O Homem Errado (1956) / The Wrong Man (1956)

 

O ano é 1956. Alfred Hitchcock ainda levaria alguns anos para fazer seus filmes mais celebrados, aqueles pelos quais ele é lembrado até hoje. Mas ele já era o Mestre do Suspense. Tanto que seu nome vem acima do título em “O Homem Errado”. Tanto que sua voz pode ser ouvida antes de o filme começar, dizendo que este é um filme diferente para ele porque é baseado em uma história real. “Baseado em uma história real”: palavras que causam um arrepio na espinha de qualquer cinéfilo. 

The year is 1956. Alfred Hitchcock would take a few more years to make his most celebrated movies, the ones he’s reminded for until today. But he was already the Master of Suspense. So much that his name comes above the title in “The Wrong Man”. So much that his voice can be heard before the movie starts, claiming that this was a different movie for him because it’s based on a true story. “Based on a true story”: words that give every cinephile chills. 

Quatorze de janeiro de 1953. A vida de Christopher Emanuel Balestrero vai mudar para sempre. Nosso Chris (Henry Fonda) é um músico que trabalha à noite, e chega cedinho em casa onde estão seus dois filhos, Robert e Gregory, e sua esposa Rose (Vera Miles), que atualmente está sofrendo com uma dor de dentes. Quando Chris tenta arranjar um empréstimo para pagar o dentista, ele é confundido com um ladrão e horas depois é levado para a delegacia.

January 14th, 1953. Christopher Emanuel Balestrero’s life will change forever. Our Chris (Henry Fonda) is a musician who works at night, and at the wee hours arrives home to his two sons, Robert and Gregory, and his wife Rose (Vera Miles), who currently is suffering from a toothache. When Chris tries to get a loan to pay the dentist, he’s mistaken for a robber and hours later is taken to the police station.

Chris esteve nos mesmos lugares que o ladrão. A caligrafia de Chris se parece com a do ladrão. Testemunhas identificam Chris como o ladrão. Sob a trilha sonora sinistra de Bernard Herrmann, Chris é preso. Conforme ele vai absorvendo o que acabou de acontecer com ele, a câmera de Hitchcock gira ao redor de sua cabeça, e nós nos sentimos zonzos, como o personagem.

Chris has been to the same places as the robber. Chris’ handwriting looks similar to the robber’s. Witnesses identify him as the robber. Under Bernard Herrmann’s eerie soundtrack, Chris is incarcerated. As Chris is absorbing what just happened to him, Hitchcock’s camera does a loop around his head, and we feel dizzy, just like the character.

Ser preso por um crime que não cometemos é um medo válido para nós, humanos que amamos a liberdade. E se amamos a liberdade precisamos temer também desgraças como a censura, o autoritarismo e os ditadores. Mas em vez de focar em Chris na cadeia, o filme muda de rumo e segue Chris e Rose tentando conseguir álibis.    

Being arrested for a crime we didn’t commit is a valid fear for most of us, freedom-loving human beings. And if we love freedom we should also be afraid of disgraces such as censorship, authoritarianism and dictators. But instead of focusing on Chris in jail, the film takes a turn and follows Chris and Rose trying to find alibis.

Hitchcock lidou com o tema do homem errado em muitos de seus filmes, como “O Pensionista” (1927) e “Os 39 Degraus” (1935), mas não tão abertamente quanto faz aqui, num filme que é, afinal, chamado O Homem Errado. Mas o que o fez escolher a história de Chris entre tantas de homens erroneamente encarcerados? A resposta está no prólogo: neste caso, alguns elementos são mais inacreditáveis do que qualquer ficção.  

Hitchcock had dealt with the trope of the wrong man in several of his films, such as “The Lodger” (1927) and “The 39 Steps” (1935), but not as openly as he did here, in a film that is, after all, called The Wrong Man. But why he chose Chris’ story among so many of wrongly imprisoned men? The answer is in the prologue: in this case, many elements are stranger than fiction.

