’t seen them, they’re new.”1 I think many are accustomed to what are now considered to be Hitchock’s classics like Vertigo (1958), Psycho, Rear Window (1954), and North by Northwest. I’m not someone who needs convincing, but as film studies as an academic discipline continues to change, what would be your advice to encourage students to watch the older/lesser known films of Alfred Hitchcock like his work from the silent era?
I would say the rapture and the joy is out there. It costs almost nothing to see something that might change your life.
Endnote
1. Hulin, Adam. “BY BOGDANOVICH: A Career Retrospective Interview with Peter Bogdanovich.” YouTube, ElDoradoRoad, 14 Nov. 2023, www.youtube.com/watch?v=16cNmd1mAs0.
Jonathan Monovich is a Chicago-based writer and a regular contributor for Film International. His writing has also been featured in Film Matters, Bright Lights Film Journal, and PopMatters.