Somehow, I was expecting something more mesmerizing. In my mind, this was Hitchcock going giallo. And that would have been awesome. Why not have the one who influenced giallo so heavily demonstrate what he would do?
Well, he didn't. I somehow had convinced myself that Frenzy was a thrilling and twisty affair I still had to watch. Upon watching, I realized I had watched it already, hated it, then subconsciously blocked it from my memory. So why did I hate it? Apparently, Hitchcock thought the 70s were all about sex and nudity, and that is exactly what you are getting. There is one rape / murder scene that still is pretty unnerving and shocking today. One could argue that this scene is important to point out how disgusting and vile this Necktie Murderer is. But why reveal the killer? Why let us know who this killer is? This only works if you manage to increase tension and suspense in other ways. And to be frank, I didn't mind the nudity. As far as I can remember, he was suggestive and not explicit. It just was weird to see Hitchcock succumb to this.
Instead, an innocent man gets framed since he is quite volatile and impossible to root for. Great idea, Alfred. Let the lead be super obnoxious, almost on the same level as the killer. Why would I even care to follow him and the surrounding investigation? To make matters worse, the film is in no hurry to catch the killer. It takes its sweet time to get events going, and even then these are slowed down by focusing on Chief Inspector Tim Oxford and his wife, Mrs. Oxford, who is under the impression she is a culinary genius. Perhaps this was Alfred's way of saying that his wife is the one who slowed down the investigation because of the food not agreeing with him?
I have to admit, that I after trying hard to get invested I found myself bored that I sped up the film several times until it got a little bit compelling. Frenzy is such a contrast. It has no qualms of showing off bare bottoms and vaginas. Yet, can't commit to showing the true brutality of the murders. I also didn't understand why Hitchcock even entertained the idea of rehashing his favourite framed man plot. Surely, after having made so many thrillers, couldn't he think of something more creative? I also, don't understand the nonchalant attitude of most people in the film. For example, there are two men discussing the murder in a pub as if it were the most normal thing ever. But wait, it gets worse. They even make a joke about rape, blatantly saying that the victim at least got to enjoy herself before she got murdered. This is the type of stuff I expect in a 80s and 90s Wong Jing Hong Kong flick. Maybe Hitchcock tried to provoke existing attitudes? Or was he a misogynist?
It doesn't really matter. Frenzy is devoid of thrills and suspense. All we are left with is some misplaced comedy and terrible characters. I remember a film called Four Flies on Grey Velvet where Bud Spencer of all people as usual is the comic relief character in a pretty serious murder mystery. But unlike Hitchcock, Dario Argento pulled it off. He managed to successfully combine thrills with humour.
Overall, you are better off forgetting about Frenzy. Watch Four Flies on Grey Velvet instead.
Also check:
No comments:
Post a Comment