Eu chamo nosso protagonista de Chris, mas os policiais e Rose o chamam de Manny, apelido de Emanuel. Eu nunca entendi a ideia de ter um nome do meio que raramente - quase nunca! - combina com o primeiro nome. Nomes do meio tiveram origem na Roma Antiga e voltaram à moda no século XIX. Aqui no Brasil usamos dois sobrenomes e raramente um nome do meio.

I keep calling our main character Chris, but the cops and Rose call him Manny, short for Emanuel. I never understood the idea of having a middle name that not always - almost never! - matches the first one. Middle names were originated in Ancient Rome and caught up again in the 19th century. Here in Brazil we use two surnames but rarely a middle name.

Vera Miles voltaria a trabalhar com Hitchcock em “Psicose” (1960). Nascida Vera June Ralston em 1930, foi coroada Miss Kansas em 1948 e foi finalista do Miss América. Ela então mudou-se para Hollywood e adotou o sobrenome do marido como nome artístico. Seu primeiro trabalho creditado veio em 1952 e o último em 1995, quando ela se aposentou das telas. Em “O Homem Errado”, sua Rose fica mais e mais paranoica conforme ela vê que não há saída para Chris - ela até começa a achar que o marido é mesmo culpado!   

Vera Miles would work again with Hitchcock in “Psycho” (1960). Born Vera June Ralston in 1930, she was crowned Miss Kansas in 1948 and was a finalist in Miss America. She then moved to Hollywood and adopted her first husband’s last name as her stage name. Her first credited role came in 1952 and her last in 1995, when she retired from the screen. In “The Wrong Man” her Rose gets more and more paranoid as she sees there is no way out for Chris - she even starts thinking her husband is guilty after all!

Interpretando o advogado de Chris, Frank O’Connor, temos Anthony Quayle. O ator britânico teve longa carreira no teatro clássico e experiência como combatente durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial. Ele escreveu dois romances e uma autobiografia e virou Cavaleiro em 1985. Um comentário no Letterboxd mencionou que este é o terceiro filme de Hitchcock a ter cenas de tribunal, depois de dois que eu ainda não vi: “Mulher Pública” (1928) e “Agonia de Amor” (1947). As sequências no tribunal com Frank são breves, caso contrário ficariam enfadonhas.

Playing Chris’ lawyer Frank O’Connor we have Anthony Quayle. This British actor had a long run in classical theater and experience in combat during World War II. He wrote two novels and an autobiography and was knighted in 1985. A Letterboxd comment noticed this is the third Hitchcock film that is briefly a courtroom drama, after two I haven’t seen: “Easy Virtue” (1928) and “The Paradine Case” (1947). The sequences in the court with Frank are brief, or else they would be very boring.

Nas mãos de Hitchcock, o que poderia ser só mais um melodrama se torna algo a mais. Com Rose se culpando pelo que aconteceu com Chris, ela passa por um médico. Hitchcock já tinha lidado com os mistérios da mente no menosprezado “Quando Fala o Coração”, de 1945. Aqui, Rose é descrita como prisioneira de “um labirinto de terror”. Por um breve momento, Hitchcock faz de Rose tão protagonista quanto Chris. Porque se é difícil para o homem errado se reerguer, é ainda mais para uma mulher enganada.  

On Hitchcock’s hand, what could have been just another melodrama becomes something else. With Rose blaming herself for what happened to Chris, she sees a shrink. Hitchcock had already dealt with the mysteries of the mind in the underrated “Spellbound”, from 1945. Here, Rose is described as being trapped in a “maze of horror”. For a brief while, Hitchcock makes Rose as much a lead as Chris. Because if it’s hard for a wrong man to stand on his feet again, it’s even harder for a wronged woman.

This is my contribution to the 4th Master of Suspense blogathon, hosted by Maddy at Classic Film and TV Corner.

Book review: Alfred Hitchcock’s Moviemaking Master Class, by Tony Lee Moral

 

“He pioneered and revolutionized the way all kinds of stories were told on screen.” Who could be that we’re talking about? None other than the Master of Suspense - and, as described in the book, suspense is the stretching out of anticipation -: Alfred Hitchcock. Because every story - even the love stories - could use a bit of suspense, Hitchcock’s influences can be seen in all of cinema and even in other arts. I once searched and found out that there were more than 2,600 books written about Hitchcock, according to the Goodreads database. Another one comes to the batch: Tony Lee Moral’s “Alfred Hitchcock’s Moviemaking Master Class”. Is it a good addition or an unnecessary new book? Let us see.

