Alfredders

So far, I haven't seen an Alfred Hitchcock film I don't like. He brings to the screen an interesting combination of realistic theatrical elements and fictional literary elements. The two styles of elements create superb entertainment and enjoyment. In Rear Window (1954), Hitchcock uses mostly diegtic sounds throughout the film, to give the movie a more realistic feel. However, the plot isn't so realistic. Maybe if someone were actually dumb enough to commit a murder in plain sight and the neighbor happened to witness it, then became so obsessed with proving it, that he risked his girlfriend's life as well as his own, then yes it could be realistic!

But I'm not saying all this to be plausible. I'm only saying this because it takes a lot of talent to combine those two in a way that works well. I like watching a non-realistic story every once in a while, because it is unfamiliar and fresh (depending on the movie of course). Scary, suspenseful movies wouldn't be all that scary or suspenseful if the plot was totally realistic, would it?

Psycho (1960) is another example of Hitchcock combining these two elements. Once again, the plot isn't all that realistic. But I really like his combination of fiction with realistic theatrical elements, it makes the unrealistic feel more... realistic! (Have I used that word enough?) It helps me stay at the "edge of my seat" if it feels like I'm there in the movie experiencing what the characters are experiencing. Hitchcock does just that! Thank you Alfred!