Film classifications should be expanded. In addition to, say, “Suitable for audiences aged 15 and over” or “Contains strong language and nudity,” there should be other warnings. Films could be preceded by notices such as “Less Enjoyable than a Root Canal” (my suggestion for The Ice Storm) or “Insidious mind-rotting consumerism dressed up as female liberation” (Pretty Woman) or “Watch with the sound turned down” (Titanic). Other suggestions of mine would be “Have you seen Tootsie and Kramer v Kramer? Then you’ve seen this already” (Mrs Doubtfire) or “If you’ve seen one, you’ve seen ‘em all” (any James Bond film).
Of course you can see how the movie studios might not appreciate this level of helpfulness.
And many films should have a warning that says “You are ruining a cinema classic by watching this first.” The absence of this warning is the reason I watched Apocalypse Now and Citizen Kane in the wrong order. Ditto The Truman Show and Citizen Kane. Now I find I’ve watched Rear Window and any number of films the wrong way around. If only I had a time machine. I would return to my younger self as I was about to enter a cinema to see Manhattan Murder Mystery and scream “Don’t do it! Eighteen years from now you won’t appreciate fully the remarkable cinematic achievement of Rear Window.” It wouldn’t be solely altruism, though. I’d also use the opportunity to tell my younger self to buy shares in Apple.
So, as you’ve doubtless spotted, I’ve yet again addressed a gap in my cultural life, this time by watching Alfred Hitchcock. Rear Window is another example of a very prescient film. It foretold our modern atomised urban landscape where many people don’t know another soul. It laid bare the modern dilemma of the dual career couple trying to reconcile their conflicting lives. And yet, in other ways, Rear Window is so out of touch with modern life that it becomes a window, if you’ll forgive the pun, on a quaint and distant past. A guy plays piano all night and nobody complains? I don’t think so. With the standard of sound-proofing in some modern apartments, he’d annoy his neighbours just by rustling his sheet music. A crime is committed and the police are there in seconds? Eh, no. In Rear Window 2012, Lisa would have been murdered twelve times over in Thorwald’s apartment while the police were still stuck in traffic. A photographer and a policeman are best buddies? That would be part of the Levenson Enquiry today. A dog is murdered and everyone goes quietly about their business? No, today there would be a mawkish shrine with flowers and balloons. Probably a book of condolences and a Facebook tribute page. A married couple sleeping outdoors? They’d have their own Youtube channel. And then lying on a balcony would become an internet meme like planking or owling. Ditto “Miss Torso” – she would be a viral sensation. Don’t even get me started on what would happen if a single, childless guy sat at his window all day looking out at his neighbours through an array of cameras. Sex. Offenders. Register. And, my personal favourite, an insurance company paying for a nurse to come to your home every day? Purr-lease! The only insurance staff to visit your home these days are wearing suits and stern expressions and telling you that your water tank bursting was an act of God and isn’t covered by your policy. In a modern re-telling, Stella, the home-care nurse, would have to be replaced by a pizza delivery guy with poor interpersonal boundaries.
Nonetheless, Rear Window is a very pleasant way to spend an evening. My only addition would be a film classification warning that said “May contain scenes inconceivable and preposterous to anyone under fifty.”
You could do movie reviews! It would be helpful to get the classification before you fell asleep in the theater!
Thanks for your reply. And you’ve given me an idea for another classification – “Drink a triple shot espresso before watching.”
[…] Comments « Discovering … Alfred Hitchcock […]