Through examples from Hitchcock’s oeuvre, the book teaches things such as pitching a story to a producer, choosing the theme of the film, writing the screenplay, exploring your background scenario and props to the maximum, storyboarding key scenes, working with actors (who are not cattle), exercising camera logic, the importance of editing and how to advertise your film.

The sub-sections of the chapters are short and straight to the point. Nothing is discussed in a deeper focus, and this isn’t a problem. Once the point has been made about the section’s title, it’s time to move on. This makes reading easy and in a nice flow. However, to Hitchcock’s experts, there is very little that they haven’t heard about. In the end of each chapter, something different appears: exercises and tips about movies to watch and books to read to further the ideas presented in the chapter.

Writing the screenplay is given a whole chapter. A job divided in the outline, the treatment and the screenplay, this is explored in deep focus, which is no surprise considering that writing the screenplay was Hitchcock’s favorite part of making a movie. He closely followed the writing of the screenplays for his movies, but, preferring to focus on telling a story visually, he left the dialogues for his screenwriters.

There is also a whole chapter devoted to how Hitchcock cut and assembled his films. The author explains how the director portrayed a character’s reaction through cutting - using the Kuleshov effect - and how he created fear and depicted violence also through cutting - by choosing to show several close-ups instead of the violent act: this is what happens in the shower murder scene in “Psycho” (1960). We then learn about how Hitch used jump cuts, match cuts and cross-cuts to establish ideas and develop the plots of his films.

We can find the definition and exemplification of terms such as the famous McGuffin and the “ice box syndrome”, that is, the holes left in the plot that become debates once the viewers leave the movie theater and hit home. One very interesting term I learned - and something Hitchcock used in many movies - is the double chase: when the hero is persecuted at the same time by the police and the villains. Another learning opportunity came with the discussion of the Vertigo Shot and how it was achieved, zooming in on camera and having the camera dollying back simultaneously.

We have the comparison between leading men Cary Grant and James Stewart. Grant was the debonair seductive man Hitchcock wanted to be, while Stewart was the boy-next-door type. The author said Stewart was the man Hitchcock actually was, but I just partially agree with this affirmation.

There is, of course, valuable advice and many great catchphrases, such as: “When characters are unbelievable, you never get real suspense, only surprise.”; “Surprise takes 10 seconds; anticipation can take an hour.”; “A successful movie juxtaposes tension and relaxation, and relieves horror with humor.”; “He was a purist and believed that film is a succession of images on the screen; this in turn creates ideas, which in turn creates emotion, which only seldom leads to dialogue.”

There are quotes from other directors about how Hitchcock influenced them, and plenty of examples of Hitchcockian non-Hitchcock movies. We can also find quotes from stars who worked with Hitch, such as Eva Marie Saint and Kim Novak, as well as quotes from people who were part of the crew in some Hitchcock movies.

There are also plenty of inspiring quotes from Hitchcock himself, such as: “A film cannot be compared to a play or a novel. It is closer to a short story, which, as a rule, sustains one idea that culminates when the action has reached the highest point of the dramatic curve.”; “Mystery is an intellectual process, as in [solving] a ‘whodunit’…but suspense is essentially an emotional process. With suspense it’s necessary to involve emotion.”; “I think a director should understand the psychology of audiences,”; “People don’t often always express their inner thoughts to one another; a conversation might be quite trivial, but often the eyes reveal what a person thinks or feels.”; “For me, suspense doesn’t have any value unless it’s balanced by humor,”; “A woman of elegance, on the other hand, will never cease to surprise you.”; “ The more successful the villain, the more successful the picture”; “ Sex on the screen should be suspenseful, I feel. If sex is too blatant or obvious, there’s no suspense.”; “You can’t direct intelligent men, the things that should come to them naturally, such as hesitancies.”

Alma Reville, Hitchcock’s wife and constant collaborator who helped shape many screenplays, is only briefly cited as the one who saw that Janet Leigh blinked after her character Marion was murdered in “Psycho”. Another mistake in the book is saying that the French term for “pre-production” is “mise-en-scène” - it simply isn’t. Some sentences are poorly written and there are some typos that a more accurate revision would have erased, as well as factual errors - Anny Ondra wasn’t on the cast list for “The Lodger” (1927).

The Master of Suspense - who was also the master of branding - is as relevant as ever, no matter that he died over forty years ago. As the book says, there is always something new and exciting to find out when rewatching Hitchcock’s films. We, creatives, can also learn something new by rewatching his movies. Tony Lee Moral, an expert in Hitch, offered us valuable advice in this tight and thought-provoking book.

Cinco Dedos (1952) / 5 Fingers (1952)

 

“Esta é uma história verídica”: sempre que essas palavras aparecem na tela antes do começo do filme, meu coração acelera. Às vezes a realidade é mais louca e mais inacreditável que a ficção, e este é o caso de “Cinco Dedos” (também conhecido pelo título “Operação Cícero”), um filme de suspense extremamente subestimado protagonizado por James Mason. Desde que eu o vi pela primeira vez em 31 de dezembro de 2012 – foi tão memorável que eu me lembro do dia – eu considero “Cinco Dedos” como um exemplo perfeito de um tesouro escondido do cinema.

“This is a true story”: anytime those words pop up on screen before a film starts, my heart skips a bit. Sometimes reality is wilder and more unbelievable than fiction, and this is the case of “5 Fingers”, an extremely underrated thriller starring James Mason. Since I saw it for the first time on December 31^st, 2012 – it was so memorable that I remember the day – I consider “5 Fingers” to be a palpable example of a “hidden gem”.

É março de 1944, e o cenário é a Turquia, um país neutro durante a Segunda Guerra Mundial. A condessa Anna Staviska (Danielle Darrieux) é uma francesa que vivia em Varsóvia com o falecido marido, um conde polonês. Ela deixou a Polônia quando os bombardeios começaram. Agora ela só consegue comer quando é convidada para algum jantar por um amigo. São tempos difíceis para ela, como nota o conde Franz Von Papen (John Wengraf), embaixador alemão. Em tempos difíceis são tomadas decisões difíceis: a condessa está disposta a trabalhar como espiã, e Von Papen  a aconselha a desistir da ideia.

It’s March 1944, and the scenery is Turkey, a neutral country during World War II. Countess Anna Staviska (Danielle Darrieux) is a French woman who lived in Warsaw with her late husband, a Polish count. She left Poland when the bombings started. She now can only eat when she’s invited for any friend's reception. These are difficult times for her, as Count Franz Von Papen (John Wengraf), the German Ambassador, notices. In desperate times, desperate measures: the countess is willing to work as a spy, and Von Papen advises her to forget this idea.

L.C. Moyzisch (Oskar Karlweis), que trabalha para Von Papen, é visitado numa noite por um espião de verdade, Ulysses Diello (James Mason), que oferece para os alemães várias informações armazenadas em microfilme. Diello é na verdade o camareiro do embaixador britânico, por isso ele tem acesso a documentos ultrassecretos.

L.C. Moyzisch (Oskar Karlweis), who works for Von Papen,  is visited one night by a real spy, Ulysses Diello (James Mason), who offers a bunch of information in microfilm for the Germans. Diello is actually the valet of the British Ambassador, that’s why he has access to top secret documents.

Moyzisch fica nervoso facilmente e é um pouco tonto. Diello é esperto, muito esperto – ou foi o patriotismo dos alemães que os deixou burros e sem imaginação? Diello consegue abrir o cofre da casa de Moyzisch usando como combinação a data em que Hitler chegou ao poder. Moyzisch fica abestalhado mas, seguindo as ordens que havia recebido, ele diz que a embaixada alemã irá trabalhar com Diello, que dali em diante receberá o codinome Cícero. Diello fica satisfeito porque Cícero, o chefe de Estado romano foi, nas palavras de Diello, “um homem de nobreza, eloquência e insatisfação”. Como podemos ver, Diello é esperto mas também vaidoso.

Moyzisch is nervous and a bit silly. Diello is smart, very smart – or did German’s patriotism made them dumb and unimaginative? Diello is able to open the safe at Moyzisch’s place using the date when Hitler rose to power as the combination. Moyzisch is stunned but, as he was advised to do, he says the German Embassy will now work with Diello, who will from now on be referred to with the codename Cicero. Diello is pleased, as Cicero the Roman statesman was, as he says “a man of nobility, eloquence and dissatisfaction”. As we can see, Diello is clever but also vain.

Agora todas as pontas soltas se unem: Diello dá parte do dinheiro para a condessa Staviska – porque ele era camareiro do conde e, após a morte do patrão, a condessa o demitiu. Ela diz que o demitiu porque ele era “esperto demais para um criado”. Ele sabe que ela o demitiu porque ele gostava dela. Agora ele oferece parte do dinheiro que ganhou para que a condessa alugue uma casa onde Diello possa, de vez em quando, fazer negócios. Em três meses, ele terá dinheiro suficiente para conseguir uma nova identidade e começar uma vida nova com ela na América do Sul.

Now everything comes full circle: Diello gives part of the money to Countess Staviska – because he was the count’ valet and, after his boss died, the countess fired him. She says she fired him because he was “too clever for a servant”, he knows she fired him because he liked her. Now he offers part of the money he made for the countess to get a house where Diello can, sometimes, do his business. In three months, he will have enough to adopt a new identity and start a new life with her in South America.

Obviamente, não demora para que a embaixada britânica desconfie de que há um espião entre eles. O agente especial Colin Travers (Michael Rennie) é enviado da Inglaterra para investigar o caso. Agora todos são suspeitos, incluindo Diello e a condessa Anna Staviska. 

Of course, soon the British Embassy suspects that there is a spy among them. Special agent Colin Travers (Michael Rennie) is sent from England to investigate the case. Now everybody is a suspect, including Diello and the Countess Anna Staviska.

“Cinco Dedos” foi filmado em locação na Turquia, com o objetivo de parecer mais real. Entretanto, a produção se recusou a deixar tudo ainda mais real quando dispensaram serviços de consultoria do verdadeiro Cícero, o espião Elyesa Bazna, e de Moyzisch, que escreveu o livro que deu origem ao filme. O Moyzisch verdadeiro não gostou da maneira como foi retratado nas telas. A história foi recontada em 1956 em um episódio da série de TV antológica “The 20^th Century-Fox Hour”, com Ricardo Montalban como Diello/Cicero e com Peter Lorre como Moyzisch.

“5 Fingers” was shot in location in Turkey, aiming for reality. However, the production refused to make things even more real when they refused technical advice from both the real Cicero, the spy Elyesa Bazna, and from Moyzisch, who wrote the book who originated the film. The real Moyzisch was displeased with the manner he was portrayed on screen. The story was told again in 1956 in an episode of the TV anthology series “The 20^th Century-Fox Hour”, with Ricardo Montalban as Diello/Cicero and Peter Lorre as Moyzisch.

“Cinco Dedos” foi dirigido por Joseph L. Mankiewicz, que também dirigiu “Quem é o Infiel?” (1949) e “A Malvada” (1950). Mas a direção e as mudanças no roteiro feitas pelo outro Mank não são a parte mais importante do filme: na minha opinião, a música de Bernard Herrmann é o elemento que se destaca. Herrmann havia estreado no cinema com “Cidadão Kane” (1941) e suas colaborações com Hitchcock ainda aconteceriam dali a alguns anos, mas em “Cinco Dedos” sua trilha sonora cria suspense da maneira que só um mestre da música conseguiria.

“5 Fingers” was directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz, who also directed “A Letter to Three Wives” (1949) and “All About Eve” (1950). But the other Mank's direction and changes in the script aren't the most important part of the film: I think the music by Bernard Herrmann is the real outstanding element. Herrmann had debuted in films with “Citizen Kane” (1941) and his collaborations with Hithcock were still a few years in the future, but in “5 Fingers” his soundtrack creates suspense like only a master musician could do. 

É interessante perceber como é a relação entre Diello e a condessa Anna Staviska. Em alguns momentos ela fala para ele preparar um drink para ela, como se ele fosse empregado dela. Quando eles finalmente se beijam, isto mudo e ele que fala para ela preparar-lhe um drink, o que ela faz com um sorriso tímido nos lábios. Entretanto, existe sempre a sensação de que eles vão entregar um ao outro, em especial quando Diello fala para Colin Travers sobre seus anos trabalhando para o conde.

It’s interesting to notice the relationship between Diello and Countess Anna Staviska. In some moments she tells him to fix him a drink, as if he was her servant. When they finally kiss, this changes and he tells her to fix him a drink, which she does with a shy smile in her lips. However, there is always the feeling that they are going to betray each other, in special when Diello talks to Colin Travers about the years he worked for the count.

Von Papen é um personagem extremamente interessante. Ele é um embaixador alemão, mas diz que “representamos um governo de delinquentes juvenis” - que é um jeito bem leve de se referir a nazistas. Começamos a ver que ele é diferente dos outros alemães na primeira cena, quando ele confessa que não suporta as composições de Wagner. Mais humano e preocupado com os outros, ele acredita que os alemães precisavam contar aos outros povos – os romenos, no caso – que seu país estava prestes a ser bombardeado pela Inglaterra, de acordo com os documentos vendidos por Diello, em vez que ficar esperando para confirmar se esta informação era correta. Na vida real, Franz Von Papen não era tão legal: enquanto chanceler, ajudou Hitler a chegar ao poder e serviu por dois anos como vice-chanceler de Hitler. Não faço ideia do motivo que levou Hollywood a retratá-lo como um cara legal.

Von Papen is an extremely interesting character. He is a German ambassador, but says that “we represent a government of juvenile delinquents” - which is a rather light term to refer to Nazis. We start to see that he’s different from other Germans in his very first scene, when he confesses that he can’t stand Wagner’s compositions. More human and concerned with others, he believes the Germans needed to tell other people – the Romanians, in this case – that their country was about to be bombarded by England, according to the documents Diello sold, rather than wait and watch to confirm the information is correct. In real life, Franz Von Papen was nowhere as nice: as a Chancellor, he helped Hitler rise to power and served as Hitler's Vice-Chancellor for two years. I have no idea why Hollywood portrayed him as a nice guy.

Ulysses Diello é esperto, sedutor e por vezes esnobe. Ele está trabalhando para os nazistas – somente por dinheiro, porque ele não é simpatizante nazista – e mesmo assim torcemos por ele. Talvez a razão para esta torcida seja porque ele é interpretado pelo sempre fabuloso James Mason. Outro dia eu me surpreendi novamente com o fato de que Mason nunca ganhou o Oscar. Talvez seja porque a Academia não foi capaz de reconhecer a facilidade e a classe com que ele atuava – e essas são as características de um ótimo espião, não?

Ulysses Diello is clever, seductive and sometimes a snob. He’s working for the Nazis – only for money, because he isn't a sympathizer – and yet we root for him. Maybe the reason why we root for him is because he’s played by the always fabulous James Mason. The other day I was once again surprised with the fact that Mason won no Oscars. Maybe it's because the Academy couldn't recognize the effortlessness and class with which he acted – and an effortless and classy spy sounds like a great spy, doesn't it?

Cheio de reviravoltas até o final, “Cinco Dedos” é um ótimo suspense que deveria ser mais conhecido. Joseph L. Mankiewicz disse que Darryl F. Zanuck, o produtor, supervisionou o processo de edição e eliminou algumas das melhores cenas. O que vemos na tela já é incrível – e eu posso apenas imaginar como este filme poderia ter sido ainda melhor se acreditarmos na palavra de Mankiewicz.

Full of plot twists until the very end, “5 Fingers” is a thrilling movie that should be better known. Joseph L. Mankiewicz said that Darryl F. Zanuck, the producer, supervised the editing process and ended up cutting some of the best scenes. What we see on screen is already amazing – and I can only wonder how much better the film could have been if we believe Mankiewicz's claim.

This is my contribution to the CMBA Hidden Classics blogathon, hosted by the Classic Movie Blog Association.